[0:00]Here in the UK, police have made two major arrests related to the Epstein files. >> Andrew Mountbatton Winter, formerly known as Prince Andrew, >> first British royal arrested in nearly
[0:11]400 years. >> Former UK ambassador >> Peter Mandelson has been arrested. >> So plenty of people are asking, why isn't that happening in the United States?
[0:19]>> When will we see justice? Let's hear it for British justice, which is better than American justice. Do we still believe that justice applies upward or
[0:30]only downward? >> But something important is being missed. What those arrests are actually for. The former prince Andrew like the politician Peter Mandlesson, they were both arrested for alleged misconduct in
[0:42]public office. If that's proven it's a serious crime. But we think what's more interesting is what Andrew hasn't been arrested for. Because since the release of millions of files in January, we now
[0:53]know that a victim of Epstein contacted the Metropolitan Police and told them she was sexually abused as a teenager by the former prince as part of a blackmailing operation right here in the
[1:03]UK. That in fact the Met police were contacted by multiple Epstein victims, more than they've ever publicly acknowledged. And despite numerous allegations of crimes taking place in
[1:14]the UK, the Met has repeatedly chosen not to investigate. Why weren't those complaints investigated? Why? >> So, let's talk about how years of our own investigations have led us to a
[1:26]simple question. Why has the Metropolitan Police never investigated the allegations against a former prince, Jeffrey Epstein, and Gileain Maxwell?
[1:37]Before we get into all that, I just want to update you with some major developments in the Epstein story. So, let's just do a quick fire catch up. Donald Trump started a war in the Middle East and critics think that distraction is all part of the plan.
[1:49]>> I don't think that that coincidence is something to dismiss off the cuff. >> Journalists found that files related to President Trump were missing in the Department of Justice's original release
[2:00]of documents back in January. And under pressure, they did finally release new pages. In them were FBI interview summaries containing allegations that Trump and Epstein sexually assaulted a
[2:12]minor in the 1980s. The White House denied all allegations against Trump, describing the new claims as completely baseless. And the DOJ has also denied there was a cover up. Investigators are searching the Zoro Ranch. That's
[2:24]Epstein's New Mexico property where it's alleged women and girls were abused, as well as claims that two women's bodies were buried near the ranch. And arguably the most shocking development since our
[2:34]last episode. Judy K. Brown, a journalist at the Miami Herald, who's covered this story for nearly a decade. She revealed that an inmate in Epstein's Manhattan Jail, says that he overheard guards talking about covering up
[2:46]Epstein's death. So, like we said at the end of our last episode, we're still just at the beginning of this story, as you can see from all of that Epstein coverage since we last recorded. And we're going to put links to all of those
[2:56]stories in the description so you can look at them in your own time. And we we haven't stopped digging through these files here either. Which brings me to this a monstrosity of a timeline to help
[3:07]me understand it. Fortunately, I have Ed Haler from our investigations team here. I mean, Ed, what exactly am I looking at and what does it mean? >> So, I'm just one of a host of people who
[3:18]have been asking questions about the Epstein scandal in particular, how it affects the UK. And what you're looking at is years of correspondence, years of questioning and documents that have
[3:28]emerged as we've tried to piece together and understand what happened and how have the UK's um authorities, the Metropolitan Police for example, have they responded to it all? >> So you've been looking into this for
[3:38]seven years, but obviously a big development recently has been the dumping of the new Epstein files. Has that changed any of your work? What they do is give these really, really
[3:48]important new glimpses into some of the Metropolitan Police activity. The first thing, there's no question they show the UK authorities, the Metropolitan Police in particular, assisting US
[3:59]investigators whilst they try to go about looking at Maxwell and Epstein investigating and in the case of Maxwell, prosecuting their crimes. But there's also some information that
[4:10]invites some tougher questions. one particular document we'd never seen before and it's from May 2015 and it's a letter from Virginia Roberts Jafrey's lawyer to the Metropolitan Police laying
[4:21]out her claims for the first time asking UK police to look at them. >> At this point we need to talk about just how important Virginia Robert Jafrey is to this story. She's one of the most
[4:33]widely recognized victims of Jeffrey Epstein. Robert Chafrey said she met Galileain Maxwell in 1999 when she was just 15 and Maxwell then introduced her to Jeffrey Epstein. From then on, she
