SOME years ago I worked in Whitehall as a press officer at the Home Office. In theory, my job was to promote the department’s policies and protect it, and the Home Secretary of the day, against media criticism.

In practice, it was a miserable and bizarre job that amounted to little more than defending the indefensible, day after day. Think The Thick of It without any laughs. I didn’t last long.

With this in mind, I have a certain amount of sympathy for Prince Andrew’s PR staff at the moment. How many have phoned in sick over the last week, I wonder? In the days since the prince’s pal, convicted paedophile and suspected sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, killed himself in a New York prison cell before facing a string of charges, pressure has been mounting on Andrew to explain how much he knew about the behaviour and activities of this sexual predator.

Read more: 'Mystery brunette' with Prince Andrew at Jeffery Epstein home is named

And it’s no wonder the 59-year-old, purported to be the Queen’s favourite son, faces questions, since despite now referring to Epstein as “an associate”, it’s increasingly clear the disgraced financier was more than that. Indeed, there is a growing dossier of evidence, photographic and otherwise, that the Duke spent time with Epstein on a number of occasions, including a six-day stint at his mansion in 2010, after the latter had been put on the sex offender’s register and served time in jail for prostituting underage girls. Wonder what they talked about over dinner? Prison food? The unfairness of life?

In the years before that, Epstein attended the Prince’s 40th birthday bash, hosted by the Queen, and stayed at Sandringham, while Andrew has admitted staying at “a number” of his other residencies around the world. Reports over the weekend suggested the Prince is named in other papers relating to Epstein.

Yet Prince Andrew’s response to perfectly legitimate questions about his knowledge of and involvement in Epstein’s nefarious activities has been to arrogantly play the royal card in expectation that the whole affair will be quietly brushed under the carpet.

This, of course, is a man used to getting his own way and being deferred to, who despite being worth a reputed £50m and receiving a generous annual stipend from his mother, is transported around – often by helicopter – at the taxpayers’ expense.

Read more: 'Mystery brunette' with Prince Andrew at Jeffery Epstein home is named

We, the great unwashed, were supposed to be impressed and satisfied last week when Buckingham Palace lackeys issued a statement saying the Prince denied any knowledge of Epstein’s behaviour and was “appalled” – what, that anyone dared confront a member of the royal family?

Then, when it became clear those pesky journalist types were not going to let up, a second statement appeared. And boy, was it terrible. Andrew claimed he was keen to “clarify the facts”, while admitting it was “a mistake” to meet – i.e. spend an entire week holed up with – Epstein after his release from prison on child prostitution charges. He went on to claim he saw Epstein “infrequently”, “probably no more than once or twice a year”, adding that “at no stage” did he “see or suspect” anything criminal.

Perhaps most galling of all, he went on to express “tremendous sympathy” for his friend’s alleged victims. Such breath-taking humanity, eh? Oh, and he ended by saying he was “at a loss to be able to understand or explain Mr Epstein’s lifestyle.” To describe abuse as a “lifestyle” is not only odd, but insulting to all victims of sex crime.

Had this guff been written by Andrew himself? Had some stressed-out royal press officer come up with it in a panic? It’s hard to tell. What we can say for sure, however, is that it is a PR disaster.

Far from drawing a line under the prince’s relationship to Epstein, the statement’s refusal to answer specific points, alongside the arrogant, disingenuous tone, has only prompted more questions.

Unsurprisingly, the Windsor distraction machine is already in full throttle, placing stories aimed at boosting the image of the Yorks, including a possible reconciliation for Andrew and Fergie – just what we’ve all been waiting for, eh? – and rumours of a wedding for…yup, you’ve guessed it, Princess Beatrice.

But when the Mail on Sunday, that bastion of Monarchy, runs a column claiming the prince’s words “insult our intelligence”, and eminent child abuse lawyers say few will believe his pleas of ignorance, while advising that he offer himself for interview to the US authorities, it’s surely time for the Andrew to face the consequences of his actions, choices and conduct.

There comes a point when one must cease defending the indefensible and come clean. Both the prince and the palace are at that juncture now.