Born into unimaginable luxury and showered with honors, the man formerly known as His Royal Highness Prince Andrew, Duke of York will henceforth be addressed as plain old Mr. Mountbatten Windsor.

It's a stunning fall. The second, apparently favorite, son of Queen Elizabeth II has not only lost his many titles but also his home. He’s been kicked out of his lavish grace-and-favor mansion in the grounds of Windsor Castle after elder brother King Charles III’s patience finally snapped. An endless torrent of ugly revelations related to his closeness to pedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein became unbearable for a family whose No. 1 job is to embody a dignified permanence at the heart of the British state.

Charles has long sought a slimmed down version of “the firm,” the name by which the working royals have come to be known. In stripping the former princeling of any place in public life, he’s shown a ruthlessness and moral clarity others should try. The U.S. Congress and Trump administration need to do now what many of the president’s supporters want and open the full Epstein files to public scrutiny.

Despite having paid her a reported £12 million ($15.8 million) to settle a legal case and that infamous photograph showing them together, Mountbatten Windsor continues to deny having had sex with Virginia Giuffre, the woman abused by Epstein and trafficked to his powerful friends. Her memoir posthumously published this month describes in detail what she alleges these men, including the ex-prince, did to her.

Mountbatten Windsor’s credibility suffered further damage when a tabloid published an alleged email from him suggesting he’d dissembled about the date on which he’d last had contact with Epstein. Another alleged message appeared to show he’d asked his taxpayer-funded protection detail to dig up dirt on his accuser. Police are investigating that potential abuse of power. The ex-prince has consistently denied all claims against him.

As Charles’ shock statement defenestrating his brother landed on Thursday evening, Giuffre’s family made clear not only their pride in her for bravely challenging the account of a powerful prince, but that justice for the surviving victims must follow. They are right. Mountbatten Windsor still has questions to answer about what he saw at Epstein’s mansion. He should finally give evidence in cases pending against the billionaire’s estate. But this shameful episode goes way beyond the alleged deeds of one blue-blooded ne'er-do-well.

Giuffre’s book is a Who’s Who of rich, powerful men, and some women, whom she encountered during the horrendous two years she traveled the world with the disgraced financier. They allegedly include dozens of politicians, business leaders and academics, whose friendship he cultivated in the vain hope it would make him look weighty and clever.

Among them is an individual she refers to as the ex-minister, whom she claims was the most violent of her rapists. During one alleged assault she said she thought she would die, yet when she complained to Epstein he allegedly told her: “You’ll get that sometimes.” It was this nonchalant absence of concern that made Giuffre realize he cared little for her welfare.

That the outrage over Epstein and his coterie hasn’t died down over the past decade suggests the public does care, viscerally. Charles’ humiliation of his own brother is living proof. The elite figures who cozied up to the financier, lapping up the wealthy trappings without questioning his surrounding himself with very young “masseuses,” need to tell us what they saw. Though it may be a long wait, given the omerta so far.

A few years ago, a shocking photo emerged of the model Naomi Campbell’s 31st birthday party on board a yacht, in which a child-like Giuffre can be seen in the foreground. What were the other guests thinking?

Giuffre names Bill Clinton, Al and Tipper Gore and many others in her book as people who saw her with Epstein (she doesn’t accuse Clinton or either Gore of abuse). It’s time for witnesses to come forward, including the many cooks, housekeepers, pilots, personal assistants and other staff retained by Epstein.

For the past year, Congress and the White House have obfuscated, using political tricks such as early recess and the government shutdown to prevent disclosing the hundreds of gigabytes of data plus other material held by the FBI relating to Epstein and associates, including his jailed girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell.

We’ve already learned plenty from the limited release of the Epstein files so far, helped by my colleagues on Bloomberg News. In September, the UK ambassador to the U.S., Peter Mandelson, had to resign over revelations by Bloomberg that he kept associating with Epstein after the pedophile’s first incarceration. Now Windsor Mountbatten has been sacked by the royal family.

Why has the British establishment, not known historically for its alacrity, acted more swiftly than its U.S. counterpart to try to cut out the Epstein cancer. UK tabloids are ferocious diggers, but public disgust at the affair and hunger for justice is no less potent in America. Quite the opposite.

According to his own accounts of his sometime friendship with Epstein, Donald Trump has nothing to fear from a full release of the files. Giuffre said the president didn’t abuse or mistreat her, and she never saw him at Epstein properties. The legislative and executive branches of the U.S. government should take their cue from the UK’s non-executive chairman, King Charles. This scandal won’t go away until the rot has been removed.

____

This column reflects the personal views of the author and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.

Rosa Prince is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering UK politics and policy. She was formerly an editor and writer at Politico and the Daily Telegraph, and is the author of "Comrade Corbyn" and "Theresa May: The Enigmatic Prime Minister."

©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Visit bloomberg.com/opinion. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.