[4:43]claimed she was his sex slave for roughly the next 3 years. And it was during that period in 2001 that she said she met Prince Andrew and this now infamous photo was taken. A claim that
[4:55]appears to be backed up by an Epstein email from 2011. In a Florida court filing in 2014, Robert Chafrey wrote in detail about her time with Epstein,
[5:05]Maxwell, and Andrew, including claims she was forced to have sex with Andrew three times. She later settled a separate civil case against Andrew in
[5:14]2022 and was paid millions. The prince admitted no liability, and he has always strongly denied all allegations of sexual misconduct or wrongdoing. In
[5:24]2025, Robert Jafrey took her own life aged just 41. So that's sort of a quick timeline of Virginia Roberts Jafrey and her allegations. We have known about
[5:34]those allegations against Epstein Maxwell and Prince Andrew for more than a decade. Right. And the police have too. >> Yeah. And the police have looked at them. They've reviewed their decision
[5:46]not to investigate on a number of occasions. And the analysis that they've given us has always been that these are non-reent trafficking for sexual exploitation allegations and that they
[5:57]principally concern matters outside of the UK. So outside of their jurisdiction basically how does this document then from Robert Jafre's lawyers how does this change things? >> This letter is putting the Metropolitan
[6:07]Police on notice about a whole series of things that are going on uh in the Epstein scandal. The letter starts by alleging that while in London, Epstein
[6:17]had sex with Virginia Roberts Jafrey. But there's also a specific claim that Virginia was quote unquote lent to Andrew Mountbatten Windsor as part of
[6:28]this sex trafficking operation. It gets more serious, more explicit really in the filings that appear to be attached to this document. So you have a
[6:38]description of Epstein trafficking me to for sexual purposes to many other powerful men, Virginia estates. In around 2011, I spoke to attorney Brad Edwards. I told him about my abuse and
[6:50]trafficking by Epstein. I also told him at the time that I had been sexually abused by Prince Andrew, Galain Maxwell, and a list of other people as well. Absolutely black and white. And then
[7:02]there's a third thing. It's probably the most concerning uh of all of them from the point of view of uh you know national security and intelligence which is that Virginia is talking about all of
[7:12]this as a blackmail op. She describes it as she's working as effectively a sex slave who is compromising individuals and I mean that's incredibly serious in
[7:23]circumstances where you're dealing with a really senior member of the royal family. So, Robert Defray in that document is talking about not just sex trafficking, but blackmail and sexual abuse. But that doesn't match up with
[7:33]what the Met's been saying, which is that they've only received information about sex trafficking primarily outside of the UK. >> It's more complicated than that brief line that the Met has always used to
[7:44]describe its uh investigation >> because over the years we've repeatedly contacted the Metropolitan Police about Epstein and Maxwell and Virginia Roberts
[7:54]UK allegations. In the first statement they gave us back in 2019, they said they'd only received an allegation of non-reent trafficking for sexual exploitation. They said they reviewed
[8:04]the evidence and decided not to pursue a full investigation. Later that year, they added detail to their argument, saying any investigation into trafficking would be largely focused on activities and relationships outside the
[8:16]UK. And so the Met, in their opinion, was not the appropriate body to lead any investigation. That messaging from the Met Police to us and to the public has
[8:26]barely changed over the years, including in their most recent statement from December 2025. In it, they still only refer to sex trafficking primarily outside the UK, say that they've
[8:37]repeatedly reviewed the evidence and see no reason for an investigation. And there's another crucial point in the statement that having looked at all available evidence at the time in 2015
[8:48]that it did not result in any allegation of criminal conduct against any UK-based nationals. What we're talking about here uh is very strange because it appears to
[8:59]be the case that there's a very specific allegation against a UKbased national against Andrew Mountbatten Windsor. Now, we're not saying that that's true, but we're literally saying that the
[9:09]allegation, the claim is on the table. >> The allegations of potential sexual abuse and blackmail have disappeared from their statements. But also on that
[9:18]point, Andrew, the allegation against him is also seems to be disappearing. >> Yes. So, way back at the start, you have this um letter in August 2015 that was
[9:29]released in the FA files. you have a sort of description of the original complaint from the Metropolitan Police where they say it's allegations made
