Harry Dismisses Claim That Meghan Dominates Him

28:15So we have this now quite interesting dynamic where they've chosen war. They've chosen to basically go to war with Bauer, which is going to bring a whole load of extra publicity onto the book. But it did also lead a lot of the coverage, you know, the kind of clap back from Harry and Meghan led a lot of the news stories about the book. But then on the other hand, you know, there's the old adage, all publicity is good publicity. So I want to take you through some of what the book actually says. I want to take you through, obviously, what Harry and Meghan spokesperson says about it. But I also, you know, I want to just kind of toss around this idea of whether it's a good idea or not to actually fight back against these things.

28:52Because, you know, the age old theory in PR, there's something called the Streisand effect, which sometimes is used predominantly around privacy lawsuits, but I think it applies just as well to royal books too, which is that the more you fight something, the more you basically just give it the oxygen of publicity. And it's exactly what a guy like Tom Bauer wants. So let's go through it all, but let's start with the actual claims in the book. So the big one that got a load of the early headlines was the suggestion that Queen Camilla told a friend of hers early on when Harry and Meghan were still working royals before they quit the palace, that Meghan had brainwashed Harry.

29:31Now, there's not a huge amount of context to it. I always think these kind of anecdotes are most compelling when you have a lot of the surrounding context. You understand what Camilla was referring to, what the context of the comment was, where and when it was made. Was she happy or sad when she said it? But we've just really got this kind of floating fact that, according to Bauer, this is what Queen Camilla told her friend. And, you know, to be totally honest, I wouldn't be 100 % surprised if it was true, because I think a lot of the Royals did feel like Harry changed after Meghan came along.

30:07And I think actually probably a big part of that change was down to Harry deciding that he was going, you know, that the media had destroyed all of his past relationships and this time he was going to fight. So I don't necessarily think it was all Meghan's fault, but I do think that Harry changed significantly after Meghan came along. But let's talk also about the clapback from the Sussexes. So this is what the spokesperson says. Mr. Bower's commentary has long crossed the line from criticism into fixation. This is someone who has publicly stated the monarchy, in fact, depends on actually obliterating the Sussexes from our state of life.

30:41Language that speaks for itself. He has made a career out of constructing ever more elaborate theories about people he does not know and has never met. Those interests and facts will look elsewhere. where those seeking deranged conspiracy and melodrama know exactly where to find him. So there's a little bit more from the Invictus Games Foundation, which I'll talk about when it's relevant, but let's go through some more of these claims first. So obviously we've got this claim that Meghan brainwashed Harry, but that is also packaged and wrapped into some other wider stuff about William and Kate apparently believing Meghan was not reconciled to what was deemed her destiny in London.

31:19So basically, he's saying Meghan came along and she didn't know what was coming, which actually I guess is what Harry and Meghan themselves say. But specifically, Bower says Meghan lamented Harry's unlikely chances of one day being king, just as she regretted the possibility that she would never be queen. With Meghan's encouragement, Harry started to move beyond the palace's control. So do I agree with that? I mean, I probably agree with some of it. I don't know that Meghan ever actually did imagine that she would literally be queen one day. I think maybe that's a little far-fetched. I think there was, what I suppose underneath it all, Bauer is suggesting, is that there was a little bit of jealousy or rivalry.

31:58And I think there probably was actually on both sides. I do think that it didn't sit right with Meghan, that she had to kind of toe the line and do things the royal way and process into royal events in order of the line of succession and that she had to be behind William and Kate and all of these things. I don't think Meghan did enjoy that. I think Meghan resented it quite a lot. I don't think that she actually ever thought that she would be queen. I think maybe that's going its bit. But the book argues that Meghan became divisive and that Harry became like a divisive figure in the palace. That's not particularly controversial.

32:33She definitely was. But also that Harry ignored his old friends, changed his telephone number without telling his family and kind of cut himself off. And if that's true, then it's kind of interesting that that itself is quite similar to how Charles felt about Diana, that Diana had forced Charles into cutting off his wider friendship circle and making himself kind of uncontactable. But I'm not really reading much into that, that's more of an aside. But Bauer writes that Harry, the jovial lad about town, became possessed by seeking revenge. Increasingly, his character mirrored Meghan. Emotionally, he veered towards extremes.

33:15Simple dislikes became passionate hatred. So Harry definitely, I think, what did become quite extreme in some of his, not just his perceptions of reality, but also his strategy for going about trying to get what he wants. And I base that not on this book, but actually Harry's witness statement in one of his court cases, the one against the Murdoch Empire in News UK, talks about this kind of campaign he went on to try to get the Murdoch newspapers. So The Sun, The Times, Sunday Times banned from his wedding to Meghan in 2018 over phone hacking. So Harry no doubt felt that he was fighting a really good, important cause there.

33:54But also the way that he went about it, he tried to get Sally Osman, the director of royal communications at the time. to kind of, you know, go out and like try and haul News UK executives into meetings and like really push this idea that the company needs to apologize, but also to acknowledge the phone hacking took place at the Sun. The company had always said that wasn't true. And there was like, he was definitely giving off a strong aroma of being a bit of a bull in a China shop at the time. And so I do think that probably to the people around Harry, like this was totally different to how he had been in earlier stages of his life.

34:30You know, there were times in Harry's life where actually he was a bit of a passenger in his own life and he just kind of went with the flow. And it wasn't actually until he, I think he left the military that he decided that he basically needed to grab the ball by the horns and take control. And he really went all in on that desire and he really tried to take full control. And obviously one thing that's quite difficult there is, you know, the line of succession. Like he wasn't in charge. Not only was he not the queen, but he also wasn't the next in line to the throne which was his father and you know william was ahead in the beckoning order too and he was trying to do things that were affecting the whole strategy of the entire institution of the monarchy and in harry's mind that made his family wrong that he was fighting a good cause he was right he was on the side of truth and justice and that his family were wrong but he suddenly became possessed by this determination to do all of this at a point when it made sense to him because he felt he was fighting for the futurist relationship to Meghan, with Meghan, sorry.

