According to Rokna, citing The Guardian, a Member of Parliament has called on the royal family to provide clarity on how Prince Andrew financed a settlement in the sexual abuse case brought by Virginia Giuffre.
Rachael Maskell, MP for York Central, emphasized that “a lot of transparency” is required regarding the reported £12 million payment made in 2022.
Maskell, who has long campaigned for Andrew to be stripped of his Duke of York title due to his connections with the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, welcomed his recent announcement that he will no longer use the title. However, she noted that the dukedom can only be formally removed by an act of parliament.
Virginia Giuffre, who tragically died by suicide at age 41 in April, had alleged that she was abused by Epstein from the age of 16 and trafficked to other influential men, including Andrew. She filed a civil lawsuit in New York, claiming he sexually assaulted her on three occasions when she was 17.
Andrew did not admit liability and has consistently denied Giuffre’s allegations, but agreed to settle the case out of court. Reports indicate that as part of the settlement, Giuffre agreed not to repeat her accusations for a year, in part to avoid overshadowing Queen Elizabeth II’s Platinum Jubilee.
There have been long-standing reports suggesting that the late queen may have contributed to the settlement using private funds from the Duchy of Lancaster, the historic property portfolio controlled by the monarchy.
Maskell commented: “We need full clarity on this. Honesty is paramount. Virginia Giuffre is no longer with us, but her family deserves transparency. There can be no room for obfuscation, no matter how uncomfortable it may be.”
Despite having no known income aside from a naval pension, Andrew continues to reside at the 30-room Royal Lodge in Windsor under a 75-year lease and is responsible for its upkeep. He has reportedly resisted attempts to relocate him to Frogmore Cottage.
Andrew’s statement last Friday explained that he decided to relinquish his titles following discussions with the king, concluding that ongoing accusations against him distract from the work of the monarch and the royal family. He will also give up the use of honors such as Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order (GCVO) and Royal Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter. The only remaining title he retains is that of prince, which, as the son of a queen, cannot be removed.
It has been reported that the Prince of Wales was not entirely satisfied with the outcome and intends to adopt a stricter stance toward Andrew in the future, potentially barring him from attending his coronation. William was consulted during the process leading to Andrew’s relinquishment of the dukedom and is reportedly aware that the “Andrew issue” will remain a recurring concern.
Maskell, who lost the Labour whip in July following dissent on welfare policy, has previously introduced legislation aimed at granting the monarch powers to revoke royal titles independently or through parliamentary recommendation. She plans to reintroduce the bill in the coming week and believes she has backing from fellow MPs. Maskell emphasized: “Residents of York strongly oppose the continuation of this title. In 2022, 80% of constituents said they did not want it maintained due to its association with our city. That is why I have stood firm.”
Reports last weekend indicate that Andrew contacted Epstein the day after a photograph emerged showing him with his arm around a teenage Giuffre. In 2019, Andrew had claimed in a BBC interview that he had cut ties with Epstein, yet emails suggest continued communication between the two.
Speaking to the BBC, Giuffre’s brother Sky Roberts described Andrew’s decision to surrender his titles as “a joyous moment,” adding that Giuffre’s children would be proud to see their mother recognized as “an international hero.” Epstein accuser Haley Robson called the development “extremely bittersweet,” saying she felt “flabbergasted” that some measure of justice had been achieved.
‘ The preceding article may include information circulated by third parties ’
‘ Some details of this article were extracted from the following source www.rokna.net ’
