Andrew must do his duty and testify about Epstein in the US, leading congressman says

Congressman Jamie Raskin, the leading Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, has suggested the disgraced royal should testify about his knowledge of Jeffrey Epstein as a service.

Representative Raskin told the Mirror: "I would imagine that anyone as deeply involved as Prince Andrew clearly was would have a story to tell. I would think he would see that as some form of service, after being so disgraced by his involvement."

The latest call for Andrew to cooperate came after it was revealed that he was being investigated for corruption offences by the police.

Read More: Andrew 'facing corruption investigation' as police widen net in probe into disgraced royal

Read More: Sarah Ferguson 'plotted to clone Queen's corgis' and 'cash-in on canines' for reality TV series

Having originally been arrested on his 66th birthday on suspicion of misconduct in a public office, the former prince is now being probed for offences under laws which are more than a century old.

The new scope to the investigation comes as several British police forces are also looking into sex trafficking allegations centring on Andrew and the notorious paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

Andrew has always vehemently denied wrongdoing related to Epstein - but has not responded to allegations of misconduct in a public office or corruption.

The investigation's broader scope will mean that the probe will likely take over a year to complete.

The authorities are also reliant on the US Department of Justice releasing the full unredacted Epstein Files to them.

The legal route of prosecuting Andrew for the alleged misconduct offences has been scuppered by investigators needing to prove that the former prince committed the offence while undertaking his specific role as UK special trade envoy.

Instead, detectives are now considering using archaic anti-corruption laws to prosecute Andrew.

The Times reports that while the Bribery Act 2010 was considered as a legal route to prosecution, this idea was shelved because the act is not retrospective.

Police are now looking into whether the Prevention of Corruption Act of 1906 would apply to Andrew.

The century-old legislation makes it a crime for any employee to accept favours or bribes in exchange for preferential treatment.

The laws have not been disapplied to public officials.

Rep Raskin has followed Congressman Suhas Subramanyam in calling for Andrew to tell American lawmakers what he knows.

Speaking to Charlotte Lynch on LBC News, the politician said: "We are going after the financial records of Jeffrey Epstein and we have also gotten documents from his estate as well.

"If they paint a picture that involves Andrew committing crimes, then we will have the information we need.

"I think for anyone, not just Andrew, who is complicit in these crimes, they can't hide from us.

"If what he's saying to the press in past interviews is that he 'did nothing wrong', then perhaps he should be saying it to the people investigating these crimes too."

"Part of the problem with this entire saga is that Jeffrey Epstein was able to evade real justice because he was rich and because he was powerful.

"What we've said all along from the very beginning of this investigation is that regardless of how rich or powerful a person is, we want to make sure that they are held accountable for the crimes they committed, especially if they are heinous crimes against underage girls."

Democratic members of the House Oversight Committee summoned the former Prince on Thursday amid suggestions Andrew could provide crucial information about Epstein and his co-conspirators.

The committee said it would now investigate the late financier's "sex trafficking operations" and "financial records such as 'massage for Andrew', raise serious questions."

Signed by 16 Democratic members of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the letter read: "The committee is seeking to uncover the identities of Mr Epstein's co-conspirators and enablers, and to understand the full extent of his criminal operations.

When asked by Charlotte if he was confident Andrew would accept the request, Mr Subramanyam said: "You just said that he's denied any wrongdoing in all of the allegations, so why wouldn't he come to our committee and say that?

"Why wouldn't he tell us what he does know? Because the evidence clearly shows that he was very close with Jeffrey Epstein.

"And then we have a victim, Virginia Giuffri, who actually pointed to him as someone who had sexually assaulted her.

"If what he's saying to the press in past interviews is that he did nothing wrong, then perhaps he should be saying it to the people investigating these crimes too."

Mr Subramanyam confirmed he not yet heard anything from Andrew's side.