Transcription
But you were staying at the house of a convicted sex offender. It was a convenient place to stay. There's I mean I mean I've gone through this in my mind so many times at the end of the day um uh with the benefit of all the hindsight that one could have. Um it was definitely the wrong thing to do.
You probably don't need a reminder. That was the moment Prince Andrew's life in the public eye came to a crashing, humiliating end. That interview with Emily in 2019 was described as the worst PR crisis for the royal family since the death of Princess Diana. The aftermath seemed to cement the public's perception of Andrew as borish, abore, arrogant, out of touch, and lacking in judgment.
Well, there's a new book out by the historian Andrew Lai which puts frankly rocket boosters on all of that. Whatever your impression was before, it will be 10 times more having read this book. It's called entitled The Rise and Fall of the House of York. And I sat down with him recently about some of the remarkable, jaw-dropping stories he's uncovered in his research to uncover the real Prince Andrew.
Well, we're joined now by Andrew Lowi. I've read the book and I am struck by the efforts you went to and the detail you got on the finances, where some of the money was coming from, some of the dodgy dealing that you uncovered, but also how much you failed to uncover. Why couldn't you get to the truth of it?
Well, I agree this is the tip of the iceberg and I've only uncovered things that were perhaps reported in the press or were uh legal cases where things emerged or legal depositions. I mean, if we hadn't had Virginia Gifrey, quite a lot of the stuff wouldn't have happened. Uh and you're absolutely right. I mean, there have been obstacles from the beginning and there continue to be obstacles.
So, one of the most important things which I've been working on for four years now is to get access to the archives and the files of Andrew as special trade envoy between 2001 and 2011. And these files should actually some of them be in the national archives anyway. Uh but there's a very strong public interest here. He was uh paid for by the taxpayer and there are suspicions and indeed I found that he was taking people with him who he shouldn't be taking. his two daughters, uh, Epstein, uh, David and Jonathan Roland, who are his business partners, uh, and others. And this, of course, has all been covered up. Uh, the Foreign Office told people, uh, not to talk to me. Uh, the, uh, Yorks themselves forbade people from talking to me. I'd hope that at least they would have some of their friends talk to me and help shape the narrative in in a in a quite a positive way for them.
Uh, and um, I mean, cover, you use the word cover up, and cover up is always a strong word. What do you mean by it? Why? How can you uh justify that suggestion?
Well, because I think in my experience the last four years with the with the information rights departments of both the foreign office and business and trade is they've given me a given me led me a merry dance. So I'll ask for files and they'll say there's so much there that you the cost compliance thing comes into it. So you need to narrow it. When I narrow it they say we've got nothing or it's health and safety or it's personal data. I mean they use every or national security or whatever. Then I come back and I ask another question and they'll say you're just being vexacious. You've asked two questions in the last 3 months and that's not allowed. So you know every excuse is used not to provide this material when actually under FOI rules they should be giving me some assistance to help me focus what I need to to uncover.
So what I want to understand in that is that you talk about you've been trying to uncover this in the past four years. Those are four years since Andrew has stepped back from royal duties. Are you saying that they're still protecting him?
Yes. You know, for example, the Department of Trade Internal Computer has been wiped of all references to him. Uh, and I think this is what Andrew realized that he was protected. I mean, first of all, he had the protection of the Queen. you know, anytime anyone raised any objections about either his financial dealings or basically what a mess he was making of being special representative, uh, she she gave them a curt sort of acknowledgement and that was it. You know, I had the head of the foreign office say that they they put in representations and they were ignored. Uh, and Chris Gr Bryant is on the record, Labour minister who put in complaints to number 10 and they just sort of shrugged their shoulders. Uh, I've got intelligence officials reporting quite serious criminal acts uh being told, you know, forget it. There's no point in in pursuing this. So, yes, you know, and Andrew just could operate with impunity knowing that nothing would happen. And part of that is the difference that we still show to the royal family. There's no parliamentary scrutiny in terms of asking questions. There's no uh they're not part of the Freedom of Information Act. uh ambassadors clearly feel that they are her majesty's ambassador and they therefore can't speak out of turn about what they've done and pressure was put on people. So for example ambassadors who who did uh say that there had been problems found that their careers were curtailed. I talked to a protection officer and said why didn't you report this? And he said I was told if you did so you had a choice. You have a nice job with first class travel or you can go back on the beat in Brixton. And so this pressure was put on lots and lots of people. And we have of course the famous case of Amy Robach at ABC television who had the story had interviewed Virginia Gifrey uh and the palace heard about it and they threatened ABC with with basically withholding access to any member of the royal family for interviews and ABC backed off. Uh uh one of the interesting things is now the book is out. members of of the media are saying we knew a lot of this stuff but we didn't feel we could report it. So I hope it may allow things to be slightly more transparent about uh what has happened.
