LONDON: Members of a United States congressional committee investigating the Jeffrey Epstein case have intensified their requires Andrew Mountbatten Windsor to reply questions on his ties to the late financier and intercourse offender, the BBC reported on Saturday (Nov 1).
King Charles stripped Andrew of his title of prince and evicted him from his mansion within the grounds of Windsor Fort on Thursday, responding to the outrage that had constructed across the royal over years of damaging headlines about his behaviour.
Buckingham Palace mentioned the censures had been wanted despite the fact that Andrew has continued to disclaim the allegations made in opposition to him.
Within the US, the king’s transfer led to extra requires Andrew to disclose all he is aware of about Epstein, notably within the mild of the expression of sympathy for victims of abuse in Thursday’s assertion from the palace.
The BBC mentioned not less than 4 Democrat members of the Home Oversight Committee investigating the US authorities’s dealing with of the Epstein case had renewed requires Andrew to testify.
It quoted considered one of them, Democrat Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi, saying: “Come clear, come earlier than the US Congress, voluntarily testify, do not look forward to a subpoena, come and testify and inform us what you realize.
“Not simply to present justice to the survivors however to forestall this from ever occurring once more.”
One other Democrat Congressman, Suhas Subramanyam, mentioned Andrew might seem remotely with a lawyer and communicate to the panel privately.
Buckingham Palace has been requested to remark.
On Friday, United Kingdom commerce minister Chris Bryant advised the BBC that Andrew ought to go to the US to reply questions on Epstein.
Individually on Saturday, the police watchdog for England and Wales, the Unbiased Workplace for Police Conduct, mentioned that in mild of media experiences about Andrew, it had contacted the Metropolitan Police to “perceive if there are any issues that will meet the factors for a referral to us”.
In response, a spokesperson for the Metropolitan Police mentioned that in 2016, officers had concluded that “different jurisdictions and organisations” had been higher positioned to pursue the particular allegations and a choice was made to not proceed to a full prison investigation.
