A forthcoming publication makes a startling allegation regarding a weekend gathering at a royal estate over two decades ago. The book claims that after a visit from the now-disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein and his associate Ghislaine Maxwell, staff at the Sandringham estate discovered evidence of an illicit party.
The event, said to have been a birthday celebration for Maxwell in the year 2000, reportedly left behind condoms, bottles of personal lubricant, and empty vials of amyl nitrite, a recreational drug often referred to as “poppers,” in guest bathrooms. These findings starkly contradict public characterizations of the weekend as a routine social visit.
At the time, Epstein and Maxwell were frequent guests within the social orbit of the Queen’s second son, Andrew, gaining access not only to Sandringham but also to the Balmoral estate in Scotland. Their integration into such privileged circles has been a persistent source of controversy, particularly following Epstein’s 2019 death while awaiting trial on s– trafficking charges and Maxwell’s subsequent conviction and 20-year prison sentence for related crimes.
The book also delves into the familial fallout from the ongoing scandals. It suggests the late monarch maintained a steadfast, maternal loyalty to her son despite the allegations, a sentiment reportedly expressed in private. However, the current sovereign, King Charles III, is described as being deeply angered and frustrated by his brother’s actions and the resulting damage to the institution.
In an effort to manage the situation, Andrew has reportedly been relocated to reside at the more secluded Sandringham estate. While the move is seen as a form of exile from the public eye, the estate remains a luxurious, private residence. Observers note this arrangement allows the King greater discretion over his brother’s visibility, even as their relationship is said to be severely strained.
The book portrays the brothers as fundamentally different personalities, with Andrew historically perceived as a favored and indulged figure, in contrast to the more serious and dutiful character of the elder sibling. These personal dynamics, the author suggests, have been further complicated by the enduring shadow of the Epstein association.
