Return to Transcripts main page

What We Know with Max Foster

Former Prince Andrew Released "Under Investigation" After Arrest; "Bad Things Will Happen": Trump Warns On Iran Deal; Trump: U.S. Providing $10B To Board Of Peace. Aired 3-4p ET

Aired February 19, 2026 - 15:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[15:00:33]

MAX FOSTER, CNN HOST: Breaking news, the former Prince Andrew arrested by police.

This is WHAT WE KNOW.

We are live at Buckingham Palace tonight on a truly historic day for the United Kingdom. The king's brother, former Prince Andrew Mountbatten-

Windsor, has been seen leaving a police station after being arrested on suspicion of misconduct in office. He was there all day.

We'll bring you all the reaction and the analysis as the fallout from the Epstein files reaches the heart of the British royal family and

establishment.

Just a short while ago, we got confirmation that Andrew has left that police station. These are pictures of him leaving, they're very stark.

Police conducted searches of both Andrew's current homes and his former residence in Windsor. Well, his current home in his former residence in

Windsor and the prince is being investigated on suspicion of misconduct in public office, though police haven't said what specifically led to this

arrest.

Mountbatten-Windsor spent a decade as a U.K. trade envoy, and emails recently released from the Epstein files appear to show that he sent

confidential trade information to Jeffrey Epstein. Now, it is worth repeating the headline, the brother of the king has been arrested, and it

all stems from his connection to perhaps the most notorious sex trafficker of all time now.

Here's a rundown of how this day played out.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

FOSTER (voice-over): Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor arrested after new revelations in the Epstein files in an extraordinary development without

precedent in modern history.

British police took the former prince into custody on Thursday morning on suspicion of misconduct in public office. Having said earlier this month

that they were assessing claims that Andrew had shared sensitive information with the late Jeffrey Epstein while serving as the U.K.'s trade

envoy.

They've not said exactly what led them to this arrest, which comes after the latest tranche of emails released by the U.S. Justice Department,

appeared to show that Andrew was sending confidential material to Epstein.

ANDREW MOUNTBATTEN-WINDSOR, MEMBER OF THE MOUNTBATTEN-WINDSOR FAMILY: Greta, pleasure. You know our ambassador.

FOSTER (voice-over): Sparking renewed scrutiny of the already disgraced royal. He's previously denied any wrongdoing and hasn't commented publicly

on these more recent misconduct allegations.

REPORTER: Your majesty, how are you feeling after your brother's arrest?

FOSTER (voice-over): King Charles didn't answer reporter's questions about his brother's arrest, but said in a statement that he learned with the

deepest concern of the news and reiterated his wholehearted support and cooperation with the authorities.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Good choice. That's good choice.

MOUNTBATTEN-WINDSOR: Under (INAUDIBLE)

FOSTER (voice-over): Andrew became trade envoy in 2001. That position saw him travel the world, carrying a duty of confidentiality. He stepped down a

decade later after coming under fire over his association with Epstein.

Questions over his friendship have haunted him ever since. That's in part because of Epstein's conviction in 2008, when the financier pleaded guilty

to state prostitution charges involving an underage minor and served time in jail.

And yet, the senior royal stayed in contact with Epstein, even after claiming in a BBC interview to have cut ties with the convicted pedophile

in late 2010 during a trip to New York.

MOUNTBATTEN-WINDSOR: Now, I went there with the sole purpose of saying to him that because he had been convicted, it was inappropriate for us to be

seen together.

FOSTER (voice-over): Emails released since then called that timeline into question. And Andrew's been dogged by a year's long crescendo of Epstein-

related scandals and allegations.

Late last year, the 66-year-old was stripped of all his royal titles and kicked out of his residence and essentially vanished from the monarchy.

The same police force that arrested Andrew on Thursday on suspicion of misconduct in public office is also looking to allegations that the woman

was trafficked to the U.K. by Jeffrey Epstein to have a sexual encounter with Andrew. That investigation is ongoing.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

FOSTER: Let's get more perspective on all this from Bidisha Mamata. She's a British TV presenter, a royal watcher, a friend of the program.

I just want to get, Bidisha, your reaction when you heard this news this morning.

BIDISHA MAMATA, BROADCASTER AND ROYAL WATCHER: My reaction was complete and utter total stupefaction.

[15:05:01]

What a staggering day. All of this has been brewing not just for a little while, but for decades. But I never thought in a million years that I'd see

Thames Valley Police, plain clothes police officers, unmarked police cars zooming up to these beautiful houses and pulling out a man whom they simply

referred to as a man in his 60s. Nor did I think over these past few days that the king himself would release a statement referring to his own

brother by his formal name, and making it very clear that the rest of the royal family stand alongside the police and the legal process, victims,

witnesses, survivors. They are making it so intensely obvious where they stand and whom they're distancing themselves from.

FOSTER: I spoke to someone close to the king today, pointing out how the king is getting ahead of this in a way that the previous administration,

let's call it that, his mother's administration didn't.

When he issued that statement today, it was in his own word, which is going on record. He did it very quickly, considering how glacially the palace

moves.

Do you think he's doing enough to separate him from Andrew?

MAMATA: He's done enough today. And I think that todays statement was very crisp, very clear, very, very cold and obvious. But because all of the

trouble around Andrew has been going on for so very long as you so clearly outlined, really, we're decades into Andrew having been a problem for the

royal family. Some of those appointments to envoy roles and diplomatic and soft culture roles are really to soak up a sense that there was always in

the -- in the royal family of his lightness of character, of his hedonism of the requirement that he should be put to do his duty.

And we are seeing right now whether he did that duty or not, legally, morally politically or anything else.

FOSTER: I just want to bring you some sound. Weve just got from air force one, Bidisha, because the president actually has broken his silence on

this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPORTER: Overseas today, former Prince Andrew arrested by the police there, related to something with Jeffrey Epstein. Do you think people in

this country, at some point, associate of Jeffrey Epstein will wind up in handcuffs, too?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, you know, I'm the expert in a way, because I've been totally exonerated. It's very nice. I

can actually speak about it very nicely.

I think it's a shame. I think it's very sad. I think it's so bad for the royal family. It's very, very sad. To me, it's a very sad thing. When I see

that, it's a very sad thing. To see it and to see what's going on with his brother, who's obviously coming to our country very soon. And he's a

fantastic man, the king. So I think it's a very sad thing.

It's really interesting because nobody used to speak about Epstein when he was alive but now they speak, but I'm the one that can talk about it

because I've been totally exonerated. I did nothing -- in fact, the opposite. He was against me. He was fighting me in the election which I

just found out from the last three million pages of documents.

Yeah, please. Yeah, please.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FOSTER: That was interesting. I think, Bidisha, also he, you know, we weren't aware that the king was heading to the United States soon, so he

let that cat out of the bag, presumably for Independence Day. But obviously, he's a big supporter of the king, isn't he? Quite stark, though,

how Americans are looking across the pond and seeing so much progress off the back of the Epstein drop here in the U.K., but very little actually in

the U.S., outside of commercial circles

MAMATA: Yes, I think that's absolutely correct. And what I take away from Trump's statement is that he is again showing where his allegiances are. He

is dropping Epstein. He's trashing Epstein, and he's saying, my ally now is the monarch. It's King Charles. And so, this goes back to King Charles's

own statement.

So, Andrew is really out. And again, Trump mentions the millions and millions of pages and citations of these Epstein files and what they're

revealing. And I do think that even in America, even though I completely agree, there has been a lag in reaction and a lag in outrage.

There is a growing desire to get beyond the level of scandal and gossip and to start talking about crimes and legality and the criminal justice

process, because we are finding out so much, it's so incriminating that people are naturally asking, hang on, what next? And maybe Andrew's arrest

is the beginning of the answer to that question. What next for these people?

FOSTER: Yeah. Bidisha, as you say, it's much bigger than Andrew, this.

Well, keep calm and carry on. It is a family motto for the royal family.

[15:10:01]

Despite the arrest of his younger brother, King Charles continued going out in public today. He went on public duties, attending an event for London

Fashion Week. The king declined to answer questions from reporters, but an earlier statement did express his deepest concern and said the law must

take its course.

