Euan McColm: A strong sense the King acted in interests of the family firm rather than victims in the Andrew scandal

He knows it’s over.

I watched the 1980 gangster movie The Long Good Friday a couple of weeks ago and I was struck, yet again, by the brilliance of its closing scene, with Bob Hoskins as Harold Shand, trapped in the back seat and running out of road.

At the end of a long bad Thursday, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor paid unwitting homage to that moment.

Mountbatten-Windsor – not the smartest, formerly known as Prince – spent much of his 66th birthday in a Norfolk police station after being arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office. When, eventually, he was released, photographers captured his Harold Shand moment. The look of anguish on Mountbatten-Windsor’s face – Bertie Wooster imagined by Lucian Freud – as he was driven away from Aylsham police station on Thursday evening now defines him.

Mountbatten-Windsor’s ongoing downfall has been marked by astonishing moments.

There was that interview with Emily Maitlis for the BBC in 2019, during which he sought to explain his relationship with the paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein, who was found dead in his New York jail cell in August 2019 after being arrested on a number of charges relating to the sexual abuse of women and girls. Mountbatten-Windsor told Maitlis he had no recollection of ever meeting Virginia Giuffre, a young trafficking victim with whom he had been photographed, and made the preposterous claim that he found it impossible to sweat.

The backlash to that interview was so great that Mountbatten-Windsor soon announced his decision to step back from his public royal duties.

Then, in 2022, Mountbatten-Windsor borrowed from the late Queen and his brother Charles in order to settle a £12 million lawsuit with Giuffre, while continuing to deny any wrongdoing.

Following the posthumous publication last year of Giuffre’s memoir, in which she alleged she had been trafficked by Epstein in order that Mountbatten-Windsor could use her sexually, King Charles stripped his brother of his royal titles.

But still the stench of corruption lingered. Mountbatten-Windsor could not outrun the consequences of his own behaviour.

His arrest on Thursday came following a complaint to police that Mountbatten-Windsor had shared confidential material, gathered during his time as a trade envoy, with Epstein.

Since then, things have got even worse for the former Royal. The Government is reportedly looking at removing him from his position as eighth in line for the throne while police have asked any of his former protection officers to come forward with any information relating to his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein.

In a statement issued following his brother’s arrest, the King said police had “our full and wholehearted support and co-operation”.

“Let me state clearly,” he added, “the law must take its course.”

It was quickly made known by palace sources that the Prince and Princess of Wales – William and Kate – support the King’s position. Andrew is now an outsider, no longer protected by royal status.

There has been much speculation that the scandal caused by Mountbatten-Windsor poses an existential threat to the Royal Family.

Cut could this boor of a man really bring down the monarchy?

Recent polling by YouGov suggests that’s highly unlikely.

The Prince and Princess of Wales are, by some distance the most popular royals, with 77 per cent having a positive opinion of them. Britons are also twice as likely (60 per cent vs 31 per cent) to have a positive rather than a negative opinion of King Charles.

Despite the crisis engulfing the House of Windsor, 64 per cent of those polled by YouGov last month believe the UK should continue to have a Royal Family.

But this relatively high level of support for the monarchy may be fragile. Polling carried out by Ipsos earlier this month found that less than a third of the British public believes the Royal Family has dealt with Mountbatten-Windsor well since allegations about his behaviour first came to light. Only 28 per cent of those surveyed feel that actions taken by the King have been adequate.

Transparency – so frequently promised by the Royals – remains a problem, with just two thirds of the public believing the family have become more open since Charles ascended to the throne in September 2022.

While the King’s position on his younger brother is now clear and unequivocal, it is impossible to ignore the uncomfortable truth that the monarch has been reactive rather than proactive.

Mountbatten-Windsor, even as he was being publicly humiliated with the removal of his titles and privileges, was protected by his family, given a place to live and an allowance by the King.

Three years passed between Mountbatten-Windsor’s pay-off of Virginia Giuffre and the stripping of his royal title. The sense that the King has acted with the family firm rather than the victims of Epstein and his associates in mind is overwhelming.

But, then, this has also been the case with politicians trapped in Jeffrey Epstein’s web. Peter Mandelson, now facing his own police investigation over claims he passed confidential government information to the deceased predator, was appointed ambassador to the USA in 2024 by Sir Keir Starmer despite the Prime Minister knowing of his friendship with Epstein.

When Mandelson was finally sacked, last September, Starmer was solving an unnecessary problem of his own creation.

Like Peter Mandelson, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was protected by his status up until the point at which he was not.

Ironically, the power that once cushioned both men from consequences now makes them vulnerable.

The public demands a reckoning over the Jeffrey Epstein scandal.

The powerful men involved must be left in no doubt that the law applies to them, just as it does to the rest of us.