Prince Andrew latest: Buckingham Palace has ‘grave concerns’ over new allegations

The Scottish National Party says legislation to remove Prince Andrew’s dukedom should be brought forward without “any further excuse and any delay”.

The SNP is introducing a motion to pressure Sir Keir Starmer’s government to strip Andrew of the title, which would require an Act of Parliament.

SNP Westminster leader Stephen Flynn said “power and privilege” had protected people in the Epstein scandal for too long and legislation should be brought forward to remove the title.

Mr Flynn has introduced an Early Day Motion (EDM) which allows MPs to express an opinion, promote a cause or support a position. It is rare to have debate on them.

Andrew renounced his Duke of York title last week but officially retains his dukedom.

Last month the SNP lodged a similar motion to pressure the government to remove the peerage of Lord Peter Mandelson. Britain’s former ambassador to the US was sacked over his links to pedophile financier Epstein.

The SNP’s proposed bill would remove both Prince Andrew’s dukedom and Lord Mandelson’s peerage.

Virginia Giuffre’s posthumous memoir”“Nobody’s Girl” He accused Prince Andrew’s team of trying to hire internet trolls to harass him and of trying to hide in Balmoral Castle to avoid being served court papers ahead of the 2022 deal.

The deal, she says, was reportedly worth $12 million – not only did she get the money but also acknowledgment of her suffering and a pledge that Andrew would never disgrace her again.

“After casting doubt on my credibility for so long – Prince Andrew’s team went so far as to try to employ internet trolls to harass me – even the Duke of York had to offer me a meaningful apology,” she wrote in her memoir.

“Of course, we’ll never get a confession. That’s what settlements are designed to avoid. But we were trying for the next best thing: a general acknowledgment of what I’ve been through.”

Prince Andrew has strongly denied any wrongdoing.

The law has been used before to strip titles, including from descendants of Queen Victoria and Prince Albert, who supported the German side in the First World War.

The Titles Deprivation Act 1917 was used two years later to strip the titles of Leopold Charles, Duke of Albany, Earl of Clarence and Baron Arklow; Ernest Augustus, Duke of Cumberland and Teviotdale, Earl of Armagh; Ernest Augustus, Duke of Brunswick, Prince of Great Britain and Ireland; and Henry, Viscount Taaffe of Corran and Baron of Ballymote.

The law remains in force but since it specifically refers to the First World War, its provisions are unlikely to be relevant today.

The government has indicated it will not introduce legislation to strip Andrew of his titles unless the king wishes.

Virginia Giuffre’s brother and sister-in-law have appealed to the police watchdog to review the Metropolitan Police’s decision to drop their investigation into allegations against Prince Andrew.

Skye and Amanda Roberts told channel 4 news Ms Giuffre was “gaslit” by police and officers, which for her was a “kick in the stomach”.

They have called on the Met to reopen its investigation into Ms Giuffre’s claims that she was forced to have sex with Prince Andrew when she was 17, an allegation he vehemently denies.

And he said that if the London force did not take action, the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) should review the decision.

Mr Roberts told podcast The Forecast that his sister constantly asked: “What would it take for people to finally believe me?”

Mr Roberts’ wife, Amanda, said the issue has been raised in the US from the Justice Department to the House of Representatives, adding: “So every branch of government needs to take this seriously.”

The IOPC will not comment on this matter.

The Metropolitan Police said that following legal advice, it was clear that any investigation into human trafficking would largely focus on activities and relationships outside the UK.

“Officers therefore concluded that the Met was not the appropriate authority to conduct the inquiry in the circumstances and, in November 2016, a decision was taken that the case would not proceed to a full criminal investigation.

“That decision was reviewed in August 2019.

“In November 2019, the Met Office confirmed that this would remain unchanged.”