EXCLUSIVE: How King Charles 'Saved the Monarchy' by Stripping Disgraced Brother Andrew of Royal Titles 'In Nick of Time' Before New Epstein Files Dump
King Charles stripped his brother of his titles last year.
Feb. 7 2026, Published 12:00 p.m. ET
Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor stands exposed at the center of a vast new release of Jeffrey Epstein records – but palace aides have told RadarOnline.com King Charles had acted "just in the nick of time" by stripping his younger brother of royal titles in a move they now argue "saved the monarchy" from even more serious damage.
The latest tranche of roughly three million documents released by the U.S. Department of Justice related to the Epstein case lays bare emails, photographs, financial records, and legal paperwork linked to the convicted s-- offender who died in jail in 2019 aged 66 from an apparent suicide.
Epstein Files Detail Disgraced Prince Andrew Links
A graphic photograph captured the then-Prince on all fours and smiling over a woman on the floor.
The files repeatedly reference Andrew, 65, formerly the Duke of York, detailing invitations, in correspondence and arrangements made during the period when Epstein was seeking influence and access.
The disclosures arrive just three months after Charles formally removed Andrew's titles and his right to a Crown Estate home, following years of internal debate at Buckingham Palace over how to handle the scandal.
Among the material are graphic photographs described as showing the then-prince on all fours and smiling over a woman on the floor, as well as an invitation Andrew sent to Epstein to visit Buckingham Palace after the financier had served a jail sentence for procuring a minor.
Also included is an email accepting an offer to entertain a "beautiful, trustworthy" 26-year-old Russian woman, signed "HRH The Duke of York KG" – language aides say, which illustrates the scale of the problem facing the palace.
'The Damage Would Not Have Stopped With Him'
King Charles stripped Andrew of his royal titles in October 2025.
A senior royal source said the timing of Charles's decision was crucial.
The insider added, "What we are seeing now is precisely the scenario everyone inside the Palace worried about for years. The scale and detail of these disclosures underline why the King's decision to strip Andrew of his titles was not only unavoidable but urgent.
"Had that step not been taken before the documents emerged, the institution itself would have been dragged directly into the fallout."
Another aide added: "If Andrew had remained a titled royal when these documents surfaced, the damage would not have stopped with him.
"Every headline would have pulled the Crown into the story, and the monarchy would have been forced to answer for conduct it neither sanctioned nor controlled. Charles acted just in the nick of time in terms of salvaging the royal brand."
Ghislaine Maxwell arranged dinners and meetings for the royal family.
The documents include 2,549 mentions of "Prince Andrew," 798 references to the "Duke of York," and 107 to "the Invisible Man" – an alias Andrew used in exchanges with Ghislaine Maxwell, 64, who is serving a 20-year U.S. prison sentence for trafficking girls for Epstein.
The emails show Maxwell arranging accommodation, dinners, and meetings, while Andrew and his former wife, Sarah Ferguson, 66, discussed access to royal residences and introductions involving their daughters, Princess Beatrice, 37, and Princess Eugenie, 35.
Never Miss an
Daily updates from the heart of Hollywood, right to your inbox
By entering your email and clicking Sign Up, you’re agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Andrew used the alias Invisible Man in email exchanges with Maxwell.
As Andrew prepares to leave Royal Lodge in Windsor for a smaller property on the Sandringham estate, aides insist there remains a "duty of care" to him from within the royal family.
One palace insider said, "There is no escaping the fact that Andrew exercised extremely poor judgment over a long period. Even so, the King is adamant that he should not be left financially vulnerable in a way that could drive him back toward influential benefactors whose support comes with strings attached."
At the time of the October decision, some questioned whether Charles had gone too far, noting Andrew had never been convicted of a crime.
Yet advisers now said they did not previously grasp the full extent of the material held in U.S. files.
One said: "Andrew would repeatedly insist that there was nothing further waiting to emerge and that the worst was already known. In reality, those around him had no independent way of verifying that, which left the Palace operating in the dark."