[9:39]against Epstein and Ms. Maxwell. Well, I mean plainly it's also allegations against Andrew and that these allegations are more than sex trafficking. So just on that, so just to
[9:50]recap, so they send this letter in May 2015 and they clearly in the cover letter talk about allegations against Epstein, Maxwell, and Andrew. And then in the reply from the Met Police, we can
[10:01]see here 3 months later, all they mention is Epstein and Maxwell, no Andrew. Okay. So, we're saying absolutely that there's some admission
[10:11]that the original complaint filed by Virginia's lawyer changes over time >> uh or is refiled. But we don't have a
[10:22]concrete explanation of why it is that these pretty clear allegations against Andrew, allegations that Virginia would go on to repeat, including in a civil action against him and in a number of
[10:34]interviews over the years, why those allegations fall away in terms of the Mets investigation, we simply don't know why that happens. But if it does happen,
[10:44]it begs this question. To what extent were Virginia's claims against Andrew of sexual abuse looked at by the UK police? Let's talk about Andrew and the royal
[10:56]family because like the Met police, they've got questions to answer, too. Andrew's relationship with Epstein was dragged into the open 15 years ago. Early in 2011, a major UK newspaper reported he'd met with the convicted sex
[11:08]offender in New York City. Shortly after this now infamous photo of Virginia Robert Chafrey with Andrew was published. Later that year he stepped
[11:17]down as a UK trade envoy. Then in 2015 after the allegations by Robert Jafrey came out in those Florida court documents. Andrew and Buckingham Palace issued a number of denials saying that
[11:29]any suggestion of impropriety with underage minors is categorically untrue and the allegations against Andrew are false and without any foundation. Andrew then addressed the allegations himself
[11:40]on camera. >> I just wish to uh reiterate and to reaffirm the statements which have already been made on my behalf by [ __ ] Palace.
[11:51]>> Then in 2019 with Epstein back in the news following his arrest and his death. The palace issued this strongly worded statement describing the mere suggestion that Andrew would be involved in
[12:02]exploitation as abhorrent. So up until 2019, we just get categorical denials consistently from Buckingham Palace. >> There's no question that he was given a
[12:13]lot of support by the institution of the monarchy. And I think the 2019 statement uh is so striking because you know it ends with this line. It's abhorrent to
[12:23]suggest he would participate in the exploitation of any human being. So the question is who's the target of that statement? Is it Virginia? Is it the media for reporting on the claims which
[12:33]have obviously been reported across the world? I don't really know the answer to that question, but I do know that it feels a bit unwise given that Virginia brought a civil case against Andrew
[12:44]which he settled in 2022 for reportedly millions of pounds. And that all then ends up going to the heart of this which is that Andrew's association with Epstein along with these claims puts the
[12:55]palace in an invidious relationship with him. And it's not just the palace that's in this tricky relationship. It's also the Metropolitan Police. >> On that point, I mean, obviously, by the
[13:07]way, you know, Andrew settles in 2022 with Robert Jafrey. He doesn't admit any wrongdoing. >> None at all. No. >> But in those documents, when it comes to this idea of that relationship between
[13:18]Andrew, the palace, and the Met, and this story around Epstein, you found something interesting in those documents. Well, we found these
[13:27]questions that Virginia's civil lawyers are asking Andrew to help feed her civil action against him, requesting uh information about who holds the
[13:37]documentation about Andrew's interactions relating to Epstein. And what we find is again and again the answer to that question is Buckingham
[13:48]Palace holds that information and the Metropolitan Police holds that information. So wait a minute. H how would the Met police know Andrew's whereabouts? Exactly. >> Andrew has personal protection officers
[14:00]who are employed by the Metropolitan Police who follow him where he goes. >> If there are Met Police officers always with Andrew most of the time, that means
[14:10]they were probably there when Epste and Maxwell were visiting. If we go back to that Virginia Robert Jafrey uh court filing, it's there, right? I mean, she says when we talk about the 2001, her
[14:21]first meeting with Prince Andrew, Andy traveled in a separate car with his guards. She was then left alone with Prince Andrew upstairs after they engaged in sexual activities. She says
[14:33]Andy left quickly with his security. That's her claim. It's a messy issue essentially for the Met Police when it comes to all of this. So the question there is does it end up generating a conflict of interest for the
