Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor ‘could face life in prison’, says expert – what the next year could look like

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor “could face life in prison” if he is found guilty of the latest allegations relating to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, experts have revealed. 

Thames Valley Police confirmed this week that it is assessing claims that Andrew shared secret reports from his UK trade envoy role with Epstein, with King Charles stating he would support any investigation.

The maximum sentence, if found guilty, is life imprisonment, if a serious breach of responsibility was found to have been committed. Unlike his brother, the King, Andrew is able to be criminally prosecuted and jailed – and sovereign immunity does not apply. 

So what could the next year look like for Andrew, and will anything actually come of the police investigation?

Here, HELLO! speaks to Chloe Jay, a Criminal Solicitor and the Senior Partner of Shentons Solicitors, a law firm in Winchester, and Simarjot Singh Judge, criminal defence solicitor at Judge Law in Windsor. Dr Jennifer Obaseki, who runs Obaseki Solicitors in East London, warns that there could be a “very quick and serious turn of events” for the former Prince in a “worst-case scenario” situation. 

Andrew, who has faced scrutiny for years over his relationship with Epstein, has always denied any wrongdoing. 

What are the next steps for Andrew?

If Andrew is contacted by Thames Valley Police, the first step would be an invitation to attend a voluntary interview. 

Simarjot Singh Judge, criminal defence solicitor at Judge Law, said: “If Andrew were to be contacted by Thames Valley Police, that would usually mean officers want to speak to him as part of an ongoing investigation. It does not automatically mean he will be charged, arrested, or prosecuted.

“The first step would typically be an invitation to attend a voluntary interview or, in some cases, an arrest if police believe it is necessary. At that stage, legal advice is absolutely crucial, and no one should engage with police questioning without a solicitor present.”

However, he emphasised that any investigation may “take many months, sometimes longer than a year, depending on the complexity of the allegations”. 

Chloe said that even to reach a decision about whether he is prosecuted or not, the process could take “a year”. Pre-charge bail is generally three months, set by the custody and authorised up to nine months, at which point it goes to the magistrates’ court to get it extended even further, she explained, adding: “But a complex investigation quite often takes more than a year.”

The evidence then goes to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and is reviewed by a lawyer to test whether it is sufficient and in the public interest. At this point, if he pleaded ‘not guilty’, there wouldn’t be a trial. Otherwise, a plea would be entered at the Crown Court, but could take a “couple of years” to reach trial. 

As for the trial itself, Chloe believes it would likely last “minimum a month”, depending on peripheral issues, such as the reporting, the fairness of the trial, and the time taken to go through the evidence. However, Jennifer tells HELLO! that if sufficient evidence was found, things could begin to happen “quickly”. 

What evidence will they be looking at?

The claims relate to Andrew’s time as the UK’s special representative for international trade and investment. He held the position from 2001 after retiring from the Royal Navy until 2011. At the time, the UK Trade & Investment government body described the role as such: “The duke’s unique position gives him unrivalled access to members of royal families, heads of state, government ministers and chief executives of companies.”

Jennifer said evidence could include looking at the files, what has been alleged, the information obtained and how, and the level of security the documents carried. Chloe added: “They’ve got to prove willful neglect or misconduct to a degree that constitutes an abuse of public trust, so it requires a serious breach, such as giving away information that could be used in any way contrary to this country’s interests. If the evidence is in emails or documents, rather than hearsay, it will be much easier to prove.”

Could Andrew go to prison?

Despite being a member of the royal family, Andrew is able to be criminally prosecuted and jailed if found guilty. The royals are not immune from legal punishment – and in 2002, Princess Anne was fined £500 after one of her dogs was found to have bitten two children. 

The case was brought ‘Regina v Laurence, Anne Elizabeth Alice’ – mother v daughter. For Andrew and Charles, it would be brother versus brother. The Princess Royal has also faced several convictions for speeding. 

Simarjot said: “Whether Andrew could face jail depends entirely on the nature of the allegation, the strength of the evidence, and whether any offence is ultimately charged. Many investigations do not result in charges at all, and even where charges are brought, custodial sentences are not automatic.”

“It’s important to stress that being under investigation is not the same as being guilty. The legal process is designed to test evidence thoroughly before any decision is made, and everyone is entitled to the presumption of innocence.”

“The best thing anyone in Andrew’s position can do is seek early legal advice, avoid discussing the matter publicly or online, and allow the process to unfold with proper representation.”

Jennifer added that “we don’t know the level of information” yet that is being dealt with. “It depends on the level of privilege, the information he had and what he divulged,” she said. 

How long would Andrew go to prison for, if found guilty?

Chloe Jay tells HELLO! that the “the maximum penalty” for such allegations is life imprisonment – but explains that a full life sentence is unlikely. However, she does believe it would be for a “substantial period of time” – likely “years not months” – depending on the “real consequences” of what was found.

Jennifer agreed about the “seriousness of the breach” being crucial, for example, if it included “sensitive military information”. She explained: “It’s the level of trust that has been breached, if it’s extremely high, the risk to the public and the risk to the government, those will all be things to look at.”

She explained that Andrew doesn’t have any previous criminal history but the “backdrop” to the situation and “other allegations” and potential “concealment” may make it difficult to plead for good character. 

What is the most likely outcome for Andrew?

Chloe emphasised that there are many people arrested every day who “never get anywhere near a conviction”. She added: “It won’t be until he’s convicted that we could be sure of anything about what’s happened.” Andrew himself has always vehemently denied any wrongdoing. However, if he isn’t charged, she believes there will be a “real public outcry” as the people “want justice”. 

Jennifer added that the police will be facing “pressure” and “they can’t be seen to sweep it under the carpet”. She said: “It also means that other people will not be deterred from leaking secrets or highly classified documents. If a member of the royal household could not be trusted to hold classified information, who can? And if nothing happens to him, then who wants to stop anybody from doing it again?” 

Both lawyers emphasised that the situation is very unique, with little to no legal precedent.