We do understand the prince and princess of Wales are supportive of King Charles's statement suggesting that William was involved with it, in fact,

and William and Kate had been concerned by the continuing revelations from documents related to Jeffrey Epstein. That was their only other recent

statement on this.

And the anti-monarchy group Republic said Andrew's arrest is most likely influenced by its own pursuit of a private prosecution. Quoting the group's

CEO, we reported Andrew to the police when others were unwilling to act.

Now, before Andrew's arrest, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer was asked if the former prince should testify in relation to the Epstein files. But

this is in relation to Congress and also largely in relation to a separate set of allegations relating to sex offenses, potentially.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KEIR STARMER, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: Anybody who has any information should testify. So, whether it's Andrew or anybody else, anybody who's got

relevant information should come forward to whatever the relevant body is. In this particular case, we're talking about Epstein, but there are plenty

of other cases. It is -- anybody who's got information relating to any aspect of violence against women and girls has, in my view, a duty to come

forward, whoever they are.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FOSTER: Well, despite the sordid allegations involving Andrew, the key issue here that led to this arrest appears to be the conduct he -- of his

conduct or misconduct while serving as U.K. trade envoy.

To understand more, I'm going to bring in CNN's Richard Quest, who worked with Andrew on this.

I don't know if that's the right phraseology, Richard, but you traveled with him as an envoy.

RICHARD QUEST, CNN BUSINESS EDITOR-AT-LARGE: Yeah.

FOSTER: Take us through his role on that and the confidentiality that was expected of him.

QUEST: Well, when Andrew got the job as being trade envoy, there had been other members -- more minor members of the royal family, who'd had it in

the past. But Andrew was the most high profile, and it was controversial when it was given to him because of the whole air miles, Andy, the whole

idea of was he going to do it properly.

And to some extent from day one, he never really got ahead of himself. He would travel the world trying to sell British companies, doing deals

basically, he was U.K. PLC's representative. However, time and again there were stories that he hadn't read his brief properly, that he had ulterior

motives, that countries that he was visiting were actually designed more for his private interests than actually the work of the envoy.

Overall, though at the end of the day, he did it for however many years it was, and he finally had to leave the role because of the Epstein scandal.

And now, once again, that has come back, but in a different way.

FOSTER: Take us through this offense then, which we believe the police are investigating that he of misconduct in public office in relation to that

role. I mean, what would that mean?

QUEST: The only information we've got on that is what we know from the Epstein files. And a lot of that, of course can now no longer be discussed

because the reporting restrictions, the very severe reporting restrictions in the United Kingdom have come into play.

But we do know the central allegation is that Andrew is believed or accused of passing a certain documents, secret documents that he would have

received in his role as trade envoy and he had passed them on to Epstein. These were documents that Epstein might have been able to use in some shape

or form. There's no evidence so far that he did, but that he might have used to trade or to make money, or to do some sort of deals on the back of

it.

FOSTER: What does this mean for the monarchy? I'm asking you that, Richard, because obviously you're in Australia, which has a very strong

Republican movement, much bigger than it is here in the United Kingdom.

I mean, what's your feeling there, since we've had the Epstein files, has support for the monarchy reduced, would you say?

QUEST: No, I wouldn't say so. I think that the way in which they have managed to divorce themselves, or Charles has managed to divorce and hive

off Andrew. And let's face it, I mean you cover it.

[15:15:01]

You are the royal correspondent. Charles moved just in time before the really serious stuff, which is what we've got today of the arrest before

they've actually even got to the other serious stuff that may still come down the road.

So to the extent that Charles has moved fast, that he has quarantined Andrew off to the side, and now, we'll have to go through the whole process

of the investigation ultimately finding out whether the crown prosecution service decides there is enough evidence to charge Andrew with any of the

offenses. And we've seen it before, Max, but you'll end up with the unedifying sight of Charles prosecuting his own brother, because it is the

king against whoever.

FOSTER: Yeah, I mean, in fact, he arrested him as well today because that was done in the name of state as well.

Richard, thank you so much for joining us from Australia.

So, to clarify we are talking here about misconduct in public office offenses. The separate allegations are sexual allegations, which are not

what the police are investigating here, but the family of Virginia Giuffre, who claimed she was forced to have sex with Andrew whilst underage, have

released a statement on this arrest.

