THE Metropolitan Police has released a statement following court files relating to paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein referred to Prince Andrew.
Andrew, who has been named within the raft of documents, was reported to police on Thursday by anti-monarchy group Republic.
The Met said no investigation has yet been launched.
Campaigners hit out at the move and called the Met a "disgrace" after the statement was published on Friday morning.
In a short statement, the force said: “We are aware of the release of court documents in relation to Jeffrey Epstein.
“As with any matter, should new and relevant information be brought to our attention we will assess it.
“No investigation has been launched.”
READ MORE: Epstein: King Charles determined 'no way back' for Prince Andrew
Graham Smith, CEO of Republic, said on Twitter/X, said: "The Met police are a disgrace.
"They haven’t conducted any serious investigation despite the evidence and legal proceedings in the US. This would be very different if it was anyone else accused."
Republic reported the Earl of Inverness over the alleged sexual abuse of a 17-year-old girl - referred to as Jane Doe #3 - in London.
The alleged victim is believed to be Virginia Giuffre, who previously waived her anonymity to allege that she was trafficked to have sex with Andrew three times as a teenager by Epstein.
Epstein (above) died in jail aged 66 while awaiting trial in 2019.
Republic claimed the files contained “new details of sexual assault and rape allegations” against Andrew.
The filing alleges Epstein instructed Jane Doe #3 to “give the prince whatever he demanded and required Jane Doe #3 to report back to him on the details of the sexual abuse”.
Republic is demanding answers from the palace, police, and politicians, saying the whole affair suggests the royals are "beyond the law".
Previously, Smith said: "I have reported Andrew to the police, well aware that the Met claims to have looked into this before.
"To date, there appears to have been no serious criminal investigation, no interview of the accused or other witnesses and no clear justification for taking no action.
READ MORE: BBC flooded with complaints of bias over King Charles documentary
"I am calling on the Met Police to re-open this case, I am calling on MPs to debate this affair in parliament and I am calling on Charles to make a public statement – in front of the press and taking questions – to respond to these allegations and what they say about the monarchy."
Epstein was accused of luring underage girls to his homes under the guise of giving him massages and then sexually abusing them.
The documents that were unsealed are part of a 2015 US defamation case by Giuffre against Ghislaine Maxwell, the British socialite who supplied Epstein with underage girls.
They include evidence from Johanna Sjoberg who claimed Andrew touched her breast while sitting on a sofa in Epstein's apartment in 2001.
A second batch of unsealed court documents revealed Buckingham Palace's defence of Andrew was used in court by Maxwell.
The royal household issued a statement in 2015 in which the Palace “emphatically denied” Andrew had any form of sexual contact or relationship with Giuffre, branding the allegations “false and without foundation”.
Newly-released legal papers show the attorney of disgraced British socialite Maxwell mentioned the Palace’s defence of Andrew in a bid to get the defamation complaint dismissed.
It comes amid reports the King is determined there is "no way back" to public royal life for his brother.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel