The law must take its course, the King said—but the Palace still won't say what it knew.
Six years before Prince Andrew's arrest, Buckingham Palace quietly received an archive of 30,000 emails documenting his financial entanglements and alleged misuse of confidential government information during his time as a royal trade envoy. The material arrived at the office of the Lord Chamberlain in May 2020, yet what became of it — whether it was examined, acted upon, or set aside — remains unanswered. As a police investigation continues and transparency requests are denied on security grounds, the episode raises an enduring question about institutions and accountability: what is known, by whom, and what is done with that knowledge.
- Court documents have only now revealed that the Palace held a vast email archive for years while public scrutiny of Andrew intensified — the silence around it is itself a source of tension.
- The emails suggest Andrew shared a confidential Treasury briefing on Iceland's banking crisis with a business contact, telling him to act on it before making his move — a potential blurring of royal duty and private financial interest.
- The Epstein Files released in the US deepened the picture, showing Andrew describing a key figure in the email archive as his 'trusted money man' and linking his ex-wife to a loan from the same failed bank.
- Thames Valley Police arrested Andrew in 2024 on suspicion of misconduct in public office, yet it remains unknown whether investigators have ever obtained the emails the Palace received four years prior.
- Freedom of Information requests about Andrew's official activities continue to be blocked on national security grounds, prompting calls from researchers and transparency advocates for a full parliamentary inquiry.
In May 2020, an archive of 30,000 emails documenting Prince Andrew's financial dealings and conduct as a royal trade envoy was delivered to the office of the Lord Chamberlain at Buckingham Palace. The material had passed through several hands — originating from a businessman's personal account, surfacing during a commercial dispute, and eventually reaching Kevin Stanford, an entrepreneur with grievances tied to the collapse of Icelandic bank Kaupthing. Stanford shared the archive with authorities in Monaco and Luxembourg, and also with the Palace. What happened to it after that is not known.
Fragments of the emails have since emerged with serious implications. Among them: a 2010 exchange in which Andrew requested a confidential Treasury briefing on Iceland's banking crisis and forwarded it to a business contact, advising him to use it before making his move. The contact's father had taken control of Kaupthing's Luxembourg operations, which later became Banque Havilland — a bank that went on to face regulatory sanctions in both the UK and EU. The Epstein Files, released in the United States this year, added further texture, showing Andrew promoting the same family's ventures and describing the father as his trusted money man. His ex-wife Sarah Ferguson was also recorded as having received a loan from the bank.
When Thames Valley Police arrested Andrew in 2024 on suspicion of misconduct in public office, the existence of the archive became newly significant. Yet neither the Palace nor police have confirmed whether investigators have ever accessed it. Buckingham Palace declined to comment, citing the ongoing inquiry. Researcher Andrew Lownie, who has studied Andrew's time as trade envoy, has called for a parliamentary investigation, noting that Freedom of Information requests about his official activities — including a 2011 trip to Azerbaijan — continue to be denied on national security grounds.
The emails arrived during the reign of Queen Elizabeth II. Under King Charles, the posture toward Andrew has changed: titles were stripped, and after the arrest, the King stated that the law must take its course. But the deeper question — what the Palace knew, and what it chose to do — remains open. The archive sits somewhere within the Royal Household, its contents largely shielded from public view, its significance still unresolved.
In May 2020, Buckingham Palace received a trove of 30,000 emails documenting Prince Andrew's financial dealings and his time as a royal trade envoy. The archive arrived at the office of the Lord Chamberlain, the most senior official in the Royal Household, according to court documents that have only now come to light. What the Palace did with those emails—or whether they were ever examined—remains unclear.
The emails originated from Jonathan Rowland's personal business account and had been extracted during a dispute with a business associate. They eventually landed with Kevin Stanford, a retail entrepreneur and former majority owner of All Saints, who had his own grievances tied to investments in Kaupthing, a failed Icelandic bank. Stanford shared the archive with authorities in Monaco and Luxembourg, and also with the Lord Chamberlain's office. In 2020, that position was held by Lord Peel, whose office oversees the conduct and general business of the Royal Household.
