Did the Met Police cover up for Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor?

0:00Less support through telehealth, but it feels overwhelming and rushed. Check out orderlymeds.com now. Orderlymeds.com was built to be different. Here, you connect with real doctors who take the time to understand your goals, review your eligibility, and guide you through a plan that's right for you. Orderlymeds provides access to proven GLP-1 medications like semaglutide and terzepatide, including both name brand options and personalized compound versions when appropriate. So you have choices backed by clinical oversight. not guesswork. It's a simpler, more supportive telehealth experience designed around people who want clarity, care, and confidence in their weight loss journey.

0:37And your medication is delivered directly to your home in discreet packaging. So your experience stays private from start to finish. Do your research, ask the right questions, then visit orderlymeds.com slash podcast for an exclusive offer. Again, that's orderlymeds.com slash podcast. Individual results may vary, not medical advice eligibility required. See site for details.

1:02This is a Global Player original podcast. I think for Andrew in particular, I think his brother has done an amazing job of putting pressure on him, but there's no way he should be living where he's living and still holding the esteem that he has. I mean, I know he's been stripped of his titles, but he looks like he's still pretty comfortable these days. I think for somebody that may have committed these types of crimes, There should be a more thorough investigation that takes place. And if it is found that he's implicated, then he needs to be put behind bars. That is Sky Roberts. He's the brother of Virginia Roberts, Virginia Dufresne, Jeffrey Epstein's most vocal victim.

1:42And he's talking to us about the relationship between the Met Police and the royal family. In particular, why things aren't moving faster with the case of the former Prince Andrew. We also hear from a Royal Protection Officer who says that the Royalty Unit in the police were terrified of reporting any questionable behaviour from the Royals. It sounds like Scotland Yard is about to change its whole attitude towards policing and the Royal Family. Welcome to the News Agents.

2:22The News Agents. It's John. It's Emily. And that was Sky Roberts, the brother of Virginia Dufresne, Virginia Roberts, as was, talking to us about where they feel the investigation into former Prince Andrew is now going. And today we're going to bring you a story of our own, or rather a story by Andy Hughes of the crime agents, who's been looking into the relationship between the Royal Family and the Met Police. In particular, that close bond between protection officers and the Royal Family, and where they see their role, their loyalty vis-a-vis the police and the Royals. So Andy, just take us through, first of all, how you met the source that we're going to hear from today.

3:14Yeah, it won't surprise either of you that protection officers very, very rarely speak to journalists. And the reason for that is they like to operate in the shadows. But this certain officer who I've known for a while, he felt compelled to speak to me after the release of the Epstein files. because he wanted to know about a certain culture that was going on in the royal protection unit. In protection offices, you've got either political or royal. The political units, they deal with different politicians all the time. But with the royal protection teams, they are assigned to a certain royal family member.

3:57And it's not unusual for them to stick with them for more than a decade. And what he told me was there was serious concerns, certainly in the late 90s, early noughties and 2010s, that certain members of the Royal Protection Team became too close, too close to what they call their principles. And in the case of Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, this officer tells me that there was real concern that his security detail were actually withholding information from the Met Police. Who employs them? These officers, they don't work for the royal family, they work for the Met Police. And specifically, they were concerned about what they would have witnessed during the then Prince Andrew's visits to Epstein's private island.

4:44So let me ask you this, Andy, because this is so fascinating. What are the rules of engagement, as it were, for a police officer? Because for goodness sake, it's an elite job within the police force to be a personal protection officer, close protection officer to a member of the royal family or a senior politician. You travel around in suits. You kind of have a very different life. But what is their responsibility? Is it to say to the principal that the person they're protecting, you can't do that. That's against the law. Or is it to say, I'm just here to keep you safe. You do whatever you like.

5:16The first thing they tell you, I'm told in the training for Royal Protection Officers, is that whatever you do, do not forget that you are a police officer. If you see any criminality, you must act. That's the first thing they're told. They're clearly told this because there has been an issue for many years, certainly within the Royal Protection Unit, of Royal Protection officers becoming too close, up to the point where they started behaving and acting like the royal family. For example, they started wearing signet rings and began talking and acting way more like royal family members than actual police officers.

