Arrogant prince is already a big loser no matter what happens in court
The silence from the palace has been deafening since Jeffrey Epstein’s victim Virginia Roberts Giuffre filed her bombshell lawsuit against the Duke of York, claiming he sexually abused her when she was 17.
The language of the legal claim could not have been more lurid, saying: “Prince Andrew’s actions... constitute extreme and outrageous conduct that shocks the conscience.
“Prince Andrew’s sexual abuse of a child who he knew was a sextrafficking victim, and when he was approximately 40 years old, goes beyond all possible bounds of decency and is intolerable in a civilised community.”
The Duke, 61, denies the allegations, which have been filed under the New York Child Victims Act to prosecute historic childhood sexual abuse offences.
Yet despite being very publicly accused of battery, sexual assault and the intentional infliction of emotional distress, neither the palace nor the Duke’s lawyers have issued a response.
While it may be a legal strategy to remain silent, staying schtum somewhat plays into the hands of US prosecutors who have complained about a lack of cooperation from the Queen’s second son.
With the palace press office having seemingly washed its hands of the saga, he is effectively on his tod.
While his 95-year-old mother may be providing emotional support – having invited both Andrew and his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson, the Duchess of York, to Balmoral this week – he appears to have been completely divorced from Her Majesty’s advisers.
Instead, he is being counselled by a tight-knit external PR team working hand in glove with his lawyers.
Yet the ramifications caused by his gravely misjudged decision to visit Epstein in New York in December 2010 – after he had been jailed for procuring a child for prostitution and of soliciting a prostitute – are still being felt by the institution .
The Duke was not a popular figure behind palace gates before his relationship with the billionaire paedophile started making headlines, which may explain his growing sense of isolation. Even his brother Prince Charles cannot see a way back for him in the Royal family.
As one source close to the future king put it: “He has long ago concluded that it is probably an unsolvable problem. This will probably further strengthen in the prince’s mind that a way back for the Duke is demonstrably not possible, because the spectre of this [accusation] raises its head with hideous regularity.”
The problem for Andrew, and by association his royal relatives, is that despite protesting his innocence, he has been found guilty in the court of public opinion. Even if Mrs Giuffre’s claims remain unproven, the consensus is that we, as a country, have for years been victims of a pompous, arrogant fool who has spent much of his time since serving in the Falklands on a series of jollies at the taxpayers’ expense.
Even without the spectre of a two-year legal battle, Andrew remains a distinctly objectionable figure on the periphery of an establishment whose survival depends on the popularity of its members. Ultimately the decision won’t even be Charles’s when he becomes king. If his subjects don’t want the grand old Duke of York back in the royal fold – he’s finished.