Years before Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor became engulfed in the Epstein scandal, the former prince made a rather unsuccessful attempt to deviate from his royal duties.
The former duke of York was said to be ‘very serious about his photography’, revealed renowned snapper Gene Nocon 2011. He went on to work as Andrew’s technical assistant in a bid to nurture his ‘instinctive aesthetic eye’.
After being encouraged by ‘one or two’ individuals to share his passion with the world, Andrew made the unprecedented move to release a photography book in 1995.
Photographs: Andrew, Prince Duke of York, was described in the foreword as ‘a small slice of autobiography recording memories and impressions through my eyes and the lens of a camera’.
‘This is a book by me, tyro-photographer, rather than by me, member of the Royal Family,’ wrote the former prince.
Featuring members of the Royal Family and actress Finola Hughes, the largely black-and-white collection offered a rare glimpse into the life of a senior working royal.
Yet following its release, the book received an incredibly poor reception across the globe and was even branded ‘sad and pathetic’ by the Los Angeles Times.
The tranche of public criticism was heavily directed towards two particular images of a young Prince Harry.
In one shot, the infant was seen clutching a bucket and spade while on a royal tour aboard the Royal Yacht Britannia. A second, also taken on the ship, captured Harry sat on a swing while facing away from the camera.
Tim Hughes, then associate editor of the British Journal of Photography, described the images of Harry by his uncle Andrew as ‘technically very poor’.
‘The printers have had the unenviable task of trying to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear,’ he added.
Meanwhile, Professor John Hedgecoe, head of photography at the London School of Art, described Harry’s eyes as ‘black slits’ and added that his face ‘is just like a mask’.
‘It is an absolute mess. If it were possible to take the child out of the swing altogether it would have been better, the rope cuts across his face. I don’t like this one at all,’ said Kodak’s head of customer relations.
Even Andrew himself struggled to defend himself against the tranche of criticism relating to the two photographs and later admitted during a sit-down ITN interview that ‘technically they weren’t particularly brilliant’.
However, the former prince went on to explain that the image of Harry on the swing had been particularly challenging to take as his father, Prince Charles, was pushing him out of short.
Speaking from Buckingham Palace, the former prince added that he firmly believed the ‘point’ of the images of Harry ‘had been missed’ by the public.
‘A small baby, what was everybody expecting?,’ he questioned.
‘Were they expecting a Snowdon like portrait? I’m not that brilliant.’
In the year before Andrew’s book release, the impassioned former prince hit the headlines for breaking a brand-new £1,800 Hasselblad camera, a personal gift to Queen Elizabeth II, during a photography session at Buckingham Palace.
Yet Andrew remained undeterred by suggestions that he should abandon his passion for photography altogether despite the book’s poor reception.
Instead, during the sit-down interview, he reflected on the ‘conflict between myself as a photographer and myself as a member of the Royal Family’.
When asked whether the book was only possible because of his royal status, the former prince responded: ‘I think that the publisher and the agent and the people who were around me at the time took that into consideration right from the word go.
‘Their view was that the photographs stood up on their own.’
Later on in the interview, Andrew went on to address the prospect of entering into a full-time career as a photographer while continuing his royal duties.
‘I don’t see myself necessarily doing it as a full time job. I don’t think I could find the time,’ he said.
‘Who knows? Maybe, in 20 years time?’ he continued, before breaking out into a gleeful smile.
Yet Andrew’s dreams of making it big in the photography world would fall rather short.
Instead, it was to be a damning photograph of the former prince that would ultimately lead to his sensational public downfall.
The infamous image of Andrew with his arm around then 17-year-old Virginia Giuffre in front of Ghislaine Maxwell at her home in 2001 would ultimately lead to Andrew being stripped of his royal titles and banished from the Firm.
It provided evidence to the FBI of Ms Giuffre’s life as a ‘sex slave’ to Epstein and Maxwell, and prompted the criminal investigations that led to the paedophile financier’s suicide in prison and Maxwell’s 20-year sentence for sex trafficking.
Andrew has long disputed the authenticity of the image of him in intimate contact with Ms Giuffre.
And his suggestion that the damning 2001 image may have been faked was central to the defence he tried to put over in his disastrous Newsnight interview.
But in February an email came to light from disgraced socialite Maxwell in which she said she was ‘stating for the record as fact’ that not only had she introduced the former Prince to Giuffre but that the image was taken at her London home that same night.
Her admission, unearthed by the Daily Mail, will come as a major blow to Andrew, leaving his controversial Pizza Express ‘alibi’ in tatters.
It was made in a series of 2015 emails released in a tranche of more than three million Jeffrey Epstein-related documents by the US Department of Justice last week.
Drafting a statement intended to hit back at reports of mounting allegations in the press, disgraced socialite Maxwell had sent Epstein an email asking for his approval.
‘In 2001 I was in London when (redacted) met a number of friends of mine including Prince Andrew,’ she wrote.
‘A photograph was taken as I imagine she wanted to show it to friends and family.
‘I never asked (redacted) to give him a massage,’ her draft statement added.
In the body of the email, she said: ‘I am stating for the record as fact’ before adding: ‘Prince Andrew came to my house to visit me – (redacted) was in the house and they did meet.’
However, she claimed she had ‘no knowledge’ of Ms Giuffre ‘having sexual activity’ with Andrew or any other ‘famous people’.
Epstein replied saying her statement left ‘too many unanswered questions’ adding: ‘Her and andrew?…whats the deal here? why is she there.’
Maxwell insisted that she need the statement ‘asap’ and that she was advised to say ‘I was not aware of massage w/andrew in my house’.
‘These thing they have to stay, along w/meeting virginia and rebutting those allegations. I needs it asap.’
Despite claiming they never met, the former duke paid Ms Giuffre millions to settle a civil sexual assault claim in 2022.
Maxwell, too, dismissed the image as fake in an interview from prison, while those close to Andrew insisted his fingers were ‘chubbier’ and he was taller than depicted.
The convicted associate of paedophile Epstein also claimed in interviews with the US Department of Justice that she had no recollection of the pair meeting in her home.
The picture was unearthed by The Mail on Sunday as Ms Giuffre insisted, she slept with Andrew in London – a claim the disgraced ex-prince has vehemently denied.
Ms Giuffre said convicted paedophile Epstein took the photograph on a disposable camera before the group went to dinner and then Tramp nightclub.
She claimed was forced to have sex with Andrew that night at Maxwell’s house as well as at Epstein’s home in Manhattan and on his private Caribbean island of Little St James.
The latest revelations added fresh humiliation on Andrew’s embarrassing ties to Epstein – links that saw him stripped of his titles and subsequently forced to leave his lavish Royal Lodge home in favour of his new, more modest, Sandringham abode.
He has been keeping a low profile in Norfolk since his arrest on suspicion of misconduct in public office on his 66th birthday on February 19.
However, the former prince stands accused of sharing confidential information with the paedophile during his time as a trade ambassador for the UK Government.
