Three days after the US Department of Justice released what it says are the final documents linked to Jeffrey Epstein, one image continues to dominate headlines. A newly released photograph of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor has reignited international scrutiny, even as it becomes clear he is not the only royal name appearing in the files.
The release followed the passing of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, approved by Congress in November. According to Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, the publication marked the conclusion of a lengthy review process designed to ensure transparency. Still, several House Democrats dispute that claim, arguing that a significant portion of the material has yet to be made public.
The dataset is vast. It includes flight logs, emails, identification records, employment documents, more than 180,000 images, and over 2,000 videos. Among the names referenced are politicians, financiers, celebrities, and multiple members of European royal families. Being mentioned does not automatically imply wrongdoing, but the volume and nature of the material have renewed public debate.
Prince Andrew and the documents that deepen the controversy
Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor appears repeatedly throughout the files. Long before this latest release, he denied allegations connected to Epstein, who died by suicide in prison in 2019 while awaiting trial for sex crimes.
Virginia Giuffre accused Andrew of sexually assaulting her multiple times when she was a minor after being trafficked by Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. The British monarchy later reached a financial settlement with Giuffre in 2022. Following the posthumous release of her memoir last year, King Charles III stripped Andrew of his remaining royal titles and ordered him to vacate Royal Lodge.
Among the newly released materials is an undated photograph showing Andrew crouched over an unidentified woman, touching her abdomen. Additional emails include exchanges between Epstein and a sender identifying themselves as HRH The Duke of York. In one, Andrew discusses meeting a beautiful Russian woman. In another, he invites Epstein to Buckingham Palace in 2010, two years after Epstein’s conviction for soliciting a minor.
Emails involving Ghislaine Maxwell also reference Andrew, including discussions about whether he should spend time with Sarah Ferguson and their children at a Spanish resort instead of visiting Epstein’s private island. Andrew continues to deny all allegations.
Other royals named and what the references mean
Sarah Ferguson is mentioned several times in the files. Documents include Epstein requesting help drafting a public statement on her behalf in 2011. At the time, she publicly expressed regret over her association with him and apologised for accepting money from him. Later emails show her referring to Epstein as a dear friend, which her representatives claim was part of an attempt to defuse a defamation threat. Ferguson has said she cut off contact once the scale of Epstein’s crimes became clear.
Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie are referenced only peripherally. Emails show their father sending photographs of them to Epstein between 2011 and 2012, including holiday images and charity activities. Another message from Ferguson appears to invite Epstein to Andrew’s 50th birthday party. The sisters themselves were minors at the time of Epstein’s crimes and are not accused of any wrongdoing.
The files also mention Mette-Marit, Crown Princess of Norway, extensively. Norwegian media report that she appears more than 1,000 times in correspondence dating from 2011 to 2014. Emails show friendly language between her and Epstein long after his conviction. Following the release, she issued a statement acknowledging poor judgment and expressing regret for any contact with him.
Queen Camilla and Princess Diana are also named, though authorities stress that these references do not suggest personal relationships or misconduct. In Diana’s case, mentions appear to stem from articles or third party accounts, with no solid evidence confirming direct contact.
As with all names in the documents, officials emphasise that inclusion alone does not equal guilt. Still, the scale of the material and the prominence of those mentioned ensure the Epstein files will remain under intense public scrutiny for some time.
