King Charles III will no longer be able to say “blatant denial” when it comes to Prince Andrew’s attempts to escape the charge of sexually assaulting Virginia Giuffre, one of Jeffrey Epstein’s most notorious youth trafficking victims, according to reports.
The Sun reported on Wednesday that Charles, as Prince of Wales, personally contributed almost $2 million of the $16 million loan to Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, whose younger brother was “silencing” Giuffre in 2022 by persuading him to withdraw his US case against him.
It is believed that a large part of the loan Andrew, which funded his out-of-court settlement with Giuffre, was paid by the late Queen Elizabeth II, according to The Sun. By reaching a settlement, Andrew was also saved from testifying in court, after he had already begun three years of scandalizing the British royal family due to revelations about his friendship with Epstein.
But if Charles had a hand in paying for Giuffre’s settlement, that “makes it clear that he and his office were fully involved in covering up Andrew’s behavior,” writes Daily Beast editor Tom Sykes in his Royalist Substack.
“Charles’ money was used to buy Andrew out of a full public figure, to close a civil case that would have put allegations of sexual abuse of the king’s trafficked youth in a New York court,” Sykes added, saying the then-king was “making difficult political calculations about what was in the best interest of the Empire.”
But it looks like Charles’ political calculations have backfired.
Since 2022, the scandal of Andrew’s association with Epstein has grown, especially with the recent release of emails and photos from the Epstein files of the US Department of Justice. Andrew has long denied any wrongdoing regarding Epstein. He also said in his infamous 2019 BBC interview that he did not remember meeting Giuffre in 2021, when he said he had sex with him three times under Epstein’s guidance. Giuffre died last year by suicide, and Epstein also died in a reported suicide in 2019 after being arrested on sex-trafficking charges.
Documents in Epstein’s files show that Andrew remained friends with the convicted sex offender long after he said he had cut off contact. They also raise further questions about whether Andrew enjoyed the benefits of Epstein’s sex-trafficking and whether he passed confidential messages to the late patron about his visits to Asian countries while serving as Britain’s trade ambassador in 2010.
The new letters prompted a police investigation, reported last week and this week. It also forced the king to enter the unthinkable situation of having to authorize a police investigation of a member of his family. Buckingham Palace released a statement this week saying the monarch “has made clear, in words and actions that have never been seen before, his deep concern about the allegations that continue to emerge about Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor’s conduct.”
“While the claims in question are for Mr Mountbatten-Windsor to respond to, if contacted by Thames Valley Police we stand ready to support them as you would expect,” the statement said.
Regarding the king’s “deep concern” and “unprecedented actions,” he has followed the lead of the late queen in taking various steps since 2019 to reduce Andrew’s role in the royal community, but critics continue to say that he tried to reconcile with his disgraced brother and that his actions were too little, too late.
Last year, Charles stripped Andrew of his crown and the Duke of York and officially removed him from his 30-room mansion at Royal Lodge near Windsor Castle. But Andrew continued to stay at home and was often seen riding his horse around Windsor Great Park and photographed waving to crowds. Charles finally ordered Andrew to leave the Royal Lodge last week, and the former ruler was transported in the dark of night to the royal family’s private residence, Sandringham.
Rather than take decisive action against his brother, the king instead pushed the issue that the queen was responsible for “Andrew’s chaos,” according to Sykes. In the past few months, stories have surfaced accusing him of appeasing his “beloved son,” Sykes added.
For example, Andrew Lownie, royal historian and Andrew’s biographer, reported that the queen knew how her son used taxpayer-funded trips as a trade envoy to the UK to “line his pockets,” play golf and “chase women,” including when he allegedly brought 40 prostitutes to his five-star hotel room while on a four-day official trip to Thailand.
“He knew exactly what was going on,” Lownie said in an interview in October. “I know that people have gone to complain to the queen. I had spoken to two full-time undersecretaries who complained to the queen’s private secretary, and they were dismissed with nothing in their ears.”
But for Sykes, it’s still the way Charles’ camp blames the queen for the scandal that continues to engulf the House of Windsor. He said this blame game is “a terrible disgrace to his legacy.”
“Despite his love for his beloved son, he completely ostracized him from society,” Sykes said. “Charles, on the contrary, from the time he became king, starting with his mother’s funeral, has been making great efforts to bring Andrew to the table.”
