Politics
Epstein survivors fear reporting information about Andrew due to lack of faith in British police and media
Citing the lack of action taken by police authorities when Epstein was alive and the harassment seen in the British press, an American lawyer representing “multiple clients” has said these Epstein survivors will not speak to the police in the UK.
Women who potentially have important information regarding disgraced paedo-prince Andrew Mountbatten Windsor appear to feel unsafe at the prospect of coming forward. This relatable fear stems from a lack of faith in how the British police and the UK mainstream media would handle the case.
Moreover, Brad Edwards highlighted the impact of subsequent press intrusion seen against a woman he represents — in which UK journalists chose to investigate the woman and her wider family, saying:
Other victims took notice.
Consequently, the multiple clients prepared to speak to that allegation have effectively been intimidated into silence.
This underscores further how the mainstream press and the British state continue to protect powerful men, whilst perpetuating the culture of silence around sexual abuse and Epstein survivors generally.
Onus on Epstein victims to expose themselves rather than on authorities to investigate
It is worth noting that Brad Edwards has long challenged this system of power and influence which prefers to ignore victims.
Spending over a decade fighting for justice and representing more than 30 Epstein survivors, Edwards said in 2020:
The government enabled this. They knew what he was doing and they let it continue.
Brad Edwards represented more than 30 Epstein survivors.
"The government enabled this. They knew what he was doing and they let it continue."
Edwards spent 11 years in court fighting for victims the system chose to ignore. pic.twitter.com/PFyfZbddVF
— Epstein File Search (@epsteinsearchin) April 8, 2026
It appears, due to the intimidating impact of an untrustworthy police force and our cruel, sensationalist media, that the state not only enabled the abuse in the first place — but continues to shield the very perpetrators by putting the responsibility on victims to give up their own right to privacy.
Frankly, these women have already had their right to privacy stolen from them by Epstein and his posh-paedo, pervy pals — yet the press and state seem more interested in upholding Andrew’s privacy instead.
As Edwards has underscored, he represents a woman who alleges that Epstein trafficked her in 2010 to the Royal Lodge — the then-prince Andrew’s official residence — for sex with him. However, she has not yet formally reported the allegation to the police, and she may never do so because an intimidating atmosphere leaves survivors vulnerable to further unwarranted abuse.
Thames Valley Police issued a statement last week, updating on the allegations raised originally in February:
Should she wish to report this to police it will be taken seriously and handled with care, sensitivity and respect for her privacy.
Since then, the police have also updated that they have contacted Edwards, confirmed by the lawyer to the BBC, but that:
her lawyer had said she would not communicate with police over fears regarding her privacy.
Consequently, this once again draws an even greater issue to the forefront of public debate — the way our system treats victims of abuse.
Epstein files — When will protecting women matter more than powerful men’s reputations?
Rape cases in the UK see pretty abysmal statistics, in which only a small minority make it to trial and a subsequent conviction. Instead, victims are made to relive their deep trauma, exposed and vulnerable, and more effort is made to understand why the offender did what he did rather than remotely centre the lifelong impact on victims.
However, rapes themselves have increased by 511% in just two decades — and that’s with a significant number of silent cases where 5 in 6 of women and 4 in 5 of men don’t report. This just reinforces the reality that people in the UK doubt that the system will give them the dignity and safety they are long overdue.
For instance, victims of rape and sexual abuse often suffer psychological abuse from the perpetrators. Thus, they face an uphill struggle to learn that there is nothing any woman — or girl — can do which justifies sexual abuse or violent behaviour against them.
They didn’t ‘bring it on themselves’ like our patriarchal system wishes to reframe it as — but our criminal justice system instead unwinds that healing process and drags victims back to square one.
Another US lawyer representing survivors, Sigrid McCawley, who also represented the former prince’s most renowned accuser Virginia Guiffre, has told BBC News that the Metropolitan Police have made no efforts to contact her.
McCawley has long fought for justice for survivors of Jeffrey Epstein and has played a prominent role in campaigning for the release of the Epstein Files:
— Harry Sisson (@harryjsisson) August 1, 2025
Right to anonymity IF you go public — a sick contradiction
Since then, a spokesperson for the National Police Chiefs’ Council said:
As part of the UK policing response, efforts have been made to contact victim-survivors who have already chosen to share their experiences publicly.
In some cases, this has involved engagement with legal representatives; however, we recognise that we have not yet been able to reach everyone and our efforts continue.
We understand that coming forward can be incredibly difficult, and we want anyone affected to know they can do so in their own time, when they feel ready. Our door remains open.
Should any victim-survivors choose to contact UK policing, they will be treated with care, compassion and respect, with their wellbeing, privacy and right to anonymity at [the] centre of our response.
Needless to say, the NPCC’s comment regarding ‘right to anonymity’ is a bit redundant if they are only looking to victims who have gone public. It is entirely foreseeable, and understandable even, that victims of abuse will shy from publicly naming their abuse and its perpetrators due to the intimidating impact of our media and its trolls.
After all, survivors know that putting themselves through that process would likely compound their trauma, while offering only the thinnest possibility of finding justice in the UK.
This sinister status quo must end — women and girls deserve better
It is clear that survivors of abuse in the UK often feel they must protect themselves from the very institutions and people who are supposed to support them.
Media coverage of that reluctance only reinforces the widespread belief that reporting sexual abuse or rape in the UK is pointless, because the system so often places survivors under scrutiny while offenders escape meaningful accountability.
Once again, powerful institutions uphold the status quo by prioritising the reputation of influential men — and, in this case, the elite and privileged monarchy they belong to — over women’s pain and suffering.
Featured image via Peter Nicholls/Getty Images
You must be logged in to post a comment Login