Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

So what do we think will happen to Andrew, could he actually go to prison?

458 replies

cateringday · 19/02/2026 14:54

I just don’t believe it could happen. Also I’d like him to go to prison for the sex offences, that seems more important than his sharing confidential information problem.

OP posts:
manywanderings · 20/02/2026 22:29

Yep Andrew could potentially be found guilty of trafficking if the police find any Uk airports were used for a trafficked woman to be "sent" to Andrew. I was googling it and ignorance of whether or not the woman has been trafficked is no defence apparently - he'd be seen to be complicit in the trafficking. Unless he has been blackmailed and then he could claim duress. But it might be hard to claim duress if he willingly met up with the trafficking victim that was sent and brought her to the palace. We will have to wait and see. Because presumably the Russian 26 or 27 year old lady would have arrived at some airport in the Uk.

However what about all these other men that had women trafficked to them! Mainly in the US. They have probably hidden all evidence and got lawyered up already, just seeing what is happening with Andrew.

Paul2023 · 20/02/2026 22:44

PistachioTiramisu · 20/02/2026 18:38

I was thinking about all this in the shower - why doesn't Ghislaine Maxwell turn State's Evidence and tell the truth about what she knows? It would clear things up to some extent and she would probably have her sentence either reduced or cancelled.

I suppose depending on what she said it would be her word against Andrew’s?

Giving her that option , of a reduced sentence means she could say anything she likes , true or not in the hope that she gets released early.

She isn’t a credible witness. Andrew would
deny any wrongdoing.

Elisirdamour · 20/02/2026 22:48

manywanderings · 20/02/2026 20:10

I think Andrew was being blackmailed by Epstein, hence sharing all those documents about his trade visits (allegedly). I think the problem started with Fergie after she and Andrew divorced. Apparently Epstein had been funding her since the year of her divorced. He seems to like getting vulnerable women under his wing. Maxwell's Father had just died when he took her under his wing. Fergie had just been chucked out of the Royal Family under scandal and divorce and apparently needed money. So he maybe seemed like a kind helpful friend. But then he kept bankrolling her. I suspect Andrew met Epstein through Fergie - she has already been caught offering access to Andrew for money once so she may well have done that previously with Epstein. Then there was some kind of honey trap maybe. Andrew is probably pretty thick and naive and came from a certain background where not only Royals were immune but probably hadn't even heard of sex trafficking. Also from an era (the 70s) were anyone slept with anyone and so what. So he may well have had no idea that a girl he was introduced to was a honey trap. Epstein apparently had videos on various people in compromising situations. I read a piece (can't rememer who from - Epstein's neighbour maybe) that said that's how he made all his money - blackmailing people.

So - I'm not condoning anything (and also bear in mind Andrew is innocent until proved guilty and trial by media isn't a court) but nothing so far has proved he has done anything illegal. Seedy yes, as mentioned before.

And then he and Fergie were caught up in Epstein's world financially. They had to keep giving favours because he was funding them. I think Andrew in particular wanted to help Fergie out when she got into millions of pounds worth of debt and got more in with Epstein the financier. They were both caught up with him. I also think Andrew, having a bit of a Royal ego (and maybe a chip on his shoulder for being a second son and without the huge income Charles had from the Duchy of Cornwall etc) was flattered or even groomed by Epstein into thinking he was some kind of businessman worth knowing. When he got the job as trade envoy or whatever, Epstein was still calling in the favours. If he did share things he shouldn't have he was either thick, foolish, blackmailed, believing he really was being an ace businessman dealing with a financier, or a bit of all four.

But Epstein had something on both of them so they couldn't stop. And Andrew had more to lose than most, being such a public figure and part of the monarchy.

Whether he eventually knew about the sex trafficking or not I have no idea - and nobody does unless it's proved. Maybe he was arrogant enough to think that a 27 year old Russian woman just wanted to sleep with him because he was a Prince and that Epstein just happened to know a lot of beautiful women (she was probably paid a lot of money for it like Ms Giuffre but who knows - but was significantly older). Even so it could still be sex trafficking.

