Prince Andrew: why meeting with US authorities would be a 'catch-22'
Duke of York said he’s ‘willing to help law enforcement’ with Epstein investigation, but legal experts say it carries risks
Duke of York said he’s ‘willing to help law enforcement’ with Epstein investigation, but legal experts say it carries risks
As the fallout from Prince Andrew’s friendship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein continues, questions have surfaced about whether the royal might face legal trouble.
Andrew’s disastrous Newsnight interview on the issue – where he emphatically denied Epstein’s accuser Virginia Giuffre’s claim that she had a sexual encounter with the royal at age 17 – has seen the prince exit public life in disgrace.
But in a statement announcing his current departure from public duties, the Duke of York said: “Of course, I am willing to help any appropriate law enforcement agency with their investigations, if required.” This echoed his comment during the BBC interview, in which he said he
was prepared to give testimony under oath “if push came to shove and the legal advice was to do so”.Prince Andrew’s offer to potentially be interviewed could be important for US authorities’ continued investigation of Epstein – who killed himself in jail after his arrest for
alleged sex trafficking of minors – as they are keen to talk to high-profile friends of the disgraced financier as they seek to track down more of his accomplices and associates.
But speaking with US authorities – even when innocent – inherently carries legal risk, longtime attorneys told the Guardian.
Prince Andrew is not charged with wrongdoing but with the BBC airing an interview with Giuffre on 2 December the controversy is only likely to ramp up.
Prince Andrew is not charged with wrongdoing but with the BBC airing an interview with Giuffre on 2 December the controversy is only likely to ramp up.
Julie Rendelman, a former prosecutor who has long practiced criminal defense, said she would advise clients to be wary if subpoenaed by a grand jury – a body of US citizens which determines whether to bring an indictment
– if there is any possibility that they are the subject of an investigation.“Unless they’re being given immunity, then as an attorney who believes that a client potentially has risk of criminality or criminal liability, I would tell them to
plead the fifth,” Rendelman said, referring to the US constitutional protection against self-incrimination. “There’s nothing to be gained by talking to a grand jury without immunity in those circumstances.”