35:29But for the rest of the royals, there was no particular reason why any of this had to happen in this moment. And so that, it's true, that was a major cause of the rift and of the inability of the two sides to get on the same page about all of this. So I don't necessarily think there's anything actually that controversial in those passages of Bower's book. You know, I don't think Meghan and Harry will like the way he phrases himself, but you strip it all away and underneath it all. There is some truth there, I think, but there are definitely bits here where I can understand why Harry and Meghan got so upset.

36:04But let's keep going for now. So this is a really interesting line, right? So Bauer says that Harry and Meghan were basically shell-shocked by Prince Andrew, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor being banished over Epstein. And because not necessarily, I think, because they took Andrew's side or because they didn't think Andrew had done anything wrong, but because they saw the potential reality that if it can be done to Andrew, it could be done to them. So he says, Meghan has separated herself from Harry more recently, except seemingly when a joint appearance would enrich her publicity. They won't like that.

36:38That'll annoy them. But also Harry is isolated from Britain. His charitable activities have become threadbare and his desperation noticeable to many. Obviously, that's going to upset him too. He's permanently alienated from William and Kate. Harry was reportedly stunned by his brother's ferocious reaction to revelations about the man now known as Andrew Mountbatten Windsor and his relationship with the convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein. The unpredicted and unimaginable humiliation of Andrew shocked Harry. Rightly, Harry fears that the future King William could remove all the Sussexes' titles and effectively banish him from Britain.

37:16Whether Meghan understands the potential consequences of any deliberate aggravation of the Prince and Princess of Wales remains to be seen. So Bower's saying there that he has some insight into Harry's feelings about a really actually very recent event. And he gives no indication of how he knows, which makes it very difficult to assess his source. Again, like maybe it's not super controversial in some respects. Maybe Bower is kind of reading in what he anticipates Harry would think. He doesn't actually mention in the serialisation having a source for that material. But it is kind of weird that Harry hasn't come out.

37:56In my opinion, I do think it's kind of weird that Harry hasn't come out and backed King Charles' strong line on Andrew. And it did strike me as odd that he hadn't done that. And then actually, maybe it would kind of make some logical sense if the reason was to do with fearing the precedent and what it could mean for him in the future. Because obviously William does not like Harry. They don't talk anymore. They've massively fallen out. They get on much worse than Harry and Charles. And I think Charles still has not necessarily fully forgiven Harry, but does want to maintain a relationship with his son.

38:29But William clearly is still very angry with his brother. So yeah, it could, you know, I mean, I kind of, my gut instinct tells me maybe, like I just find it very difficult to believe that Tom Bauer has a, you would have to have a source inside the Sussex camp now. And I just don't know who that would be. Like even recently departed, you know, AIDS, like it's just so recent. It would have to be one of the people who left the foundation in the last few months, like probably over Christmas, January, you know, actually some of them are not even out the door yet. James Holt, for example, not out the door yet, still working for them.

39:09I just don't know who it would be who would go and speak to Tom Bauer about it within the last like, how long ago was October? Like five months ago? Six months ago? I just find it very difficult to believe that Tom Bauer has a source inside the inner sanctum of the Sussex camp in the last six months. I 100 % believe he has sources in the palace and way back when. I just find it very difficult to believe he has a source as recent as that. But who knows? Maybe he does. And by all means, read the book and decide for yourselves if that's what you want to do. But the bit that I think is actually really upset the Sussexes is actually about the Invictus Games.

39:53And there's a couple of aspects to it. So Bauer talks a bit about these executives from the Canada Invictus Games who quit seemingly because they weren't totally on board with how things were being done. Bauer says that they felt it was turning into the Megan show basically and that Megan was a distraction from the injured veterans. He quotes one of them saying she's bling, not rehabilitation because obviously the Invictus Games is an Olympic style tournament for soldiers who predominantly who have been injured in war or some who have had post-traumatic stress disorder. More on that later. But one of these executives supposedly said, Harry can't decide whether a victory should be styled on the Olympics or on more intimate warrior games, embracing the military family.

40:41But Bauer says if they're caught halfway, the competition would once again be ignored by the media after the star started opening concert at the BC Palace Stadium in British Columbia. And one of these executives apparently says, we need bigger ambitions to bring in the audience. It's just there's concerns about diminishing audience for the games. So what do I think of that? Well, look, you know, the bling is going to get people to pay attention to it. It's going to put it on people's radar. Yes, people will focus on Megan and her outfits instead of the stories of the competitors. But I don't actually know, I don't personally think they necessarily have another route into getting people through the door.

41:22So it's all very well and good to say that Megan star power is an imperfect way of getting people to engage with the Invictus games. But beyond just, you know, building connections and community within, you know, the military community, I don't actually think there's necessarily another non-Megan route to a really wide audience outside of the military community. So I, you know, I just, I sympathize with what's being said, but I'm not sure that there is actually another option for them. but this is this is the difficult bit this is the bit that they'll hate so bauer says that he talks about a specific wheelchair basketball competition between america and nigeria and he says you know that some of the nigerian soldiers weren't allowed in on visas but you know those that did make you know the kind of team that they managed to scrape together out of those who made it into the country did feature people with missing limbs.

