Andrew Mountbatten‑Windsor Is Being Investigated for Sexual Offences

It has been decades. Decades of whispers, open secrets, victim statements, dodged questions, out‑of‑court settlements, and a carefully staged “car crash” interview that somehow made everything worse without producing a single consequence. Andrew Mountbatten‑Windsor has been photographed with Jeffrey Epstein, accused of sexual assault by multiple women, and stripped of his military titles and royal patronages. But criminal charges? Real police scrutiny? That always seemed to belong to a different universe.

Until February, when Andrew was arrested on his birthday. The police surprised him at breakfast in Norfolk, took him into custody, and questioned him for 12 hours. Now, new details have emerged: the investigation is examining potential sexual offences, and it falls under the category of “misconduct in public office involving abuse of position for a sexual purpose.” So, finally, a member of the royal family is being formally investigated for using his public office for sexual abuse.

Here is what ITV News reported on May 22, 2026:

It followed weeks of revelations about Andrew’s friendship with the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, with whom he was alleged to have shared sensitive information, while in post as trade envoy between 2001 and 2011.

The Crown Prosecution Service clearly states that “the offence can take a wide range of forms” and that includes cases “involving abuse of position for a sexual purpose”. ITV News understands that the Andrew investigation does fall into this category.

Since Mr Mountbatten‑Windsor was “released under investigation”, there have been no developments in the case, although police did carry out extensive searches of his home on the Sandringham estate and his former home, Royal Lodge, on the Windsor Estate. Material recovered during those searches is still being worked through.

Thames Valley Police Assistant Chief Constable Oliver Wright said: “Our team of very experienced detectives are working meticulously through a significant amount of information that has come in from the public and other sources. We are committed to conducting a thorough investigation into all reasonable lines of enquiry, wherever they may lead.”

Why the Andrew Investigation Still Feels Like Palace Damage Control

I  am deeply suspicious of this investigation, not because the allegations lack seriousness, but because the institutions around Andrew have spent decades teaching the public not to trust them. The royal family has a long history of managing scandal through silence, access control and careful narrative management. Questions have also lingered for years about whether UK authorities took Epstein‑related claims seriously when survivors and lawyers first raised them. Now we are supposed to believe that an institution with vast wealth, land holdings and a deferential media will simply “do the right thing”?

I worry this is an “investigate to exonerate” exercise: examine the sexual misconduct claims just enough to conclude there is insufficient evidence, then let the Palace frame the outcome as proof Andrew did nothing criminal. He was arrested in February, released under investigation, and there is still no charge or prosecution decision. Police say they are working through material and speaking to witnesses. But the public has heard “wait for the process” before.

And what about Andrew’s victims? Virginia Giuffre is no longer alive. Other women have been ignored, doubted or marginalised for years. If investigators find enough evidence for a prosecution, the public will expect action. If nothing happens, faith in the justice system will take another hit.

The royals are hiding behind “the law must take its course.” Fine. Let it. But the law has had decades to take Andrew seriously, and for most of that time he has appeared protected. He was the late Queen’s favourite. He knows the family’s secrets. That is why many people view this process with such suspicion. From the outside, this still feels performative unless it leads to real accountability. Andrew was protected for years. I will believe that has changed when I see it, and not a moment before.