Why why do you think it is that even though you know the disgrace came most notably when my you know my news agent colleague Emily Mateless did the interview with Prince Andrew. Why the need to still protect him? Surely the smart thing to do if you're the royal family would be to absolutely hang him out to dry and say he's he was a wrongand from the start.
But they're not doing that. They've said you could you've got to stand back from royal duties but institutionally they're still you as your book argues are still protecting him.
Yeah. I mean you know in some ways they need to cut off this infected limb otherwise it'll affect the the body politic and King Charles knew about his brother. I mean, he was one of the people who argued against him being appointed a special trade representative. He knew it was going to be a disaster. So, um I think the feeling is that, you know, this is just a summer thing. It'll pass over. So what? We've been here before. Um but I agree. I think they they need to take this seriously because it undermines the good work that the rest of the family do. And I speak as a monarchist, slightly disappointed one sometimes because you know I think monarchy is our best form. It is the best system. Most of them do a great job and it's only people like the Yorks who really let the side down because people clearly get very upset by uh royals using their status to u enrich themselves personally.
So obviously the Prince Andrew stood back not because of financial misdoings, it was his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein and we'll come to that in a minute. What was in your mind the most egregious example of his behavior when he was our foreign trade representative?
Well, I think you know there were so many but but I think it was just he was so brazen that he would actually put in requests to ambassadors to shoehorn in meetings for his buddies for them for them to do business as opposed to promote British trade. Another moment is in a famous high court trial in 2022 when a Turkish millionaires sued a man called Selman Turk who had won Pitch at the Palace which was a charity that Andrew ran on the grounds that um she had paid £750,000 to Andrew to help her get a passport. Now that actually wasn't true. Uh but Andrew couldn't explain what he'd been paid £750,000 for. And Sus Sarah Ferguson had got £250,000 pres uh ostensibly as a brand ambassador for a solar energy company uh but couldn't really explain that either. It was all connected with a man called Taruk Katuni who had been giving jewelry to their daughter and was a Libyan gun runner. And then the daughter was paid £25,000 in her bank account uh from someone she had never heard of for a for a for either a birthday party months ahead or for a wedding which had 22 people. And no one could explain what these payments were for.
Okay, we're going to come back to the legality in a minute because I think it's such an interesting area of how you write a book like this and and get it past the lawyers, frankly. But we'll come to that in a second. I want to pick up though on the Epstein relationship which is obviously the critical moment when everything went sour for Prince Andrew. Um you don't believe that Epstein committed suicide? I read your passage on it and you say the anomalies, the discrepancies, the injuries were just not consistent with suicide.
Yes. I mean I think um there there several arguments. One is, you know, why was uh his uh cellmate moved out and when he was on suicide watch just beforehand? Why were the cameras not working? Why were two prison guards suddenly falling asleep for 3 hours at the same time and didn't mount checks? uh Michael Baden who was the cor the New York coroner did uh an autopsy at the for the brother Mark Epstein because the autopsy findings had not been made public and his findings were that these were signs of homicide rather than of uh suicide. There was uh another prisoner who was interviewed and said it's almost impossible to commit suicide. They just make it impossible for you. And I think the other factor is that Spencer Kuven who was one of the uh lawyers for the victims said that um he was Epste was in prison. It was the early stage of the whole process. He had always got away with things. He had good lawyers. He was feeling very optimistic. Uh so there was no uh reason for him to commit suicide. And we do have the extraordinary picture of the man in the orange jumpsuit the night before he died. We have the cutting of the the government showing a film which then has a minute taken out of it. So why why why would you cover up something if if it was all perfectly innocent? So I I think I I I leave it open for the reader to decide. But you know lots of people who know uh or or who are in the know certainly don't believe that that this was a suicide.
