The disgraced royal was sheltered by silence. Accountability to victims must mean testimony abroad and scrutiny at home, not palace containment tactics
W
hen Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was stripped of his titles last October, it was presented as a final act: a disgraced royal cut loose to protect the monarchy. The Epstein files suggest otherwise. Photographs and emails released by US authorities place Mr Mountbatten-Windsor deep inside Epstein’s network of favours. And they reveal an intimacy that goes far beyond poor judgment by the former prince.
This is no longer about salacious gossip or constitutional niceties, but about providing accountability to victims of sexual abuse. Mr Mountbatten-Windsor insists on his innocence yet refuses to cooperate with investigators. The US Congress continues to pursue Epstein’s connections. In Britain, parliament still averts its gaze. This looks untenable.
The details are jaw-dropping. Mr Mountbatten-Windsor engaged with Epstein’s offer of a “friend” for dinner, described as “26, Russian, beautiful, trustworthy”, despite the financier’s conviction for soliciting prostitution from a minor. He is pictured on all fours, looming over a woman lying on the floor. Other emails imply that the king’s brother proposed Buckingham Palace as a discreet meeting place with Epstein. He appeared to ask the financier how to dodge personal investment restrictions. As UK trade envoy, he apparently lobbied foreign states on Epstein’s behalf.









