The High Court has ruled that search warrants used by Thames Valley Police to raid Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s homes were unlawful. Police admitted the legal error, but the criminal investigation into suspected misconduct in public office continues.
The High Court in London has quashed search warrants used by Thames Valley police to raid the homes of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, formerly known as Prince Andrew. The ruling follows a legal challenge by the former prince, who accused officers of seizing personal items unrelated to the investigation. Police accepted the legal error and agreed the warrants should be invalidated.
Justice Nicholas Hilliard ruled that the warrants allowing searches of Mountbatten-Windsor’s residence on the Sandringham estate and his former home at Royal Lodge had not been lawfully granted. The police force acknowledged that the warrants had been obtained using the wrong legal basis.
A Thames Valley Police spokesperson stated, "We accept the position that the initial court’s decision to issue warrants under the specific piece of legislation used was incorrect and therefore these must be legally quashed."
The spokesperson added that this admission "is not a judgment on our ongoing investigation." The police said they ensured the court was presented with all necessary information and paperwork, following correct legal processes throughout.
Despite the quashing of the warrants, the criminal investigation into suspected misconduct in public office remains active. Justice Hilliard clarified the limits of the ruling, stating, "The fact that the search warrants were quashed does not bring an investigation to an end, or mean that the whole of the investigation was unlawful."
The ruling does not require police to immediately return the material seized during the raids. Separate legal proceedings will determine whether police can retain and use the material. According to reports, a hearing to decide on the retention of seized items is scheduled to be held in private next year.
Danielle Reece-Greenhalgh, a partner at Corker Binning, noted that an unlawful search warrant does not automatically stop police from examining items during an investigation, nor does it automatically render evidence inadmissible in a future trial.
Mountbatten-Windsor, 66, was arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office in February. He was questioned under caution and released under investigation without being charged. The investigation followed the U.S. Department of Justice’s release of files related to Jeffrey Epstein, which renewed scrutiny of Mountbatten-Windsor’s dealings with the convicted sex offender and his time as Britain’s trade envoy from 2001 to 2011.
Mountbatten-Windsor denies any wrongdoing. He was stripped of his royal titles and his right to use the title prince last year amid scrutiny of his association with Epstein. Buckingham Palace has distanced the royal family from the legal action, warning Mountbatten-Windsor not to use financial support from the king’s private funds to fund his challenge against the police.
This case marks the first time in centuries that a member of the British royal family has challenged criminal proceedings against them in court. The last such instance was the 1649 trial of King Charles I. While the former prince secured a procedural victory regarding the legality of the search warrants, the ongoing investigation and future hearings on seized materials mean the legal uncertainty surrounding his status persists.
Sources
This article was drafted with AI assistance and checked against the sources above. Company claims are reported as claims. Cover image is AI-generated.
The day's checked news, by email
One short email a day with the top stories. Free, and you can unsubscribe in one click.
US prosecutors filed new charges against ousted Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores, alleging conspiracy to commit torture against detainees, including US citizens.
WorldTrending
Curtis Flowers, a Black man wrongfully convicted after six trials for the same murders, died at 56. He was freed in 2019 after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled his rights were violated.
