STUNNING: Andrew’s former staff member suddenly appears before police with a USB drive and an old schedule linked to Epstein – meetings and documents dating back to Andrew’s time as a trade envoy.

A former member of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s staff has unexpectedly come forward to police. The individual arrived carrying a USB drive and an old personal schedule that appears linked to Jeffrey Epstein. The materials date from the period when Andrew served as the United Kingdom’s special trade envoy.

The contents of the USB are said to include digital copies of meeting notes, correspondence and diary entries. Investigators are examining whether the records show contacts and document exchanges that occurred while Andrew held his official government role.

The schedule reportedly lists appointments and travel arrangements that coincide with known periods of contact between the two men.

This development has forced the long-running Prince Andrew–Epstein controversy back into public view. Many had believed the scandal had largely run its course after titles were stripped and an earlier police inquiry began. The sudden appearance of physical evidence from a former insider has changed that assessment.

Police are treating the USB and accompanying schedule as potential new leads. Officers have taken formal statements from the former staff member and have begun forensic examination of the digital files.

Early indications suggest the materials cover a span of several years during Andrew’s decade as trade envoy between 2001 and 2011.

The trade envoy position gave Andrew access to confidential commercial and diplomatic information. Official guidance at the time required strict confidentiality over sensitive details obtained during overseas visits and investment discussions.

Any sharing of such material with private individuals would have raised serious questions about the proper discharge of public duties.

Sources familiar with the investigation say the schedule appears to cross-reference certain meetings and travel dates with entries found in previously released Epstein correspondence.

The USB is also understood to contain scanned copies of internal notes and briefings that were never intended for external circulation. Detectives are working to verify the authenticity of every file before deciding on next steps.

Andrew has consistently denied any wrongdoing in connection with Epstein. He has maintained that their association ended years earlier than the newly examined timeline suggests.

No charges have been filed against him arising from the latest material, and he remains under investigation from the earlier arrest on suspicion of misconduct in public office.

The re-emergence of the scandal places fresh pressure on both the Metropolitan Police and Thames Valley Police teams already examining related claims.

Officers must determine whether the USB contents add new evidence or merely duplicate information already in the public domain from the large release of Epstein files. That process is expected to take weeks of detailed analysis.

Public interest has surged once again. Commentators note that the involvement of a former staff member lends a different weight to the material than anonymous document dumps. An individual who once worked inside the household has chosen to hand evidence directly to authorities rather than leaking it through media channels.

The timing is particularly sensitive. Andrew already faces ongoing scrutiny over his former role and the extent of his contacts with Epstein after the financier’s 2008 conviction. Any confirmation that confidential trade documents or schedules were retained and later shared would complicate his position further.

Palace officials have declined detailed comment, stating only that the matter is now entirely in the hands of the police. King Charles III previously made clear that the royal family would cooperate fully with any lawful investigation. That stance is understood to remain unchanged.

Legal experts point out that possession of old schedules and digital files does not automatically prove criminal conduct.

Investigators must establish context, intent and whether any information contained on the USB was still subject to confidentiality rules at the time it was allegedly shared. The former staff member’s motives for coming forward after so many years will also form part of the inquiry.

Nevertheless, the simple fact that new physical evidence has surfaced has reopened questions many believed were settled.

Media coverage has intensified, and political figures have begun calling for greater transparency about the scope of the police work. Some MPs have asked whether further documents still exist in private hands that have not yet been examined.

The USB itself is being handled under strict chain-of-custody procedures. Digital forensics specialists are creating verified copies and examining metadata to establish when files were created, modified or copied. Parallel inquiries are checking the old paper schedule against official travel records and diary entries from the relevant years.

For Andrew, the development represents another serious setback. Having already lost titles, official roles and public standing, he now confronts the possibility that material from his own former circle could deepen the existing investigation. Supporters insist he has always cooperated and that the latest claims will ultimately prove unfounded.

Critics argue that the repeated appearance of new evidence, whether from official archives or private individuals, demonstrates that the full story has never been told. They welcome the former staff member’s decision to approach police directly and urge others with relevant information to do the same.

As forensic work continues, the scandal that once seemed to have reached a natural conclusion has returned to the centre of public attention.

The USB drive and the accompanying schedule have ensured that questions about Andrew’s time as trade envoy and his relationship with Epstein will remain under active examination for the foreseeable future.