Stripped of his royal titles, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, the former Prince Andrew, is being investigated by the British police over accusations that he shared confidential documents with Jeffrey Epstein, the financier and convicted sex offender who died in 2019.
Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor was briefly arrested in February, but he has not been charged with a crime and denies wrongdoing.
The information he has been accused of sharing with Mr. Epstein relates to his work as a British trade envoy, a post he held between 2001 and 2011. After pressure from lawmakers in the opposition Liberal Democratic Party, some official records about his appointment to that position were released on Thursday.
Here are five things we learned from the documents.
Queen Elizabeth II wanted him to have the job.
There has been speculation about who lobbied for Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor to get the trade envoy position, and whether they might have included another friend of Mr. Epstein, Peter Mandelson, a former cabinet minister. Mr. Mandelson was fired last year as Britain’s ambassador to the United States over his links to the disgraced financier, and the repercussions from his appointment have dogged Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s government.
The documents released on Thursday do not suggest that Mr. Mandelson was involved in getting Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor the post, or that any lobbying was needed. One paper, from 2000 — recounting discussions within the government about what would happen when the envoy role was vacated by another member of the royal family, the Duke of Kent — shows that Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor had an extremely well-placed advocate.
“The Queen’s wish is that the Duke of Kent should be succeeded in this role by the Duke of York,” the document reads, referring to Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor by a title he held at the time. It added: “The Queen is very keen that the Duke of York should take on a prominent role in the promotion of national interests.”
He preferred ballet to theater.
The documents shed some light on Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor’s personal tastes.
After a meeting with one of his aides, Kathryn Colvin, a British diplomat, recalled being told that Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor was “particularly good on high-tech matters, trade, youth (including primary schools and outward bound projects), cultural events, with a preference for ballet rather than theater, the Commonwealth and military and foreign affairs.”
Ms. Colvin said she was also told that he “tended to prefer the more sophisticated countries, particularly those in the lead on technology.” The words that followed were redacted.
The aide also told Ms. Colvin that Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor “should not be offered golfing functions abroad,” saying that golf was a “private activity” and that “if he took his clubs with him he would not play in any public sense.” His reasons for saying this are a mystery.
His aides prepped him for an interview.
The documents include briefing papers prepared for Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor before a 2001 interview with The Times of London about his new position. The then-prince was encouraged to tell the reporter that he had “no hesitation in taking up the role.”
It was also suggested that he acknowledge his “lack of direct business experience,” say that he’d faced “a steep learning curve” and add, “But I relish the challenge. Hope to make a difference.”
Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor was also prepared for questions about a visit to New York and the scene of the Sept. 11 attacks. He was encouraged to stress his “deep impression of courage and fortitude of New Yorkers and Americans more generally in the face of such adversity” and to say that “11 September, far from cowing their spirit, provoked new determination to defy the perpetrators.”
If asked about having left his life in the Royal Navy and started the trade position, it was suggested that he describe it as a “big wrench” but add that his new role was one in which he “would never stop learning.”
He was never vetted.
In a statement accompanying the documents, Chris Bryant, a trade minister in Mr. Starmer’s government, said there was “no evidence that a formal due diligence or vetting process was undertaken” before Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor was given the post, or that anyone considered doing so.
Mr. Bryant added, however, that this was “understandable” because the appointment “was a continuation of the royal family’s involvement in trade and investment promotion work following the Duke of Kent’s decision to relinquish his duties.”
One document — in a question-and-answer format, apparently prepared for the media — addresses doubts about Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor’s suitability for the role.
“But he is not very experienced,” one question reads. “Why not someone better placed?”
The answer cites the “high profile and commitment he is able to give to this work as a member of the royal family.”
There are limits to the British government’s transparency.
Some of the text is redacted. By way of explanation, Mr. Bryant said officials had withheld the “bare minimum” of personal information and material that would prejudice international relations.
Officials were also in contact with the police investigating Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor, Mr. Bryant said, suggesting that they wanted to be sure that nothing they released prejudiced the investigation.