I mean this now has an impact. I suspect your copy deadline when your publisher said, "Right, enough, Andrew. Stop. I've got we've got to get this book published." Since then, we've had the Epstein affair blow up and start hitting Donald Trump as well. And there are some pretty big questions for him in all of this as well in terms of his relationship with Epstein.
Absolutely. I mean, you know, I quote testimony of the two of them being good friends, doing business together. So, um, yeah, they were very close. So I think I think I say something like they were best friends for years.
Well, you also talk about the relationship of Epstein and Prince Andrew and you say it went on for longer than had previously been acknowledged. Is that right?
Yes. Andrew says the relationship began in 1999. Well, his own private secretary, Alistister Watson, wrote a letter to the Times saying it began in the early 90s. and Steve Hoffenberg who was a business associate of of Epstein who actually went to prison for 18 years having been involved in the Ponzi scheme with Epstein where he he took the basically he took the fall. Uh he said they met in 1991. So you know I think also they were seeing each other after 2010 when Andrew ostensibly had cut off contact and we know this from legal depositions in for example the Jess Slay case. So what he said to Emily in that News Night interview, I mean it was de devastating for Prince Andrew, but it wasn't the whole truth.
No, of course not. I mean, and many people have have exposed that. I mean, she did it in her own interview, and it's been exposed since, you know, his ability to sweat, why he went there. Um um the fact he'd never seen Virginia Jeffrey. I mean, you know, we have, I quote, correspondents, emails, uh showing uh the Jeffrey being discussed by Gain Maxwell and Andrew and how they're going to deal with it.
You talk about Epstein saying that Trump was a close friend. You've also got a quote from Epstein about his close relationship with Prince Andrew, which I want to read. We are very similar. We are both serial sex addicts. He's the only person I've met who is more obsessed with than me. We've shared the same women. From the reports I've got back from them, he's the most perverted animal in the bedroom. He likes to engage in stuff that's even kinky to me. And I'm the king of kink.
What the hell does that mean? Well, I think they were they were sort of partners um you know brought together by their love of women and uh and money uh and you know one of the interesting things in a biography is you can chart sort of the journey of the person and clearly there are signs in Andrew's early life that he was sexualized very early uh and he you know his inability to sustain relationships with woman you know shows in many ways he was very similar to to to Epstein. Epstein needed, you know, three women a day um or sexual activity three times a day and Andrew seems to be a little bit the same. Uh so you can see that they had this mutual respect. I have a story uh in the book about Andrew on a one of these um u official uh missions to Thailand to celebrate the anniversary of the king of Thailand in which he you know he has 40 escorts brought to him in the course of four days. Uh, and this is a story from a named source, Andrew McGregor Marshall, the Reuters correspondent out there. It's confirmed by Ian Proud, a diplomat who served in the um embassy and indeed uh a further confirmation from a member of the Thai aristocracy who was aware whose driver got very friendly with Andrew's driver. Uh, and this material was coming to Andrew uh Marshall McGregor from uh hotel staff that he used to socialize with in the evening.
Only other story is Epstein sold stories about Andrew to intelligence services, to the Israelis, to the Saudis, to whoever. Really?
