Police feared Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor would invoke King to block royal home raids, court documents show

Legal papers from High Court proceedings show that detectives applied for search warrants partly because they feared Mr Mountbatten-Windsor or his legal representatives would claim “that the property belongs to someone else (the King) and that separate legal permission should be sought.”

Officers believed that obtaining such consent “may not be expeditious” and that pursuing it beforehand could “frustrate the nature and purpose of the search.”

The documents were released following a request by the Daily Mail to the High Court.

The Detective Chief Inspector overseeing the raids, whose identity was withheld, outlined the rationale to the Old Bailey judge who approved the warrants.

“My investigative objectives are to secure relevant evidence in a timely and secure fashion,” the senior officer stated. “Failure to do so risks loss of evidence and a consequent loss of public trust and confidence in the investigation.”

The potential destruction of evidence is an argument commonly relied on in applications for search warrants.

The DCI further warned that Mr Mountbatten-Windsor and his representatives might or might not be willing to grant access, adding: “Either way I cannot risk not have an appropriate legal power to achieve my objectives.”

Investigators were specifically seeking material connected to Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s tenure as Special Representative for Trade and Investment.

The police application also alleged that Mr Mountbatten-Windsor, who has denied any wrongdoing, was considered a suspect “in a number of serious offences” and had a documented history of failing to engage with other inquiries linked to Jeffrey Epstein. Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s lawyers said this was “materially and factually incorrect”.

According to the warrant application, Mr Mountbatten-Windsor was suspected of forwarding official Government reports to convicted paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein “within minutes of receiving them” during his time as trade envoy. The police application claimed these documents related to official visits he undertook on behalf of the British government to Singapore, Vietnam, China and Hong Kong in October 2010.

Police further alleged that in 2011, while still serving as envoy, he arranged a meeting with a private investment firm during which he suggested Epstein could invest in the company.

Mr Mountbatten-Windsor was taken into custody on February 19, his 66th birthday, on suspicion of misconduct in public office.

He was questioned for nearly 12 hours at Aylsham police station before being released under investigation. Six days of searches followed at Royal Lodge in Windsor and Wood Farm on the Sandringham Estate.

Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s legal team mounted a robust challenge to the police’s justifications. His lawyers argued there was no legitimate basis for concluding he would refuse to cooperate or might destroy evidence, pointing to “the claimant’s good character, his public role as a former working member of the Royal Family, the intense public scrutiny to which he is subject, and the willingness expressed in respect of other investigations to assist the police and co-operate.”

They also argued that Thames Valley Police had never approached Mr Mountbatten-Windsor or his representatives to request access to the properties or any relevant material.

His lawyers further contended that publishing the Epstein Files earlier in 2026 would have given him ample opportunity to dispose of evidence, undermining the urgency argument.

The legal challenge proved successful. Mr Justice Hilliard formally quashed the search warrants on July 22 after Thames Valley Police conceded they were unlawful, without a full hearing.

Despite the warrants being declared unlawful, the investigation into Mr Mountbatten-Windsor’s conduct remains active. Thames Valley Police applied on June 4 for permission to keep the material seized during the raids, arguing there is a legitimate reason to retain them.

Mr Mountbatten-Windsor is fighting this application. Mr Justice Hilliard confirmed that a hearing on the matter will take place in private in 2027, meaning the former prince faces months of uncertainty before learning whether he will be charged.

The judge remarked that the conclusion of the police investigation was likely “quite a way off.”

Mr Mountbatten-Windsor, who was stripped of his royal titles and removed from Royal Lodge over his association with Epstein, now resides at Marsh Farm near Sandringham.

He has consistently and strongly denied any wrongdoing, including in relation to Epstein and the allegation of misconduct in public office. Buckingham Palace has confirmed the King is not funding his brother’s legal challenge.