The contents of the archive are only partially known, but fragments have surfaced with troubling implications. Earlier this year, the Telegraph published emails showing that in 2010, Andrew had requested a confidential briefing from Treasury officials about Iceland's banking crisis and then shared it with Jonathan Rowland, telling him to use it "before you make your move." Rowland's father, David Rowland, had taken control of the Luxembourg operations of Kaupthing, which later became Banque Havilland. The bank subsequently faced sanctions from regulators in both the UK and the EU. The emails suggest Andrew may have been blending his royal duties with private financial interests in ways that raised serious questions about conflicts of interest and the proper use of government information.
The Epstein Files, released in the United States earlier this year, added another layer to the picture. Those documents showed Andrew promoting the Rowlands' business ventures and describing David Rowland as his "trusted money man." His ex-wife Sarah Ferguson was also recorded as having received a loan from the Rowland bank. The constellation of relationships—between Andrew, the Rowlands, and the failed bank—painted a portrait of entanglement that went well beyond what a working royal should have been involved in.
When Thames Valley Police arrested Andrew in 2024 on suspicion of misconduct in public office, the existence of these 30,000 emails became newly relevant. Yet it remains unknown whether police have access to them or what the Palace has done with the material in its possession. When asked, Buckingham Palace declined to comment, citing the ongoing police inquiry. A Thames Valley Police spokesperson said they were aware of allegations circulating publicly and encouraged anyone with information to come forward, but would not confirm whether they had obtained the emails that the Palace received four years earlier.
Author Andrew Lownie, who has researched Andrew's time as trade envoy, has called for a parliamentary inquiry into his conduct in that role. He points to a pattern of opacity: Freedom of Information requests about Andrew's activities continue to be denied on grounds of national security and law enforcement. When Lownie sought information about a 2011 trip to Azerbaijan, the Foreign Office withheld it entirely. "The cover-up continues," Lownie has said, arguing that Britain lacks sufficient transparency about Andrew's official activities and the decisions made around them.
The emails were handed to the Palace during the reign of Queen Elizabeth II. Under King Charles, the approach to Andrew has shifted markedly. The King stripped him of his titles and, after his arrest, issued a statement saying "the law must take its course." But what the Palace knew, and when it knew it, remains a question that has not been answered. The 30,000 emails sit somewhere in the machinery of the Royal Household, their contents largely unknown to the public, their significance still unfolding.
Citas Notables
The law must take its course.— King Charles, in a statement after Andrew's arrest
The cover-up continues. Freedom of Information requests about Andrew's activities are being denied on grounds of national security.— Author Andrew Lownie, calling for a parliamentary inquiry
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why does it matter that the Palace received these emails in 2020, years before Andrew was arrested?
Because it suggests the institution may have had evidence of his misconduct sitting in its files while publicly maintaining distance from him. The timing is crucial—he'd already stepped down as a working royal in 2019, but the Palace apparently knew more about his financial entanglements than it let on.
What exactly did Andrew do that was wrong?
He appears to have used his position as trade envoy to access confidential government briefings, then shared them with business contacts who stood to profit. In the Iceland case, he got a Treasury briefing about banking problems and handed it to Jonathan Rowland before Rowland's father made moves in that market. That's not trade promotion—that's using state information for private gain.
But the Palace says it can't comment because of the police inquiry. Isn't that reasonable?
It would be, except the inquiry is recent and the emails are old. The Palace has had four years to understand what was in those files. The silence feels less like legal caution and more like institutional self-protection.
Who actually sent the emails to the Palace?
A retail entrepreneur named Kevin Stanford, who'd gotten them from Jonathan Rowland's account during a business dispute. Stanford was trying to expose what he saw as misconduct, sharing the archive with authorities and the Palace. He was essentially a whistleblower, though not an official one.
What's the connection to Epstein?
The Epstein Files show Andrew was deeply embedded with the Rowlands—promoting their ventures, vouching for David Rowland as his money man. It suggests the relationships documented in those 30,000 emails weren't isolated incidents but part of a broader pattern of Andrew mixing royal access with private financial interests.
So what happens now?
That's the real question. Police say they're aware of the allegations and want information. But it's unclear if they have the emails. Transparency advocates are calling for a parliamentary inquiry. The Palace is silent. The emails exist, but their contents and what was done with them remain largely hidden.