Well, it sounds incredible. Uh it again comes from a good source. Um we have uh Tim Riley who worked for Croll talking about compromat on uh Andrew in in Russia. I talked to a Kazakhstan uh businessman who said it was standard pro uh procedure for for anyone who was caught in these honey traps with these girls provided that would be filmed and it would be used against them. Uh there's a lot of material that was taken out on Libya, but again there's material there. Uh and it does seem strange but but we know that they're honey traps. Any businessman who goes off in the old days to Russia or whatever would be filmed and Andrew is pretty um naive about this. Um, I mean there's a story in the book of him going to South Africa or indeed his private secretary asking the consul if he they would provide women for him. He said they like blondes, you know. So he kind of was opening himself up to to people taking advantage of him. And we do know from other books, I mean, not my research that Epstein was trading information with people. He had close connections with intelligence services. Um, uh, we know from Mark Dugan, the the Palm Beach policeman who eventually ended up in Moscow, that there were tapes, there were there were film, uh, and that this may well have been passed to Putin. So, Andrew may well be there. We just don't know. Uh, and Juliet Bryant, who's one of of Epstein's victims, has gone on the record saying she went into one of the rooms at the house and saw the recording material there. So, there's quite a lot of of of evidence. Um, and it wouldn't it it doesn't seem to be surprising that that's exactly how um Epstein operated. I mean, one of the reasons that he went in December 2010, according to one of the people I talked to, was partly to get some more money for for Fergie. I mean, not so much to to break off with him, but also to get reassurances from Epstein, that um he didn't have any compromising material on him, presumably he' he'd put two and two together. So, it does sound extraordinary, but you know, there are stranger things happened. Um, you know, time and time again, uh, with when I did the book on Mount Batton and said that, you know, I'd found evidence that he had been molesting young boys, everyone said I'd made it up, even when I produced FBI files. And and and the two people I'd interviewed were were making it up. And now we've had other people come forward. Arthur Smith has just now appeared and and making a case in the Belfast. So quite often you put the stuff out and and that then brings other people forward. Um, but you know, of course one could cut all sorts of things out of these books but then you know, one wouldn't take the story forward. One would just be be censoring oneself because as you know as a journalist you can't always stand everything up. It's particularly with royal books it's really difficult. Um, I mean there three pages of acknowledgements you know as there are a lot of people who have gone on the record and I'm hoping that people will trust me. The lawyers saw all the statements from people. I had to get them signed off. Um, so it's not as if I've made this stuff up. Uh, and clearly I had to in the course of the legal read go back and provide often further evidence to make them feel comfortable.
So let's talk about how on earth this book got legal because okay, you've got sources like that. You you've made the allegation about Andrew. He lost his virginity aged 11. Honestly, I read the book and I thought that some of the financial reporting was kind of so forensic and detailed. And then the other stuff I thought, "Wow, how has the lawyer allowed that to get through?" Did you take the view in writing this book or did your lawyers take the view he's never going to sue? He's got too much to lose. We can print what we want.
Well, I I took the view that I should put everything in and then the lawyers could take it out. And of course, there are certain things that do sound extraordinary, and you don't want to undermine the stuff that is, you know, which does, you know, add up like the financial stuff with the sexual stuff. And you know, one could be accused of it being salacious, but it seemed to me that it was quite important to try and understand his behavior, which I mean, there's no doubt about his sexual activities. Um, and uh, yeah, the lawyers led it through.
And he's salacious to the point of prient detail at time. I I kind of, you know, there were bits I thought, oh god, I don't want to know that. I mean, you know, the soiled tissues left on the by the side of the bed which kind of domestic staff had to clear up for him.
Well, that comes actually from a memoir by the housekeeper at H Highrove, uh, Wendy Barry. I mean, clearly not all this stuff is is direct testimony to me and I've source everything. So, there are some stuff from newspaper accounts, uh, some stuff personal memoirs like Wendy Barry's. Uh, so, um, you know, and you have to trust these things and they clearly gone through before and there's not been a problem. So I can only surmise that the lawyers felt that you know this stuff had appeared and it had been okay.
So the story is in the book that maybe Andrew has slept with a thousand women. Prince Andrew is such a public figure who has faced disgrace. Isn't it astonishing that more haven't come forward and thinking I can earn a couple of grand from a red top tabloid by selling my story? I see if it were if it was a thousand women, you'd have thought there would be quite a few that would think there's a payday there to be had.
Absolutely. I mean, the quote comes from the son uh from Phil Dampia and others. Uh and as as you say, what evidence can one provide? I certainly found quite a lot of of uh girlfriends. Um I I didn't put them all in. Um um, you know, there are privacy issues and all sorts of things. So, you know, certainly I was picking up a lot of this stuff. I think there is a murder around the royal family. I think people are pretty discreet and loyal, but you know there are girlfriends who've come forward. Denise Martell did a sort of kiss and tell story about a a sort of two night stand.
You say there are privacy issues. What about his privacy? I mean if if he's having consensual relations with a whole bunch of women, you know, whatever, or even paying for it. I mean, it's none of our bloody business, is it?
Absolutely. And a lot of that stuff didn't go in. You know, I felt for example,
10 women a day in Thailand went in.
Well, that was on a taxpayer funded trip. Uh I think that there is a a public interest there to know what he was doing. You know, didn't really bring the the you know, the country into a great repute by doing that. You know, I think sometimes it is a difficult balance. Uh and um my view is sometimes you have to put the stuff in because why should you self censor yourself?
