THE Queen has shown her support for Prince Andrew, backing the Duke of York to keep his honorary role as colonel of the Grenadier Guards.
Andrew holed up in Balmoral after a US lawsuit was launched against him by Jeffrey Epstein accuser Virginia Giuffre, who has alleged that the royal sexually assaulted her when she was a teenager.
The prince has strenuously denied all the allegations against him.
Queen Elizabeth has now “let it be known” that he should keep his honorary military role, military sources told The Times, branding it “unsatisfactory” and “very difficult”.
They told the paper: “The Queen has let it be known to the regiment that she wants the Duke of York to remain as colonel and the feeling is that nobody wants to do anything that could cause upset to the colonel-in-chief. It is a very difficult, unsatisfactory situation.
“His position is not tenable or viable. How can you have a colonel who can’t perform the role? For the brief time he was in post, he was a good colonel, but the feeling across the regiment is that it’s not appropriate to retain him. You can’t have a colonel who can’t do public duties.”
Andrew, like Prince Harry, no longer carries out his public duties, but unlike the Duke of Sussex he has not been forced to give up his military titles.
Giuffre took legal action against Prince Andrew saying it was “past time for him to be held to account”.
Allegations in the civil suit seeking unspecified damages at a New York federal court claim she was “lent out for sexual purposes” by convicted sex offender Epstein including while still a minor under US law.
The lawsuit says: "In this country no person, whether president or prince, is above the law, and no person, no matter how powerless or vulnerable, can be deprived of the law's protection.
"Twenty years ago Prince Andrew's wealth, power, position, and connections enabled him to abuse a frightened, vulnerable child with no one there to protect her. It is long past the time for him to be held to account.”
The lawsuit alleges that Giuffre was sexually abused while aged under 18 at Epstein associate and former girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell’s home in London, at Epstein’s New York mansion and at other locations including Epstein’s private island in the US Virgin Islands.
Maxwell has pleaded not guilty to sex trafficking charges and faces trial in November.
Epstein took his own life in jail a month after he was arrested on sex trafficking charges.
The documents claim Giuffre "was compelled by express or implied threats by Epstein, Maxwell, and/or Prince Andrew to engage in sexual acts with Prince Andrew, and feared death or physical injury to herself or another and other repercussions for disobeying Epstein, Maxwell, and Prince Andrew due to their powerful connections, wealth and authority".
Virginia Giuffre
The duke engaged in the sexual acts without Giuffre's consent, while aware of her age and while "knowing that she was a sex-trafficking victim", the documents claim, adding the alleged assaults "have caused, and continue to cause her, significant emotional and psychological distress and harm".
"Prince Andrew's actions, described above, constitute extreme and outrageous conduct that shocks the conscience," the lawsuit stated as it described the emotional distress suffered by Giuffre.
"Prince Andrew's sexual abuse of a child who he knew was a sex-trafficking victim, and when he was approximately 40 years old, goes beyond all possible bounds of decency and is intolerable in a civilised community."
Andrew has denied claims that he slept with Giuffre on three separate occasions, saying: "I can absolutely categorically tell you it never happened. I have no recollection of ever meeting this lady, none whatsoever."
The duke also said he has no memory of a well-known photograph, above, of him with his arm around Giuffre's waist at Maxwell's house, and has questioned whether it was his own hand in the image.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel