The Duke of York told Jeffrey Epstein they would “play some more soon!” two months after he claimed he cut contact with the convicted paedophile.
The emails were disclosed in a filing by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), who are defending an appeal by former Barclays boss, Jes Staley.
Staley is challenging a decision to ban him from the industry for misleading regulators on his ties to Epstein, one of the most severe measures the FCA can impose.
The court documents show an exchange of messages between Epstein and “a member of the British Royal Family” – believed to be Prince Andrew. It suggests the duke and Epstein – who killed himself in jail in 2019 – were in contact for longer than he has previously admitted.
In 2008, Epstein pleaded guilty to soliciting prostitution from a minor and was sentenced to 18 months in prison. After his release, Epstein and the duke were photographed walking together in New York’s Central Park, in December 2010.
The prince has claimed this was the last contact he had with Epstein.
He has previously strenuously denied all allegations against him.
Newsnight interview ‘ill-advised’ – aide
Other court documents released on Friday revealed one of the prince’s senior aides admitted in a letter to an alleged Chinese spy that the duke’s Newsnight interview with Emily Maitlis was “hugely ill-advised and unsuccessful”.
Dominic Hampshire wrote to Yang Tengbo on Buckingham Palace notepaper in March 2020.
In the letter, he said they “have dealt with the aftermath of a hugely ill-advised and unsuccessful television interview”.
Mr Hampshire praised Mr Yang, writing that “in what originally seemed like a lost cause, you have somehow managed to not only salvage but maintain and then incredibly, enhance the reputation of my principal [Prince Andrew] in China.
“Under your guidance, we found a way to get the relevant people unnoticed in and out of the house in Windsor; we orchestrated a very powerful verbal message of support to China at a Chinese New Year’s dinner and between the three of us, we have written, amended and then always agreed a number of letters at the highest level possible.”
Mr Yang said in a statement on Friday the spying allegations against him are “entirely unfounded”.
The Jes Staley emails
Emails showed Epstein inviting Andrew to meet Staley on 27 February, saying: “jes staley will be in London on next tue afternoon, if you have time [sic].”
Andrew replied: “Jes is coming on 1st March or next week?”
The pair then engaged in a discussion about press articles, before the duke told Epstein they would “play some more soon”.
Sky News has contacted Prince Andrew for a comment.
The prince still making uncomfortable headlines for his family
Just when you thought Prince Andrew couldn’t fall any further, another twist emerges in his shameful association with Jeffrey Epstein.
He’d claimed the last time he had contact with the convicted paedophile was in December 2010, when the pair were infamously photographed together in Central Park.
The Duke of York insisted he thought he was being “honourable” when choosing to stay with Epstein and personally tell him they could no longer be friends.
But this email suggests the pair stayed in touch beyond this date. We don’t know for how long, but it leaves Prince Andrew once more facing difficult and damaging questions about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein.
And yet again, Andrew’s judgement is under considerable scrutiny.
Last year had ended badly for the disgraced Duke after his association with an alleged Chinese spy was exposed. He had to keep clear of the Royal Family’s traditional Christmas day gathering at Sandringham.
The Duke of York has always denied witnessing or suspecting any of Epstein’s behaviour.
But their friendship cost him his reputation.
He now leads a reclusive life in Windsor, stripped of responsibility and royal roles. Yet still making uncomfortable headlines for the rest of his family.
The body of a woman has been recovered from the River Dee close to where two missing sisters disappeared in Aberdeen.
Eliza and Henrietta Huszti, both aged 32, were last spotted on CCTV in the city’s Market Street at Victoria Bridge at about 2.12am on Tuesday 7 January.
The women were seen crossing the bridge and turning right on to a footpath next to the River Dee in the direction of Aberdeen Boat Club.
On Friday, it was confirmed a woman’s body had been recovered from the water east of the club.
Although the body is yet to be formally identified, Police Scotland said the family of Henrietta had been informed.
The force added there were “no apparent suspicious circumstances”, with searches ongoing for Eliza.
The Police Scotland dive and marine unit, along with other specialist officers, are carrying out further searches of the river and the riverbanks between Queen Elizabeth Bridge and Victoria Bridge.
Superintendent David Howieson said: “Our thoughts are with the Huszti family today. We are keeping them fully updated following this recovery and the further search activity which is ongoing.
