Shocking? Perhaps only for the accountability reaching to that level of the elite. Six police cars showed up at King Charles III's Sandringham estate to arrest his younger brother Andrew, the Jeffrey Epstein pal formerly known as Prince. Officially, the police are just claiming to have made an arrest of a man for "suspicion of misconduct in public office," but everyone knows that the butler didn't do it this time:
CBS News offers more details. The issue is not Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor's appearance in the Epstein Files per se, but rather the allegation that Andrew passed along confidential trade-policy material to Epstein. Andrew served as a trade envoy during his Epstein period, and the allegation is that he gave Epstein inside information on which the disgraced sex offender could have profited:
The former Prince Andrew, now Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, was arrested Thursday for suspected misconduct in public office after revelations in the Jeffrey Epstein files. King Charles III's younger brother was arrested on his 66th birthday, about two weeks after an anti-royal organization called for police to investigate documents indicating that Andrew shared confidential government information with the late American sex offender when the royal worked as a British trade envoy.
Shortly after 8 a.m. local time (3 a.m. Eastern), six unmarked police vehicles were seen arriving at Wood Farm, Andrew's new residence on King Charles' Sandringham estate in Norfolk, eastern England.
The Thames Valley Police force confirmed just over a week ago that it was assessing claims against Mountbatten-Windsor that emerged in the latest release of Epstein files by the U.S. Justice Department to determine whether a formal investigation was warranted.
In a statement on Thursday, the Thames Valley Police confirmed that, "as part of the investigation, we have today (19/2) arrested a man in his sixties from Norfolk on suspicion of misconduct in public office and are carrying out searches at addresses in Berkshire and Norfolk." It said the man, who it did not name in line with police procedures, "remains in police custody at this time."
What about his older brother? The King has made clear that he won't interfere with any criminal investigation into his brother, who he booted from royal status a while back. The official statement alluded to that by calling Andrew "Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor":
"The King has made clear, in words and through unprecedented actions, his profound concern at allegations which continue to come to light in respect of Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor's conduct," a spokesperson for Buckingham Palace said in a statement. "While the specific claims in question are for Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor to address, if we are approached by Thames Valley Police we stand ready to support them as you would expect."
Charles himself followed up with a personal statement to the press:
I have learned with the deepest concern the news about Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor and suspicion of misconduct in public office.
What now follows is the full, fair and proper process by which this issue is investigated in the appropriate manner and by the appropriate authorities.
In this, as I have said before, they have our full and wholehearted support and co-operation.
Let me state clearly: the law must take its course.
As this process continues, it would not be right for me to comment further on this matter.
Meanwhile, my family and I will continue in our duty and service to you all. Charles R.
In other words ...
How much trouble could Andrew face over these charges? In the UK, this crime carries a potential life sentence. However, BBC legal correspondent Dominic Casciani lays out the substantial hurdles that a prosecution must overcome to succeed at trial for a charge of misconduct in public office:
First, the police must establish whether the person they’re investigating was a “public officer” and the incident in question was plausibly part of those duties.
If that’s agreed, detectives will then look for evidence that the incident in question saw the suspect “wilfully” neglecting to perform their duty or wilfully misconducting themselves in some other way. That wordy definition has long been a source of legal debate - more on that later.
The next question is whether the action they committed was so bad that it was “an abuse of the public's trust”.
Lastly, if the evidence has passed those three tests, police need to examine whether the person under investigation acted “without reasonable excuse or justification”.
We still haven't seen the evidence, and in both English and American law, the legal presumption at this stage is innocence. Let me climb out on a limb, however, and point out that police and prosecutors would likely not raid the King's estate to arrest his brother without having a great deal of confidence in their ability to meet those requirements in court.
We'll keep up with this story as it develops, obviously.
Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy conservative reporting that takes on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.
Join Hot Air VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership!
Join the conversation as a VIP Member