42:17But he says, now this is not me, I have not had an opportunity to bottom out this claim. I've asked the US Department of War and I haven't had an answer. But he says that the US team, the American team that played Nigeria at the Canada Invictus Games, none of them were actually wheelchair bound. And that they were all suffering post-traumatic stress disorder. And that after the game, they hammered the Nigerian team, absolutely demolished them. And then after the game, they wheeled themselves off in their wheelchairs into a secluded area. And effortlessly, they all got up and walked away. None of them appeared to be physically injured.

43:00And this is the bit that I think has blown Harry's head off, basically. And has made him go all in and basically declare open warfare with Tom Bauer. and disregard the risk or possibility that it gives Bauer exactly the publicity he wants. And so we have a particular statement from a spokesperson for the Invictus Games Foundation who said, It is disappointing to see the times give prominence to commentary that appears driven by a long-established agenda rather than a genuine understanding of the Invictus Games and the community it supports. The Foundation exists to support the recovery and rehabilitation of wounded, injured and sick service personnel and veterans from around the world.

43:41Attempts to question the legitimacy of competitors or diminish the experiences of those living with both physical injuries and invisible wounds such as PTSD are deeply disrespectful to the men and women the games were created for. The focus should remain where it belongs, on the courage, recovery and camaraderie of those who have served. And my understanding is this has also gone down quite badly with some people in the kind of wider military community. Obviously, a lot of soldiers reading this will be, you know, they will know, they will have friends who have PTSD, who are dealing with some of these kind of, you know, the mental health aspects of recovering from fighting in war.

44:18And they will really, you know, want the best for their friends who are going through all of this. And I suppose if the Invictus Games is giving something to those soldiers and helping with their recovery, then, you know, maybe it's not the most popular thing to do in the world to start trying to basically undermine that and say you shouldn't be competing. But on the flip side, I can see why, how a lot of people who are outside the military community who are tuning into the Invictus Games as though it was the Olympics probably would have an anticipation that a person in a wheelchair would only be in a wheelchair if they needed that wheel, if they were wheelchair bound in their day-to-day lives.

44:58So in other words, if you're somebody who doesn't use a wheelchair in any other context, except to play wheelchair basketball, That would probably be a bit of a surprise to a casual spectator to this competition. There's one more little Invictus bit that I want to read just before I move on. But it's quite interesting. So Bauer says Harry was basically hoping to use the 2027 Invictus game, which is going to be in England in Birmingham, which for American listeners is Britain's second biggest city. And because that's going to be in Britain, Harry wants to get Charles to attend the opening ceremony.

45:33and that is the kind of vehicle for driving a reconciliation with his father forward. But one thing that he didn't anticipate is that actually Invictus includes a team from Israel, from the Israeli Defence Forces, and that actually there's a very real prospect that that could spark protests in Birmingham. So Birmingham, for those who don't know much about the city, it's the same city where Aston Villa, who's the local football team, and they were due to play Maccabee Tel Aviv and the Maccabee Tel Aviv fans were banned and there was this whole massive argument in Britain about why did the police ban the Maccabee Tel Aviv fans.

46:12One theory put forward by, or at least one account put forward by the police was because it was due to hooliganism by the Maccabee Tel Aviv fans. There's definitely some basis for saying that they have been engaged in hooliganism before. In fact, one of their own games was called off, but also there was the suggestion that basically it was in anticipation of anti-Israel protests in Birmingham. So that turned into a massive political row in Britain, on all the front pages, massive in the news, Prime Minister coming under pressure over it, and make up your own minds, basically. It's not really what this podcast is about, but that I think is probably the reason why Bauer is speculating about possible protests.

46:54So that I think is probably the background to why Bauer is speculating about protests. It might feel a bit like it comes from left field, but I think that's probably the reason. So will it happen? It's not impossible. I mean, I don't think you can rule it out. But I could also see Invictus being a bit lower profile than a major football match, major soccer match in Britain. So I wouldn't necessarily say it's a foregone conclusion that there will be. But what Bauer's suggesting is that actually the possibility that there might be will make Invictus in Birmingham a too controversial prospect for Charles to go.

47:33So this is what he writes. The Sussexes aimed for nothing less than to be reinstated in London by the King as trusted members of the royal family. The vehicle for their triumphant return would be the Invictus Games to be held in July 2027 in Birmingham. From the outset, Harry had plotted for the king to open the games as the backdrop for Meghan, accompanied by their children to dominate the media. But in choosing Birmingham, Harry had unwittingly exposed himself to unexpected controversy, the toxic reality of a city in turmoil mired in threats of protest. So I don't think Birmingham is a toxic city.

48:08Personally, some people may disagree, but there we are. But it's not impossible that the inclusion of IDF soldiers in the Invictus Games at Birmingham in 2027 will really upset people if it's high profile enough. If it doesn't upset people, it will be because it's not high profile enough. But yeah, I mean, you know, it's a valid point to make. Let's put it that way. And then the one final point from the book that I just want to raise is to do with the One Young World Conference in Manchester in 2022. so people might remember this was what Meghan was doing immediately before Queen Elizabeth died.

48:44It was the reason that they went to Britain, that Harry and Meghan were in Britain at the time of succession. And so Meghan went and did this speech for One Young World and Bower quotes Ella Robertson who he says is the daughter of one of the co-founders of One Young World who is Kate Robertson. And this is what he writes. In the countdown to the big moment, so this is about Meghan's speech by the way. He's saying that basically Megan's speech was all about her and it upsets the organisers. It's the general thrust of it. In the countdown to the big moment, Ella Robertson read Megan Markle's proposed speech on the autocue.