[14:44]Metropolitan Police around Andrew with security officers but also asked to investigate what happened. So we've talked about the allegations of
[14:55]Virginia Roberts Juprey and we've talked about this messy relationship between Prince Andrew and the Mets and the statements from the palace. But Ed, in everything you've been saying with your
[15:06]investigation, you've been looking at the wide operation of Epstein and Maxwell in particular in the UK. Has the Met ever investigated other victims? >> No, they haven't. We know that beyond Robert Stfrey, there are other victims
[15:17]who contacted the Met about Maxwell and Epstein and they did not pursue those claims. So let's go back then to your work and 2021 when it comes to other
[15:28]victims because you did this big report for Channel 4 News in June of that year. The team did. Yeah. We looked very closely at what was the extent and nature of the Epstein Maxwell sort of
[15:40]activity network in the UK. >> While police forces across the world have launched investigations, Scotland Yard has seemingly done very little. Tonight we ask why. Our report laid out
[15:51]claims of grooming, trafficking, and abuse of multiple young women in the UK, as well as details about the properties used by Epstein and Maxwell along with dozens of flights they took in and out
[16:02]of the country on the so-called Lolita Express. So, after that report, the Met reviewed their decision to not investigate this stuff back in 2015 2016. And then off the back of that
[16:14]report, they told us that a second victim had come forward. They said at the time that there was no other allegations of crime that had been put to them. Then in November 2021, they
[16:25]kind of said, "Actually, well, we were wrong. Sorry about that." There was a third victim. Three separate complaints. Virginia, who obviously did want the matter pursued and two others that didn't. And at the end of the day, no investigation.
[16:36]>> But we're now here in 2026 with the release of the Epstein files. Does that change anything when it comes to this? >> Well, there's two additional references to complaints in these files. Now, we haven't got the totality of the
[16:47]complaints. We don't precisely know what happened, but there are these references in 2020 to these additional interactions with victims that the Met have. Again, it begs that question, which is why
[16:59]weren't they acknowledged? I mean, there might be a really good reason, but it's not a thoroughgoing account that we have of what happened here. >> So, I guess when the Met issues you that sort of mini apology saying, "Sorry, we
[17:09]actually meant uh three people have come to us." They probably should have said, "Well, five." Well, we've put the question to them because on first sight,
[17:18]the math doesn't work. >> So, I guess what you're saying here, Ed, is that more than a decade since Virginia Roberts Jafrey's complaint to the Met Police and after 7 years of your
[17:30]investigation work, it's baffling really that the Met Police has decided time and time again to never investigate Jeffrey Epstein, Gla Maxwell, Prince Andrew. Let me just start by saying we don't know
[17:41]the totality of what the Met has looked at in what way, who it spoke to, what evidence it gathered, how serious it is, and they don't give a running commentary, nor should they. But it is
[17:52]peculiar that there hasn't been an investigation. And it has led people to make really specific criticisms of the Metropolitan Police because it didn't
[18:01]appear to investigate all of these allegations of crime at a really early point. The punchiest of all of those claims is in 2019 when Virginia sends a
[18:12]tweet talking about corruption at the highest levels of government because there hasn't been a satisfactory investigation as far as she's concerned. And it's really really sad. She ends up
[18:23]feeling like she's been in some way betrayed by them. And given how serious it is, given how high level it is, that is all a risk to people's faith and confidence in policing. which is which I think is a really important point
[18:35]because you know she is no longer here and when you talk about her feeling let down that is the crux of so much of the Epstein files in this story it's not just your investigation team or me sitting here saying look at all these
[18:46]holes cuz it's not about us it's about the victims at the heart of this who feel like nothing has been done >> Lisa Phillips is one of the Epstein survivors we asked her how she thought
[18:56]that the Met's handling of the Andrew allegations had affected Virginia Roberts Chafrey >> I think it destroyed her. It took a lot of courage for her to speak out about
[19:08]these people and she was just like vilified, you know, and nobody believed her. And I mean, look where it led for her for her life. But she fought really,
[19:18]really hard. She did. And basically, that's one reason why I I want answers and I want to see this through was for her. >> There is conspiracy around this story.
