Copyright dailymail
One of the UK's most senior former prosecutors has called for a full investigation into whether police resources were used to try and smear Virginia Giuffre by Andrew. Nazir Afzal, the ex-Chief Crown Prosecutor for North West England, today said there needed to be 'full transparency' into whether Andrew asked one of his bodyguards to investigate his accuser. It follows The Mail on Sunday's world exclusive story on October 19th that Andrew attempted to smear his accuser by asking his taxpayer-funded Met bodyguard to investigate her. A bombshell email obtained by the newspaper exposed how Andrew asked one of his personal protection officers - part of the Met's elite SO14 Royal Protection Group - to dig up information about Ms Giuffre, passing him her date of birth and confidential social security number. He then astonishingly told Ed Perkins, the late Queen's deputy press secretary, what he had done. Mr Afzal said the possibility 'a senior figure used police resources to try to allegedly smear an accuser raises issues of abuse of power and policing resources' and said that no-one should be above the law. He told Radio 4's Today programme: 'The Met have said that they will investigate this independently but there has to be full transparency about this. 'I can't ask for someone's social security number – there is no reason why he should be able to do that and that means that somebody then acted in a way they shouldn't be able to do and carried out some kind of misconduct in public office. 'We need public clarity. We need to ensure that nobody has special or privileged status. That investigation needs to go forward and I am sure it will and if any misuse of police assets has taken place – there needs to be accountability.' Mr Afzal also backed a call for the Met to take another look at Andrew's role in the abuse of Epstein's victims both as an alleged suspect and a witness. The Mail on Sunday's exclusive story revealed how Andrew emailed Mr Perkins hours before this newspaper first published the infamous picture of the duke with 17-year-old Ms Giuffre, which would ultimately bring about his downfall. 'It would also seem she has a criminal record in the [United] States,' he wrote. 'I have given her DoB [date of birth] and social security number for investigation with XXX, the on duty ppo [personal protection officer].' It is not suggested that the officer complied with the prince's request, while Ms Giuffre's family said she did not have a criminal record. In response to the prince's email, Mr Perkins wrote 'Indeed Sir. All received. Awaiting their response now. Lawyers primed'. The duke then told Mr Perkins he believed Ms Giuffre had a criminal record in America and that he had handed over her social security number and date of birth to one of his protection officers. Less than three hours later Andrew forwarded his emails with Mr Perkins to Epstein and simply wrote 'latest'. Andrew refused to explain how he obtained Ms Giuffre's nine-digit US social security number - described as 'the key to someone's life, required for opening bank accounts, applying for loans and getting a driver's licence or passport'. Mr Afzal also told the BBC that Andrew should co-operate with US authorities over what he knows about Epstein and he would do so 'if he wished to truly clear his name'. He said: 'When he was interviewed for BBC Newsnight, he said he would co-operate with any enquiry anywhere in the world and unfortunately, he hasn't – that's the issue. 'There's no reason why the UK authorities can't ask him – and it's got to be voluntary – for him to come forward and explain what's happened. 'We have got two issues here – Andrew is an alleged suspect and he's also a witness. While the focus has largely been on allegations against him, there is the issue of him being a witness. 'He knows the identity of other individuals at Epstein's residences or parties – he probably knows who funded or facilitated the travel and properties themselves and he will have greater insight into how Epstein gained access to social and political circles and how others within that orbit behaved and what they knew. 'If Andrew truly wishes to clear his name, proactively assisting investigators, either here or in the US, about others who may have committed crimes – that would demonstrate integrity and commitment to justice.' His comments came as the IOPC police watchdog called on the Met to ask whether there are any matters it should now be looking into having filed to previously investigate Andrew. In response, the Met said this morning that 'officers had concluded when allegations were made back in 2015 about trafficking for sexual exploitation that other jurisdictions and organisations were better placed to pursue those particular aims which is why a decision was made not to proceed to a full criminal investigation'. Mr Afzal not only backed the IOPC's call for the Met to look at Andrew's alleged crimes again but called on the watchdog to use its own powers to look into Andrew. 'Their decision was made in 2015. At that time, a statement hadn't been taken from Virginia Giuffre and then in 2021 a further review took place based on findings from the civil case and also from the Ghislaine Maxwell prosecution in the US - and again the matter wasn't investigated – so this matter hasn't been investigated never mind taken any further and that is a cause for real concern because survivors want accountability, they want redress, they want to be heard and that's not what's happening here.' He added: 'The IOPC have a proactive power to investigate – they have had the power since 2020 to carry out their own investigations and there is no reason why they shouldn't.' And he warned that the public were concerned that the rich and powerful were not scrutinised as thoroughly as average citizens. 'Public confidence has been shaken by this. People do feel that there is some two-tier justice here – that if you are powerful, you don't get the same level of attention as you would do if you were say homeless. 'The IOPC is meant to hold policing to account. It is meant to ensure policing does its job without fear or favour. It is positive that they have asked a question of the Met but they can do a great deal more.
