Andrew Mountbatten Windsor was called upon by the US Congress to testify regarding his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein – but the former prince missed the deadline to respond
Pressure for Andrew Mountbatten Windsor to testify over his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein reached new heights in recent days when US lawmakers sent him a letter asking him to provide evidence. But what could come of the investigation over in the States?
The former duke recently relinquished his royal titles and honours and agreed to give up his 30-room mansion, Royal Lodge, after scrutiny over his connection to the late paedophile ramped up. Leaked emails earlier this year showed that Andrew had misled the Palace and public on exactly when he cut ties with the disgraced financier.
Then further shame for the Royal Family came with the release of Virginia Guiffre’s posthumous memoir, Nobody’s Girl. The Epstein victim – who tragically died by suicide this year – accused Andrew of sexually assaulting her three times as a teenager, claims he vehemently denies.
READ MORE: Andrew’s net worth as former prince ‘earning £20k a year’READ MORE: Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor given damning public verdict amid Epstein probe
It also emerged that Andrew is the most mentioned British name in the bombshell cache of 23,000 Jeffrey Epstein-linked documents handed to the US House Oversight Committee by the Epstein estate. While a name’s appearance does not imply any wrongdoing, Andrew’s prominence dwarfs every other UK figure and underscores how deeply his downfall became entwined with the Epstein scandal.
The US Congress recently called on Andrew to provide testimony about his relationship with the convicted sex offender, but the two-week deadline that was set by them has since passed without a reply. The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform contacted Andrew by letter, as part of their investigation into the late disgraced financier, his sex trafficking network and how authorities handled the case. However, Andrew was not legally obliged to provide testimony.
The last time Andrew publicly discussed his friendship with Epstein was in 2019, when he sat down for an in-depth interview with the BBC – which was widely dubbed a complete “car crash” and saw him swiftly step down from royal duties. Andrew swerved another occasion in which he would have been forced to answer questions about his ties to the sex offender in 2022, when Virginia Giuffre brought a civil case against him in the US.
Andrew settled with Giuffre out of court – reportedly for millions – but the settlement did not include any admission of guilt for the allegations she had made, which he has consistently denied are true.
Two Democrats who sit on the committee calling for Andrew to testify issued a scathing statement condemning the ex prince’s silence. Ranking Member Robert Garcia and Congressman Suhas Subramanyam said: “Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s silence in the face of the Oversight Democrat’s demand for testimony speaks volumes.
“The documents we’ve reviewed, along with public records and Virginia Roberts Giuffre’s testimony, raise serious questions he must answer, yet he continues to hide. Our work will move forward with or without him, and we will hold anyone who was involved in these crimes accountable, no matter their wealth, status, or political party. We will get justice for the survivors.”
And now a US political expert has told the Mirror that despite the desire amongst Democrats to hear Andrew’s testimony, Andrew could continue to “refuse” any further requests made, even if they came in stronger terms than the letter he has already been sent.
“Let us not forget that it is principally the Democrats on the House Overnight Committee who are calling for Mountbatten Windsor to testify, although a few Republicans have joined them,” explained Professor John E. Owens, from the University of Westminster.
“So, if there is sufficient political will on the committee, a bipartisan majority could issue a subpoena, going beyond the simple letter they have sent already. And they might agree to Mountbatten Windsor testifying by Zoom.
“Mountbatten Windsor would probably refuse whatever request is made, which would then leave open the possibility of the Congress ruling him in contempt of Congress, although the US constitution does not explicitly grant the Congress this power.”
The expert, who is Professor of United States Government and Politics at the Centre for the Study of Democracy, added: “Given the political stakes at issue here, and House Republicans’ fealty to Trump, who may be damaged further politically by Mountbatten Windsor’s testimony, it seems unlikely that the whole House would issue a contempt order.
“If they did, it would be down to Trump’s politically subservient Department of Justice to prosecute Mountbatten Windsor. [Which is] not going to happen.” The expert acknowledged that there could have been “a different outcome” if Andrew were a US citizen or resided in the US, but as it stands, he has the ability to swerve the questioning from Congress.
Last week, Prime Minister Keir Starmer weighed in on whether Andrew should agree to speak to the House Oversight Committee, saying that whilst he wouldn’t be drawn on the specifics as a “general principle I’ve held for a very long time is that anybody who has got relevant information in relation to these kind of cases should give that evidence to those that need it.”
It comes as the Metropolitan Police said last month that they will be investigating after it was claimed that Andrew had given Guiffre’s personal details to a royal protection officer, allegedly requesting the police officer dig up dirt on his accuser. Two officers have reportedly been questioned already, and the Independent Office for Police Conduct has been contacted by the Met over the issue, but they have yet to refer themselves officially to the watchdog.