5:52I mean, it's interesting because what you're describing is what the manual says or what the training says, which is you mustn't forget you're a police officer. So what happens to a police officer who then says, actually, my principal has done something they shouldn't have done. They were speeding or they were smoking pot or whatever. Well, this is where it becomes really interesting and actually quite sinister, because there seems to be a wall of silence. Because on several occasions in the past, when these protection officers have flagged up or reported any questionable behaviour, shall we say, by royal family members, It has been a regular thing that this officer was then brought in the next day and not only taken off that unit, not only taken off that detail, but was actually put back in uniform, walking the beat as punishment for reporting a member of the royal family.

6:43It just plays into this whole idea that this team's whole mission was to really protect the secrets of the royal family rather than to report and protect the law. I mean, if you are a close protection officer, you think there is little to be gained in spilling the beans back to HQ if it's just going to lose you your job or if you're dismissed as a spy or if you're seen as somehow a traitor to the person that you're meant to be protecting. I mean, I guess that is where the whole complication of that role falls down. Right. What do they report and what do they suck up? Well, this is the thing, Emily, because police officers speak to each other.

7:26And all of a sudden, if one officer doesn't turn up for work the next day, the first question is why. And when you find out the reason is because they reported some behaviour by a member of the royal family, then it doesn't exactly encourage you to report, does it? So who is at fault here? Is it the way that the royals have tried to cover up or is it the way the police have interpreted that role? I think it's a bit of both. I think it's a bit of both. It's clear to me, certainly from what this source says to me, that this unit completely spiralled out of control in terms of they became so secretive.

8:07They became withdrawn. And all the other units used to say, what on earth are those guys doing? What are they up to? And then now, obviously, with what we now know and all this stuff coming out in the Epstein files, there's serious questions being asked now. And interestingly, I don't know what you think about this, but I find the language of what the Met Police are saying now very interesting. In the past, anything to do with the roles, anything about protection, close protection, it was just a blanket, no comment. We don't speak about these security arrangements. now they're coming forward and they're telling me because they want the public to know that actually they're taking this seriously they're actively investigating and from my sources I know that already two officers who were assigned to Prince Andrew have been contacted by the Met OK so that's what I was going to ask because I mean I guess we have to ask Andy if it's just one source and he's got a grudge to bear against someone or someone in the force you know is it possible that he's bringing that story to you because he sort of wants to wear his dirty laundry.

9:10But you're saying no action has been taken as a result. Well, action's already been taken. And also I triple sourced this. My source, I can't tell you who he is, but put it this way, he's as legit as they get. He's the real deal. He's done the job at the highest level. We've talked about what an elite job it is to be a close protection officer to the royal family. Was there a gradation within the royal family about which royal you served? Yes, is the short answer. It is widely known that to be on Prince Andrew's detail was the least desirable. It was the one job they didn't want. And there's a reason for that.

9:46They said to me that it's because they were put in awkward positions on many occasions. This, especially during the Randy Andy days, when he was flying all over the world, this source says, and meeting women. And that just puts them in a very difficult position. He said to me, it is the least enviable job in the Met Police being Prince Andrew's security detail. I mean, I've been going through the files, you know, as I'm sure you have, we all have. And there's one exchange between Epstein and Prince Andrew where essentially Andrew asks how many of his protection officers can stay in the Manhattan townhouse, you know, and what floor they're going to be on.

10:24And so you do kind of get this insight into, well, you know, I can fit one in, but I'm not sure I can fit two. He'll be on the fifth floor. You'll be on the third floor. And so I guess they're in this position where they've got to feel that they are saving his life if something happens. But they don't want to be in the next door bedroom, right? I asked this exact same question because I was equally as curious as you are. And what he said was, what would have happened is, just say they went to Epstein's property. Yeah. The first thing they would have done is the protection officers would have gone in before the prince went in.

