Search warrants used by British police to raid the homes of former Prince Andrew were unlawful, a London court confirmed on Thursday, October 8, after Thames Valley Police admitted it had made a "significant error" when applying for them. The ruling is a legal victory for Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor — but the judge stressed it does not end the criminal investigation into him.
What the court decided on Thursday
At a hearing at London's High Court, Justice Nicholas Hilliard said the force had made a significant error in applying for the warrants that were used to search Andrew's properties on the Sandringham Estate in Norfolk and Royal Lodge in Windsor. Thames Valley Police agreed the warrants were not properly granted by the courts, saying the initial decision to issue them under the specific piece of legislation used was incorrect — and therefore the warrants "must be legally quashed."
According to reporting by The Sun, the force had actually agreed to quash the warrants as far back as July 22, accepting they should have been sought under a separate section of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act. Thursday's hearing made the agreement public and formal.
The warrants were issued by a High Court judge at London's Central Criminal Court on February 18 — the day before Andrew, 66, was arrested on his 66th birthday on suspicion of misconduct in public office over his links to late American sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Detectives spent days searching both properties, removing documents and electronic devices.
The investigation continues
Both the judge and the police were clear that the quashing changes the legality of the searches — not the underlying investigation. "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," Hilliard said.
Thames Valley Police said legal proceedings are ongoing over how the seized material will be managed — the force wants to keep it in support of the continuing investigation, while Andrew is opposing that, and the dispute will not be settled until next year. The force said it had returned nothing to Andrew beyond material deemed unconnected to its inquiry.
The investigation began after the release of millions of documents by the US Department of Justice relating to Epstein. Andrew, the younger brother of King Charles III, was stripped of his royal titles last year over the Epstein connection. He has denied any wrongdoing, has not been formally charged, and did not attend Thursday's hearing.
A royal first since 1649
Andrew's legal challenge against the police marked the first time a member of the British royal family has challenged the lawfulness of criminal proceedings against them since the trial of Charles I in 1649, according to USA Today. People magazine reported that a friend of Andrew's says he is "utterly convinced that one day he will be completely exonerated" and views the ruling as a first step toward that.
Buckingham Palace has confirmed that while the King continues to fund Andrew's living costs, the monarch is not providing money for the legal claim.
Music in this post's reel: Kevin MacLeod - Long Road Ahead B (incompetech.com), licensed under CC BY 3.0
The takeaway: Andrew has won the battle over the raids, but not the war. With the seized material still in police hands and the misconduct investigation ongoing, the legal fight around the former prince is far from over.
Sources
- Al Jazeera: UK ex-prince Andrew search warrants quashed after police accept legal error
- Reuters: Ex-prince Andrew search warrants quashed after police accept legal error
- USA Today: Police raids on ex-Prince Andrew's homes were unlawful, court rules
- People: Ex-Prince Andrew scores legal win as court rules warrants unlawful