‘Police need to investigate’: will Andrew be questioned over his relationship with Epstein? | Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor

Gordon Brown is a man who goes into detail.

While in office and ever since, he applied his forensic mind to matters that concerned him. He has recently focused on the Epstein files.

What he discovered shocked him. There was direct outrage over the “extent of betrayal” by former trade secretary Peter Mandelson during the global financial crisis.

But it was “the abuse of women by male predators and their enablers, and Britain’s as yet unacknowledged role,” that left the deepest mark.

He looked at flight records, examined the evidence and concluded: Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor should face police questioning about Jeffrey Epstein.

He is not alone in this opinion.

This week, voices in and around Westminster insisted that the role of UK institutions in this most appalling scandal must now be examined. And that includes monarchy.

On Thursday cabinet secretary Chris Ward was cornered over the former prince by Sarah Owen, chair of the House of Commons women and equalities committee.

Mountbatten-Windsor was trade ambassador to critical countries, including China and Hong Kong, between 2001 and 2011.

“Isn’t it time to hold both the police and parliament accountable?” he asked.

Owen told the Guardian that MPs could no longer afford to be deferential to the royal family.

“We must do this to restore people’s faith in the systems in which they have lost faith,” he said. “If we don’t do this, it weakens people’s faith in democracy, their trust in politics as a force for good. And that risks taking us down a really dark path.”

Writing in the New StatesmanBrown made a reference BBC investigation It revealed that many of Epstein’s private planes passed through Stansted and other UK airports where women were “transferred from one Epstein plane to another”.

But Brown was told “privately” that the Metropolitan police’s “previous investigations into the former Prince Andrew had not properly checked vital evidence relating to the flights”.

“Stansted’s revelations alone warrant their interview of Andrew,” he argued.

Former Victims Commissioner Vera Baird told the Guardian she had spoken to police about Mountbatten-Windsor before the Covid outbreak emerged but was assured the matter was being thoroughly investigated in the US.

“Frankly, [Mountbatten-Windsor] he himself will not do anything. “Obviously there are limits to what the royal family can do,” he said, adding: “That’s why the police need to investigate.”

From her hideout in Sandringham, Norfolk, to where she was exiled by her brother King Charles, can Mountbatten-Windsor still ignore the deafening roars for her to co-operate with any police investigation and testify to the US Congress about what she knows about Epstein, even though she has vociferously denied any wrongdoing?

Thames Valley police are considering whether to investigate whether documents were apparently shared while Mountbatten-Windsor was Epstein’s trade envoy and are in talks with specialist crown prosecutors from the CPS. The same force is also considering claims that a woman was flown to the UK by Epstein for a sexual encounter with the then prince, which allegedly occurred at the former Royal Lodge house in 2010. The woman, who was not British, was in her 20s at the time. The claim is separate from Virginia Giuffre’s claim.

There has been no response from Mountbatten-Windsor, as her past responses regarding her relationship with Epstein have apparently fallen flat.

With the headlines still intact, when the then-Prince Andrew told interviewer Emily Maitlis and 1.7 million BBC Newsnight viewers about his Pizza Express alibi in Woking in 2019 and revealed he had a medically temporary sweating problem, one would have expected him to be believed, especially as the queen’s son.

Not anymore.

There was also an issue with the March 2001 photo of Mountbatten-Windsor’s hand around the bare waist of 17-year-old Virginia Giuffre, who would later claim she was forced to have sex with the royal; Giuffre has always denied this claim and said she was taken to Ghislaine Maxwell’s stable home in Belgravia, London.

He looked at Maitlis seriously when asked this question. He insisted that it was difficult to “prove” that it was “fake” because it was a photograph of a photograph.

“Whether it’s my hand or the position…” he continued and concluded: “I’m afraid to say that I don’t believe the photo was taken as suggested.”

Was it filmed by Epstein? The then-prince said he had never seen Epstein “with a camera in my life.”

However, it appears that Epstein kept many people’s photos, possibly for use at a later date.

Mountbatten-Windsor’s account of this photograph in July 2011 has now been strongly questioned. Email from Epstein “yes she was on my plane and yes she had her picture taken with Andrew,” she tells her journalist, an apparent reference to Giuffre.

Maxwell further strengthened the argument for the authenticity of this document by sending an email to Epstein in 2015 titled “draft notice.” It appears to read: “I was in London in 2001. [redacted] I met many of my friends, including Prince Andrew. A photo was taken that I think he wanted to show to his friends and family.

