Prince Andrew's Accuser Virginia Roberts-Giuffre Won't Agree to Out-of-Court Settlement - Report

The prince currently awaits a ruling on whether he will face a full civil trial in New York over allegations that he sexually molested Giuffre three times when she was only 17 years old in 2001 — claims he rejects.

Virginia Roberts Giuffre would refuse more than £3.7million ($5 million) in damages if offered by Prince Andrew, who is apparently considering selling his £17 million ($23.1 million) Swiss ski lodge since the Queen refuses to cover his legal fees, the Telegraph reported.

According to insiders cited in the report, Giuffre, who claims she was forced to have sex with the Duke of York at the behest of her abuser, the late pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, will not accept an out-of-court settlement.

Earlier, the 2009 settlement between Giuffre and Epstein was revealed to the public, and according to its terms, the disgraced financier agreed to pay Giuffre $500,000 (£370,000) to settle her legal claims against him. But now, Giuffre is said to want a trial so that anyone suspected of abusing young girls "with power and privilege" will face the full weight of the law.

According to The Telegraph, Giuffre has advised her attorneys that reaching a multi-million pound deal with Prince Andrew, who denies the claims, will not "advance that message."

Meanwhile, the New York Post reported this week that if the Queen's second son had apologized to Giuffre "years ago," she would never have sued him.

"Virginia has always just wanted the prince to acknowledge that he did something he shouldn’t have, she wants him to apologize. She has never made this all about money," the source claimed. "I think she would have dropped this a long, long time ago had the prince said he was guilty of wrongdoing, but he’s embroiled in denial which has brought him down."

The Duke has strongly denied the accusations and stated that he intends to fight them and clear his name, while his legal team has reportedly not ruled out the idea of a large payoff being offered to minimize additional damage to the Royal Family's reputation.

But Giuffre's legal team is reportedly well aware of the international attention and the outrage that would result if they accepted the Duke's money instead of going to trial. According to earlier reports, Giuffre's lawyer, David Boies, claimed that before initiating the lawsuit, his team had offered the Duke a "tolling agreement," which would have allowed him time to discreetly negotiate a settlement.

According to The Telegraph, while the option of avoiding litigation was on the table last summer, the Duke's team is now adamant about going to trial.

Following Ghislaine Maxwell's conviction for sex trafficking last month, Giuffre, who is also reported to have received millions in compensation related to the years of abuse she endured at the hands of Maxwell and Epstein, said that "others must be held accountable."

On Thursday, both sides awaited Judge Lewis Kaplan's decision on the Duke's motion to dismiss the case, which is based on a 2009 settlement accord Giuffre struck with Epstein.

As of now, Andrew is reportedly trying to force the sale of his £17 million Swiss ski chalet in Verbier to help pay for his mounting legal bills as he battles sexual assault charges, with Sarah, the Duchess of York, also lending him financial and emotional support.

"It is crunch time for Andrew on several fronts," a source told the Mirror this week. "He is meeting all the costs himself so he needs to raise cash fast to pay bills which are increasing by the day. If there was the potential to settle, well, that is an option, but it is in no doubt that the Queen would not assist him in doing so."

When reports surfaced that the monarch could be asked to pay Andrew's costs, senior royals, namely his brother Prince Charles and nephew Prince William were said to be "absolutely furious," as they reportedly believe that the prince "can sort out his own mess."

"No discussions have been had regarding a financial settlement," a source said of the Giuffre case. "This is a US civil ­litigation, and given that the vast majority of US civil litigation is settled out of court, it would always remain an option on the table."