49:16She's effed it, basically groaned Robertson, except she actually said the swear word, which I'm sparing you hearing. Instead of speaking as agreed about the charity One Young World, Megan's speech was focused on herself. Nearly 50 times in just 10 minutes she intended to say I. So it sounds like from the book that Ella Robertson spoke to Bauer and said that she wasn't happy with the way that Meghan just focused on herself all the time and didn't speak enough about the charity. So Bauer writes, to Ella Robertson's anger, her speech praised one young world who saw in me what I wanted to see fully in myself.

49:56And over the next 10 minutes, she spoke exclusively about herself and her rise to fame. At the end, the audience politely clapped. So that's basically the main lines from the serialization we've had so far. Obviously, there'll be more in the book itself, but I can definitely see why Harry and Meghan were very angry about this, particularly that stuff about Invictus competitors, I think will have really, really upset Harry, not just because it's a very important project to him, but also as a soldier, ex-soldier, I think he will feel that it was really diminishing and undermining the mental health of his fellow soldiers who fought in Afghanistan.

50:31But also, you know, this still remains this question, like, is it the right thing to fight back against it? Or does that just draw even more attention to the very thing that you want people not to see? Because that's what you have to bear in mind. Like you can't, a war of words in the media, in the public eye is not the same as a real physical war. In a real physical war, you can go out and try at least to destroy your enemy in a war of words in the media you can't there is no destroying your enemy you just have to kind of try to vaguely come out on top and i kind of think that tom bauer really will benefit and wants them to do this to go to war with him tom bauer as background is somebody who has he has this theory of power powerful people that they don't get to the top except by being terrible people.

51:25You know, he believes that the most powerful people in the world, in society, all have a kind of trail of bodies on the path that took them to fame and success. And so his whole kind of career, even before he'd ever written about the royals, his entire career was built around trying to expose the terrible things that powerful famous people do in order to get to the top of the food chain. And he's, you know, originally he would write about business, you know, people in business or politicians. Then he did one on Simon Cowell, and then he did one on King Charles back when he was Prince of Wales, which was when the male described Bauer as the undisputed witch finder general of modern biography.

52:05And then he did this book, Revenge, about Meghan, and it had all of this controversial stuff in it. And the Sussex Squad, like Meghan's fandom, her fan base, really seized on it and seized on him and almost built their own identities out of fighting Tom Bauer. And at one point he did an interview on British television calling Meghan a brazen hussy. And so they all went around putting brazen hussy on the end of their social media profile accounts. You know, at the end of their Twitter accounts, they'd be like, whatever the name was, brackets brazen hussy or whatever. And I kind of feel like Tom Bauer has found like his perfect dance partner.

52:47for this slightly toxic waltz that he wants to do in Megan. And he has succeeded in dragging them into giving free publicity to his book. And none of the other people who Tom Bauer wrote about took away in a long-term way anything that he said or did or wrote. Like Simon Cowell actually played up to it. I think basically Simon Cowell probably briefed Bauer and gave him some of the material. And then Simon Cowell did this ridiculous thing where he kind of like came, you know, he was like coming out of his house, getting photographed and he had like a bruise under his eye, but then no explanation of how it happened.

53:28And, you know, I think it was widely interpreted basically as a publicity stunt. So Simon Cowell just leaned into it, let it all wash over him and accepted the reality that it was going to elevate his profile. Whereas Meghan and Harry have been determined to try to fight back against Bauer. And I just think it doesn't work. It's what he wants. and this is why basically he's written a second book about Meghan because the first book went so well and it went so well despite having a number of glaring factual inaccuracies in it partly because he became like it became it was a cultural moment within royal reporting within the royal reporting world and one part of how that happened and why that happened is not just the fight back from Harry and Meghan themselves and they did Meghan did actually in some of her own explicit comments make reference to things in Bauer's book, but also the way that Meghan's supporters made this massive thing out of going to war with Bauer showed him that actually there's a lot of mileage in writing about Meghan.

54:27You can sell a lot of books that way and make a lot of money. So, you know, I totally understand why Harry and Meghan are so upset about it. I'm not necessarily totally convinced that coming out fighting is the right way to deal with it. But, you know, all that said, if it makes them feel better, maybe it's worth it for them. Maybe they're buying something. Sometimes you can do that. Just spend your money on something you want because you want it. It's the same thing. Maybe spend some PR capital on doing something that makes you feel better. If that's all they're doing and they know that that's what they're doing and they're not expecting it to destroy Tom Bauer then maybe it's fine.

55:04I'm going to take one more quick break. Before I do, a reminder to follow me on X. I'm at Jack underscore Royston and you will find all my latest stories for Newsweek. And when I'm back, the British police are trying to get hold of the original files from the Epstein files. And if they can't, it could derail the criminal case against Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor.

55:28Hello, listeners, and welcome to the show to Nima Romani. Nima is the president of West Coast Trial Lawyers, and he is a former federal prosecutor. And so he is therefore the perfect person to talk to about a major aspect of the Prince Andrew. Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor story this week, which is that British police have been trying to get hold of the unredacted versions of the Epstein files, all of these emails that we've been free to read, free to search the databases. None of those emails can form the basis of an actual criminal prosecution of Andrew, which means that actually this whole thing, potentially, it sounds like, could collapse if they can't get hold of those originals.

56:08So, Nima, have I got that right does that make sense to you that does make sense and jack really excited to be on you and i have talked about the epstein files for years and finally at least there in the uk we may may finally be seeing a criminal prosecution although we've just had arrests not quite there yet yeah exactly so the status of andrew at the moment obviously he's always denied epstein related wrongdoing he hasn't actually issued any kind of statement post arrest addressing these specific allegations. He's been released under investigation and the police investigation continues. So we've had Mark Rowley this week, who is the head of the Metropolitan, Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, Britain's most senior police officer, a very important man basically, has done an interview with ABC News, which I think is quite interesting in and of itself, obviously, to pick a US outlet and speak to them.

