As a sea of sordid allegations has roiled around Prince Andrew over the past seven days, the royals have responded by doing what they usually do at moments of crisis: nothing at all.
Despite the fact that, as The Daily Beast reported this week, Prince William fears more revelations and is bemused and unimpressed by his father’s decision to publicly stand by Andrew and continue to actively associate him with the institution, most notably by including him in the royal party walking to church on Christmas morning last month, there has been no meeting or summit between William and King Charles in the past week to discuss the issue, sources say.
Friends of Charles and Andrew argued this was unsurprising, given that this week’s allegations are “unproven” and not, they say, new.
ADVERTISEMENT
One friend of the king said: “I think [the king] has been very clear that family unity comes first. He is not going to change course on the basis of a series of unproven allegations that have all been made before, and will almost certainly all be made again.”
It’s a valid point, but it’s also true that the lurid allegations against Prince Andrew have grabbed global headlines—hardly a good look for the royal family—and the king’s decision to clutch Andrew in the family’s embrace has mystified some insiders.
The stories about Andrew emerged from a trove of documents dating back up to a decade and unsealed by a New York judge last week. The documents were originally sealed after a defamation suit brought against Ghislaine Maxwell by Virginia Roberts Giuffre was settled. Giuffre was a Jeffrey Epstein sex slave who accused Andrew of having sex with her three times, and wrung a $14 million settlement out of Andrew.
However, as Andrew’s friends were keen to point out to The Daily Beast in a number of discussions this week, all of the allegations against Andrew in the documents had been aired previously.
For example, the claims that Andrew had participated in an “underaged orgy” at Epstein’s Caribbean island home and that he had sex with Roberts in London when she was 17 at the home of Ghislaine Maxwell, when the notorious photograph of a grinning Andrew with his arm slung around the teen’s bare midriff was taken, have been rehearsed many times now.
As embarrassing as it may be for the allegations to be raked up again, Andrew’s supporters are correct about one thing: They are far from new.
Wishes that the British police will prosecute or even investigate Andrew are the stuff of Republican fantasy. In 2021, London’s Metropolitan Police said it had investigated Giuffre’s claims and would take no further action. It’s hard to see them reopening the file on the basis of the same claims, even if they were made in a 2014 deposition rather than a newspaper article.
Claims about sex tapes being filmed of Andrew made headlines around the world—but these claims have been aired before as well. It is a matter of public record that Epstein’s mansion in New York was wired extensively with a video surveillance system.
As Palm Beach lawyer Spencer Kuvin told The Daily Beast this week: “I can confirm that during my walk-through of the Palm Beach home I saw where cameras were located but had been removed. Additionally I have a client that can confirm that video recording devices were located inside his Manhattan home in various rooms. It is likely that the FBI confiscated any digital video devices and memory/hard drives when they executed a search warrant at the different locations.”
Were a tape to emerge of Andrew having sex with Giuffre, whom he has said he has no recollection of ever meeting, that would of course be a sensational development. And while it seems easy to imagine that an operator like Epstein may have made such tapes, the claims remain in the realm of speculation for now.
Another allegation made in connection with Andrew was the claim that Epstein paid Giuffre $15,000 to have sex with Andrew, but this claim has been out there since at least 2020.
Andrew’s supporters are correct to assume that Charles will not dramatically alter his family unity strategy on the basis of these old allegations. As another friend of the king told The Daily Beast: “As far as the king is concerned, nothing has changed.”
A friend of William said: “He disagrees with the strategy, but accepts his father’s authority,” and added that he has not sought a meeting with his father to discuss the new revelations.
The one area where Andrew’s enemies perhaps spy a chance to drive a wedge between Andrew and the king is in his continued occupation of Royal Lodge, the vast former home of the famously extravagant Queen Mother, who died there in 2002. (There are plenty of foes in courtly circles, where long-serving staffers have endured years of arrogance and rudeness from Andrew, which makes him the least popular member of the family with staff.)
It is likely that anti-Andrew agents at court are behind a spate of stories saying that the king is going to redouble efforts to get him out of the Windsor home, reputedly earmarked for William and Kate Middleton, perhaps by cutting off his security.
Friends of Andrew say this is nonsense. “I don’t think exposing Andrew to attack is remotely what the king has planned,” said one.
Last week, intriguingly, one senior courtier seemed keen to play down rumors the king would evict Andrew, pointing out that Andrew’s lease is with the Crown Estate, the independent company that manages the Crown’s assets on behalf of the nation, not the king.
When the friend of Andrew was told this, they said: “Well, exactly. It’s his house. He has a lease. If they want to give it to William, they will need to buy him out.”
Representatives for Buckingham Palace, Kensington Palace, and the Duke of York did not respond to requests for comment.