Well, I suppose I would answer that as a journalist. If I if I can't if I'm not convinced it's true, you know, there the old line in journalism, it's a story that's too good to check. You know, you love the idea of it, so let's not bother checking it. Let's just put it in anyway.
Well, it's very difficult to check a thousand women. You're absolutely right. I think that's in a
What about what about the fight you site that took place between and it's a very colorful description of Andrew saying to Prince Harry, "Your marriage isn't going to last a month. She's too old for you. She's on the make. You're making a huge mistake, mate." And he and apparently Harry then clobers him.
Yeah. Well, I mean, my source was somebody who works for Andrew. I mean, he's proved uh reliable and everything else. I doubled down in it after Harry popped up.
Harry's denied it, hasn't he?
He has denied it. And, you know, recollections can vary, of course. Um, but, uh, it doesn't mean that because he's denied it, it isn't true. Uh, this could be just an attempt to, you know, protect the honor of his wife. It's not damaging to him. But I did go back. I mean, there are two episodes which have got conflated. There was an episode in 2013 with the bloody nose. Uh and that is about actually Andrew uh saying you know you need to get your life in order. You're sort of on the skids. Uh and then there's the episode in 2017 about Meghan Markle when he'd met her and he says you know have you done your due diligence? Now that's exactly what Prince William for example said to him. It's what I was picking up when I was re researching my book on the Mount Battens in in 2017 that the people there were were raising the same concerns. So, I mean, sometimes you have to go a little a little bit with instinct. You're not going to get affidavit from people uh for these sort of books. Um, but my source was was I think trustworthy. We went back and they doubled down on it. You know, it's Harry's word against this source.
Have you had any reaction from Andrew and Fergie? Have you had any injunctions? I mean, you you talk about affidavit. It's hard to get affidavit. Understand that. But it's very easy if people want to block something to issue injunctions and whatever else and say this is lielist. This is defamatory. You cannot say this.
Well, so far we've had nothing. Um, uh, you know, there were legal letters to Collins from, uh, Sarah Ferguson's lawyers before the book came out, but I put my reputation on the line with this book. I mean, I'm hope a serious historian that done serious books. Um, but I did feel, and I clearly don't want to overshadow what the financial aspect with the sexual aspect, but it just seemed to me part of the whole story. Um, uh, to try and understand it.
Let me ask you a blunt question. Did you think that putting in all the sex stories would help the book sell better?
I didn't really think of all that to be honest. I just sort of put it all in. I mean, uh, as I gathered it, I I stuck it in. I I was interested in in things and I kind of assumed that if there were problems, um, either the editor would say this is a little over the top or the lawyers would say you can't say this. Um, but you know, I was given this information and I I I I didn't feel that that there was any reason to to cut it.
I saw you gave an interview uh to the Sunday Times. Apparently, you played rugby against Andrew. You were public schools together in Scotland at the same sort of time. You're the same sort of age. Uh, we all gave him a kicking in the scrum because we all hated him.
Yes. It's a slight misquote. I wasn't in the scrum with him, but I know other people did. Yeah.
So, it's not a hatchet job. I mean, this book is given what you say about him, it's devastating. It if you have any views of Andrew after the whole Virginia Du Fray stuff and the Epstein relationship and his appalling interview with Emily on News Night, this book is a hundred times worse than you imagined, I think.
Yeah. No, no, I went with a completely open mind. Um, uh, which is why I wanted to cooperate with them. I wanted to give them a chance to to to put their side of the story for it to be as fair and balanced as it could. And I have, you know, there is some stuff there showing, for example, that he could be very useful in the Middle East, that, you know, she was very good with her charitable work, that she's, you know, got lots of friends and is a in some ways, you know, a very charming, charismatic person. So certainly it had no sense of of going after him. I mean, my background is writing literary biography and intelligence biography. Um I moved into royal books because of doing a book on Burgess which led me to Mount Batton and from there to Trader King and I will probably do a completely different sort of book next time. I'm not in people say I'm obsessed with the royals. I'm a biographer who is trying to tell the truth when I write these books and maybe I've gone too too far for some people but you know I think if you're going to write the story then you should try and do it as as completely as you can.
Where is Andrew now? What is he doing?
