Campaigners will challenge the Met police over their refusal to investigate Prince Andrew, asking why they can interview Russell Brand under caution but not a member of the royal family.
Graham Smith, CEO of Republic, will be writing to the Met over the weekend asking for an explanation for their refusal to investigate.
Graham Smith said today:
"In November last year the Met said it had received a "number of allegations of sexual offences" against Russell Brand and they acted. They are now aware of a number of allegations of sexual assault against underage girls directed at Prince Andrew, accusations made under oath, and they do nothing."
"The accusations against Brand date as far back as 2006, those against Andrew are from 1999-2001. What is the material difference between these cases that Brand is interviewed under caution and Andrew is not?"
"I am writing to the Commissioner Mark Rowley to raise these questions and ask why the Met appears to be protecting the royals from potential prosecution."
The documents released this week say: "Jane Doe #3 was forced to have sexual relations with this Prince when she was a minor in three separate geographical locations: in London..." and "(in an orgy with numerous other under-aged girls). Epstein instructed Jane Doe #3 that she was to give the Prince whatever he demanded.."
Details of the original police report are here:
Do you like this page?