King Charles’s current Lord Steward was head of royal protection in 2011

Over the weekend, about a full day after Prince Andrew volunteered to relinquish his royal titles and honors, the Mail reported that Andrew asked one of his royal protection officers to dig up information about Virginia Giuffre. Andrew had gotten ahold of Virginia’s date of birth and Social Security number, and he passed the information along to the police officers guarding him. He bragged about all of this to Ed Perkins, who was then Queen Elizabeth II’s deputy press secretary. No one knows if Andrew’s RPOs actually looked into Virginia. But what is known is that many people around Andrew AND QEII knew that Andrew was trying to dig up dirt on her. Well, at the same time Andrew was ordering his RPOs to do this, the head of royal protection was a man by the name of Peter Loughborough. He’s currently known as Lord Peter Rosslyn, Lord Steward and Personal Secretary to King Charles and Queen Camilla.

A current senior member of the King’s household was the head of royal protection at the time Prince Andrew allegedly asked one of his police officers to dig up dirt on Virginia Guiffre, Sky News has discovered. Lord Peter Rosslyn, who is now Lord Steward and Personal Secretary to the King and Queen, was head of Royalty and Diplomatic Protection between 2003-2014.

It is not clear if Lord Rosslyn – known at the time as Commander Peter Loughborough – was made aware of Prince Andrew’s request. However, it reportedly happened in 2011 when it’s claimed Andrew wrote in an email that he passed the date of birth and confidential social security number of his accuser, Virginia Guiffre, to one of his close protection team to find out information about her.

At the weekend, the Metropolitan Police said it was “actively looking into the claims made”. Sky News approached Lord Rosslyn for comment, which was passed to Buckingham Palace.

A palace spokesperson said: “As you may or may not be aware, Lord Rosslyn works for The Royal Household and thus this issue has been referred to me. However, since this matter relates to his time in service with the Metropolitan Police, they would be the appropriate body to approach with media enquiries of this nature.”

The Met Police had nothing further to add. Police sources have told Sky News the officer (CPO) involved would have been expected to escalate this request from Andrew to his superiors.

While there may have been other members of senior staff between the CPO and Lord Rosslyn, the request should have been considered serious enough to be referred to the top of the Royalty and Diplomatic Service. Those with knowledge of the royal household tell us Lord Rosslyn is one of the King’s closest and most trusted members of staff. His role as Lord Steward involves managing all aspects of the King’s personal affairs, and the non-state business of the monarch.

[From Sky News]

While I’m not expecting to hear much more about this investigatory avenue, I think it’s interesting that royal reporters are at least doing some bare-bones straight reporting. They’re looking into who was part of the royal protection unit in 2011, who might have received Andrew’s information about Virginia, and whether the officers did anything about it, including “inform their commanding officers that a prince wanted them to dig up dirt on an American trafficking survivor.” If we had an FBI worth a damn, I’m sure they’d like to know if British police were actively investigating and dirt-digging on an American citizen/survivor as well. It would certainly be interesting to know if the king’s current Lord Steward has any recollection of the king’s brother ordering RPOs to look into Virginia. It would certainly be fascinating to see Ravec deal with this quandary too, especially since members of the royal households sit on the committee which assigns royal protection. It’s not so much a Venn diagram as much as it is just one big circle.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

16 Responses to “King Charles’s current Lord Steward was head of royal protection in 2011”

  1. Vs says:

    When I read all of this, I wonder why the hell Harry wants to ever talk to his sperm donor? There has to be something beyond just reconciling with that pos he has as a father!

    • ABritGuest says:

      Because the governments comments around Andrew where they say they will defer to the palace around Andrew’s title, makes clear that Harry may not get an arrangement around security to be able to visit uk safely with his family if Charles doesn’t sign off on it. Obviously William won’t when he’s king so there’s probably urgency on Harry’s part to get something in place with his father. Most royal commentators have said it’s an issue Charles has to solve.

      The governments comments re Andrew really contradict the idea that security is just managed by the government without input from the palace (I mean why else does the palace have members on RAVEC?) . It’s obvious when it comes to members of the BRF, the government defers to palace wishes.

      The palace has long known about Andrew’s alleged crimes. They’ve been denying Virginia’s claims since 2015 & been covering for him since then. His royal protection officers could have easily verified his version of events from the newsnight interview but there’s a reason why that wasn’t even asked for by the press & why the met police refused to investigate. Power supporting & shielding power

    • North of Boston says:

      IDK

      Parent-child relationships are complex, and even with a POS parent an adult child can have complicated, mixed feelings about the relationship and want it to be better. Yes, even when they see their POS parent clearly and know intellectually that the possibility for change, improvement is little to none.

