London: Three months after police arrested the man formerly known as Prince Andrew in February, they issued a statement that seemed to widen the investigation into their suspect.
Thames Valley Police wanted witnesses to come forward with anything they knew about Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor so they could assess claims of sexual misconduct during his friendship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
But the investigation has been slow. Police have clearly struggled to find the witnesses they want. And the former prince is now trying to turn the tables on Thames Valley Police by challenging their search warrants in court.
The utter humiliation of Mountbatten-Windsor seems complete after police arrested him on February 19 on suspicion of misconduct in public office over his links to Epstein, held him for questioning for about 12 hours and searched his properties for evidence. This was and is an astonishing fall for a member of the royal family.
Even so, the humiliation is not actually complete. Police have not charged Mountbatten-Windsor. He went home from the interrogation and has made no comment since. There is no sign of progress in the investigation, which means he may never face charges, let alone be found guilty of any crime.
And he is, under the law, innocent until proven guilty.
His legal action against Thames Valley Police, revealed by London’s Telegraph, is an application to a judge to decide whether the officers had lawful reasons to search his properties.
The judicial review could determine whether the February search warrants, granted by an Old Bailey judge at the request of the Thames Valley Police, were lawful. Mountbatten-Windsor has already gained a decision from a High Court judge to let his case proceed.
All of this raises the key questions: Has the Thames Valley Police got the evidence it needs? And what happens to its investigation if there is a problem with its search warrants?
Thames Valley Police Assistant Chief Constable Oliver Wright said in May that the force wanted to hear from more witnesses.
“In terms of Epstein victims and survivors, we hope that anyone with relevant information will come forward, and I really want to stress that our door is open whenever a victim-survivor is ready to engage with us,” he said. “We’re ready for you at whatever point that may be.”
It seemed unusual at the time for the police to need this additional call for witnesses, given the years of publicity around the former prince and the global headlines about his February arrest. The logical analysis was that the police knew they did not have enough evidence to lay charges.
Whatever happens in the police investigation and the judicial review, the former prince will be judged by the public based on years of testimony and documents.
First are the public accusations of sexual assault. These claims by Virginia Roberts Giuffre, who took her own life in Western Australia last year, will always hang over Mountbatten-Windsor. Will others come forward? There is no sign of that, so far at least.
Second are the questions about whether Mountbatten-Windsor shared confidential government information with Epstein and others when he was a government envoy. He had useful information as the United Kingdom’s special representative for international trade and investment from 2001 to 2011.
One document from October 2010, among the many released by the US Department of Justice earlier this year as part of the Epstein file dump, showed the way Mountbatten-Windsor passed on useful information to Epstein. The prince, as he was at the time, shared information about a trade mission to Vietnam, Singapore, Hong Kong and Shenzhen. On November 30, that year, he received a set of “visit reports” from one of his advisers about each location. He forwarded these documents to Epstein five minutes after receiving them.
The BBC found these emails in the Department of Justice’s searchable archive, but the government documents cannot be seen because the attachments were not released. And without those attachments, who can convict the royal trade envoy of committing a crime?
The potential charge against Mountbatten-Windsor is that he engaged in misconduct in public office. This could cover sexual misconduct. It could also cover misconduct in sharing inside information covered by government secrecy rules.
Right now, however, the police can say only that they arrested him on suspicion of misconduct. And there is no sign of progress in their investigation more than seven months later.
Mountbatten-Windsor looked beaten when he emerged from the arrest in February. In a famous Reuters photograph, he slouched in the back seat of a vehicle to try to avoid being photographed as he was driven away from a Norfolk police station.
Now he has a chance to stymie or stop the case against him if the police lack the evidence they feel they need to proceed. Even if he succeeds in court with a judicial review, however, it will be too late to rescue his reputation. The court of public opinion has already ruled.
Get a note directly from our foreign correspondents on what’s making headlines around the world. Sign up for our weekly What in the World newsletter.
David Crowe is Europe correspondent for The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.Connect via X or email.