10:59They would have scanned the property, swept it, swept it to make sure that there's no immediate threats. As soon as they deem that there's no immediate threats, they would then have to get permission from Prince Andrew to then leave the room and leave him to it. Now, that's I'm told is how it worked. So they would have then, for example, on Epstein's Island. I said well where were they staying they would have been in staff quarters they wouldn't have been in and around any parties or anything like that but as soon as he leaves any property just say he goes for a walk he has to be tailed by protection officers but if he's inside a building that has already been secured then the protection officers don't have to be there in view of the investigations you've made in the response you've had from Scotland Yard that the officers concerned may well be called in.

11:47I mean, presumably it's not beyond the realms of possibility that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor is called in. Well, yeah, I suppose it depends on what the officers will say. There's clearly efforts being made now. It's hardly a surprise because the Met Police do not want to be left open to this. They don't want to be the ones under the microscope if any wrongdoing has happened. So what they're doing is they're make an investigation finding out from people who were with them at questionable times what happened what did you see and it's only after that they will then decide if any criminal case is to be answered but this is what's so fascinating about how the establishment works that a year ago you would have got the no comment yeah but the royal family now wants to be seen to be doing something about Andrew.

12:39So Buckingham Palace is probably giving a nod. There's no email traffic, I'm sure. But giving the nod to Scotland Yard to say, please make it clear that we're taking all of this very seriously and some bad things went on. And that is the transformation that has happened. When the response came through from the Met, it slightly stunned us in a way. It was like... Because they were taking its answers. Yeah, which is ridiculous, right? But because I'm so used to just getting a blanket wall of silence from anything to do with the sensitivities around the royal family, you just expect a no comment.

13:13So you're preparing your story as if you're going to get a no comment. And then all of a sudden the police statement comes through and says, listen, we're actively looking at this. I think that has changed even as quickly as the last six months, because in the interview that I've just done with Sky Roberts, Virginia's brother, the former victim of Jeffrey Epstein, he described the Met reaching out six months ago and opening and closing a case in the space of about a week or 10 days. This was over whether Prince Andrew, then Prince Andrew, had released details of her social security number. And he suggested in that interview that they had not taken it seriously enough.

13:56So if what you're saying is true, that has changed literally in the space of the revelation from these files in the last two weeks. Let's hear from Sky Roberts. We begin by talking about his appearance at the House Judiciary Committee last week, where Pam Bondi was asked if she'd made contact with any of the Epstein victims or survivors, or if any of them had asked to see her and she'd said no. We'll be back. You can hear exactly what Sky Roberts thinks about Pam Bondi and about Prince Andrew after the break.

14:37Breaking news, in-depth analysis and trusted voices, all in one place. From award-winning journalists asking the questions that shape your world. Prime Minister, you talked about doing patriotic things. Welcoming the leader of the opposition, leader of the Conservative Party, Kerry Batenau, back to the studio. The leader of the Liberal Democrats, Sir Ed Davey. The news that matters from the UK and around the world and why it matters to you. Listen on our free Global Player app or the LBC app. LBC, leading Britain's conversation. When people turn to telehealth or weight loss, they're looking for real support.

15:10That's why more people are choosing orderlymeds.com. Orderly Meds connects you with real doctors and access to proven GLP-1 medications like semaglutide and terzeptatide. No guessing, just a more supportive experience. And all shipped directly to your door in discreet packaging. Do your research, ask questions, then visit orderlymeds.com slash podcast for an exclusive offer. That's orderlymeds.com slash podcast. Individual results may vary. Not medical advice. Eligibility required. See site for details.

15:42The News Agents. Well joining us now is Virginia Roberts' brother Sky Roberts and his wife Amanda Roberts. Very good to have you both. Sky, I want to take you back if I can to that moment with Pam Bondi, the Attorney General in the House Judiciary Committee last week. she was asked if she had made contact with any of the victims and the victims were asked if they could raise their hands if they hadn't yet had a meeting with her just talk us through that moment because you were in the room and your hand went up yeah i mean it was a it was a very surreal moment for us you know you have the attorney general of the united states sitting three feet in front of you and the lack of acknowledgement um even in the room right she wouldn't make eye contact with any survivors.

