Andrew Mountbatten Windsor continues to be embroiled in scandal, and despite the ‘censures’ from King Charles that have attempted to distance the monarchy from the controversy, the Windsors are in turmoil
The Prince of Wales and his disgraced uncle Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor
New details in the Epstein files are sending shockwaves around the world – and through the Royal Family itself.
For years, Andrew has denied that the infamous photo of Andrew and his accuser, Virginia Giuffre, is real, insisting it was doctored and that he has no memory of meeting her. But the latest release of documents shows an email appearing to be from Epstein’s accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell, claiming the exact opposite.
A message titled ‘draft statement’ sent by a ‘G Maxwell’ to Epstein in 2015 reads: “In 2001 I was in London when [redacted] met a number of friends of mine including Prince Andrew. A photograph was taken as I imagine she wanted to show it to friends and family.” In a damning summary, royal expert Richard Fitzwilliams tells the Mirror, “We know it’s genuine now. We always did.”
And now a second accuser against Andrew has come forward, alleging she was sent to the UK by Epstein for a sexual encounter with the King’s brother in 2010. Lawyers for the victim allege the encounter took place at Royal Lodge, and that the following day she was given a tour of Buckingham Palace.
READ MORE: Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s new neighbours deliver same brutal verdict as royal moves inREAD MORE: Princess Eugenie’s friend responds to Epstein ‘s***-show’ with major update
Andrew with Virginia Giuffre and Ghislaine Maxwell(Image: PA)
Meanwhile, Andrew has been forced into early exile, leaving his Windsor home under the cover of darkness at the apparent behest of horrified King Charles, to start his reduced life on Marsh Farm in Norfolk. He has always strenuously denied any wrongdoing. But as the blows keep on coming, will his sidelining be enough to keep the wolves from the door?
Royal expert Richard Fitzwilliams tells the Mirror the latest developments are incredibly “big news” for a Royal Family that is undeniably reeling. Andrew may have repeatedly denied any wrongdoing, but the fact of the matter is that the “enormous interest” from the public is bad for the House of Windsor.
‘Feuding’ brothers
Aside from one statement issued by King Charles supporting Epstein’s victims, the royals have remained tight-lipped on the scandal. But Andrew’s baby brother Prince Edward, 61, broke rank when he addressed it head-on on Tuesday.
The statement that is believed to have been written by Ghislaine Maxwell(Image: INSTAGRAM)
Asked how he was ‘coping’ while speaking at the World Governments Summit in Dubai, he told journalists: “Well, with the best will in the world, I’m not sure this is the audience that is the least bit interested in that. They all came here to listen to education, solving the future, but no, I think it’s all really important, always, to remember the victims and who are the victims in all this.”
Fitzwilliams tell the Mirror that this was Edward’s way of aligning with Charles and “continuing the particular emphasis” the King and Queen put on supporting survivors of abuse.
Indeed, while Edward and Charles are close, there’s said to be no love lost between Edward and Andrew, who are just four years apart in age. Even as children in the nursery, Andrew is said have been a “bruiser” who ‘bullied’ his younger sibling and stole his cake.
Andrew was famously the late Queen’s favourite – an action man and Naval officer who fought in the Falklands. Meanwhile, Edward was apparently a ‘sweet, quiet and studious’ child and beloved by staff. Unlike his war hero brother, he studied history at Cambridge and enjoyed amateur dramatics.
According to royal author Robert Jobson, Edward was closest to sensitive Charles, despite their 16-year age gap. At nights, he says, Charles would read to his little brother and make up stories, enjoying their shared imagination and humour.
“Andrew, meanwhile, was loud and robust. He would constantly swipe his younger brother. If he saw Edward going for a particular piece of cake, Andrew would try to grab it first. Edward learned to yield to him,” Jobson wrote in the Daily Mail.
While Prince Philip was famously close to daughter Princess Anne, Edward was apparently his favourite son and he was uncharacteristically supportive when his youngest quit the Royal Marines in 1987. As the princes grew, their divide became all the more obvious, Jobson says. “Andrew and Edward are very different characters. The former feels the system owes him; the latter always seems happy to serve the system. The tension between Andrew and Edward continued into adulthood.”
Andrew with younger brother Prince Edward, the Duke of Edinburgh(Image: PA)
Eventually though, he writes that Edward – who chose not to give his children royal titles – found his voice and asserted his own power. He added: “If Andrew thought he could bully his brother in later years, it didn’t wash. On shoots on royal estates, if Andrew made some outlandish statement, Edward would be the first to dismiss it as ‘utter nonsense’. Different characters, different judgments – and very different fates.”
Indeed, while Andrew has been stripped of all his titles as a direct result of his choices, Edward has been gifted the coveted Duke of Edinburg title that previously belonged to his father.
Split loyalties
When details of King Charles’ decisive action to strip his brother’s titles first surfaced, the move apparently divided the family. Princess Anne is said to have deemed it “harsh”, while princes William and Edward were in full agreement.
However, royal expert Richard Fitzwilliams tells the Mirror that whilst it “may well have been” true that Anne might have considered Andrew’s punishment to be “brutal”, the release of the Epstein files has proved the King’s actions were “absolutely necessary” and were part of a longer game. “The fact is the King had no actual power to get Andrew out of Royal Lodge but the optics of him remaining there were impossible,” he says.
And bad blood is said to be seeping through the family as the Andrew problem threatens to undermine its charity work. “There’s clearly considerable irritation, the scandal detracts from the royal calendar and also what the message that members of the Royal Family are trying to get across,” Fitzwilliams says.
A man appearing to be Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor pictured in the Epstein files(Image: US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE/AFP via)
Both Edward’s wife Duchess Sophie and Queen Camilla have “dedicated” themselves to the “very important work” of supporting survivors of sexual and domestic violence, putting them directly at odds with the allegations surrounding Andrew. “Sophie will visit various countries where there have been terrible wars, Camilla has done a lot of work to help survivors of domestic abuse and has given this a very considerable priority.
“This is very significant at a time like this when a member of the Royal Family – though he denies it and has been found guilty of nothing – has been accused of sexual abuse.”
The Mail also reports that that there has been an “eroding” of the relationship between Eugenie and William. Fitzwilliams says that to his understanding “they have not been close” and that Eugenie “has always been closer with Prince Harry” and his wife Meghan, who are estranged from William and Kate. According to the author, “there was always the possibility that she might be a bridge between the Windsors and Sussexes”.
Some reports claimed previously that William might take Beatrice and Eugenie’s titles away when the time comes for him to take the throne, however, this has since been debunked by palace sources.
King Charles’ horror
Removal vans have been spotted at Royal Lodge(Image: Getty)
The monarch himself is said to have been the one to give Andrew the instruction to leave Royal Lodge in the dead of night, after becoming increasingly horrified over how visible his brother was making himself while he remained in the lavish Windsor property.
Andrew had continued taking his routinely scheduled horse rides, despite the fact these outings meant he was regularly photographed in images splashed across the front pages. “Questions were being asked in royal circles along the lines of ‘what’s he still doing here?’ each time he appeared out riding,” a source told the Mail. “Someone less arrogant than Andrew would have read the room and kept his head down for a while, but that’s not in his make-up, so something had to be done.” The outlet quotes another source as saying that Andrew “was encouraged to think that it would be a good time to move on”.
Sandringham staff ‘strike’
Andrew won’t have room for live-in staff at his new home, Marsh Farm, but the King has reportedly offered him the “ad-hoc” use of staff from Sandringham House, including cleaners and cooks. This apparently has not “gone down well” with the former prince, but there’s been another twist in the staffing saga.
The Sun reports that employees have been informed that they are able to refuse working for Andrew if they don’t feel comfortable. And it’s a “long list,” according to a source who has said there is no way they will be helping him out.