Well, as far as I understand, I mean, he's in Royal Lodge. I mean, he's a man of 65. He's like,
Royal Lodge is the vast sprawling estate in Windsor Great Park that Charles has tried to kick him out of and it's now sort of in some state of disrepair and Andrew hasn't got much money coming in, or so we think.
Well, that's a public story. I mean, you know, I I I think he does have money, so I'm surprised that he isn't keeping it up. Um, he has a lease and I think it would be very difficult to to to push him out. Uh and though the optics may not look good and Charles may have plans for other people there, uh Andrew is entirely entitled to to stay there. Um but in answer to your initial question, I think he, you know, we see him going out uh to um on rides. He he plays golf. Uh he goes shoot to shoot on shooting weekends. Uh he entertains people at Sandringham. Uh he watches videos. Um he reads a bit. Um, I'm sure he's still doing business. He's now he's sort of there's less scrutiny on him in terms of that. So, I mean, it's not that different from most 65 year olds who've given up work,
But he's pretty friendless, isn't he?
Well, I think he's been friendless most of his life. I mean, it's one of the sort of sad um elements to it. I mean, I describe it as a sort of tragic comedy in some ways, you know, partly that's because he has been segregated. So, for example, he was in a separate uh house uh when he was at Cordensson. he was uh in a different block when he was at on naval bases. You know, he felt betrayed by people who' betrayed his trust. So, he would didn't get close to people when he was a young boy. Um but I think also just by nature of his character, he doesn't necessarily draw people to him and he's admitted he's a loner. um you know he talks about his love of photography and these taking the pictures of rather desolate landscapes you know so there there's something there and you know he was wasn't well treated for example in his marriage you know there are moments where you do feel sorry for him um but and you know he clearly rose to the occasion during the forklands I mean no one can take away what he did there and and I talked to lots of people who who serve with him there to try and get an as accurate a picture as possible so what I've tried to do is be as complete as possible and maybe in some areas I've gone further than people would want, but I've tried to be as as as as accurate as I could and and as complete as I could and sometimes that led one down errors which, as you say, are not particularly um uh redeeming.
Tragic comedy is kind of the description, isn't it? Because there are times when you read it and think it is laughable, reasonable how much he and she misjudge people, situations, behavior and get it all so appallingly wrong and tragic because you think why are you such an rude, borish man who behaves so badly and has screwed it all up?
Yeah. It is a sad story and I mean one wonders if he'd married Kustark there would be a different story there. I mean part of his problems have been trying to support a wife who's extremely extravagant and that partly drew him into the Epstein net. You know Epstein was picking up a lot of the bills. Um but you know and there were moments in even in his naval career there's a moment when Tony Hog his naval mentor says look you know I can help shape things and make things work for you if you really want to get behind this. And it things do work for a time. Uh but he's quite lazy and I think the problem is that he was spoiled as a child. I mean everyone says that including the queen herself and without boundaries uh without uh being able to to basically get away with things. It's got worse and worse. You know one of the things I struggled with was to find people who could say positive things about him. Uh you know I was keen to have that because clearly one doesn't want to read a book which is unremittingly hostile. You know, people are complex and it is nuanced. Um, but I struggled much easier with with Sarah Ferguson because there are a lot of things there. She's a good friend to people. She's got a kind heart. She has a terrific empathy for the disadvantaged. I mean, there's scenes there, like quite a lot of people, where she goes into very difficult charitable situations uh and and turns things round. I mean, there's a lot to admire and that's I say part of the tragedy that if there had been more support perhaps uh and perhaps people around them directing both of them they wouldn't have got themselves in this mess.
Andrew Lani, thank you very much indeed.
Thank you. As you can imagine, we've reached out to Prince Andrew Buckingham Palace and the government about some of the claims in the interview. The Department for Trade told us the department has complied with its obligations under the Freedom of Information Act and Public Records Act. We've yet to hear back from the palace or Prince Andrew. And a statement issued by Prince Harry's office denies any physical altercation between himself and Andrew. The statement says, "I can confirm Prince Harry and Prince Andrew have never had a physical fight, nor did Prince Andrew ever make the comments he's alleged to have made about the Duchess of Sussex to Prince Harry. And the £750,000 payment to Prince Andrew that Andrew Lowey referred to in that interview was later repaid.
The news agents, this is a Global Player original podcast. [Music]