Keir Starmer Comment on Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor Draws ...

By Jack Royston

Chief Royal Correspondent

ShareNewsweek is a Trust Project member

Keir Starmer appeared to suggest Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, formerly Prince Andrew, should testify to Congress about Jeffrey Epstein, increasing the pressure on the embattled royal.

The British prime minister was asked whether he believed Andrew should comply with requests by the House Oversight Committee to give evidence in America.

"I won’t comment on his particular case," Starmer replied, quoted by The Guardian. "But as a general principle I’ve held for a very long time is that anybody who has got relevant information in relation to these kind of cases should give that evidence to those that need it."

Starmer did, though, offer the caveat that this is a "decision for him [Andrew]."

...

Why It Matters

Virginia Giuffre said she was trafficked aged 17 and made to have sex with Andrew by Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell in 2001. Andrew has always denied the allegations and settled a lawsuit brought by Giuffre in New York in 2022 for an undisclosed sum without admitting liability.

In April, Giuffre died after what her family described as a suicide and in October her memoir, Nobody's Girl, was released after her death, retelling her account of being abused.

Emails newly released by the House Oversight Committee also undermined Andrew's account to the BBC in 2019 about his friendship with Epstein, including the purpose of a 2010 visit to stay in Epstein's New York mansion.

It all led to King Charles III stripping Andrew of his royal titles in an October 30 Buckingham Palace statement. However, the Oversight Committee still wants Andrew's testimony on what he knows about Epstein.

The Significance of Keir Starmer's Comment on Andrew

Starmer has made similar remarks before but this was the first time since the deadline for Andrew to respond to the House Oversight Committee expired on Thursday. And the fact the prime minister remains willing to be drawn into commenting by journalists keeps the issue in the news at a crucial time.

The Mail on Sunday ran the story on the front page suggesting Starmer's comment "piles pressure on Andrew to testify" with similar coverage on the front pages of The Sun and Sunday People.

Loading twitter content...

Congress passed a bill earlier this month compelling the release of the Department of Justice Epstein files which was then signed off by Donald Trump.

If more documents emerge, it is possible they will contain more embarrassing, awkward or damaging revelations about Andrew and Epstein, placing further pressure not only on Andrew but also on the king.

So far, Charles' move to strip Andrew of his titles appears to have successfully contained the impact of the scandal on the Monarchy but pressure from U.K. politicians had been building.

Two Democrats from the Oversight Committee, Robert Garcia and Suhas Subramanyam, released a statement on Friday after the deadline for Andrew's co-operation passed. They said: "Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s silence in the face of the Oversight Democrats’ demand for testimony speaks volumes."

"Our work will move forward with or without him," they continued, "and we will hold anyone who was involved in these crimes accountable, no matter their wealth, status, or political party. We will get justice for the survivors."

The Release of the Epstein Files

All eyes will now be on whether the D.O.J. does release the files, with some arguing Trump administration officials may ultimately state it is not possible to comply.

Trump has for months now described the Epstein scandal as a Democrat "hoax," but ordered an investigation by the D.O.J. into Democrat politicians named. Some say this could mean the content of the files is considered "privileged" and therefore not eligible for release.

Former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani recently told Newsweek: "Regardless of whether Trump signs it into law or Congress overrides his veto, the DOJ can still assert those privileges.

"There may be a fight that the courts will have to sort through. It’s not necessarily going to be the law is passed and the DOJ just turns over the files."

What Happens Next

The D.O.J. has 30 days from the president's signature to release the Epstein files.

Do you have a question about King Charles III and Queen Camilla, Prince William and Princess Kate, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry, or their family that you would like our experienced royal correspondents to answer? Email [email protected]. We'd love to hear from you.

Request Reprint & LicensingSubmit CorrectionView Editorial & AI Guidelines