Do you think Andrew will face any criminal charges?

[LotsInCommon]

I’m only now reading Virginias book and it’s a very difficult read.

It’s 7 months on from Andrews arrest for misconduct in public office. Do you think he will be charged with anything to do with that? Do you think he’ll be charged with sexual abuse and rape?

I am in no way excusing AMW as my post makes clear.

I just want the worse offenders prosecuted too.

Bizarrely a lot of them are even more protected than AMW by wealth which make KC's millions look like pocket money and have infinitesimal power from their political patronages.

Whilst I agree that the current Shite House is uninterested in justice that doesn't mean to say I shrug my shoulders and let them off.

The vast majority of offenders in this case are American and pressure must be applied to bring them to court.

No he won't get charged with anything. He's teflon. They all are.

Yes! Agree absolutely for all of these reasons!

The only chink of light perhaps is the fact that the Thames Valley Police are investing some allegations and perhaps they are competitive with the MET? Probably wishful thinking on my part.

I can’t link it, but I would urge anyone interested in this subject to look at the episode of The News Agent with Andrew Lownie and Lewis Goodall which is available on You Tube.

Course not

No, cos he settled with Giuffre and the other stuff is hard to prove.

His life’s ruined though. Without a Court case which is a bit iffy - I’d much rather he was convicted.

I think he might because I think when the decision to arrest him was made they must have felt confident in finding something specific, I don’t think they’d have arrested him otherwise.

It won’t be anything to do with Epstein or any of his victims there though. It’ll be money related

That’s what I’m thinking @JustAnotherWhinger

Absolutely not.

Mummy connived at him hiding behind her skirts when it came to serving papers for his civil case. The firm went on to have a whip round (donors still unclear but we all still want to know) to keep him out of a civil hearing he wouldn't even have been compelled to attend.

While other offences have resulted in prosecutions (Anne and her out of control and well-fanged mutts spring to mind) there's no way we'll see a royal behind bars however well deserved.

@LotsInCommon

Thank you for starting this thread. Whilst there is not much in the media about AMW at the moment, how he has behaved over decades is far far worse than anything any other member of the Royal Family has done. And it gets overlooked. Especially on MN.

No, I don't think for one moment he will be prosecuted for anything to do with Virginia Guiffre. However, misconduct in public office is a huge one. What he did is equivalent to treason to be honest. He was passing on government papers to not only Epstein but other friends all to enrich them. Over 11 years AMW was passing confidential trade reports to Epstein

However it is notoriously hard to prove for all sorts of reasons. Even though there is proof he passed on documents. Was he in public office, he wasn't paid, only received expenses (which were beyond a joke) and I think this will be the Palace's loophole they will use. He was 'unsalaried'

The Law Commission has called for years to make the offence more specific and of course this not happening will work in AMW's favour. Too vague for him to be guilty. It is said by legal experts that it is unlikely that either man will be convicted of anything. Cases involving misconduct in public office with anyone higher than a police officer is extremely rare, not happening with politicians or shock horror a member of the RF.

As @Chocolatethumbprints says "Unfortunately it’s virtually impossible to prosecute for malfeasance in public office" (Sorry, I am just repeating what you have said in a long winded way!)

If anyone’s interested, there’s an excellent interview with Andrew Lownie on this morning’s News Agent podcast which touches on this subject.

Unlikely despite the fact he deserves it.

Unlikely

It's a State ruse common enough - when there is a scandal story, the papers report that 'the police are looking into it' - so the public thinks, okay, this is in the right hands! Say no more! Then, lo and behold, nothing comes of it. Surrey Police used to do that with care homes that came to the press's attention.

Andrew's arrest sort of took the heat off him. And, as has been pointed out, was nothing to do with Epstein and his sex ring.

Andrew Lownie had another book about the Royals, Lord Mountbatten, published some years ago and it was well received and reviewed in the mainstream press. A chapter near the end is 20 pages of credible rumours about his rampant homosexuality and also his sexual abuse of minors in a Northern Ireland care home. It's reported in a very non-judgemental, non salacious way and is more damning because of it. It's like we're allowed to know half a century later - but even then a lot of info is still kept under wraps by the Royals.