      Sometimes the best thing for them is to go 100% no contact, other times minimal contact with a door slightly cracked is better for the AC’s needs, peace of mind. Having one or both parties in the public eye and other family members in the mix complicates things further.

      In my case, though the public eye bit was only local ie dad being a sports hero/fixture in the city and state, it took me years and lots of grieving what the relationship could, should have been to move from the cracked door position to the 100% no contact position. Even though I was clear eyed the whole time that he wasn’t ever going to change.

  2. Maxine Branch says:

    It is such a tangled web between the royal households, royal protection officers and the Met police. That institution operates like the mafia. There can be no hope for any of them to do what is fair and just. The house of cards the firm needs to collapse under its own weight of corruption.

    • Smart&Messy says:

      I agree completely. I wonder where the avalanche is going to stop this time. I don’t believe it will take all of them down. I only hope that the MPs asking for the title removal will also demand Andrew being prosecuted at least.

  3. Dee(2) says:

    This is what kills me about the reporters on the Royal beat though, and why so many of them are not actually journalists. Because this is the type of stuff that could make you as a journalist. These are the type of stories you could break that allows you to sit on panels, be invited to speak at forums, and basically let you write well received popular books for the rest of your life ( cough, Bob Woodward).

    I know that a lot of it is about access, but DC reporters also protect their access and still will do investigative reporting. They sit on stories like this, the stories yesterday about the no rent/peppercorn of rent for years. Instead they write about snubs, cheeky gestures, body language, and ridiculous criticism about smiling, clothes, how much lunch and dinners cost. Then they wonder why their chosen media is dying.

    I don’t expect anything to come for this, because they have good reason to ensure that nothing comes from it. It just goes to show even further how much the fish rots from the head. All of these people doing these shady things just bounce between the Met Police, the Tory government, and the Royal households.

    • sevenblue says:

      Their media is mostly right-wing. The reporters can’t report anything their bosses don’t want them to. A few of them already said, they weren’t allowed to write negative stories on W&K, only on H&M. Their stories simply won’t get printed. Any reporter going against it are bullied out of the job. Look what they did to Omid, because he dared not to attack H&M. I watched a few interviews he did in british shows, they were interrogating him like he was an enemy. If you go against the mainstream narrative, they won’t let you work in that industry.

  4. Shoegirl77 says:

    Off topic but isn’t it interesting that they understand a change of surname when it comes to lords and sycophants?

  5. Jais says:

    So basically this guy likely knew about Andrew’s request and he works for Charles. So Charles probably knew. And they refer reporters to the Met rather than answer even though they all know the answer. And the Met has no comment. Convenient. Entitled. They’re all protecting each other. Obviously the royals are above the law and above paying rent. Unless you’re Harry and Meghan.

    • Brassy Rebel says:

      From the royal household to the Met and back again. It’s a vicious circle of feigned ignorance. Everyone is still protecting Andrew the creep in case anyone was wondering.

      • Hypocrisy says:

        It is a viscous circle but it is also a very visible one and it will tarnish the Monarchy the most imo. I hope the pressure to do something with these left overs continues. I personally say have parliament cut their funding completely forget the stupid titles take the money away let them earn a living, find private property to live in and pay for their own security that is what’s needed. At this point the leftover royals are a national embarrassment that the subjects are penalized over half a billion pounds a year to fund.

      • SURE says:

        Why aren’t WanK subjected to the two child benefits cap like other welfare recipients?

  6. SuOutdoors says:

    You know what the now Lord Steward will say, don’t you? Recollections may vary…

  7. Harla says:

    Imho, Andrew is not an outlier or anomaly in the royal family, he is indicative of the widespread corruption and grifting of the entire family and institution. He was just a bit too greedy and stupid to be careful of who he associated with, other than that he’s no different from the rest of them.

  8. Elly says:

    Charles and the Met must have known all about Andrew and his sex crimes. Charles is the head of the church! What appalling hypocrisy. Seeing photos of Charles and Andrew just disgusts me. William too but for different reasons.

Commenting Guidelines

Read the article before commenting.

We aim to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy and our privacy policy

Do not engage with trolls, contrarians or rude people. Comment "troll" and we will see it.

Please e-mail the moderators at cbcomments at gmail.com to delete a comment if it's offensive or spam. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please email us to get it retrieved.

You can sign up to get an image next to your name at Gravatar.com Thank you!

Leave a comment after you have read the article

Save my name and email in this browser for the next time I comment