Mountbatten-Windsor emphasized to Maitlis that another reason to doubt the photo was that “she is not someone who would hug and make displays of affection in public.” However, a recently surfaced photo of an unidentified woman lying on the ground, crouching on all fours, barefoot and smiling, also casts doubt on this claim.

How about another photo that was pivotal in his downfall, taken in early December 2010, five months after the financier was released from prison for soliciting sexual intercourse with an underage child, showing two men strolling through New York’s Central Park?

Cited as evidence of her ongoing relationship with Epstein, Mountbatten-Windsor would push this belief aside as the final moment of their friendship.

He told Maitlis he needed to show “leadership” and tell Epstein: “This is it.” It was “the honorable and right thing” to do face to face. More importantly, he insisted, “I never had any contact with him after that day.”

However, in his thank-you email to Epstein dated December 22, 2010, he wrote: “It was great spending time with my US family. I look forward to joining you all again soon.”

Then, with the imminent publication of an article about Andrew, Epstein and Maxwell in the Mail on Sunday, “The Duke” writes to Epstein in February 2011: “It looks like we’re in this together and we’ll just have to get through it.” Another says in March 2011: “Please make sure that every statement or legal letter clearly states that I am not involved in these allegations and that I have and have known NOTHING about any of these allegations. I cannot admit any more on my part.”

These emails may raise serious questions about a public figure’s personal integrity, but what about professional integrity.

Emails between Andrew and Epstein show the former prince sharing information about potential investments for his friend while he was on the government payroll as the UK trade envoy.

When anti-monarchy campaign group Republic reported Mountbatten-Windsor to Thames Valley police this week, its chief executive, Graham Smith, said: “I cannot see any significant difference between these allegations and those against Peter Mandelson.”

On Christmas Eve 2010, the former duke, who insists he had no contact, appears to have passed a document to Epstein containing information about gold and uranium investment opportunities in Afghanistan.

The document prepared specifically for him by the state authorities, According to BBCIt cites “significant high-value mineral deposits” and “low-cost extraction potential,” including valuable natural resources such as marble, gold, iridium, uranium, thorium, and possible oil and gas deposits. Apparently they were all sent to Epstein.

Another email states that on October 7, 2010, she sent Epstein details of official trips as a trade envoy to Singapore, Vietnam, Shenzhen in China and Hong Kong, where the child sex offender was accompanied by business associates. Following the trip, on November 30, he appears to have forwarded official reports of the visits sent by his then-special assistant Amit Patel to Epstein within five minutes of receiving them.

When Buckingham Palace stripped Charles of all his brother’s copyrights in October and kicked him and his ex-wife out of the Royal Lodge, his 30-room Windsor residence, he may have said that “such condemnations were deemed necessary even though he continued to deny the allegations against him.”

As the trickle of revelations continues, Buckingham Palace this week stressed that Charles was “deeply concerned” about the allegations and stood ready to support any police investigation. Although “the specific allegations in question are for Mr Mountbatten-Windsor to address”, he said: “If Thames Valley police approach us, we are prepared to support them, as you would expect.” A spokesman for the Prince and Princess of Wales also said they were “deeply concerned” by the ongoing revelations.

Will this palace support mean access to royal email addresses used by Mountbatten-Windsor? One of Epstein’s survivors has called on Buckingham Palace to proactively seek files and emails related to then-Prince Andrew. Juliette Bryant, he told the BBC Stating that she had never met Andrew at his home in Cape Town and had not made any allegations against him, she said of the Palace: “It’s great that they’ve finally made a statement. But the truth is, are they really going to take action?” Referring to the palace as well as police and other officials, he added: “They need to review all of Prince Andrew’s files and emails.”

Bolsolver MP Natalie Fleet, who survived her teenage upbringing, says it has been difficult for the family whose dysfunction has been brutally exposed in public, for politicians who love to praise the royal family, and for members of the public who have deep respect for this most revered of public institutions.

Filo said: “Absolutely [the royal family] They’re on a pedestal and I want to keep them there, they’re a very important part of our country and I think most people feel that way too.

“But that’s why, in times like these, there’s even more need to be seen to do the right thing. Women are tired of hearing the right thing. We’re always grateful for that, but it needs to be followed up with action, actions, not words.”

Mountbatten-Windsor has been approached for comment.