Prince Andrew, Entitled, and the Epstein Nexus: What We Know vs. What’s Alleged. Andrew Lownie’s Entitled makes explosive claims about Prince Andrew. Here’s what’s documented, what’s disputed, and what remains unproven.

The British royal family has weathered many scandals, but few have proved as enduring—and as complex—as those surrounding Prince Andrew, Duke of York. A new biography by Andrew Lownie, Entitled: The Rise and Fall of the House of York (2025), has reignited debate over Andrew’s finances, his links to Jeffrey Epstein, and his role as a public servant.

This article separates what is documented from what is alleged, clarifying where the record ends and where Lownie’s claims begin.

---

The Documented Record

Trade Envoy Role and FOI Controversies

From 2001 to 2011, Prince Andrew served as a UK trade envoy, tasked with promoting British business abroad. Diplomats and business leaders filed multiple complaints about his expenses and effectiveness. Freedom of Information (FOI) requests to release details of his trips—paid for by taxpayers—have been consistently refused by the Cabinet Office and Foreign Office, citing exemptions normally reserved for the monarch’s private activities. This unusual opacity has drawn criticism from transparency advocates.¹

Pitch@Palace and the 2% Clause

In 2014 Andrew launched Pitch@Palace, an initiative to connect entrepreneurs with investors, using Buckingham Palace and other royal venues to give events gravitas. While Pitch@Palace was registered as a charity, he also established a parallel private company, Pitch@Palace Global, which contained a controversial clause entitling it to a 2% equity slice in participating businesses.²
Although Andrew’s office insisted the clause was never enforced, filings show that the company existed and was active, raising concerns over blurred lines between charitable and commercial activity.³

Selman Turk and Questionable Transfers

Court proceedings in Isbilen v. Turk (2022) revealed that financier Selman Turk transferred £750,000 to Prince Andrew, £250,000 to Sarah Ferguson, and £25,000 to Princess Eugenie. The Yorks described the payment as a wedding or birthday gift, and Andrew later repaid the £750,000.⁴ While the High Court case focused on Turk’s alleged fraud against his client Nebahat Isbilen, the financial links to Andrew and his family raised questions about judgment and due diligence.⁵

David Rowland and Banque Havilland

Andrew’s relationship with financier David Rowland is well documented. Rowland’s Banque Havilland extended loans reportedly worth £1.5–2 million to Andrew, later repaid.⁶ The Financial Times also reported that Rowland and his son accompanied Andrew on overseas trips, blurring the lines between public duty and private finance.⁷

Epstein Connection—On Record

Andrew’s friendship with Jeffrey Epstein is undeniable. Photographs, flight logs, and testimony show Andrew visited Epstein’s residences and maintained contact even after Epstein’s 2008 conviction for sex offenses. While Andrew has denied all allegations of sexual misconduct, leaked documents suggest his relationship with Epstein continued longer than publicly admitted, with emails showing contact until at least 2015.⁸

---

Allegations from Entitled

Thailand and Sexual Allegations

According to Andrew Lownie’s Entitled, Andrew allegedly entertained 40 prostitutes in four days during a 2004 official visit to Thailand. Lownie cites diplomats and hotel staff interviewed by journalist Andrew Marshall and others.⁹ These claims have not been tested in court, and Andrew has not responded directly to them.

Money, Influence, and Side Deals

Lownie alleges that Andrew used his role as envoy to advance private business interests, including helping the Rowlands secure meetings abroad and taking a cut in ventures such as “Inverness Management.” He further claims Andrew received jewelry and undeclared payments as informal commissions.¹⁰ These remain allegations, though they are consistent with the documented pattern of blurred boundaries in his public and private dealings.

Suppression of Complaints

The book also portrays a culture of complaint suppression, alleging that diplomats, police, and staff who raised concerns about Andrew’s behavior were sidelined or reassigned.¹¹ Again, this is presented as testimony from insiders rather than verified through official inquiries.

Epstein’s Blackmail Network

Lownie repeats allegations that Epstein ran a blackmail operation, secretly taping high-profile figures—including Andrew—in compromising situations. He claims some of this material may now be in the hands of Russian or Middle Eastern intelligence services.¹² None of these claims have been substantiated by courts or independent investigators, though Epstein’s collection of recordings has been reported elsewhere.¹³

---

Epstein’s Death: Suicide or Murder?

The official cause of Epstein’s death in 2019 was suicide by hanging. A family-hired pathologist, Dr. Michael Baden, has disputed this, citing injuries more consistent with strangulation.¹⁴ Critics point to the simultaneous failure of cameras and guards as suspicious, while others argue Epstein had little motive to kill himself. Lownie echoes the doubts, but the official record remains suicide.¹⁵

---

Reading Entitled Responsibly

Lownie’s biography is ambitious, deeply researched, and based on hundreds of FOI requests, interviews, and archival work. Yet many of its most salacious claims—sexual escapades, kompromat files, and intelligence ties—are allegations, not adjudicated facts. Readers should distinguish between:

• Documented record: court filings, FOI refusals, company accounts, photographic evidence.

• Unproven allegations: sexual rumors, kompromat claims, intelligence speculation.

---

Conclusion

Prince Andrew’s fall from grace is undeniable. The documented record shows questionable financial ties, poor judgment in associations, and persistent secrecy around his public role. Lownie’s Entitled adds a layer of explosive allegations—some plausible, others sensational—but not all are verifiable.
In a democracy, what matters most is not rumor but accountability: transparency in public office, scrutiny of financial dealings, and recognition that privilege cannot exempt anyone from the standards of public life.

---

Notes (Turabian Style)

1. Andrew Lownie, Entitled: The Rise and Fall of the House of York (London: William Collins, 2025), Introduction; see also The Week, August 2025.

2. “Pitch@Palace Global Ltd.,” Companies House filing, March 2024.

3. Jamie Young, “Cash withdrawal from Prince Andrew’s Pitch@Palace,” Business Matters, January 4, 2025.

4. High Court, Isbilen v. Turk (2022).

5. “Selman Turk Transfers,” The Times, March 2022.

6. “David Rowland Loan,” The Spectator, April 2023.

7. “Banque Havilland Fined,” Financial Times, July 2021.

8. “Prince Andrew and Epstein Emails,” Sky News, February 2023.

9. Lownie, Entitled, chap. 8.

10. Ibid., chap. 10.

11. Ibid., chap. 12.

12. Ibid., chap. 13.

13. Julie K. Brown, Perversion of Justice (New York: Harper, 2021).

14. Michael Baden, interview with Fox News, 2019.

15. U.S. Bureau of Prisons, “Epstein Death Report,” 2020.

---