Ex-Prince Andrew Epstein’s Spy Fears Explode Over Shared Government Information
Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor is facing a ‘spy scandal’ amid allegations that he deliberately shared confidential government briefings with Jeffrey Epstein while serving as the United Kingdom’s special trade envoy.
RadarOnline.com can reveal newly released documents showing the disgraced royal passed sensitive commercial and diplomatic information to his now-convicted friend, which has now sparked calls for a criminal investigation and raised fears the former prince may have breached the Official Secrets Act.
The documents, drawn from the vast cache of Epstein correspondence released by the US Department of Justice and now forensically examined by Radar, show Andrew, 65, exchanged a series of emails with Epstein between October 2010 and February 2011 – two years after Epstein’s conviction for soliciting a minor into prostitution.
As British trade envoy, Andrew was bound by a confidentiality agreement, but messages to his serial killer friend show he forwarded internal briefing material on trade visits to Singapore, Vietnam, Shenzhen and Hong Kong – including confidential investment information.
One email dated October 7, 2010 mentioned his upcoming official meetings, while another on December 24 that year reportedly shared sensitive details about investment opportunities in Afghanistan’s Helmand province – a reconstruction project supported by British troops and funded by British taxpayers.
Andrew has consistently denied wrongdoing and insisted he did his part BBC2019 News night interview his last meeting with Epstein took place in early December 2010 during a trip to New York. Still, if Radar has reported, the newly unearthed Christmas Eve message implies that contact continued weeks later, which contradicts his story.
Former business secretary Sir Vince Cable admitted his surprise at the new revelations, saying: “I was not aware of Andrew… previously sharing information about investment opportunities (in Afghanistan) – this is the first I have heard of it.”
A former State Department official familiar with diplomatic protocols said the alleged behavior could amount to “an extraordinary breach of trust.”
The source added: “Trade envoys occupy a uniquely trusted space – they speak with the implicit authority of the Crown and are expected to handle information with absolute discretion.
“Providing even informal updates to an outsider crosses a bright red line, and doing so with someone with Epstein’s criminal record is indefensible. If these exchanges are authentic, this would represent a breathtaking error of judgment with potential diplomatic, political, and even legal ramifications.”
“It undermines the credibility not only of the envoy, but also of the government systems designed to protect sensitive economic information.”
A senior government insider added: ‘What these messages suggest goes far beyond informal emails between acquaintances. They have the structure and tone of formal updates – as if Epstein is being briefed on sensitive matters.
“Even if none of the content is technically secret, the perception is appalling. “It gives the impression of a royal insider treating an official role like a private network, sharing insights with someone the whole world already knew was a convicted predator.
“Those kinds of blurred boundaries between public duties and personal connections are exactly what erodes trust in institutions.”
The emails also contained details of subsequent exchanges in early 2011, including one in which Andrew Epstein said he had recently toured a private equity firm and had “been thinking about you” – a phrase that raised new questions about whether the s– trader was privy to business intelligence through royal channels.
Official government guidelines for trade envoys make it explicit that although envoys are not civil servants, they do have a permanent obligation of confidentiality.
“This may include sensitive, commercial or political information,” the guidelines say. “This obligation of confidentiality will continue after the expiration of their terms of office.”
A Whitehall source said there was “great alarm” within the British government over the claims. “If what is alleged passes scrutiny, it reflects an extraordinary error of judgment,” the insider added.
‘Someone in his position carries not only personal responsibility, but also symbolic authority – every action is interpreted as representative of the nation.
“Sharing, even inadvertently, privileged material with a man already convicted of serious crimes would be indefensible.
“It undermines the integrity of the office he once held and undermines public confidence in the way sensitive information is handled at the top.”