And it reads in part today, "Our broken hearts have been lifted at the news that no one is above the law, not even royalty. On behalf of our sister, we

extend our gratitude to the U.K.'s Thames Valley Police for their investigation and arrest of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor."

Andrew has long denied allegations that he sexually assaulted Giuffre, who died by suicide. In 2025, but he hasn't addressed any of these misconduct

in public office offenses. And actually, he can't address them now because he's under police investigation and he won't want to affect that

investigation.

Now, as the journalist Emily Maitlis, whose 2019 interview with the then Prince Andrew turned this story into a national -- international sensation.

She spoke earlier with CNN's Christiane Amanpour and said she was stunned by the day's developments.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

EMILY MAITLIS, HOST, THE NEWS AGENTS: This is not something we see in this country. This is not something that we are used to seeing. And we have to

remember that Andrew remains eighth in line to the throne. He still lives in a royal residence. It isn't in Windsor. It isn't royal lodge, the place

that he was moved out of. But it is on the royal estate.

And I think the questions now for the royal family, and particularly for the monarch, his brother, will be how close that relationship is made to

seem between the two of them and to the wider public.

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAN ANCHOR: So, the king, his brother, did appear in public today. Extraordinarily. He was going to

London Fashion Week we have pictures of him walking in, and he refused to answer any, any journalists' questions.

He wasn't heckled by the public, as far as we can see but he wouldn't answer questions. And he has, as I said, made that statement about

supporting the course of law.

Given the seriousness of how you describe what\s just happened, why do you think it's happened now? What is the trigger?

MAITLIS: There is no question in my mind that when King Charles removed that title from Andrew six months ago last October, when he asked him to

leave royal lodge, the king was essentially paving the way for the law to take its course. He was essentially saying, I think to the forces of

justice in this country, I don't want to tie your hands. He's my brother, but he is no longer untouchable.

I'm not saying that King Charles had any advance warning of what happened today. In fact, I think we know that he didn't. There was no tip off. There

was no communication between the police, the forces that arrested him and the monarch.

But that statement was absolutely critical. When King Charles said, let the law run its course. This has to be fair justice for all essentially. But he

also said this curious line, which was, "I have the deepest concern."

I thought that was a very strange combination of words because he didn't really explain who that concern was for. Was it for a brother that he feels

he no longer can call a brother formally? Was it for the victims of Jeffrey Epstein in whatever form or guise they are?

It remains unexplained, but I do think that that was a seminal moment, because King Charles was indicating six months ago that no one is above the

law.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FOSTER: Something repeated by the prime minister as well today.

Coming up, U.S. President Donald Trump is hinting at a new deadline for his next move on Iran, as tensions in the region rise. We'll have more on that

for you.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:23:06]

FOSTER: The former Prince Andrew has left a Norfolk police station after his arrest earlier today. That arrest is causing shockwaves across the

Atlantic, too. U.S. lawmakers had already asked the former U.K. ambassador to the U.S., Peter Mandelson, to submit to questioning about his ties to

Jeffrey Epstein, a top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, says it's also long past time for Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor to cooperate with the

panels Epstein investigation. They've been asking even longer.

Congressman Suhas Subramanyam said, "We hope today's arrest will lead to answers and show that there will be accountability, even if you hide

regardless of how rich and powerful you are."

What we don't know is, will Andrew's arrest lead to more fallout in the U.S.?

Joining me now is Congressman Suhas Subramanyam.

Really appreciate you joining us, Congressman. I know you're extremely busy at the moment.

What was your reaction to the arrest today?

REP. SUHAS SUBRAMANYAM (D-VA): I think it's a huge breakthrough. The reality is a lot of the victims and their families were very encouraged

when Andrew lost his title and now to see him be arrested, it truly shows that anyone can be held accountable, regardless of how rich and powerful

they are.

And so, this is a breakthrough. I think it's only a first step. Let's remember he's being arrested for sharing secrets, state secrets, not for

the sex trafficking he may have been involved in. And so, people would like to hear more about that and see more prosecutions related to that.

But this is certainly a step in the right direction. And I think it's unfortunate that President Trump here in the United States is getting in

the way of us doing more accountability here in the U.S.

FOSTER: Because your context is much wider than Andrew, isn't it? This is just one person in Epstein's web, and you are seeing some accountability,

the sort of accountability that the Justice Department isn't following through with in the U.S., with other people in his web.

SUBRAMANYAM: Yeah, we're seeing some accountability. Not enough in the United States. We're seeing more in the U.K. We're seeing a former

Norwegian prime minister losing his job. So, we're seeing more in Europe, but we'd like to see more in the United States.

And one other thing is seeing President Trump come out and say that, you know, this is such a shame and that he's so sorry that this is happening to

Andrew. I think it shows where this president and this administrations head is at when it comes to this entire ordeal.

They're out to protect rich and powerful people. Not here for the victims, not here for the transparency. The American public deserves. And so, we

deserve better in the United States. The American public wants to see people held accountable. They don't want to see what's happened in the past

couple months and really past couple of decades with rich and powerful people being protected over and over again.

FOSTER: What will be interesting, I'm sure, to your committee, is what comes out of these police investigations in the U.K., and it's not just the

one we're talking about today. There are multiple investigations off the back of the Epstein files.

Once they open up you know, peoples computers and they look, look back at communications, you're actually going to get a sense, aren't you, of the

other side of the conversations that Epstein was having which could massively inform what you already know because it will paint a bigger

picture of what Epstein was up to.

SUBRAMANYAM: Absolutely. You know, in the United States were still waiting on 2.5 million files that the Trump administration refuses to release and

so in the meantime, we're looking for other sources of information and certainly any investigation in the U.K., to the extent they can share

information with us or make it public, will really help us.

Another source of information we're looking at is financial documents. His relationship with the banks. Weve subpoenaed the banks all around the world

to give us that information, because we think that that tells a story about the financial crimes of Jeffrey Epstein and all the people he was working

with. And so, the totality of this, we feel really confident in our investigation. And for all the people who are hiding from us and who won't

talk to us, just know that we're going to find the information regardless.

FOSTER: The prime minister of the U.K. today said he believes that Andrew should appear before your committee. You don't have any legal authority to

compel him to do so. but are you working with the British authorities to try to find some way of compelling him? Because it seems like, you know,

strong words from the prime minister, but it's not backed by any action.

SUBRAMANYAM: Yeah, we are limited because he's a foreign national to us. And so, we cannot compel him to testify. However, he has maintained over

and over again that he is engaged in no wrongdoing or illegal activities. And so, if that's the case, we are the best avenue for him to tell his

story and to clear his name, clear his family's name. So, we urge him to continue to move forward and actually testify before a committee or at

least talk to us.

I'll fly to the U.K. myself, if that's what it takes. We'll do it on his terms. But we are the best avenue for him to tell his story. And we want

that information because we want full transparency and we want to make sure we have all the information we can to do our investigation.

FOSTER: Well, I think you've got a lot of support in the U.K. for that, frankly.

I just want to change subject briefly if I could, Congressman, on Iran. Huge amount of concern that there's about to be a war there. What do we

know?

SUBRAMANYAM: Well, we know that this president does not respect the will of congress. He does not come to congress for approvals. We may see a war

powers resolution trying to prevent him from spending resources on a war with Iran. That could happen next week. We'll see.

What I do know is he's emboldened by what happened in Venezuela. The president feels like that was such a success that he can do it anywhere in

the world. And he's sadly mistaken.

So, if I were him and his administration, I would think very carefully before picking another war. It's certainly not helpful to his Nobel Peace

Prize cause.

FOSTER: Okay. Congressman Suhas Subramanyam, appreciate you joining us as ever. Thank you so much.

SUBRAMANYAM: Thank you.

FOSTER: President Trump suggests he'll decide whether to attack Iran again within the next 10 days. During the Board of Peace meeting, sources tell

CNN that the U.S. military is prepared to strike as early as this weekend. It comes as new satellite images appear to show Iran repairing and

fortifying several of its nuclear facilities, using concrete and large amounts of soil. Amid rising tensions, President Trump also hinted that

what will happen if a deal isn't struck.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: And now is the time for Iran to join us on a path that will complete what we're doing. And if they join us, that will be great. If they

don't join us, that will be great, too, but it will be a very different path.