56:58And he said, this is what he had to say. So he in all those files that at some stage we're going to need the unredacted evidence. We need the original copy. And where did it come from? And that's going to be necessary if we get to the stage of court cases. So this feels to me, Nima, like basically the police, the UK police, have not actually succeeded so far. And so now they're going to the media with a view to try and pressure the US authorities into releasing these files the easy way. But there's also a harder way to do it. So can you fill me in on what the actual process is and what you think is going on here in PR terms?

57:37Well, let's talk about the rules of evidence first. And this is very important. And obviously, you know, the Epstein files, at least in the United States, they're hearsay. You can't build a case solely based on documents. Now, documents can be used as evidence. You have to lay the proper foundation. So to the extent that documents are redacted, the parties are going to need to see those unredacted versions. Now, I'm not saying the jury is necessarily going to be able to see them, but the parties need to see them and the judge needs to review them as well. And so far, at least here in the United States, the Department of Justice has not made the unredacted Epstein files available except for members of Congress to go down and view them at the Department of Justice.

58:17So I'm sure we're going to talk about the process for potentially getting these, but that's one very important point. In any case, civil or criminal, How are these documents going to get into evidence and how are the parties going to get those unredacted versions? The other important thing to note is that you really need to build these cases, not just on documents, but witness testimony. And obviously everyone's focused about the sex abuse and those types of crimes, but even misconduct in public office, you're really going to need folks who are involved that are going to come to court and testify.

58:51It doesn't matter if it's before a jury here in the United States or before a judge there in the United Kingdom. Witness testimony is going to be very important. And I'm not sure we have it, at least on the sex abuse side of things, unfortunately, here in the United States. Yes. So just to give a little bit of an account of what we're actually talking about here. So in the Epstein files, there were all of these emails which suggested Andrew had basically been sending UK government documents to Jeffrey Epstein, some of which appeared at least to be confidential, although we can't necessarily see the attachments based on what we've got.

59:24And one really interesting aspect of it is that, which I'll probably come to a little bit further down the line, is that in some of these same email chains, Andrew and his palace staff were also talking about Epstein paying off Sarah Ferguson's debts, which we know happened. And in fact, in the Epstein files, we actually have the bank transfer records of Epstein paying a guy who Sarah Ferguson owed money to. So I want to talk about Fergie's situation a little bit later on. But for now, I suppose the first obvious people to speak to are those palace staffers who are CC'd into those emails. No question.

59:58I mean, that's who you're going to want, to establish the authenticity of those emails, to lay the foundation, to introduce them into evidence. If you're going to build a case primarily based on emails, the first thing you've got to do is talk to the people that the emails were sent to and from and who were copied. Now, obviously, Epstein is dead. Andrew is not going to be cooperating with anyone anytime soon, if ever. So those other individuals are going to be key critical witnesses, just at a minimum, to be able to get these emails into evidence in any type of case. Now, we were told by the palace quite some time ago that actually they were, in fact, not just by the palace, by the king himself, that they were willing to support the police investigation and to potentially cough up some evidence, or at least that was certainly how it sounded.

1:00:42So if the police now are saying that they need the originals from the Epstein files, do you have any concern there about whether maybe actually the palace, you know, you would think the palace would have their versions of all of these emails. Does that suggest to you maybe that perhaps they don't? Like maybe they purged their email systems at some point and they don't have their own records of these? Well, certainly quite the contrast between the king in the United Kingdom and our president here in the United States when it comes to cooperation and transparency and public trust related to the Epstein files.

1:01:17You know, with respect to electronic documents, like you said, Jack, you know, some of these emails are many, many years old, sometimes decades old. So oftentimes through just normal attrition or in the legal space, sometimes we call it spoliation, that these emails are purged. they are no longer available unless there is some retention policy. Oftentimes, many of these email servers after the course of years, emails are just routinely deleted. And sometimes they just don't exist. So whenever there's any litigation, at least here in the United States, whether it's a civil or criminal case, you know, the first thing that the lawyers do is they send preservation letters because they want to make sure that the parties are noticed.

1:01:58They stop that auto deletion, any relevant electronic data is preserved because it can certainly go away. Obviously, on the criminal side, what prosecutors and law enforcement often do is they do execute those search warrants. And we know the first thing they take away, we've all seen those videos, or the computers, the servers, the hard drives, the iPads, the iPhones, Androids, whatever the case may be, because they can contain a treasure trove of electronic data. But again, it's not preserved, it's not seized, it may not be there. So it's unclear whether the palace does have access to this information or they have to rely on the DOJ here in the United States.

1:02:35So that's actually really interesting. So I want to, you mentioned Trump, who I absolutely want to come on to in just a second, but you've just given me a sudden thought, which is that actually, you know, Virginia made her original allegations in this situation back in 2011. And a lot of these emails that we're talking about now were only 2010. So this idea of, you know, a preservation request or order should, I mean, even the palace themselves, even without a formal request from law enforcement, should they not have kind of proactively thought themselves that they would have potential material that they needed to preserve because here was a potential allegation against Andrew?

1:03:12No question. And I've always talked about Virginia Jufri. She really was the best victim in this case, not just because she had the pictures and she was accusing someone other than Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, right? Unfortunately, she is no longer alive. So, she's not going to be the part of any case, whether it's civil or criminal. Obviously, she sued Prince Andrew at the time. She did settle that case shortly before trial. I know the lawyer, he's here in Los Angeles who represented Andrew in that case. That would probably be the best case, in my opinion, in terms of evidence that was preserved.

