The Grenadier Guards reportedly want the Duchess of Cambridge to replace Prince Andrew as their colonel after his military titles and royal patronages were stripped. Video / AP
The Queen's decision to sever all official ties with the Duke of York and cast him adrift as a "private citizen" could be used against him in court, friends fear.
Buckingham Palace announced earlier this month that it had stripped Prince Andrew, 61, of all military titles and patronages, orderedhim not to use his HRH title and ruled out any return to public duties.
The "ruthless" decision was made after the Duke failed to persuade a New York judge to drop the civil case earlier this month. Such a move had previously been delayed, despite mounting legal and public pressure, for fear that it could be seen to pre-empt the outcome.
Palace aides recognised that it would be interpreted as a premature judgment on the case but ultimately felt that they had no choice, believing that win or lose, the Duke could never fully clear his name.
The move could play into his accuser's hands if the case gets to trial, sources have now warned, suggesting that even his own family consider him too toxic for their brand.
One friend said: "We fear that cutting him off looks like the Royal family has pre-judged him and that this could somehow be used against him in court.
"Stripping him of his duties before legal proceedings have barely got under way is hardly a vote of confidence."
Virginia Roberts Giuffre, 38, has alleged that she was sexually abused or raped by Prince Andrew on three separate occasions in 2001, when she was 17. The Duke denies all the allegations. She is seeking unspecified damages. Her lawyer, David Boies, is described as one of America's feared litigators who destroys opponents on the witness stand.
Mitchell Epner, a former federal prosecutor now practising with New York law firm Rottenberg Lipman Rich, said the Duke's charitable work should be front and centre of his defence strategy.
Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Andrew, Duke of York attend Royal Ascot 2017 at Ascot Racecourse. Photo / Getty Images
"When it comes to juries, facts are not persuasive but stories are," he said.
"They should be highlighting all the good works he has done, the fact that he was a brave, decorated soldier who put himself in harm's way, the hours that he has toiled at great personal expenditure of time on behalf of so many charities.
"But in that scenario, David Boies can now bring up the fact that the Queen has stripped him of all such links as a direct result of this lawsuit. It becomes the dog that did not bark."
The Prince of Wales and the Duke of Cambridge are said to have been "instrumental" in the decision to force the Duke out, determined to prioritise the institution at all costs.
When first cut adrift in November 2019, after his disastrous Newsnight interview, the Duke was afforded his own legal and PR team, allowing Buckingham Palace aides to wash their hands of the whole affair.
But even that will be interpreted as the institution giving up on him, "pulling up the drawbridge" as one source said.
"If they're not prepared to back him then who on Earth will?" the source added. "What hope is there for a jury confronted with these facts?"