[15:30:05]

They cannot continue to threaten the stability of the entire region, and they must make a deal. Or if that doesn't happen, I -- maybe can

understand. If it doesn't happen, it doesn't happen. But bad things will happen, if it doesn't.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FOSTER: CNN's Kristen Holmes joins us now.

I mean, the irony is there, isn't it? Talking the board of peace about a potential war, but, you know, what are you hearing?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. And he was on Air Force One moments later on his way to Georgia. And answered several

questions on Iran, one of them being, what do you mean by bad things will happen? He wouldn't give an answer to that, but he did extend the timeline

that he had given from 10 days to 10 to 15 days for Iran to come back.

But we're told behind the scenes that President Trump hasn't made up his mind and that, in fact, not only has he not made up his mind, but he's

argued both sides. He's argued both for strikes in Iran and against strikes in Iran, depending on who it is that he is talking to, that he has told

advisers he has pulled allies on what they believe the right move is.

And one of the big questions that we've been asking the White House is, what is the reasoning behind this? What is the sell here to the American

public as to why America needs to get involved in military intervention in Iran at this moment?

And as of now, we don't have any answers from the White House or from President Trump himself. In fact, we heard from the press secretary

yesterday saying, oh, there are a lot of reasons to get involved in Iran, but then never listing any of them out. So this is something that he had

explicitly promised that he would not do, get involved in another, quote/unquote, forever war.

And a reminder that the idea of him going in and issuing one quick, brief strike in Iran seems less and less plausible by the day. We know the

military has been arranging for some kind of intervention that could take weeks. So, we're looking at a prolonged military engagement in Iran almost

regardless if, in fact, the president does decide to sign off on these strikes.

FOSTER: Okay. Kristen Holmes, appreciate it. Thank you for that update from the White House.

Now, the historic arrest of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor. Still to come, we'll look at how police handle such a high-profile arrest.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:36:07]

FOSTER: We continue to follow breaking news out of the U.K. from here at Buckingham Palace. Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, the former prince has left a

police station after his arrest earlier today, and a day's questioning. Police say he remains under investigation. Police detained the king's

younger brother on suspicion of misconduct in public office.

CNN's royal sources say that Buckingham Palace didn't know about Andrew being arrested, and the king wasn't given any sort of tip off. King Charles

did not give any comments today as he carried on his official duties. The king said he learned of the arrest with the deepest concern. In a

statement, though, he also said that the law must take its course.

So, what we want to know is how do the police handle such high-profile arrests?

Joining me now is Dal Babu. He's the former chief superintendent for London's metropolitan police. I was interested that initially this was an

inquiry by Thames Valley Police, not a formal investigation. Then we suddenly hear that they are arresting him. That would suggest a big

development. Since that inquiry began.

DAL BABU, FORMER CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT FOR LONDON METROPOLITAN POLICE: Yeah. So, there's 43 forces. We know that nine of the 43 forces have got

some investigation into Epstein and links with Andrew and other individuals. And I think as the evidence comes out of the Epstein files,

it's quite clear that Andrew was less than honest about his dealings with Epstein. So, about his relationship when he last saw him, the photograph

with Virginia Giuffre.

And I think as more and more information came out the police decided they wanted to make a make a decision to arrest. They know they could have

invited him for an interview at the local police station. But they've decided --

FOSTER: Didn't they do that? Why did they go in with several cars? You know that was a big decision.

BABU: It was a huge decision because, you know, the last time that somebody was arrested of almost 500 years ago, the royal family. So, it's a

huge decision.

FOSTER: But it was on a royal estate.

BABU: It was. And I think what they wanted to do was be able to seize the property, because once you make the arrest, you don't need a warrant.

FOSTER: Then you can look through the house.

BABU: Well, you can look through that house, but other properties as well. And we know the law allows you, once you've arrested the person, other

properties that are connected by that individual can also be served.

FOSTER: So Windsor, we know they've looked at as well.

BABU: Yeah. So, we know that they looked at other properties and they were able to do that because they had made the arrest. So, they wouldn't have

been able to --

(CROSSTALK)

FOSTER: -- other, they will be looking for the other end of the conversations that he was having with Epstein.

