Prince Andrew’s lawyers could ‘call Maxwell victim for DEFENCE in a bid to prove accuser Virginia Roberts wasn’t victim’

PRINCE Andrew’s lawyers may call one of Ghislaine Maxwell’s victims in a bid to fight the rape lawsuit he’s facing.

Accuser Virginia Roberts Giuffre said she is unlikely to accept a pay off and the Duke of York is currently waiting on tenterhooks for a judge to decide whether her civil lawsuit will be ditched.

Maxwell was last month found guilty of of sex trafficking and grooming girls for paedophile Jeffrey Epstein to abuse.

Another one of Jeffrey Epstein’s victims said that Ms Giuffre had sex with Prince Andrew.

Carolyn Andriano, 35, has now waived her right to anonymity to share her full knowledge of Virginia’s alleged encounter.

Mrs Roberts Giuffre, then Miss Roberts, 17, reportedly showed the victim the infamous picture of her posing with Andrew at convicted sex trafficker Maxwell’s home.

As pressure mounts on the Duke to get the case dismissed, Ms Adriano could now be called for the defence to show Ms Giuffre wasn’t a victim, sources close to the case have told The Telegraph.

It comes as his lawyers also now reportedly believe they can stop the case as federal law explicitly bans two parties who are not US residents facing each other in court.

Mrs Andriano told the Daily Mail Miss Roberts texted her from London in March 2001 to say she was going for dinner with Andrew, Maxwell and Epstein.

Miss Roberts is alleged to have shown the picture of her with Andrew to Miss Andriano back in Florida, saying of the prince: “I got to sleep with him.”

She is also said to have said they had dinner and they “had sex”.

Giving her account, Mrs Andriona, who is now a mum-of-five, explained: “I asked her if she’d been to the palace. And she said ‘I got to sleep with him’.

“I said ‘What? You’re f****** with me’ and she said ‘no, I got to sleep with him’.”

The married mum added: “She said they had dinner and they had sex.

“She didn’t say anything about what they ate or where they were – that’s not what we were talking about.

“It was just that she couldn’t believe she got to sleep with Prince Andrew.”

Mrs Andriano’s account is the first time there has been any independent report of Miss Robert’s alleged meeting with Andrew.

And it comes in the midst of Andrew’s legal battle with Mrs Roberts Giuffre’, who is suing the prince for sexually assaulting her three times when she was 17 – something Andrew fiercely denies.

Sources close to him have suggested the picture of him with Miss Roberts could be fake and he says he does not recall it ever being taken.

It comes after Mrs Andriano gave a harrowing testimony against Maxwell at her trial last month.

Four of the five guilty verdicts against her were underpinned by the evidence of the married mum – including the most serious charge of sex trafficking a minor which carries a maximum 40-year jail term.

She says she was a victim of Epstein and Maxwell between the ages of 14 and 17 and had been recruited by Virginia Giuffre via their sick pyramid scheme of abuse – which saw young girls made to recruit other young girls.

Maxewell was accused of “serving up” girls for the multi-millionaire, her former lover, with the pair described as “partners in crime”.

And now, Andrew is waiting on tenterhooks for a judge to decide whether his rape accuser Virginia Roberts Giuffre’s civil lawsuit will be ditched.

His lawyers claim a secret 2009 deal she made with billionaire paedophile Jeffrey Epstein exempts Andrew from legal action.

But Judge Lewis Kaplan is unlikely to accept the pending motion, meaning lawyers will have to decide whether to settle or risk a gruelling grilling from lawyers in court.

Ms Giuffre claims she was forced to have sex with Andrew three times between 1999 and 2002 — in ­London, New York and on Epstein’s private Caribbean island, which he vehemently denies.

Now 38, she has filed a battery and infliction of emotional distress lawsuit against Andrew.

No discussions about whether to settle her case out of court have been had between Andrew and his team so far, it is understood.

A settlement would mean he – and potentially other close members of the Firm – would avoid a court appearance.