Employees have “been told they don’t have to serve Andrew or work for him if they feel uncomfortable. There is already quite a list saying no thanks. There is understandably a lot of disquiet as he is now a total pariah,” the source was quoted as saying.
“But there is also a worry that once he gets comfortable at Wood Farm while Marsh Farm is being finished, they will never get him out again.”
Questions for the Royals
How much the rest of the Royal Family knew about Andrew’s ties to Esptein, and the allegations he has faced, has been the question on everyone’s lips as more correspondence and photographs continue to emerge in the latest drop of the Epstein files.
A source speaking to the Mail claimed that William and Charles would have been told ahead of time what could be due to come down the pipe, and that now it’s all coming out in the wash, the sanctions they have brought on Andrew seem totally “appropriate”.
“It seems clear that William and the King were given some kind of forewarning in intelligence briefings late last year about what was still to come. They obviously couldn’t share that, and when they evicted Andrew and Sarah from Royal Lodge, some people thought it was too harsh. In the light of what’s now come out, it looks a more appropriate sanction,” the source said.
Meanwhile, royal authour Andrew Lownie claims: “They were sent a copy of Virginia Giuffre’s book in April while she was still alive. They can’t be surprised by some of the stuff that is now emerging.”
He added: “This is now a bigger scandal than Andrew, it’s about what the palace knew and why they didn’t act. I think he was allowed to prosper for far longer than he should have done because of the protection he had and I think he still has.”
But Fitzwilliams disagrees, claiming one of the biggest issues for the Royal Family at the moment when it comes to Andrew is that “they don’t know what is coming, and therefore it is absolutely impossible to prepare”.
What’s next?
Andrew has given up his lavish home and been stripped of his titles and other trappings of royal life, and it remains to be seen whether he will agree to testify about his connection to the convicted sex trafficker.
Some have argued that the chance of forcing Andrew to make his case has been lost along with his dukedom – a very public position. With his commercial prospects weakened, if another civil case were brought against him, he would likely not have the funds to make another settlement. He settled out of court with Virginia Giuffre in 2022, reportedly to the tune of £12 million, which did not include an admission of guilt.
Royal expert Afua Acheampong-Hagan tells the Mirror that we are approaching the point where Charles will have “to do more”. She explains: “The next step would perhaps be for the King to make some sort of statement about this.”
“This is someone who is within their ranks, who was protected by the family, and who is still going to be living off [his brother]. We know it’s the King’s private funding and his private wealth – but he is still going to be associated with the Royal Family,” the expert added.
“Maybe there does come a point where they need to be able to say ‘actually we want some more accountability’, or ‘we are sorry for the fact that we protected someone for so long.'”
Meanwhile, campaigner Graham Smith from Republic tells the Mirror that the Firm’s current policy – often dubbed ‘never complain, never explain’ – is “unsustainable”. He says: “Some people talk about this as if it’s just an ordinary family – but they are head of state, heir to throne, duke and so on, these are public positions. The equivalent has to be prime minister and cabinet, not someone else’s private family.”
He compares the situation to Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s approach to Peter Mandelson, who is also caught up in a scandal surrounding his friendship with Epstein. “If [Starmer] was saying no comment on Mandelson, he’d be gone.
“He can’t do that. Instead he has been put in a position where he has to start taking strong action and make strong statements because he knows that he is going to be facing consequences if he doesn’t, whereas Charles can just hide behind his big gates and have someone say no comment. That is not going to be sustainable.”
The campaigner says the new revelations “raise so many questions about what Charles knew and what William knew”. However, Graham admits the royals are, thanks to Andrew, currently stuck between a rock and a hard place, explaining if they continue to offer no comment “it’s going to damage them. But if they start commenting, that’s going to damage them as well, so it’s a pretty difficult situation.”
“The family angle doesn’t really get them very far,” he warns, adding: “They can’t be in these positions and claim so much in terms of status and rights and money and all the rest of it one minute and then the next, ‘Oh it’s just a family thing’.”
Buckingham Palace and Andrew Mountbatten Windsor were contacted for comment.