Court Rules Police Raids on Andrew's Homes Unlawful
A London judge ruled Thursday that police unlawfully searched two homes of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, the former Prince Andrew.
- Feb. 19: police arrested him on suspicion of misconduct in public office.
- 11 hours of questioning ended with release under investigation, uncharged.
- The issuing judge never weighed legal privilege for the seized items.
- Police conceded in July but tried to keep that private.
Why it matters: The ruling opens a path for his lawyers to contest evidence from the searches. Justice Nicholas Hilliard said it does not end the investigation or make it unlawful as a whole.
- Unlike U.S. courts, English courts may keep unlawfully seized evidence if probative, attorney Mark Stephens said.
- Buckingham Palace barred his stipend from funding the warrant challenge.
How 27 sources split on this story
Center coverage, 12 sources: The center frames it as a partial legal win for Mountbatten-Windsor that leaves the investigation intact.
Associated Press8hJudge says search warrants used to seize property from former Prince Andrew were unlawful
BBC News9hAndrew search warrants were unlawful, court hears
Forbes7hSearch Warrants Used In Ex-Prince Andrew Investigation Were Unlawful, U.K. Court Finds
France 249hSearch warrants for former prince Andrew's homes were unlawful, UK court rules
Newsweek9hEx-Prince Andrew search warrants were unlawful, police admitPenPennLive8hJudge rules search warrants against former Prince Andrew were unlawful
Reuters9hEx-prince Andrew search warrants quashed after police accept legal error
Sky News1dAndrew Mountbatten-Windsor and Thames Valley Police agreed warrants to raid two properties were unlawful
USA Today8hPolice raids on ex-Prince Andrew's homes were unlawful, court rulesLeft coverage, 9 sources: The left runs the wire report as a procedural setback for police in an ongoing Epstein-linked investigation.
Los Angeles Times8hJudge says search warrants used to seize property from former Prince Andrew were unlawful
HuffPost8hSearch Warrants Used To Seize Property From Ex-Prince Andrew Were Unlawful, Judge Finds
The Independent5hAndrew Mountbatten-Windsor wins legal claim against police over searches on his properties
ABC News9hJudge says search warrants used to seize property from ex-Prince Andrew were unlawful
Al Jazeera7hUK ex-prince Andrew search warrants quashed after police accept legal error
Business Insider4hTimeline of former Prince Andrew's ties to Jeffrey EpsteinTBGThe Boston Globe9hJudge says search warrants used to seize property form Prince Andrew were illegal
The Guardian9hSearch warrants used in Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor raids were unlawful, court rules
The Washington Post8hSearch warrants against Prince Andrew were unlawful, court findsRight coverage, 6 sources: The right carries the same wire account, stressing police agreement that the warrants were unlawful.
New York Post7hJudge says search warrants used to seize property from former Prince Andrew were unlawful
The Sun2hPolice chiefs insist Andrew probe continues ‘at pace’ after warrant blunder as they pursue ‘live lines of inquiry’
Daily Mail9hAndrew WINS High Court battle as judge rules police raids on Sandringham were unlawful
Just the News23hPolice in England acknowledge search warrants on ex-Prince Andrew in Epstein case were unlawful
Newsmax7hJudge: Warrants to Seize Fmr Prince Andrew Property Unlawful
Washington Examiner8hJudge rules police search of Prince Andrew's home was unlawfulWhat’s next: Hilliard must still decide whether police can keep the seized property as evidence. Thames Valley Police said its investigation is continuing.
- Stephens said more hearings will determine which evidence, if any, is thrown out.
- Will any seized material be excluded from a possible criminal trial?
- What other matters beyond the trade-envoy allegations are police examining?