In a dramatic escalation that shatters any remaining hopes of a quiet retirement from public life, Mr. Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, formerly known as Prince Andrew, has been formally contacted by the United States Congress.
The House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform has sent a letter requesting Mr. Windsor’s cooperation in its far-reaching investigation into the crimes and associates of the late, disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein.
The request, dated November 6, 2025, bypasses royal protocol and palace intermediaries, addressing Andrew directly as a private citizen. It arrives with the force of a diplomatic thunderclap, landing on the very same day his brother, King Charles III, signed the “letters patent” that officially strip him of his “Prince” and “His Royal Highness” (HRH) titles.
This transatlantic parliamentary pressure marks a new, precarious chapter for both Andrew and the British monarchy. It signals that while Andrew may have settled his civil case, the questions surrounding his long-standing friendship with a convicted offender are far from over. Now, a powerful U.S. government body is officially demanding answers.
The Committee’s Formal Request
The letter from the House Oversight Committee is not a subpoena, but a formal request for a “transcribed interview” to be provided by November 20, 2025.
The committee’s investigation is focused on the vast network that supported Epstein’s decades-long illicit trafficking operation. Lawmakers are seeking to understand the full scope of his “co-conspirators and enablers,” believing that many powerful individuals have escaped scrutiny.
The letter makes it plain why they believe Andrew is a person of interest:
“The Committee is seeking to uncover the identities of Mr. Epstein’s co-conspirators and enablers and to understand the full extent of his criminal operations,” the letter states. “Well-documented allegations against you… and your long-standing friendship with Mr. Epstein, indicate that you may possess knowledge of his activities relevant to our investigation.”
The letter effectively dismisses Andrew’s previous public statements and his notorious 2019 interview, treating them as insufficient. The committee is seeking new information, under formal record, and it has come armed with specific, damaging evidence it wants him to explain.
The Three Pillars of the Inquiry
The congressional letter is not a vague fishing expedition. It outlines three specific, troubling pieces of evidence that form the basis of their request, suggesting investigators have already compiled a significant file.
- The 2011 Email: “In This Together” The committee cites a 2011 email, reportedly from Andrew to Epstein. The contents are explosive, particularly the phrase “in this together.” The timing is critical: 2011 is after Epstein had already been convicted of procuring a minor for prostitution and was a registered offender. This email challenges the narrative that the friendship was naive or that contact was severed after Epstein’s crimes became known. It implies a continued, supportive, and perhaps collaborative relationship.
- The Flight Logs (1999-2006) The letter references flight logs for Epstein’s private aircraft, notoriously dubbed the “Lolita Express” by media. These logs, according to the committee, confirm Andrew was a passenger on multiple occasions between 1999 and 2006, the period when many of Epstein’s heinous crimes against minors were committed. The committee wants to know what Andrew saw, heard, and knew during these trips to Epstein’s various properties.
- The Financial Records: “Massage for Andrew” Perhaps the most starkly personal detail, the letter also cites “Epstein financial records” that allegedly contain an entry for a “massage for Andrew.” This entry, found within the financier’s own records, raises alarming questions about the nature of the “services” provided to Andrew and paid for by Epstein, directly linking him to the day-to-day operations of Epstein’s household, which was central to his abusive system.
The Shadow of Virginia Giuffre and Silenced Victims
The committee’s inquiry extends beyond Epstein’s direct actions. It is also investigating a darker, secondary question: Who tried to silence Epstein’s victims?
The letter explicitly states an interest in “any attempts to intimidate, threaten, or silence victims.”
This line of inquiry immediately brings to mind the case of Virginia Giuffre, the most prominent accuser to name Prince Andrew. Giuffre, who tragically lost her life earlier this year, alleged in her recent book that Andrew’s team had actively tried to “dig for dirt” on her to discredit her. She claimed this was a campaign to paint her as unstable and unreliable after she made her grievous allegations against the prince.
While Andrew has always vehemently denied Giuffre’s claims and settled a civil suit with her out of court without admitting liability, the committee’s focus on “silencing” victims suggests they are taking these allegations seriously. They may believe Andrew has knowledge of, or was even part of, a broader effort to manage, discredit, or intimidate accusers.
An Impossible Dilemma
As the Sky News report highlights, Prince Andrew is now trapped in an impossible position.
Because he is a British citizen residing in the U.K., the U.S. Congress cannot legally compel him to testify. He can, simply, ignore the November 20 deadline.
But the political and public relations fallout of such a move would be catastrophic.
- If he refuses: A refusal to cooperate, or even silence, will be interpreted by many as an admission of guilt. It would be portrayed as a man with something to hide, showing profound disrespect to the victims and obstructing a U.S. government investigation. It would confirm the worst suspicions about his character and his involvement.
- If he agrees: Cooperating is equally perilous. A “transcribed interview” is a formal proceeding. He would be questioned by seasoned investigators and lawyers. Any misstatement or “misremembered” fact—like those that plagued his 2019 BBC interview—could open him to accusations of lying to Congress. It would also inevitably lead to more questions, more headlines, and more demands for information.
The Palace’s “Day of Reckoning”
This formal request from Washington is the exact scenario that “Prince William and the rest of the Palace were hoping to avoid,” according to Sky News. For years, the Royal Family has tried to contain the “Andrew problem.”
The timing is symbolic. On the very day the King signed the “letters patent” to formally make Andrew a private citizen, this letter arrived, proving that a change of title does not erase the past. By addressing the letter to “Mr. Andrew Mountbatten Windsor,” the committee is acknowledging the King’s move while simultaneously signaling that, as a private citizen, Andrew now has even less cover. He can no longer hide behind the shield of the monarchy.
This congressional action ensures that the Epstein scandal will continue to haunt the Royal Family. It links the monarchy, via one of its own, to one of the most sordid criminal investigations of the 21st century.
The world, the victims, and now the U.S. Congress are waiting. The clock is ticking toward November 20.