16:32It just, it felt very unhuman, right? I mean, this is what we've been saying the entire time. Like, let's take the politics out of this for a moment. And let's think of the human side. And I think that's what I was most disappointed in is the fact that she wouldn't even acknowledge survivors, even though they were only three feet away from her. And I'm like, listen, how much more obvious can it get here? But this administration genuinely doesn't care. And they're gaslighting. I mean, look at the theatrics that was put on during that. I mean, I think the best way to put it was it was kind of a clown show.

17:03She kept deflecting. So, I mean, all in all, it was very surreal. And I think survivors felt very slighted. This is how they've been treated before, where people try to silence them. And our DOJ hasn't done a very good job of making us feel inclusive into this process. Has she reached out to you since then? Have you heard from her? We have not. And nor do I expect that we will. I mean, they would have done it by now, in my opinion. And also, like, of course, we raised our hands to say, yes, we would still speak with the DOJ. We'd still open that line of communication. But I think there's a trust issue here now.

17:42I don't know if we can really trust our Department of Justice. Has she ever sat down with you? Have you met her face to face or her representatives? No. And there have been attempts on our end and also on other survivors. One of the survivors actually wrote Todd Blanche a letter requesting to meet with him, requesting that we be involved in how the files are released and making sure that the victims' names were redacted. We've never gotten a response with them. there was one time that she had reached out to an organizer from the organization that we had been working with saying that yes she wanted to meet with us and that the files were going to be released some of the files were going to be released on the 19th but when we were like okay let's make that happen it never happened the day that the files were released she apparently had some type of appointment that she scheduled and said that she wanted to speak with us and she never did.

18:42What do you think is going on here? Because if you step back, this is a leading politician who has it in her gift to really get on top of this. This is a story the whole world wants to get to the bottom of now. This is something that everyone is hungry to see justice served on. What do you think is going on? Why would she not respond to the people that we all now want to hear from? The victims, the survivors, the people that are actually seeking justice now? I don't see how we can see this in any other way but covering up for others. I said it in an interview yesterday, especially one as a woman, two as a former prosecutor for these cases.

19:32How can you sit here with this type of case and knowing what's in those files? They know what's in those files. They know that they are co-conspirators. They know the horrific things that happened to these children. They were children. How can you sit back and just let this happen. So I had said either you break away from whatever ties, whoever is coaxing you to not do the right thing here, or you resign. You resign to someone who's going to do their job. I heard Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez call for her resignation. I mean, you don't think Pam Bondi herself is culpable, presumably. You think she is doing what she's been told.

20:19I mean, And who do you think she's covering for? I think she's covering for the rich and powerful. She's covering for the other class that thinks that because they have money and power, that the same laws don't apply to them, the same laws that would apply to anybody else in this sort of case. And do we think she's incriminated in it? Not necessarily, but I think there's a guilty by association. I think right now, if you aren't going to support survivors and you are going to cover up for this other class of people, then yes, you are guilty by association. And it just feels that much worse because it's your own government doing it, right?

20:57I mean, the UK has gone far beyond what the United States has done, and we've certainly commended them for it. And here's the one thing you haven't seen up to this point, Emily, and this is a first of its kind, is this many survivors coming forward, banding together at one time to make a statement to our government that we will not stop until justice is served. And that was really a general line from Virginia. Virginia so bravely got up on the podium in the Capitol steps and said, I will not stop until justice is served. And now you see that same strength of Virginia and her survivor sisters. So, you know, I think Pam Bondi's got a lot of questions she needs to answer right now.

21:38She started this and we wouldn't be where we are today without her. And I'm really pleased we can kind of acknowledge that. If I asked you, since the files dropped, and you both will have known clearly a lot of the information that we're now seeing for the first time, but has anything more surprised you? Are you now clearer about the other men that raped your sister, the other men she was trafficked to? Are you able to name them? I think it's still very difficult to be put in that position, like she still has children that, you know, there's the safety factor that has always been a factor when coming forward.