So he's been arrested over the potential misconduct in a public office regarding documents. Which is apparently very hard to prove and that's if he was even classed as being in "public office" - he wasn't a politician. If it was just seen as bad judgement it's not a criminal offence. Maybe it depends what the documents are.

Epstein was an evil man - because he's dead he can't be villified in the media. So all the attention is on Andrew.

I may be lynched for this, but I actually think it has all gone to far and is indeed a witch hunt against someone who has the furthest to fall, can't help what he was born into and his upbringing, has had no real benefits from being Royal, married the wrong person and stayed loyal so he could see his children a lot perhaps. And just got himself into a very big mess (not helped by chip on shoulder and arrogance) and yes maybe he's also a sexist product of the 70s (there was a lot of sleeze in the 70s "Readers wives" and so on).

But I am personally quite horrified at the amount of hate and vitriol online about someone who has never been found guilty of anything. That might change if he ends up in court. When there were so many others involved in the Epstein scandal who are sitting there untouched.

Andrew has lost everything, his family, his home (given to him by his Mother), his dignity, he seems to be the most hated person in Britain, he is ridiculed and humiliated publicly in the papers daily. Isn't that punishment enough for someone who has never even been found guilty of someone.

He is alone having been shunted into a house owned by his brother the King. They apparently never did get on and Andrew was resented for being the favourite. And now his parents are gone he is dependent on the brother who doesn't particularly like him (was maybe even jealous) and who has thrown him under a bus to save the monarchy.

What does get my goat is all the people saying poor King. Poor King my xxxx - he was hardly a paragon of virtue - friend of Saville. And other members of the Royal Family who had girls smuggled into Buckingham Palace (Phillip I think it was, allegedly). It was the norm. The King is the only member of the Royal Family who can;t be arrested apparently. The law is under his name! If Andrew went to court the case would be Andrew Mountbatten Windsor versus the King. His own brother.

I don't think any of us (the multitude online) should be vigilante and drive a man to suicide with hatred and vitriol. He accepted giving up various things to put the monarchy first (some were forced on him as well). But now it has just become cruelty and unpleasant.

Let the law play out and see where it goes, but until then, he is innocent until proved guilty despite his lifestyle and awful association with Epstein.

Whether true or not, Fergie said she had written those emails after denouncing him because he had threatened to kill her children. That sounds plausible to me after everythibg else known about Epstein. So Andrew also could have been being blackmailed. He's a complete idiot yes. And he probably will end up in court over something.

But he has no privacy whatsoever - he's been thrown to the baying hounds by his own family. The whole monarchy needs to go - it ruins the lives of people born into it who won't become future monarch. And yes if he had stayed in the Navy (where he was a war hero and highly thought of) and married someone less flighty and extravagant, or born in a different era, his life may have been a lot better.

I think the whole thing now is verging on inhuman. The pages of comments on social media hoping he kills himself - because he looks so shocked and terrified on that photo as he left the police station. That is sick.

And yes I do think about the victims - Epstein's victims. Andrew is a complete scapegoat in all this compared to all the people getting away with things who aren't Royal.

Sorry for the rant - but - just get rid of the Monarchy! But then we'd have no scandals to gossip about would we?

I suspect it would be hard for them to be able to charge him for this offence but there is also a strong likelihood that he will be charged "because it's in the public interest". And that may lead to further investigations.

What the heck are the US doing about all this? Nothing it seems.

Never liked Charles.

I didn’t know Sarah Ferguson said Epstein threatened to kill her children. Is this right? Did SF claim this?

Paul2023 · 20/02/2026 22:56

I may be wrong here, but some of the posts on this thread indicate Andrew was arrested because of the sexual allegations.
Its not. It’s the sharing of information of financial importance to Jeffrey Epstein that he allegedly did. Secret government files and information.
Andrew was trade envoy for the UK, and represented the UKs business interests for global trade deals.

This is misconduct in public office. Not to do with sex with young women who were trafficked.

MO0N · 20/02/2026 23:53

Maybe Andrew is the cork that was holding the genie in the bottle....now we will see the full evil entity oozing out.
I've heard that Lex Wexner was initially a source of much of Epstein's money, also that they had a physical relationship. Same surely goes for Mandelson, hence the misty eyed fawning over him.

sassdunn · 21/02/2026 00:30

catownerofthenorth · 19/02/2026 15:11

Be mindful anything you say online could end up prejudicing proceedings if any take place. Will report this thread.