It is even hinted that the IRA were allowed to get on with targeting him because his paedophile activities were known; his special protection officer was made to stand down 24 hours before it happened, and there are other such oddities.

Actually, having young women arranged for Andrew at Buckingham Palace is really not that scandalous or unusual in itself; pop stars had young fans or groupies directed to their dressing rooms of course, it's just that's 'okay' because they're said to be so sexually magnetic etc. You could argue that women who are actually prostitutes are at least less vulnerable than teenage fans - and as for them being taken to Buck Palace - shock horror - well, where else? It makes him less vulnerable to blackmail if it's on home turf.

In order to charge him with anything, there needs to be proof. Actual hard evidence that stands up in a criminal court, and is "beyond reasonable doubt". He is entitled to the same legal process as the rest of us. So far I haven't seen or heard anything to indicate there is any proof. A book isn't evidence, it is one woman's recollection, and is written to sell, not necessarily the truth. Her word against his.

Sexual assault charges would require proof - a witness or forensics or cctv or multiple individuals reporting the same behaviour etc. All I've seen is a picture of AMW with his arm around a blonde girl. It merely shows that they met.

That he was a vain arrogant inappropriate idiot who enjoyed parties with lots of pretty women too freely, and actually thought very young women were attracted to him is not in doubt. But then as a royal, he'd had women chasing him throughout his younger years so maybe not so impossible.

Did he know girls were paid to be there or had been trafficked? Did he know how young they were? We can't know for sure. Were they intimate? If so, how old was VG at the time, and in which country (re: age of consent)? Has AMW been honest? certainly not. Did JE blackmail his "guests"? very probably. All those fawning emails don't ring true.

As far as I can see, any half-decent barrister could drive a coach and horses through the "evidence" we've heard so far.

On the charge of misconduct in public office, I'd say there will be evidence - an email trail, but the govt may decide it is not in the UK's interest to pursue charges, But AMWs reputation has been permanently wrecked. He now lives, effectively on his brother's charity and his humiliation is complete. That may have to be enough.

Make no mistake about it that the hard evidence required in court is available but has been covered up for the last decade or more and is continuing to be covered up,

Have you actually read Entitled?

Andrew Lownie’s book details lots of proof from documentation and double sourced verified sources.

Lownie explains that during official trade trips, when the then Prince was representing the UK as a special trade envoy, the prince's staff routinely sent out lists of strict personal demands to local consulates. In one instance, a private secretary sent a list specifying travel preferences, refreshments, and a note stating that the prince "prefers blondes." In response to the request that attractive women be procured for events, a British consul famously replied, "I'm a diplomat, not a pimp."

Entitled also details an official trip taken by Prince Andrew to Thailand where 40 prostitutes were allegedly brought to his hotel suite over four days. The author asserts that hotel staff noted more than 10 women a day were directed to the room, and that the activities were enabled by diplomatic staff during the taxpayer-funded mission.

Andrew Lownie has seen letters to protection officers warning them about their obligations of confidentiality and reminding them about the conditions of their pensions.

He has evidence of travel logs going missing.

He details instances where civil servants who were previously willing to talk have been sent legal letters and are no longer prepared to talk.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/feb/24/andrew-mountbatten-windsor-biographer-andrew-lownie-entitled

The Selman Turk case provided evidence of cash for passports in court;

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/apr/05/selman-turk-exiled-businessman-prince-andrew

And remember that £12 million was paid to Giuffre to settle out of court. According to Lownie, Prince Philip, the late Queen and Charles contributed to this fund, so they all knew and that’s the problem. This issue goes straight back to the Crown. Hence the cover up.

Andrew Lownie himself has offered an entire dossier of information to the National Crime Agency and they haven’t shown any interest in it at all.

Make no mistake about it that the hard evidence required in court is available but has been covered up for the last decade or more and is continuing to be covered up

Yep.

Quite telling that the vast bulk of the TE records remain sealed until 2065 and that the clamour to have them unsealed has largely died down.

I agree. I highly doubt he will face criminal charges for the sexual assault but he was protected for so long by the Royals, enabled by too many government ministers, civil servants, police etc for anything significant to happen.

