4 min read • 697 words
Introduction
A fresh legal bombshell has landed in the long-running Jeffrey Epstein scandal. A second woman, represented by the legal team of high-profile accuser Virginia Giuffre, has come forward with allegations of sexual assault against Prince Andrew. The claims, which the Duke of York vehemently denies, place the alleged incident at his Royal Lodge residence in Windsor in 2010, a year after Epstein’s first criminal conviction.
A Deepening Royal Crisis
The new allegation, revealed by attorney Spencer Kuvin, represents a significant escalation in the legal and reputational crisis facing the British royal. While Virginia Giuffre’s civil suit was settled out of court in 2026, this new claim from another alleged victim suggests the legal fallout is far from over. It paints a picture of potential ongoing misconduct even after Epstein was a registered sex offender.
The accuser, an American woman who was in her twenties at the time, states she was trafficked to the UK specifically for the purpose of meeting Prince Andrew. This narrative directly challenges the Prince’s previous assertions of minimal contact with Epstein’s social circle post-2010. The Royal Lodge, a grace-and-favour home, is now central to a major international scandal.
The Legal Landscape Intensifies
Spencer Kuvin, who represents several Epstein victims, disclosed the allegation during a recent television interview. He stated his client possesses compelling evidence to support her account. This development indicates that Prince Andrew’s legal vulnerabilities extend beyond the settled Giuffre case, potentially opening the door to further civil litigation or complicating any attempts at public rehabilitation.
Buckingham Palace has historically maintained a stance of blanket denial regarding all allegations against the Duke. A spokesperson previously stated, “It is emphatically denied that The Duke of York had any form of sexual contact or relationship” with Giuffre. The Palace is expected to issue a similarly forceful rebuttal to this latest claim, likely characterizing it as baseless and without merit.
Context: A Timeline Under Scrutiny
The alleged 2010 date is particularly damaging. By that year, Jeffrey Epstein was a convicted sex offender, having pleaded guilty in 2008 to Florida state charges of procuring a minor for prostitution. His controversial non-prosecution agreement had already sparked public outrage. Association with him was widely seen as toxic, raising serious questions about judgment and association.
Prince Andrew has admitted that his association with Epstein, which began in 1999, was a “mistake.” However, he has consistently denied ever meeting the latest accuser or having any recollection of such an event. The 2010 timeline directly contradicts his 2019 BBC Newsnight assertion that he could not have been with Giuffre in 2001 because he was at a PizzaExpress in Woking—an explanation widely ridiculed.
The Broader Fallout and Institutional Damage
This new allegation ensures the Epstein scandal remains a live wire for the British monarchy. Prince Andrew was stripped of his military affiliations and royal patronages in 2026 and ceased using his HRH style in an official capacity. He remains a Counsellor of State, a constitutional role, though it is understood he will not undertake such duties. The case continues to cast a long shadow over the institution.
For survivors of Epstein’s trafficking network, each new allegation reinforces their collective quest for accountability. It underscores the pattern of powerful men allegedly exploiting a system designed by Epstein and his associate Ghislaine Maxwell. Their fight has moved from the financier himself to the circles in which he operated, challenging impunity at the highest levels of society.
Conclusion and Future Outlook
The emergence of a second accuser ensures that Prince Andrew’s past will remain under unforgiving scrutiny. While he settled one lawsuit, this new claim demonstrates that financial settlements may not permanently silence the chorus of allegations. The court of public opinion has largely reached a verdict, and this development solidifies his exile from public life.
Looking ahead, the potential for formal legal action from this new accuser looms. Furthermore, any future revelations from ongoing investigations or from other victims could trigger another wave of crisis for the royal household. For the monarchy, the challenge is now one of permanent damage control, striving to insulate the institution from a scandal that shows no sign of abating. The story of Epstein’s enablers, it seems, is still being written.