1:03:49But you're right. Why didn't authorities in the United Kingdom or frankly here in the United States, why did they not open a criminal investigation into Prince Andrew now, Andrew Mountbatten, Windsor at or near the time? He did give that infamous BBC interview saying he didn't know Virginia Giuffre. We've all seen that image. There's certainly enough evidence, in my opinion, to at least start that process. you have a capable, willing accuser who's willing to go forward with a civil case, someone who's willing to testify. One of the challenges you have in a sex abuse case is sometimes, often, frankly, the victims don't want to come forward.

1:04:26They don't want to testify. They don't want to appear before the grand jury. They don't want to be re-victimized again and tell their story in a very public way. And as a former prosecutor, there were instances sometimes where I would drag victims against their will into the courtroom. But the general practice is that you don't want to do that because that re-traumatizes them. So you had someone who was willing to move forward and you didn't, at least what appears to be open a criminal prosecution at the time. So it was certainly a missed opportunity, I believe, both here in the United States and in the UK.

1:05:05Yeah, indeed. Absolutely. I couldn't agree more. So let's talk a little bit about Trump then. So obviously Donald Trump is a man who is in the Epstein files. He is also a man who says that it's all a hoax. could Donald so my understanding of the system is that the police in Britain can try and just approach, casually approach the police in America and say terribly sorry old boy is it possible to get these files obviously you would have to be clinically insane if you were just in the attorney's office for the southern district of New York to just give over all of these documents in such a politically charged situation I'm assuming, do shoot me down if you think I'm wrong, in which case it was presumably destined for the DOJ And the DOJ, no doubt, will fill Trump in on any request.

1:05:50And so it's probably going to have to go through, no matter what Mark Rowley might say to ABC News, it's probably going to have to go through the formal channel of what's called a mutual legal assistance request. So my question for you is, first of all, can you tell us what the process there is? But also, can Trump just shoot that down? Like, does he have the power to actually just tell the DOJ, just don't do it? Yeah, you're right. Right. I'll tell you, it typically works. And probably what's going to happen in this particular case, this is not your typical case. Like you said, Jack, typically it's an MLAT request.

1:06:21That's a mutual legal assistance treaty, right? So normally you make the process, there's folks at the Department of Justice. You know, I've done it where we want documents from another country. So I'll send the request, the MLAT folks, the DOJ would contact their counterparts there in the UK and whether it was interviewing a witness, potentially arresting someone, extraditing them, getting evidence, whatever we needed, it would be done through those channels. And the DOJ would work with the State Department when it comes to an MLAT request. Obviously, this is a very different case. And our government here in the United States has not been transparent.

1:07:02Donald Trump, Pam Bondi, Kash Patel, they've all made promises to the American people to make the Epstein files public. They certainly didn't do that until they were forced by Congress. And even then, the production has been partial. There's been millions of pages of documents redacted, withheld. So I don't think a request from anyone anywhere in the world is going to be honored because, frankly, I don't think that Pam Bondi and Todd Blanch is the number two at the Department of Justice here in the United States have fully complied with the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Just very recently here, members of the House, both Republicans and Democrats, they're going to issue a subpoena to Pam Bonney.

1:07:47She's going to have to testify under oath about the production of these files. So in theory, the request can be made, but I can't see any world where politically and practically anyone is going to get these Epstein files until the DOJ's, their hand is forced. And likely the only way that will happen is if a federal judge gets involved because Congress files a lawsuit. So that is possible. It is potentially possible to force the hand. And the pathway there is for Congress. What would they do? File a lawsuit or would it be a bill? Yes. So the way it would work is, and this is typical. We have under our constitution, we have Article 1, that's the legislature.

1:08:33We have Article 2, which is the executive branch, which includes Trump and the Department of Justice. They have Article 3, which is the judiciary. And typically what Article 3 judges do here in the United States is to resolve disputes between the legislature and the executive branch. So what should happen, frankly, what I expected to happen months ago was for that House Oversight Committee to file a lawsuit that would involve a district judge. And that district judge would review the documents in camera. That's a Latin term. It just means outside the presence of the public to determine whether these assertions of privilege are legally appropriate.

1:09:13And obviously, we're talking about millions of pages. So the judge may appoint what we call a special master or a retired judge, someone that can review and really take a look at these assertions of privilege. It can be work product, it can be attorney-client privilege, it can be executive privilege, deliberative process privilege. There's all these legal privileges under the law. Now, I don't think the Epstein Files Transparency Act calls for the assertion of those privileges. I think the act says that unless it's information that identifies victims of sex abuse or information that's child pornography, the Epstein Files should be produced in their entirety.

1:09:51But if you listen to Bondi and Blanche, they are making these assertions. The problem is we don't know what we don't know. So I don't know if assertions are sound. It sounds like there were at least some inconsistencies in what seems to be excess redactions. But really, you got to involve a judge. There's no way for us to know. And also what's typically done, which is not done in this case, if I'm in litigation, if I'm in a civil or criminal case, and I'm withholding documents on the basis of privilege, what I'm supposed to do is produce a privilege log, identifying each of the documents, the legal basis for the privilege.

1:10:28So someone down the road, a judge potentially can review the law, review the documents to see if the privilege is proper, and if not, to actually produce the documents. And so let's say, it sounds like you're saying Congress would go down that route in relation to those redactions. If the British police are then struggling to get hold of the original files, what do they do? Do they just register their desire to be an interested party in that case? Or do they need to go to the Congress and say, look, sorry, guys, can you actually just jump in here and file a new lawsuit on our behalf too? Yeah, they could certainly try to join the case as an interested party.

