Brief
Andrew Mountbatten‑Windsor fights to block evidence from unlawful raids
A High Court judge found the February raids on the former Duke of York unlawful, while Thames Valley Police argue the seized material should remain usable in the ongoing investigation.
By Felo News Desk · Published
Andrew Mountbatten‑Windsor, the former Duke of York, remains locked in a High Court dispute over whether evidence gathered during February raids of his Sandringham and Royal Lodge residences can be used in the police investigation into alleged misconduct in public office, according to standard.co.uk.
What happened
Old Bailey judges issued two search warrants on 18 February under separate parts of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act. Thames Valley Police used the warrants to raid Mountbatten‑Windsor’s Sandringham estate home and his former Royal Lodge property. He was arrested on 19 February – his 66th birthday – on suspicion of misconduct in public office, linked to claims he shared sensitive information with Jeffrey Epstein while serving as the UK’s trade envoy. He was interviewed under caution and later released, remaining under investigation.
What the reports add
Standard.co.uk notes that Mr Justice Hilliard ruled the warrants were “unlawful” because a “significant error” was made in their application, rendering the searches and seized material unlawful. The judge also said that the unlawful finding does not end the investigation and that a new application to retain the material may be considered. The police have launched a bid to keep the evidence, arguing it could be lawfully seized under a different provision.
What was said
Mr Justice Hilliard said, “There would be little point handing it back if it could be lawfully seized on some other provision… I will have to decide whether the new application is granted or not.” A Thames Valley Police spokesman said, “The initial court’s decision to issue warrants under the specific piece of legislation used was incorrect, and therefore these must be legally quashed. Legal proceedings are currently ongoing to decide how material seized during the searches will be managed and whether we can lawfully retain it in support of our ongoing investigation.”
How it came about
The dispute follows Mountbatten‑Windsor’s challenge to the warrants, which he was granted permission to contest earlier in October, as reported by Felo News (see former Duke of York challenges Thames Valley Police search warrants). The High Court ruling on 8 October confirms the earlier claim that the warrants were unlawful, while the police maintain the investigation remains active.
Key facts
- Old Bailey judges issued two search warrants on 18 February 2026 for raids on Mountbatten‑Windsor’s properties. (standard.co.uk)
- Mr Justice Hilliard ruled the warrants unlawful due to a significant error in their application. (standard.co.uk)
- Thames Valley Police are seeking a new application to retain seized material despite the unlawful finding. (standard.co.uk)
- Mountbatten‑Windsor was arrested on 19 February 2026 on suspicion of misconduct in public office. (standard.co.uk)
- A private hearing on the police bid to retain evidence is scheduled for 2027. (standard.co.uk)
Timeline
- 2026-02-18 — Old Bailey judges issue two search warrants for raids on Mountbatten‑Windsor’s homes.
- 2026-02-19 — Mountbatten‑Windsor arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office.
- 2026-10-08 — High Court rules the search warrants unlawful; police launch bid to retain evidence.
Sources
- [1] standard.co.uk — originally reported as “Andrew locked in battle over evidence found through unlawful search warrants”
