A DEFAMATION lawyer has told a documentary he urged Prince Andrew not to speak to the BBC before his disastrous Newsnight interview over his links to paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein.
Paul Tweed said he warned the royal’s then-chief of staff Amanda Thirsk the interview was a “bad idea” two days prior to Andrew sitting down with Emily Maitlis in November 2019.
Tweed said Thirsk then “abruptly” put the phone down on him.
The lawyer told Channel 4’s "Andrew – The Problem Prince" he also wanted to know why nobody put a stop to the interview.
READ MORE: Prince Andrew 'euphoric' after disastrous BBC interview as he 'thought it went well'
“At the back of my mind I thought: ‘Somebody’s going to stop this’… Well, what do you do?” he said.
Tweed said his appearance on the two-part documentary was “with the knowledge and agreement of the family”.
He told Channel 4 Andrew’s association with Epstein was “totally ill-judged, totally inappropriate” – adding that he was “very naive”.
Commenting on the exchange with Thirsk, Tweed said: “Amanda called me… She just said: ‘I’m just letting you know the duke has decided to do the Newsnight interview.’
“I said: ‘Is he mad? No way, no, no, no. That’s a bad idea. You should not do it.’
“Amanda just said: ‘Look, Paul, I gotta go. I’ll call you later.’
“The phone was put down abruptly and that was it.”
READ MORE: Inverness locals on why they want Prince Andrew stripped of ‘earl’ title
Tweed said the impact of the interview on Andrew and his family was “horrendous”, but believed there was a way back for him in public life.
“What is the mechanism to cope with that?” he told the documentary.
“I don’t know. It’s an horrendously difficult position, horrendous. The actual fact of it, the impact of it.
“I have never ceased to be surprised, when you think it’s all over, it’s a hopeless situation – something’s happened.
“And you can turn it round because facts come out or there are outside developments that sometimes can have a bearing. I would never say never in any case.”
You can sign the petition to see Andrew stripped of his Earl of Inverness title here.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here