1:11:06They could issue their own subpoena to the Department of Justice. I could tell you that subpoena would likely be ignored, but there would have to be an underlying case for them to be able to avail themselves of the legal process. You can't involve a judge until there's some sort of lawsuit. You can't issue a subpoena until there's some sort of case. So that's why, again, going back to someone like Virginia Jew Free, I mean, she was perfect because she had the direct accusations against Andrew. So she would be the perfect person, her lawyers, to try to get these documents if Congress in the United States was unwilling to do so.

1:11:42Right. That's really interesting. And if you were a betting man, do you think Congress will do this or if you were going to put a little wager on it? I love to make predictions and bets. So I do think that eventually Congress will force the Department of Justice's hand. I'm surprised it hasn't happened already. Obviously, we're in a midterm election. I do think a lot of people believe that Democrats will take control of the House of Representatives, at least maybe even the Senate, but certainly the House. It's a very narrow, razor-thin margin for Republicans and, you know, between Epstein files and the economy.

1:12:20And the fact that generally the incumbents tend to lose seats in the midterms, I think if it doesn't happen this year, certainly 2027, we will see a more aggressive Democratic House of Representatives. The Epstein Files issue, it's not going away and certainly not anytime soon. I mean, they want answers from Bondi, Blanche, and they want those unredacted documents. So I think it will happen. It's not a matter of if, but when. And a judge is going to have to get involved. And I think, frankly, it should have happened late last year, if not earlier this year already. issue. Yeah, totally. So one other interesting question is, what do you think of the fact then, let's say if we take as read, and maybe we shouldn't, but if we do that, the DOJ aren't going to cough this up voluntarily.

1:13:09What do you think of the fact that King Charles is going on a state visit to America in April at a point when Trump's administration are potentially refusing to cooperate with the British police? I mean, should he cancel? Yeah, I mean, it's very disappointing. I could tell you, you know, I was the Department of Justice. I was hired by a Bush U.S. attorney. I stayed on for an Obama U.S. attorney. And obviously things changed during that time. But there was never a single instance where as a former prosecutor, and I wasn't running the DOJ, I was just, you know, on the line, that we weren't following the law.

1:13:43And here, you know, there is a law squarely on point. And if you're DOJ, you're not President Trump's personal attorney. You're not there to protect the Clintons or whomever Epstein rubs shoulders with. Your job is to follow the law and serve the American people. And the fact that really it's reached this point where the DOJ has to be compelled to follow the law, it is a huge problem. Now, obviously, with the king coming to the United States, I'm sure they're dealing with all sorts of other issues unrelated to the Epstein files. Obviously, there's a war in Iran, and who knows if it's going to still be going on.

1:14:24There's all sorts of issues going on throughout the world. But I can tell you that as a former prosecutor and just American citizen, I'm extremely disappointed with how this administration has handled the Epstein files. And I can also tell you, this is also one of those rare moments of bipartisanship in Washington, D.C. And if you ask the majority of the American people, I do think they feel the same way. And this perpetuates the belief that there is a cover-up on behalf of powerful politicians, CEOs, other people who participated in sex acts with Jeffrey Epstein. Setting aside the misconduct there in the UK, and I think the lack of transparency and the difficulty in providing these documents, because let's be very frank, at any moment, the DOJ can produce these files.

1:15:17With a stroke of her pen, Pam Bondi can make the Epstein files public. The fact that they're unwilling to do so just raises more questions and adds fuel to those conspiracy theories. And so as a prosecutor, if you were involved in this case or this investigation, and you then saw your head of state go off to, you know, just spray royal fairy dust over the very administration that was refusing to release the evidence that you needed to fight that case, how would you feel? Well, I'm sure that folks would be disappointed. You know, at the end of the day, there's law and there's politics, right? And I would be naive to think that politics do not influence the law.

1:16:00Unfortunately, at least here in the United States, every prosecutor is either elected or appointed by someone who is. That's not how decisions should be made. But I do think that there are decisions at the Department of Justice being made for political reasons. And I'm probably, even though I'm not there in the United Kingdom, I'm sure that there are folks there that are frustrated as well. But I could tell you that at least there have been arrests in the United Kingdom. We haven't even reached anything close to an arrest aside from Epstein, which was arrested many years too late after he was given that sweetheart deal when Alex Acosta was the U.S.

1:16:40attorney in Miami. Ghislaine Maxwell was finally brought to justice. But really, there have been no other arrests related to the Epstein files. So I would say that at least our friends across the pond, you guys are a few steps ahead of us. Doing a little better. Yeah, indeed. And it is heartbreaking with Virginia because there was so much evidence there. And now that we've had the Epstein files, too, and we know what they were actually sitting on. I mean, there's just even more than I realized. Like I felt it was a pretty solid case before the Epstein files even got released. And now we have emails where Andrew is asking about, asking Gilla Maxwell to introduce him to more inappropriate friends just a couple of months after the final incident that Virginia, you know, identified in her court case.

1:17:21So it is heartbreaking. But I also want to ask you, so obviously, like you say, there's the two sides to it. And from what Mark Rowley, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, is saying, they haven't given up on the sex trafficking side of it. They are still looking at that. No concrete decisions have been made, but they're still looking at it. But obviously, what gave rise to the actual criminal investigation being launched was these emails that were being shared with Epstein. And like I said, Sarah Ferguson's debt, which was paid off by Epstein, was being discussed in the same email chains where these confidential documents were being forwarded to Epstein.

