New York prosecutors have made a formal request of the British government to force testimony from Prince Andrew as a potential witness in the crimes of deceased billionaire sex abuser Jeffrey Epstein, reports state.
A war of words has broken out between the legal team of Britain’s Prince Andrew and New York investigators probing Jeffrey Epstein and his co-conspirators, as the Department of Justice demands cooperation that lawyers in London claim has already been repeatedly volunteered.
Prince Andrew, the Duke of York, is the second son of UK monarch Elizabeth II and has now permanently retired from royal duties after a series of allegations about his involvement with Jeffrey Epstein surfaced. It has been alleged that one of the girls said to have been trafficked by Epstein had sex with Prince Andrew twice while underage. The Prince “emphatically” denies having met, or had a relationship with, the woman.
London newspaper of record The Times reports the United States has filed a “mutual legal assistance” request with British authorities, which if accepted by the UK government could legally compel Andrew to appear in court as a witness. The paper cites an unnamed source which said of the move: “The DoJ does not make a request of this nature lightly, especially one involving a senior member of the British royal family. It puts the UK government in a very difficult position — and the Duke of York even more so.”
Yet the Associated Press reports the Duke of York’s legal team have hit back at the allegation the Prince had offered zero cooperation with American authorities, insisting he had repeatedly offered his assistance with the investigation in the past and accused to the Department of Justice of grandstanding for the sake of publicity.
A statement from the Duke’s legal team reported by the wire service noted: “The Duke of York has on at least three occasions this year offered his assistance as a witness to the DOJ.
“Unfortunately, the DOJ has reacted to the first two offers by breaching their own confidentiality rules and claiming that the Duke has offered zero cooperation. In doing so, they are perhaps seeking publicity rather than accepting the assistance proffered.”
The statement insisted the claims of “zero cooperation” and a “wall of silence” from the Duke were false and should not have been made.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.