Epstein victims want former Prince Andrew to testify before lawmakers. He's unlikely to do so
London (AP): Former Prince Andrew saw his reputation destroyed six years ago and became the butt of internet jokes when he gave a disastrous interview to the BBC about his relationship with the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
He's unlikely to take that risk again even as Prime Minister Keir Starmer, U.S. Congress members and lawyers representing Epstein's victims call for him to tell investigators what he knows about Epstein and his network of rich and powerful friends.
“If you view the Newsnight evidence as a precedent, then who knows what Andrew would say or how he would come across in what would be some very, very hostile questioning — far (more) hostile than he faced from Emily Maitlis,'' Craig Prescott, an expert on constitutional law and the monarchy at Royal Holloway, University of London, said, referring to the 2019 BBC interview. “It's very difficult to see how that is, in a sense, in the interests of Andrew to do that voluntarily.”
The pressure for Andrew to testify is growing after the latest release of documents from the US Justice Department's investigation into Epstein revealed further unsavory details about links between the two men. Attorney Gloria Allred, who represents many of Epstein's victims, said on Monday that Andrew has a duty to provide any evidence that could help investigators understand how Epstein was able to abuse so many women for so long, and who else might have been involved in his crimes.
But the last time Andrew tried to answer questions about his friendship with Epstein it ended in disaster.
It didn't end well
After the 2019 interview with Maitlis, Andrew was pilloried for offering unbelievable explanations for his continued contact with Epstein following the financier's 2008 conviction for soliciting a minor for prostitution, and for failing to show empathy for the victims.
Last fall, King Charles III stripped Andrew of his royal titles, including the right to be called a prince, as he tried to insulate the monarchy from the continuing revelations about his younger brother's relationship with Epstein, which have tarnished the royal family for more than a decade. The former prince is now known simply as Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor.
Andrew has also been ordered to vacate Royal Lodge, the 30-room mansion near Windsor Castle that has been his home for more than a decade.
Good luck with asking him to testify
Mountbatten-Windsor has little to lose by ignoring calls for him to testify, and U.S. authorities will find it hard to compel him to appear before Congress, said lawyer Mark Stephens, who handles international and complex cases at Howard Kennedy in London.
“There will be huge pressure and calls for him to (testify), but I don't think that even if he gets there, even if he gives evidence, it's going to reveal anything meaningful,” Stephens said. “I would fully expect him to take the fifth, as Americans say, the privilege against self-incrimination. And so I don't think, beyond his name, he's going answer any of the questions either by turning up or not turning up.”
Documents released on Friday suggest that Epstein sought to arrange a date between Mountbatten-Windsor and a “beautiful'' 26-year-old Russian woman, and that the former prince offered Epstein dinner at Buckingham Palace. They also revealed emails sent by Sarah Ferguson, Mountbatten-Windsor's ex-wife, in which she called Epstein a “legend'' and “the brother I have always wished for.''
Documents do not show wrongdoing by many of those named; their appearance in the files reflects Epstein's extremely wide reach.
Not sharing what he knows
Mountbatten-Windsor has previously demonstrated caution about talking to U.S. authorities.
After he stepped away from royal duties in 2019, Mountbatten-Windsor announced that he was willing to help “any appropriate law enforcement agency” with its investigation into Epstein.
But documents released last year showed how 10 months of negotiations between Mountbatten-Windsor's lawyers and federal prosecutors failed to secure his testimony.
Attorneys for the king's brother ultimately rejected proposals for their client to be directly interviewed by the prosecutors, either in person or by video. Instead, they proposed that he give his answers in writing, something they said was perfectly acceptable in British courts.
Finally, on Sept. 23, 2020, the prosecutors gave up on the idea of securing a voluntary interview and said they planned to start the formal process of asking the British courts to compel Andrew's testimony under the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty between the two countries. There is no indication that interview ever took place.
Allred said the testimony is important for Epstein's victims.
While Mountbatten-Windsor has said he doesn't know anything about Epstein's crimes, the documents released by the Justice Department show that he has at least some understanding of the parties Epstein hosted, and how he used young women to influence his network of wealthy, powerful friends, Allred told the BBC.
“He's not the one who should decide whether he knows anything that could help in the investigation,” she said. “I am saying it's not too late, and he does have information that he can share that may help them.”
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
SC gives protection of arrest for two weeks to shaadi.com founder in fraud case
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted shaadi.com founder Anupam Mittal and two others protection from arrest for two weeks in a case related to alleged fraud by a user of the matrimonial platform.
A bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and N V Anjaria set aside a Telangana High Court order refusing to quash the proceedings against Mittal and sent the matter back to the high court for fresh consideration. The apex court also asked Mittal to approach the high court for interim bail.
The case stems from a Hyderabad woman's allegation that she was defrauded of Rs 11 lakh by a man who used a fake profile on shaadi.com and that the platform failed to properly verify user details.
"Since the quashing petition has not been decided on merits, we set aside the impugned order and remit the matter to the high court to consideration on merits. Accordingly the criminal cases are restored to their original file. The same shall be dealt with by the high court on its merits. This court has not expressed any opinion on merits," the Supreme Court said.
"In the meanwhile, petitioner shall make a prayer for interim relief before the high court. For a period of eight weeks from today, no coercive steps to be taken against the petitioner," it added.
Senior advocate Atmaram Nadkarni, appearing for Mittal, submitted that he was running a matrimonial site, which is basically just a matchmaker.
"I am just facilitating matching. We are cooperating with the investigation. But why am I an accused?" Nadkarni asked.
On June 26, the top court had issued notice to the Telangana government and stayed all proceedings.
The Telangana High Court last year declined to quash the FIR registered against Mittal and two others, Vignesh and Satish, named as accused in the case.
