![\"Prince](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/93367.jpeg\")
<\/p>\nOpinion and ideas<\/p>\n
Sunday 15 February 2026<\/p>\n
With no good outcome likely for the former Prince in the Epstein scandal, the House of Windsor could finally fall apart<\/p>\n
Prince Andrew with Virginia Roberts (later, Virginia Giuffre) and Ghislaine Maxwell, 2001<\/p>\n
![\"Photo](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/Will_Hutton_89b5d3373f9b4c1bbca38fdf9f3a33b41c2e978e_A1J98LL.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
Will HuttonColumnist<\/p>\n
Share<\/p>\n
The institution suffering the most existential threat from the Jeffrey Epstein<\/a> papers is not within or part of the American political system: it is the British monarchy. It has survived unscathed the 1936 abdication crisis and the divorce and death of \ufeffDiana, Princess of Wales in the 1990s, but the Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor<\/a> affair trumps them all. It threatens to shatter the carefully constructed story on which the appeal and legitimacy of the House of Windsor depends.<\/p>\n Universal suffrage and massive social change were potentially the twin death\ufeff knells of the monarchy as Britain entered the 20th century. Political and constitutional status should be earned through votes rather than ascribed through birth. In 1911, the Parliament Act stripped the House of Lords, then entirely populated by hereditary peers, of its veto powers; Britain\u2019s bi\ufeffcameral parliament of two equal houses \u2013 one hereditary \u2013 was dead. How long would it be before the monarchy followed suit?<\/p>\n But by redefining itself as an extended family committed to public service with only a performative constitutional role, and playing down the hereditary nature of their legitimacy, the royals have dodged the bullet. The Duke of Windsor and the Prince of Wales loving the wrong woman were understandable crises that could hit any family; many could sympathise. The royal family was proving it was as human as everyone else\ufeff.<\/p>\n Elizabeth\ufeff II<\/a>\u2019s obvious decency and unflagging commitment to duty, while simultaneously symbolically ensuring that her whole family joined her on the balcony of Buckingham Palace, sealed the deal. She was our \ufeffqueen, certainly; but she was also a wife, mother and sister. Prince Philip was the perfect foil: a consort, father and prince \u2013 but never a co-monarch.<\/p>\n Now one of the brood he fathered threatens to bring down the whole house of cards. Andrew\u2019s firm friendship with Epstein was in full swing by 1999. Now that Andrew was divorced, Epstein, a supreme networker, opened doors\ufeff and offered him introductions to women (and money to his ex-wife) in exchange \ufefffor bathing in the halo of royalty.<\/p>\n In 2001, a photo was taken of Andrew with Virginia \ufeffGiuffre\ufeff, who allege\ufeffd they had sex three times, which Andrew has consistently denied. In 2022, he paid a reported \u00a312\ufeffm to her, a woman who he said he could not recall ever meeting.\ufeff Most of the cash is said to have come from his mother and \ufefffather\u2019s estate, with the balance topped up by other family members. \ufeffKing Charles<\/a> denies he contributed.<\/p>\n Up until the recent round of disclosures, the family had kept ahead of the scandal; stripping Andrew of his title and insisting he move out of the grace and favour Royal Lodge in the grounds of Windsor Great Park, complete with his collection of \ufeff72 teddy bears. Now there are three more elements to the story that cumulatively could present an unmanageable tipping point.<\/p>\n First\ufeff, as Gordon Brown \ufeffset out powerfully in \ufefflast week\u2019s New Statesman, the latest bout of evidence reveals the mind-boggling scale of Epstein\u2019s trafficking of young women, many under\ufeffage, for sex \u2013 which seems part of this evil global business. There were an estimated 90 flights from the UK alone, of which at least 15 took place after Epstein\u2019s 2008 conviction, including British girls as passengers and others from round Europe. Andrew must, insists the former prime \ufeffminister, given the scale and extent of harm that has and is being done, be questioned by police to reveal all that he knows.<\/p>\n Second\ufeff, as the BBC has set out vividly in a \ufeffsuccinct, short, seven-minute report<\/a>, Andrew plainly lied to Emily Maitlis in the infamous 2019 BBC Newsnight<\/a> interview. His relationship with Epstein was much more extensive and went on far longer than he acknowledged, and in which misogynistic male joshing over sex \u2013 \u201cplay some more soon\u201d or Epstein promising him dinner with a beautiful Russian 26-year-old who was \u201ctrustworthy\u201d \u2013 was integral. Andrew knows much more than he has let on.<\/p>\n Charles has to be brutal. He has to urge an inquiry and insist Andrew testifiesCharles has to be brutal. He has to urge an inquiry and insist Andrew testifies<\/p>\n Last,\ufeff was his ready and speedy passporting to Epstein of classified papers from his work as trade envoy,\ufeff for potential commercial advantage. This must be investigated as potential misconduct in public office, for which the penalty involves a lengthy prison sentence.<\/p>\n NewslettersChoose the newsletters you want to receive<\/p>\n Clear, calm analysis on the stories driving the day\u2019s news.<\/p>\n The very best of our journalism, reviews and ideas \u2013 curated each day.<\/p>\n A dispatch from The Observer\u2019s kitchen table \u2013 from Nigel Slater\u2019s recipes to interviews, features and hot tips.<\/p>\n