22:21I think, you know, we have always tried to be careful about what we do because we have children as well and we're normal people. But silence is not the answer. And so the releasing of the files, yes, has allowed survivors, you know the names that were redacted has allowed them to kind of make room to give them vindication and to still speak up in ways that they couldn't speak up before and so it does give us an opportunity to kind of say look look at this this is what virginia has been saying the entire time the vindication with the gillaine maxwell email her confirming that the photo was real and that It was taken at her flat.

23:06I mean, it's the same thing Virginia had said this entire time. And so there is a sense of vindication and this opportunity to push forward, to keep pushing through for truth. So when you talk about vindication, is there also optimism that we will see more convictions or at least more investigations, more charges on different men now? I don't think we'll stop. I don't think survivors will stop. And I don't think that we're going to stop until we see that. And and it's going to really challenge our current government. It's going to challenge every piece of our government right now. And we're really, really looking towards Congress and our representatives to be that push forward.

23:49Let me ask you two specific questions then. Howard Lutnick was up in a congressional hearing and he had to explain why, having said that he essentially fled Epstein's house when he first got to understand what the man was about in around, I think it was 2005, he then managed to have lunch with him on the boat on the island with his wife and kids. I mean, does that hang together for you? Do you think that that will go further? He's still in his job. He's a commerce secretary. I think I want to say with all of the things that Congress has learned, like our representatives being able to actually see the files, there were some of them that were hesitant to push on that, that when they walked out of that congressional room and saw those files, they were petrified.

24:40They were horrified and finally got a taste of what we've been screaming about, what survivors, what Virginia have been screaming about for years. And I don't feel that they can sleep comfortably at night without pushing this thing forward. And that is what it's going to take. I am hopeful. I am hopeful that we're going to start to see real action here, because at this point, if we see no action, the people will not allow it. Sky, what does that action look like for you? You've praised the king here, King Charles, for having been ahead of this. I mean, going back to sort of last October. What has to happen now in the Andrew case?

25:26Well, I think first and foremost, we need to open an active investigation on Andrew. I think you can clearly see within the files that there's some sort of implication there. And I do know that the King said that he would be supportive of that. I can share with you that the head of the Metropolitan Police had reached out to us a handful of months ago. And by the time we were ready to respond, they actually just kind of indicated that it was an open and shut case. And this was specific to Virginia and him inquiring about gaining her social security. And so it just, you know, I think for Andrew in particular, I think his brother has done an amazing job of putting pressure on him.

26:06But there's no way he should be living where he's living and still holding the esteem that he has. I mean, I know he's been stripped of his titles, but like he looks like he's still pretty comfortable these days. It's like I think for somebody that may have committed these types of crimes, there should be a more thorough investigation that takes place. And if it is found that he's implicated, then he needs to be put behind bars. The former business secretary, Vince Cable, has said that there should be an investigation because of disgraceful behavior. I think he's talking about his behavior as a trade envoy and deals that went on at that time.

26:40I wonder, do you feel that people are perhaps taking the trade side more seriously now than the sexual abuse side? Amanda and I talk about this a lot, actually. And it's the point to be made is that if you were capable of committing one of the most heinous crimes, right, even just the affiliation with Epstein. I mean, the pictures look pretty damning. the famous interview with you, you know, a lot of stuff is backtracking what he said, especially coming through these files that may not have been true. And so, yeah, I mean, I think that if they're capable of committing these crimes, then what other crimes are they capable of committing?

27:21So, if the only way to seek some sort of justice here is to go the trade route, or to go, like, for example, Peter Mandelson, which may have shared secret government information with Epstein in exchange for a payment. I mean, that's punishable by life in the UK. That's a serious crime. So I think, yes, they should be fully investigated, whether it's this is just the starting point. This is the tipping point. It's starting the conversation. Every single person should be investigated, follow the money. And if it's found that they've committed alternative crimes, they should be prosecuted for those as well.