There are calls for police to re-investigate sex abuse allegations against Andrew Mountbatten Windsor. Photo / Getty Images
Police must re-investigate sex abuse allegations against Andrew Mountbatten Windsor following the removal of his royal titles, one of Britain’s top former prosecutors has said.
Nazir Afzal, previously chief prosecutor for North West England, said the Metropolitan Police should reopen their probe into allegations that the King’s brother sexually abused Virginia Giuffre after she was trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein.
Scotland Yard decided not to conduct a criminal investigation in 2016 when the accusations, which Mountbatten Windsor has strenuously denied, were first made.
Afzal said a fresh investigation is required after the removal of Andrew’s royal titles and his eviction from Royal Lodge in Windsor.
“At that time, a statement hadn’t been taken from Virginia Giuffre and then in 2021, a further review took place based on findings from the civil case and also from the Ghislaine Maxwell prosecution in the US, and again the matter wasn’t investigated,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.
“So this matter hasn’t been investigated, never mind taken any further,” he added.
Afzal said the decision not to complete a criminal probe was akin to “two-tier justice”.
“Public confidence has been shaken by this,” he said. “People do feel that there is some two-tier justice here – that if you are powerful, you don’t get the same level of attention as you would do if you were say homeless.”
The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) could investigate if the Met did not do so, Afzal added.
“The IOPC have a proactive power to investigate – they have had the power since 2020 to carry out their own investigations and there is no reason why they shouldn’t,” he said.
Stephen Flynn, the SNP leader in Westminster, backed a new police investigation into Andrew on Saturday.
“Andrew Mountbatten Windsor has had his titles removed, but serious allegations remain and it’s hard to imagine a scenario where the people of these isles wouldn’t expect a full investigation given the alleged public resource involved,” he said.
Rachael Maskell, the independent MP for York Central, also backed calls for a proper inquiry.
She said: “There remains many unanswered questions, but as a private citizen, I trust Mr Mountbatten Windsor will be helpful at engaging with this and other inquiries associated with his former life.”
A spokesman for the Met said it had not previously undertaken a criminal investigation because “any investigation into human trafficking would be largely focused on activities and relationships outside the UK”.
“Officers therefore concluded that other jurisdictions and organisations were better placed to pursue the specific allegations and in November 2016, a decision was made that this matter would not proceed to a full criminal investigation,” they added. “That decision was subsequently reviewed.”
On Thursday, Buckingham Palace announced that the King had removed his brother’s remaining titles, including the right to call himself Prince Andrew. The Palace also moved to evict him from Royal Lodge, where he has lived for more than two decades.
It emerged on Friday that Andrew will not move from his 30-room property in Windsor to his new home on the King’s private Sandringham estate until the new year, meaning he will not be there when the Royal family gathers for Christmas.
The former prosecutor’s comments came after the police watchdog contacted the Met over claims Andrew asked a personal protection officer to dig up information on his accuser.
According to a 2011 email leaked last month, the former prince asked his taxpayer-funded police bodyguard to investigate Giuffre, handing over her date of birth and social security number. Andrew has not commented on the claim.
The force said it was still looking into the allegations on Saturday. The IOPC said it had contacted the Met but the force was yet to refer itself to the watchdog.
A IOPC spokesman said: “We have had contact with the Met, which confirmed that no referral has been made, and as a result we have no involvement with these matters.”
Elsewhere, Andrew was warned that Epstein investigators will “find all the information that’s out there” if he refuses to testify before the US Congress.
Congressman Suhas Subramanyam, a member of the US oversight committee, said officials would “not let this go” and told Andrew that speaking to the committee would be a “great way” for him “to clear his name”.
Speaking to the BBC’s Today programme, Subramanyam said: “I would like for him to come to our committee and tell us everything he knows about Jeffrey Epstein and the crimes that were committed.
“I think that this would be a great way for Andrew to clear his name, it would be a great way for us to continue our pursuit of justice for the victims, and frankly, Andrew’s name has come up many times from the victims... so he clearly has knowledge of what happened, and we just want him to come forward and tell us what he knows.”
The US House of Representatives’ committee on oversight is investigating how Epstein, who died in jail in New York in 2019, evaded justice for so long.
In September, the committee made public the disgraced paedophile’s infamous “birthday book”, a 238-page album compiled by his then-girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a prison sentence for sex trafficking girls.
Asked what further evidence the committee could uncover, Subramanyam replied: “This is what I would tell Andrew and anyone else: even if you don’t come forward with information we are going to find all the information that’s out there possible. We are not going to let this go.”
Ro Khanna, a fellow congressman who has supported Epstein’s victims, called for “transparency and justice for the survivors who have been courageously speaking out”.
He told the Telegraph: “Andrew should be called to testify before the oversight committee. The public deserves to know who was abusing women and young girls alongside Epstein.”
The former Duke of York is expected to receive compensation for giving up the lease to his home – possibly as much as £550,000 ($1.2m) – as well as an annual stipend from the King’s private funds. Sources told the Guardian this could amount to several times his £20,000 ($45,986) annual pension from the Royal Navy.
The Telegraph has also learnt that concerns about how the Queen’s work with sexual abuse survivors might be compromised formed part of the discussions leading up to his banishment.
Jonathan Dimbleby, the King’s biographer, told the Telegraph that His Majesty would be feeling “enormous relief” that his brother’s situation has now been dealt with, enabling the King to “move on” and get on with his job as sovereign.
The King’s fears that there were more revelations to come about Andrew’s association with Epstein proved well-founded on Friday when yet more court documents were made public in a court in New York.
They included an email from Andrew to Epstein in which he said it would be “good to catch up in person” after Epstein was released from prison for prostituting minors.
Andrew is eighth in line to the throne and only an Act of Parliament could prevent him from ever becoming king. Starmer has so far resisted pressure to alter the royal succession, with Downing Street saying there were “no plans” to do so.
Although it is highly unlikely that Andrew could ever ascend the throne, it is not impossible. The three royals directly ahead of him in the line of succession are Prince Harry and his children, who, as a young family in America, are unlikely candidates to serve as monarchs. The other four are the Prince of Wales and his children.
Sign up to Herald Premium Editor’s Picks, delivered straight to your inbox every Friday. Editor-in-Chief Murray Kirkness picks the week’s best features, interviews and investigations. Sign up for Herald Premium here.