1:17:55So do you think the police would want to interview Sarah Ferguson? Yes. And let me let me talk about the Andrews arrest for the misconduct while in public office. It reminds me of getting Al Capone for tax evasion. You know, it's certainly a good start. Obviously, he does appear to be implicated in sex acts despite his denial. I mean, there's all these emails like you talked about, the inappropriate friends. So, you know, unfortunately, he hasn't been prosecuted in the United States, the United Kingdom for the more serious crimes, although even though we don't have that offense here in the United States, misconduct while in public office appears to be somewhat of a serious offense there in the United Kingdom.

1:18:38But no question, I mean, interviewing witnesses has to be step two after you have the documents, even in redacted form. So if she hasn't been interviewed, or at least attempted to be interviewed, obviously, folks can refuse to cooperate. That would be a fail by law enforcement in any country. And we don't in the media have any idea where she is. And people have been looking. It's not like no one's been looking. The Sun have been on the hunt for her. Other newspapers have been on the hunt for her. There have been all sorts of theories. She's hiding out in the Middle East. She's hiding out in New York.

1:19:11She's hiding out in Australia. I mean, do you see her coming back to Britain? Or do you think she just stays in the wind? I don't know. But I could tell you when I was a prosecutor, my best source of information was always exes. Husbands, wives, boyfriends, girlfriends, ex-employees, ex-friends. They really know where the bodies are buried, Jack. So you got to start, you got to push, you got to lean on them. Now, I don't know if there's any basis to investigate her, if she was involved in any of this. But oftentimes when you're caught up in these criminal enterprises, there's potential exposure.

1:19:42And I'm not saying that Sarah Ferguson has done anything wrong or there's any basis to charge her or arrest her, but you should certainly be asking the questions because she was very close to Epstein. He asked for her debt to be paid off. My recollection, maybe it was trying to get her a job too at some point. Well, I think she was angling. I mean, yeah, she was angling for something, I think, is probably the best way to describe it. And there was a real desperation in some of the emails that were sent between them. But then there's also the daughter, you know, Andrew and Fergie's daughters. Fergie took Beatrice and Eugenie out to see Epstein while he was still under house arrest.

1:20:22and so and there were Fergie was making various efforts to get Beatrice and Eugenie to kind of show people around Buckingham Palace on Epstein's behalf so would you as a prosecutor do you think is that a step too far or would you look to speak to Beatrice and Eugenie too? I would absolutely speak to them and look Epstein was successful in large part because he was able to cultivate these connections and connect people together he was one of the most notorious sex traffickers of our time, but his ability to network with the most powerful people throughout the world was nothing short of extraordinary.

1:21:00So he was able to parlay his relationship with Andrew and the Royal Palace to gain influence with other people. So absolutely, I think these are questions that should be asked. How can someone who is a convicted sex trafficker have this level of access, the highest levels of the United States government and the British Royal Palace. So these are fair questions, in my opinion, if I were investigating this case. Now, I have one more question, which is, so one of the big theories here has been that Epstein was a spy. And it spills out into both Andrew and Peter Mendelsohn, the former US ambassador, who has also been arrested in Britain and is under police investigation.

1:21:44and we know now that there's actually a photo of the three of them together before the point that we had originally thought that Andrew and Peter Mandelson had met. So we thought they met, you know, it was reported back in 2001, I think, that they met at a charity event, but we now have a photo that predates that meeting of them together with Jeffrey Epstein. So obviously there's a bit of a potential espionage lens here and then we are getting some noises out of the palace that they're concerned that a really deep dive by the police into all of this might actually turn up some material that was being disclosed to Epstein that was defence-related, because Andrew obviously was a vice-admiral in the Royal Navy, a ceremonial position, but right up until the time he quit the palace, he quit royal life in 2019.

1:22:32If this becomes a matter of national security, does that pose a threat to the prosecution going ahead, or does it just make the prosecution all the more important? Well, I think it makes the prosecution more important, but there's no question. Look, you don't have to dig deep into social media. There are people that think that Epstein was a foreign spy and that the sex acts were used to blackmail and gain leverage over individuals in different governments. Again, I don't know what evidence there is to support that, but I can confidently say there are many people that believe this theory. So regardless of whether it's true or not, it certainly should be investigated and debunked, because if you have someone with this type of access that is participating in sex acts, that's using the information against heads of state, that is a matter of national security in any country.

1:23:30I mean, if Jeffrey Epstein was able to infiltrate the highest levels of government, so this should be investigated. And if it's true, should absolutely be of paramount importance to prosecute. And even if it's not, to debunk, like I said, so people don't think that this is some massive blackmail and subsequent cover up. yeah indeed now Nima thank you so much for joining me and just in case any listeners are unsure of how good your credentials are you had a busy week the last couple of weeks as I recall I think you had quite a high profile trial you were working on can you say anything about it or yeah I'm happy to talk about it unrelated we took Connie West now known as Ye to trial the first time despite all his legal problems that anyone has pushed a case all the way to trial and he's actually showed up to court to testify.

1:24:21So interesting case. I can tell you that Ye's testimony wasn't all that interesting because he came to court and he actually fell asleep on the witness stand. So we were able to get a modest award,$140 ,000. We are going to get our attorney fees. The total judgment should probably be over a million dollars. But certainly an interesting case. And obviously when Ye or Kanye West is involved, it's always interesting. and that happened here in Los Angeles, where I'm sitting. Fantastic. Thank you so much, Nima. It's great to have you on. Thanks for having me, Jack, and thanks for waiting until my trial finished.

1:24:56Appreciate it. And that's it for this episode of The Royal Report. Be sure to join me every week when I visit the latest royal headlines, embark on some royal deep dives and riff on all things royal. Until next time, I'm Jack Royston. Thanks for listening, everyone, and a curtsy to you all.

1:25:14The Royal Report with Jack Royston is a member of The Trust Project.