[19:29]>> Sure. And there is a need for transparency to ensure there is no conspiracy and there is some sort of justice and there is an idea of what exactly has gone on here. >> Yeah. I mean there's a lot of cops who are trying to do a really really good
[19:38]job. That hasn't resulted in an investigation into Epstein. >> When it comes to them doing a good job, of course we know that Gain Maxwell is behind bars in America. So there has been a good job there in in terms of
[19:49]prosecuting her. And there has been a change here when it comes to the fact that Andrew was arrested by Temp's Valley police. Tame's Valley's operation takes in a set of different allegations
[20:00]that relate to Andrew. It doesn't really change those questions that we have now about why those original allegations were not investigated in 2015 and
[20:10]onwards. And it >> because because he's been arrested by a different police force and it's not what we've been discussing. >> Yeah. If there is no justice for Virginia's claims, the question you're
[20:22]left with is, are we happy about the decisions that were made along the way that meant that those claims were not investigated? We asked Buckingham Palace if it retracted its earlier statements
[20:33]concerning Andrew. It pointed us to the recent statement made by King Charles concerning his brother, saying that the law must take its course. Andrew did not respond to our request for comment, but
[20:43]has historically always denied any wrongdoing. The Met confirmed it received the 2015 letter that we examined. They said they interviewed Virginia three times and contacted other potential victims. Across those
[20:55]interviews, they said no allegation of criminal conduct was made against any UK-based individual. They said that decision was reviewed in August 2019 and again in 2021 and 2022. In each
[21:06]instance, the position remained unchanged and Miss Roberts Chafrey and her legal representative were informed and since then they have not received any additional evidence that would support reopening the investigation.
[21:18]They also told us that they are identifying and contacting former and serving officers who may have worked closely in a protection capacity with Andrew Mambbat and Windsor. They've been asked to consider carefully whether
[21:28]anything they saw or heard during that period of service may be relevant to their ongoing reviews and to share any information that could assist them. We've added the Met statement to our timeline and wanted to point out a
[21:40]couple of things. Virginia Roberts Def Freay's original allegation of sexual abuse by Andrew Mambbat in Windsor wasn't specifically disputed and the Met police appear to have updated their
[21:50]position too now saying that no allegation of criminal conduct was made against any UK-based individual during their interviews with Virginia. So my final question to you, Ed, is that with
[22:02]all the allegations exposed in the Epstein files, with this huge global pressure, do you think the Met Police will finally investigate? >> A whole set of professional people who
[22:13]work across the UK state um who are trying to do good jobs in good faith and get justice for people. That job has been unquestionably made incredibly difficult by the fact that you have
[22:23]somebody at the very top of the UK state embroiled in this network. So essentially the story is not over. >> It can't be over until there's a clear explanation about how the decisions were
[22:33]made to not investigate. And while there are rafts of uh Epstein network victims
[22:42]um still asking for justice, it's not over. And that is what we keep on saying is that we're going to keep on digging when it comes to the Epstein files. You and your team are going to keep on digging. So thank you for all the work you do and thank you for talking to me
[22:54]today, Ed. >> Thanks. Thanks for watching this episode of Foresight. Big thank you to Ed Hanker for coming here and keeping me company and talking me through the
[23:04]investigation. Another thank you as well to his colleague Guy Basnet and anyone else who worked with their team over the last seven years on this incredibly important story that they are not going to stop digging into. And remember, this
[23:16]story isn't going anywhere. I didn't even get to talk to you about how the House Oversight Committee has recently interviewed Bill and Hillary Clinton as well as Epstein's former accountant. We're still covering this story, too,
[23:27]but we are going to be taking a break. We'll be back in a few weeks. So, in the meantime, leave us a comment and let us know what you think about this episode. Do you think after everything you've seen that the Met should launch an
[23:39]investigation? And if you want to see why we're still so convinced that there's plenty more to come from the Epstein files, then watch our previous episodes about the missing terabytes of
[23:48]data. And don't forget, finally, as always, to subscribe to make sure you see the next episode of Fullight.