Judge Throws Out Epstein Search Warrants Used in Former Prince Andrew Raids

A British High Court judge has thrown out search warrants used in raids on two homes linked to Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor after police admitted they relied on the wrong legal provision, handing the former prince a procedural victory in an Epstein-related criminal investigation.

Mr Justice Hilliard formalized the agreement between Andrew and Thames Valley Police on October 8, 2026, finding that a “significant error” in the warrant applications was enough to render the warrants unlawful.

The ruling leaves police fighting to keep material seized during the raids while their investigation into suspected misconduct in public office continues. Authorities are examining allegations that Andrew shared sensitive government information with Jeffrey Epstein while serving as Britain’s special representative for international trade and investment.

Andrew was arrested in February on his 66th birthday and questioned under caution before being released while the investigation continued. Police searched his residence on the Sandringham Estate in Norfolk and Royal Lodge, his former home in Windsor, under warrants granted at the Old Bailey.

Hilliard found that police should have sought the warrants under Section 9 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, which governs access to certain protected or “special procedure” material, rather than the Section 8 route they used.

Thames Valley Police has now asked the court for authority to retain the material seized during the searches, arguing that some of it could lawfully be obtained under another provision.

Hilliard indicated that returning the material now may be unnecessary if police can lawfully seize it again. Andrew opposes the request, and a further private hearing on retention is expected in 2027.

Thames Valley Police said the legal error concerned the statutory basis used to obtain the warrants and that officers continue to pursue reasonable lines of inquiry into alleged misconduct in public office.

The investigation followed records released by the U.S. Justice Department from its Jeffrey Epstein files, which prompted scrutiny of Andrew’s communications and conduct while serving as Britain’s special representative for international trade and investment from 2001 to 2011.

Andrew has denied wrongdoing and has previously expressed regret over his association with Epstein. No charge has been announced against him.

The High Court will next decide whether police can continue holding and potentially using material seized during the February raids, a ruling that could determine how much of that evidence remains available to investigators.