Pressure continues to mount on Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, the Duke of York, as American lawmakers and victims of Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse renew their demands for him to face questioning over his long-standing ties to the disgraced financier.
Calls for his cooperation have grown louder following King Charles’s decision to strip him of his “prince” title, a move that signaled deep frustration within the Royal Family over the lingering scandal.
Members of the United States House Oversight Committee are intensifying efforts to have Andrew testify as part of an ongoing investigation into Epstein’s global network of abuse.
While the committee is currently controlled by Republicans who have not shown interest in summoning him, at least four Democratic members have publicly urged Andrew to step forward voluntarily.
They argue that he owes it to the victims and to the public to explain his role and what he knew about Epstein’s activities.
Congressman Suhas Subramanyam told the BBC that if Andrew truly wanted to clear his name and show respect for the survivors, he should come forward willingly.
Subramanyam emphasized that several victims have mentioned Andrew in their testimonies, suggesting he holds crucial information.
He said the committee would be open to allowing Andrew to appear remotely, to have a lawyer present, or even to speak privately to the panel.
In his words, no one royal or not should be above scrutiny.Another lawmaker, Raja Krishnamoorthi, said he would support issuing a subpoena to compel Andrew’s testimony if possible.
However, he admitted enforcing such a measure would be difficult since Andrew resides outside the United States. Krishnamoorthi stated that if Andrew ever visited the U.S., he would be subject to congressional jurisdiction and expected to testify.
He added that the goal was not only to deliver justice to Epstein’s survivors but also to ensure such exploitation never happens again.
Congressman Stephen Lynch echoed this sentiment, saying Andrew’s testimony could be valuable in helping survivors find closure, though he acknowledged that legal obstacles limit the committee’s reach.
Outside Congress, survivors themselves are speaking out. Liz Stein, one of Epstein’s accusers, said Andrew should take responsibility and assist investigators.
She questioned why he continues to avoid cooperation if he truly has nothing to hide.
Stein pointed out that Andrew’s close relationship with Epstein placed him in a position to witness things others could not, and that his silence only deepens suspicion.
Adding to the pressure, recently released U.S. court documents revealed that Andrew had continued communication with Epstein even after his 2008 conviction. In one 2010 email, he wrote that it would be “good to catch up in person” with Epstein, indicating their friendship had not yet ended despite his later claims.
The two were later photographed walking together in New York’s Central Park, a meeting Andrew described in a 2019 BBC interview as an attempt to end the relationship.
These details have revived questions about Andrew’s judgment and honesty. Buckingham Palace has stated that the King’s decision to remove his brother’s title was necessary, even though Andrew continues to deny all allegations against him.
The statement expressed sympathy for the victims and stressed that the Royal Family stands with survivors of abuse.
Public frustration in the UK has grown as more evidence suggests Andrew’s distancing from Epstein may not have been as swift or decisive as previously claimed.
The release of Virginia Giuffre’s memoir, which repeats allegations of sexual abuse involving Andrew, further damaged his reputation.
Even though he continues to deny any wrongdoing, many believe the damage to his public standing is irreversible.
Leave feedback about this