Don't be silly. They've already got this planned and made their minds up.

sassdunn · 21/02/2026 00:35

climbintheback · 19/02/2026 15:11

Can’t help comparing that pic of a smiling young woman with his arm around her to a 12 year old girl on a stinking mattress in Rotherham.

Unfortunately it's all relevant, no matter how you look at it. Across the board nobody should have to be in a situation like that. Abuse is abuse. Please don't forget that.

Owl55 · 21/02/2026 01:23

Nothing will happen to him for allegedly sharing information because a court case will take years to go to court with appeals etc as they won’t let an ex royal go to jail !
Or he’ll move to Saudi or somewhere where he’ll still live in exile and treated as a prince .
I would not be surprised if if he took his own life with the huge amount of pressure he must be under.

Buffs · 21/02/2026 01:55

He will have a top notch, fabulously expensive legal team paid for by Charles aka the British taxpayer and likely get off as a result.

NavyTurtle · 21/02/2026 02:18

cateringday · 19/02/2026 14:54

I just don’t believe it could happen. Also I’d like him to go to prison for the sex offences, that seems more important than his sharing confidential information problem.

This could be an Al Capone moment. They may not be able to prove the sex offences, although they know he's guilty, so they get him on something else. The sharing information in a public office still could carry a life sentence. Look at O J Simpson. Could not get him for the murder of his wife, but got him for a completely different offence. I feel they will get him, it will take a while, but they will get him on something.

NavyTurtle · 21/02/2026 02:22

catownerofthenorth · 19/02/2026 15:11

Be mindful anything you say online could end up prejudicing proceedings if any take place. Will report this thread.

Don't be ridiculous. Anyone on here does not know him and is entitled to an opinion.

JoeSikoraTommysStory · 21/02/2026 05:25

PandoraSocks · 19/02/2026 15:16

Is it a criminal offence to have sex with trafficked women?

Yes, it is.

Is there evidence that he knew they were trafficked if do

Doesn't need to be according to the legislation.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/53A

Edited

He hasn’t committed any sexual offences.
Trafficking wasn’t a crime until 2003 so even if she was brought over against her will no such crime existed then (1998/1999) so Prince Andrew is still not guilty of any sexual crimes.

Rubix89 · 21/02/2026 07:14

I agree that his victims are more important than misconduct in public office. It’s an insult quite honestly, but let’s hope this arrest leads to some form of justice for them. I say that because really, nothing will truly be enough for all they suffered. I really can’t see him going to prison - at most house arrest (hope I’m wrong). It’s quite clear that the King is not going to protect him In the way their mother had all these years - good. However, he was still born Royal. The family may wash their hands of him publicly and maybe even privately, but he has connections. Many were involved. One of the many things we can probably take away from this is that there is so much corruption. So, I can’t imagine he’s likely to experience the consequences like any other person.

PandoraSocks · 21/02/2026 07:54

JoeSikoraTommysStory · 21/02/2026 05:25

He hasn’t committed any sexual offences.
Trafficking wasn’t a crime until 2003 so even if she was brought over against her will no such crime existed then (1998/1999) so Prince Andrew is still not guilty of any sexual crimes.

You haven't read the full thread, clearly. Or even the posts from yesterday!😄

PistachioTiramisu · 21/02/2026 08:36

Rubix89 · 21/02/2026 07:14

I agree that his victims are more important than misconduct in public office. It’s an insult quite honestly, but let’s hope this arrest leads to some form of justice for them. I say that because really, nothing will truly be enough for all they suffered. I really can’t see him going to prison - at most house arrest (hope I’m wrong). It’s quite clear that the King is not going to protect him In the way their mother had all these years - good. However, he was still born Royal. The family may wash their hands of him publicly and maybe even privately, but he has connections. Many were involved. One of the many things we can probably take away from this is that there is so much corruption. So, I can’t imagine he’s likely to experience the consequences like any other person.

I'm sorry but I don't agree. Nothing is more important than national security - he could have passed on any type of top secret information which could have left our country vulnerable to attack.

Trishthedish · 21/02/2026 09:29

CalmerTree · 20/02/2026 00:30

Trump, obviously. I think Charles should cancel his visit to the US. The special relationship is over.

I totally agree. Charles should not go to the USA. Trump is up to his neck in the Epstein files and Charles should have nothing to do with it.

Crispsandredwine · 21/02/2026 09:36

Andrew Lownie (biographer who wrote Entitled) has said he believes AMW is a flight risk and will scarper to Bahrain or one of the other Gulf states. I wouldn’t bet against that happening pretty quickly now.

Trishthedish · 21/02/2026 09:41

Paul2023 · 20/02/2026 22:56

I may be wrong here, but some of the posts on this thread indicate Andrew was arrested because of the sexual allegations.
Its not. It’s the sharing of information of financial importance to Jeffrey Epstein that he allegedly did. Secret government files and information.
Andrew was trade envoy for the UK, and represented the UKs business interests for global trade deals.

This is misconduct in public office. Not to do with sex with young women who were trafficked.

Edited

Exactly this.

JustAnotherWhinger · 21/02/2026 10:26

PistachioTiramisu · 20/02/2026 18:38

I was thinking about all this in the shower - why doesn't Ghislaine Maxwell turn State's Evidence and tell the truth about what she knows? It would clear things up to some extent and she would probably have her sentence either reduced or cancelled.

She doesn’t want to end up dead like Epstein?

Naming the powerful men would be massively dangerous for her, and unless she can direct law enforcement to clear proof it may not achieve anything.

Silence is her only chance of surviving her sentence and leaving prison. It’s not like she’s suddenly going to care more about the victims than herself so she’s not going to say a word to make her life more difficult or dangerous.

Boomer55 · 21/02/2026 10:31

No, he won’t go to prison. It’s doubtful the sex allegations could even get to Court. 🤷‍♀️.

LizzieW1969 · 21/02/2026 10:37

Boomer55 · 21/02/2026 10:31

No, he won’t go to prison. It’s doubtful the sex allegations could even get to Court. 🤷‍♀️.

But the Misconduct in Public Office might achieve that. It’s much more likely to achieve that than any sexual offences charge anyway. It can carry a heavy sentence too, if he were to be convicted. (Assuming they can find a way for him to have a fair trial in this country.)

Although the investigation into flights into Stansted Airport might yet lead to a trafficking charge.

HoppityBun · 21/02/2026 11:11

LizzieW1969 · 21/02/2026 10:37

But the Misconduct in Public Office might achieve that. It’s much more likely to achieve that than any sexual offences charge anyway. It can carry a heavy sentence too, if he were to be convicted. (Assuming they can find a way for him to have a fair trial in this country.)

Although the investigation into flights into Stansted Airport might yet lead to a trafficking charge.

I think that misconduct in a public office is hard to prove and there will be doubts about whether or not he was in a public office.

On the other hand, treason might fit the circumstances

Prison would be a nightmare for the prison estate.

ReleaseTheDucksOfWar · 21/02/2026 11:17

I hoe he goes to prison for betraying confidential / secret stuff to Epstein, who had strong links apparently to the UK's enemies such as Russia and China and other countries, as well as for the awful sexual stuff, if it's proven to have happened.

This culpable fool has lived off UK taxpayers' money all his life and should have been brought up to think of the UK's best interests, not puffing up his bloated ego and betraying the people who he both depended on and despised.

climbintheback · 21/02/2026 11:20

She has said she will tell all for her freedom and immunity from prosecution

LizzieW1969 · 21/02/2026 11:48

HoppityBun · 21/02/2026 11:11

I think that misconduct in a public office is hard to prove and there will be doubts about whether or not he was in a public office.

On the other hand, treason might fit the circumstances

Prison would be a nightmare for the prison estate.

Point taken. Yes, a charge of treason would be very appropriate. Which Edward VIII should have been charged with (it carried the death penalty in those days).

It would be easier to charge Mandelson with Misconduct in Public Office.

Swipe left for the next trending thread