On the charge of misconduct in public office, I'd say there will be evidence - an email trail, but the govt may decide it is not in the UK's interest to pursue charges, But AMWs reputation has been permanently wrecked. He now lives, effectively on his brother's charity and his humiliation is complete

The government may decide this, but I would argue it is in the UKs best interests for the overly deferential, self serving unconstitutional manner successive governments have behaved to be publicised. It's not in Parliaments best interests or the Royal Family's best interests for it to exposed just how much the RF have got away with over the years with little to no scrutiny or pushback. Andrews misdemeanours would have stayed fully hidden if the US Congress hadn't demanded the release of the Epstein files. MPs have been cowardly in the extreme on this. They need to be forced to do their job and hold the Monarchy to account. That is their role in a Constitutional Monarchy and they have singularly failed to do it.

To answer you further Meadowfinch,
thinking about this, because VG was a US citizen (and she’s not the only one) and because of the age difference in the legal penalties, and because of the difficulties of proof with regard to proof in sexual crimes full stop, it may be that Virginia Giuffre’s case needs to be prosecuted there.

And the case will be pursued I believe once the Trump administration is over in which case AMW may be extradited. AMW would probably debunk to the Middle East if that happened, which would be frustrating, but him “escaping” would at least be some admission of guilt.

And btw when you say AMW’s humiliation may “have to be enough” I think that is the hope of many people in the monarchy and their supporters.

However, he is patently not living on his brother’s charity. Lownie has said recently that AMW has been seen in the Middle East, and also allegedly looking at properties in the south of France. He doesn’t recognise any fault and sees himself as a victim. He is very much not humiliated and holed up at Sandringham.

And the Crown, while making public statements about supporting the investigation, according to Lownie, at one and the same time, are sending legal letters to ex staff telling them not to talk.

The King only acted when he heard the crowds shouting “how much did you know and when?” The RF have dragged their feet over this for decades. .

Lownie has evidence that the late Queen was informed about AMW’s activities by the head of the foreign office, MPs and intelligence officers years ago. The late QE2 and Prince Philip and the then Prince Charles all paid off VG to the tune of £12 million. The RF have known about this scandal for years and if the case is not being prosecuted, it’s because of that more than anything else; because the scandal goes back to the Crown.

Those interested in proper justice should be very anxious that AMW is subject to the laws of the land, and should be subject to the same charges, in exactly the same way that any ordinary citizen would be,

The one remaining hope in this matter atm is Thames Valley Police.

Whilst I agree that parliament is not upholding it's responsibilities in a constitutional monarchy, I disagree that Congress is any better. They have made a lot of noise but no one has been convicted, or even charged with anything except 1 English woman. It is all very disappointing.

It is very disappointing but what does anyone expect given that Trump has been implicated?

Also, as I understand it, Entitled was due to be published in the USA and the publisher has allegedly breached its contract.

Their side is that the manuscript was unacceptable but they used the HarperCollins offset and there was a 90-day revision period built in to the contract. They also allegedly said that Lownie had been “uncooperative” when he said he was happy with an American editor carrying out the tweaks.

Lownie is sueing for breach of contract and loss of marketing support; this was a Sunday Times bestseller in the UK.

All very mysterious!

Interference by the current administration?

Publisher worried about being sued themselves?

Who knows?

AMWs reputation has been permanently wrecked. He now lives, effectively on his brother's charity and his humiliation is complete. That may have to be enough.

He was once cited as the third richest royal, has a history of hiding assets (Bank of England Nominees) and being cosied up with dodgy offshore tycoons. He's provided with body guards and living in a newly and lavishly refurbished property along with now apparently prowling Europe on holiday.

He's welcome with Anne and Edward and he's busily inserting himself into royal adjacent events where he can with impunity (carriage driving event at Windsor).

His lifestyle is a very long way from the humiliation and handouts the Windsors would have us swallow.

So agree @CathyorClaire

Of course he can't play dress up with the rest of them but he can go when and where he pleases because you can bet your bottom dollar he will be protected by the Monarchy, flying in and out discreetly. Because if it wasn't like that he would be snapped and in the daily mail and/or doing a tell all.

He makes me sick. No comeuppance. No apologies for anything. He will still be enjoying a rich man's lifestyle undoubtedly. Yet people seem to think he's been shamed. Nothing could be further from the truth
Ditto Sarah