Royal author Robert Jobson said: “Certainly, we have to look at the evidence. And in this case it all depends on his prosecutor as a credible witness; if she’s not, his claims of innocence may not ring that hollow.
“After all, he was never found guilty. He wanted to fight in court, but given that the anniversary of the deceased queen would be ruined if he did, he was ordered not to be the powers.
“Andrew settled outside the court has always denied misconduct. The lucrative arrangement meant that the claims of Mrs. Giuffre, those who destroyed his public life, were never tested in cross -hearing.
“For Prince Andrew this can be the first moment in the years in which public opinion starts to shift. Not to redemption – the Epstein stain is indelible – but perhaps against a reassessment.
“A possibility, no matter how faint, that he did not lie. This is not about exemption. Far from it. It is about the weight of credibility. And in the court of public opinion that counts for everything. “