“Our priority remains finding both of the sisters and search has focused on the River Dee and will do so in the coming days.
“We are carrying out further searches of the river in the area where the body was recovered this morning.
“The river in this area is tidal and conditions are challenging but we will continue to search and make every effort to locate both of the sisters.
“We have sought guidance from a number of experts and this will continue to inform our search activity.”
Investigating officers previously said there had been “no evidence” of the women leaving the immediate area and there had been nothing to suggest “suspicious circumstances or criminality”.
The police revealed that the sisters – who are part of a set of triplets and originally from Hungary – visited the bridge where they were last seen about 12 hours before they disappeared.
They also sent a text message to their landlady on the morning they vanished, indicating they would not be returning to the flat.
In 2015, Jeanne was one of six men convicted of conspiring to supply cocaine, heroin and cannabis, and sentenced to 30 months in prison.
Police said a gang of six men plotted to bring hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of drugs into Gloucestershire from London, Cardiff and Birmingham, the BBC reported at the time.
Jeanne’s stint in prison on drug offences was not his last run-in with the law, and he has also faced convictions including dangerous driving and threatening behaviour, Wales Online reported.
Police did not specify why he has now been recalled to prison.
The judges who oversaw family court proceedings involving Sara Sharif in the years before her death have been named following a Court of Appeal ruling.
Judges Alison Raeside, Peter Nathan and Sally Williams were all involved in proceedings related to the 10-year-old between 2013 and 2019.
Sara was placed in the home of her father, Urfan Sharif, and her stepmother, Beinash Batool, following the last of three sets of proceedings.
Judge Raeside, who remains an active judge, dealt with the majority of the hearings related to Sara.
Judges Nathan and Williams – who have both since retired – were involved to a lesser degree.
Several media organisations appealed against a restriction on naming judges.
The first set of proceedings heard Surrey County Council had a “number of concerns in relation to the care that (Olga Sharif) and Mr Sharif provide Z and U (Sara’s siblings) and are likely to provide to Sara”.
Judge Raeside approved the children being placed under supervision orders, meaning they stayed in their parents’ care.
That decision was supported by the council, the children’s guardian and Sara’s parents.
In November 2014, after child Z was found with an arm injury consistent with an adult bite mark, Sara and her two siblings were taken into police protection.
Olga Sharif, Sara’s mother, later accepted a caution after being charged with assault occasioning actual bodily harm.
The following day, Judge Raeside extended the same order for a week, with Judge Williams making an interim care order for Sara and one of her siblings as proceedings continued in 2015.
That was Judge Williams’s only involvement in the case.
At the end of the same set of proceedings, a hearing before Judge Raeside was told the local authority was “extremely concerned” that Sara and child U were “likely to suffer significant emotional and physical harm in their parents’ care”, as both alleged the other was violent.
Despite those allegations, however, the council still concluded “the risk can be managed” if Sara was returned to her mother’s care, with supervised contact with her father.
That decision was supported by the children’s guardian, while Judge Raeside approved the plan in May 2015.
Sara was moved to the property where she was later murdered in 2019.
She had made accusations of physical abuse by her mother, which were never proven.
In a report for a final hearing in October 2019, a social worker told the court they assessed that “Urfan and Beinash are able to meet Sara and (U’s) needs for safety, stability, emotional warmth and guidance”, adding that Urfan Sharif “appears to have the children’s welfare at heart”.
That move was also supported by the children’s guardian and Sara’s parents and was approved by Judge Raeside.
The press was previously barred from reporting the names of the judges and other professionals involved in the case.
The High Court ruled they had “acted within the parameters that law and social work practice set for them”.
However, the Court of Appeal ruled last week that the media could name the judges in the interests of open justice.
It had heard that the judges wanted to “convey their profound shock, horror and sadness about what happened to Sara Sharif”.
Surrey County Council was involved with the Sharif family for several years before Sara’s death.
Concerns about Sara’s care were raised within a week of her birth in 2013, while her parents were known to social services as early as 2010.
Surrey County Council repeatedly raised “significant concerns” that the child was likely to suffer physical and emotional abuse at the hands of her parents.
While there were the three sets of family court proceedings mentioned above, allegations that Urfan Sharif was physically abusing Sara and her siblings were never tested in court.