Police Scotland confirms Andrew-Epstein Balmoral inquiries, but names no offense

Police Scotland says it has begun active inquiries into the time Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell reportedly spent at Balmoral, the royal family’s private estate in Aberdeenshire. The force’s confirmed language is narrower than a criminal charge, an arrest or even a publicly defined criminal investigation: it says it has received “information,” that inquiries are evidence-led and that the work is at a “very early stage.”

The force has not said who supplied the information, when it arrived, what suspected offense officers are assessing, or whether any person is being treated as a suspect. It has also not said that a report has been sent to Scotland’s prosecution service. Those omissions matter because the allegation described by news organizations is serious, while the official statement does not yet establish its source or substance.

What is confirmed, and what remains an allegation

The Associated Press, ITV News and Sky News each published the same Police Scotland statement on Friday. “We have received information and active inquiries are ongoing, but these are at a very early stage,” the statement said. Police added that the needs of victim-survivors are at the heart of its work and declined to provide details of ongoing inquiries.

The specific claim in circulation is that women were trafficked to the Highland estate. AP and ITV attributed that claim to the Daily Express, which first reported the inquiries. Police Scotland did not publicly confirm that formulation, identify a possible victim, describe alleged conduct, or name a potential offense. The responsible reading, therefore, is that officers are assessing information connected to the Balmoral visits, not that trafficking at Balmoral has been proved.

News reports place Epstein and Maxwell at Balmoral in 1999, reportedly as Andrew’s guests. Images released in the U.S. Epstein files appear to show Epstein and Maxwell during a shooting trip there. An image, a name or a visit is not evidence by itself that its subject committed a crime. The U.S. Justice Department said its January release brought the production to nearly 3.5 million pages, including more than 180,000 images, and warned that the production could include false or falsely submitted material because it included items sent to the FBI by the public.

The timeline: a 1999 visit and a 2026 evidence review

1999: Epstein and Maxwell stayed at Balmoral, according to AP and The Guardian. The newly reported Scottish inquiries concern what happened around that visit, although police have not limited their statement to a precise date or described the conduct under review.

January 30, 2026: The Justice Department announced its large release under the Epstein Files Transparency Act. The scale explains why police describe the wider review as complex, but volume is not proof. The National Police Chiefs’ Council told ITV that several forces are assessing material for potential offenses, suspects, victims or witnesses and that there is no single national investigation.

February 19, 2026: Thames Valley Police arrested Andrew on suspicion of misconduct in public office over separate allegations that he shared sensitive information with Epstein while serving as a U.K. trade envoy. He was released under investigation. That case is not the Police Scotland Balmoral inquiry and should not be used as proof of the Scottish allegation.

October 30, 2026: Police Scotland publicly confirmed its active inquiries. No arrest, charge, search, named suspect or prosecutor referral connected to Balmoral was announced. Andrew has repeatedly denied committing crimes and has denied wrongdoing in relation to Epstein. The reports reviewed by the Chronicle did not carry a response from him specifically addressing the new Scottish inquiries.

What would turn inquiries into a Scottish criminal case

Scotland separates police evidence-gathering from the prosecutor’s decision. The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service says police carry out an initial investigation and may submit a report if there is enough evidence. A procurator fiscal then assesses whether action is justified. Nothing in Police Scotland’s public statement says the Balmoral matter has reached that stage.

The legal threshold is more demanding than public suspicion. Under the revised Scottish Prosecution Code, most prosecutorial action requires sufficient admissible evidence that a crime was committed and that the accused committed it, ordinarily corroborated by at least two separate sources. Prosecutors generally must also find a realistic prospect of conviction and a public-interest basis for action. There is an early exception in solemn cases: initial petition proceedings can begin from one reliable source giving reasonable grounds for suspicion if a second, corroborative source is reasonably expected. The realistic-prospect test does not apply at that initial stage; a corroborated case to answer is required for full committal.

For the monarchy, the immediate consequence is institutional rather than judicial: activity at a privately owned royal estate is now within an acknowledged police inquiry. That raises questions about records, staff knowledge and access, but it does not answer them. The next meaningful evidence would be Police Scotland identifying the nature of the suspected conduct, confirming a report to prosecutors, seeking witnesses or records, or announcing that its inquiries have ended. Until then, “active inquiries” is the fact, and a criminal case remains only a possibility.

Sources: Associated Press; ITV News; Sky News; The Guardian; U.S. Department of Justice; COPFS criminal justice guide; COPFS Prosecution Code.