BABU: Yes. So, they'll be looking on devices. They'll be looking on computers, any kind of information that may be stored on stick. There may

be some hard, hard picture elements. There could be a whole range of different information.

So they'll be looking at all of that with a view to then making an assessment. In the meantime, they would have had a huge amount of

information that they wanted to put to Andrew and the police station. And I think with these crimes, they would have had a set of questions. And what

happens is when somebody is arrested and he would, he -- he would have been treated like any other prisoner.

FOSTER: Would have been put in a cell initially.

BABU: Absolutely. He would have come in. He would have gone before the custody sergeant. He or she would have then sort of searched him. They

would have then made sure that anything that untoward on him was taken off, anything that he could hurt himself, could hurt other people.

He would then be given to the police officers, and they would then -- he'd have a lawyer present. He'd be entitled to a lawyer. I should imagine he'll

have a lawyer there and then they would have put questions to him. I should imagine the lawyers would have advised him to make no comment.

FOSTER: Yes. So that's going to be interesting what he said, right?

BABU: Absolutely. So even though the caution says, you know, if you do not say anything, which you may later rely on in court, people do most of the

time when they get interviewed, they make a no comment interview.

FOSTER: Yes.

BABU: So the police will present all that evidence. Then Andrew will then -- has in this case, he's been released under investigation.

[15:40:03]

The police can detain somebody for up to 96 hours, 24 hours initially, and then --

FOSTER: Which they didn't do.

BABU: No, which is not unusual. So, I think it's. But they've got that clock. So, the clock stops and they then are released under investigation

and they basically look for -- they'll assess what he said in the interviews. They'll assess what information they've got.

This actually may prompt other people to come forward and provide information as well.

FOSTER: But what I'm interested in is he was interviewed all day, which doesn't suggest, does it, that he was saying no comment to everything

because it would have been much shorter. Maybe he has. Maybe he is cooperating.

BABU: Not necessarily because, you know, you could have a whole range of questions and the process and the procedure, even though he's all there all

day, there's the process of booking him in. He's allowed meal times. He's allowed a break. So it wouldn't have been sort of nonstop interview there.

I mean, I don't know, I'm speculating.

FOSTER: Yes.

BABU: But my experience of dealing with individuals who've been involved in white collar crime is that they normally say no comment, and then they

garnish all the information that the police have presented to them. They might show them photographs, they might show them images. And they say,

well, you know -- you sent this email to this particular person. So, there may be a whole range of things. Then it gives the defense an opportunity to

look at how they're going to build up their case.

In the meantime, the police would have acquired lots of information, some of it useful. Some of it may not be from both those properties. Yeah, and

then they'd be assessing that that information.

FOSTER: Dal Babu, appreciate your expertise as ever. Thank you very much for joining us.

Well, still to come on the program, U.S. President Trump convenes his newly created board of peace and gets a resounding vote of confidence in his plan

for Gaza from a pretty familiar face.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

FOSTER: President Donald Trump says the U.S. will provide $10 billion to his new Board of Peace to resolve global -- or global conflicts.

[15:45:06]

Another $7 billion will come from other countries. Mr. Trump addressed heads of state representing at least 20 nations at the inaugural meeting in

Washington Thursday. His first mission reconstructing Gaza battered by Hamas's war with Israel.

Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair attended that meeting and insisted Mr. Trump's plan to end the war is Gaza's only hope.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TONY BLAIR, FORMER BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: This is a vision of Gaza as part of a Middle East at peace, not a phony peace of declarations. No one

means an agreement. No one intends to keep, but a genuine commitment to a region where whether you're a Muslim Jew, Christian of any faith or none,

you can rise by your own efforts and feel your government by your side, not on your back.

That is the vision behind President Trump's 20-point plan for Gaza, and it remains the best, indeed, the only hope for Gaza, the region and the wider

world.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FOSTER: Kevin Liptak joins us now from the White House.

I mean, when the -- when we started talking about reconstructing Gaza, I think people had one vision of the body that would do that, and now we see

it. It's quite extraordinary, really.

KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yeah. No. And this was kind of the first real vision that we had of this board of peace that President

Trump will chair, that he will chair into perpetuity. You know, there were a lot of questions about why the president hasn't been able to get more

traditional American allies to join up, you know, that meeting today, you did not see many countries from Europe.

Some had sent representatives to essentially observe the proceedings, but most have not agreed to sign up for the body itself. You know, I think the

best way to look at this board, based on what we saw today was essentially, you know, the manifestation of how Trump sees this new world order. It's

not centered on Europe. It's centered on a number of other countries, many of whom who have paid $1 billion for a permanent seat on the board.

And a lot of ways it revolves around Trump himself. You know, he is the chair. This meeting took place in a building that he has renamed for

himself here in Washington. You know, the biggest announcement out of it was the $10 billion that the president has now committed towards Gaza. He

has not said where exactly that money will come from, whether he'll ask Congress for it or whether it will be reappropriated.

So, a lot unclear about that. It was also sort of striking to see the president use this first meeting of the board of peace to essentially

threaten all out war with Iran. He said that bad things will happen if they don't agree to give up their nuclear program, which we of course know that

is behind the scenes decision making that's underway now.

And so, you know, sort of a more complete picture of what exactly the board of peace comprised of. You know, the president didn't do anything to tamp

down on some of these fears that he may be looking to supplant the United Nations. In fact, he said the Board of Peace would be, quote, looking down

on the United Nations, even as he said that that body was still an essential part of the global order.

FOSTER: Kevin Liptak at the White House, thank you so much.

Still to come, unprecedented is a often overused word, but it's certainly one being used today.

Next, why the arrest of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor is a first in modern British history.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:51:24]

FOSTER: We are live at Buckingham Palace tonight on a day that royal historians won't forget any time soon, the former Prince Andrew has left a

police station but remains under investigation after his arrest. Never before in modern times has a senior British royal been arrested before

Mountbatten-Windsor was taken into custody this morning.

This is the image of him leaving custody. His sister, Princess Anne, was prosecuted back in 2002 after her dog attacked two children, but she was

never actually arrested by police. You have to go back to the 17th century to find a senior royal who was arrested. Charles I was placed under house

arrest by parliamentarians in 1647 after the English Civil War. He was eventually tried and executed.

CNN royal historian Kate Williams joins me now.

Kate, thank you so much for joining us.

I also want to talk about the other precedent here is that did we effectively see the king arrest his brother today as the monarch is the

head of state?

KATE WILLIAMS, CNN ROYAL HISTORIAN: Yes, Max. I mean, this is unprecedented in every way. We saw Charles I was arrested, but that was by

the ruling class. That was by the parliamentarians. We've seen a couple of minor royals along the way, you know, being arrested. Anne Boleyn and of

course, many Tudors were thrown into jail. But Henry VIII put Anne Boleyn in prison and Elizabeth I -- Elizabeth I was put in prison when she was a

princess by her sister Mary when she was queen.

This is about the royal -- this is about the process of justice. The idea that royals are not above the law. And I'm a royal historian. I've been

studying the royals my whole life it seems. But certainly, you know, royals do get away with all kinds of accusations, criminal activity.

There's been very strange. There was a very strange murder that took place in 1810 in Saint James's palace. Royals have often been above the law, but

this is totally different. King Charles made it very clear this morning in that very big important statement saying the law must take its process.

And absolutely, he is arrested because Charles is head of the judiciary. He's arrested by the king's forces, essentially. And if there is such a

matter that Andrew is put on trial and then is sent to prison, because apparently, this accusation of misconduct in public office can carry a life

sentence. But if he's put in prison, that would be at his majesty's pleasure.

So, this really is unprecedented in every possible way. And as you say, historians of the future are going to be looking back on this moment for

what it means for history, what it means for perceptions of the royals and justice. But most of all, what this means for the royal family because this

is a crisis

FOSTER: So, the king put out a statement. It was very quick, wasn't it? And it was by his own hand, which was pretty extraordinary. The layers they

would have had to go through but they came out with it pretty quickly, which shows how the king is trying to get ahead of this.

But just as you described there, his web of power is very complex in the U.K. So there's a -- there's a lot of room for him to make a misstep and to

be seen to be interfering in this process, which would make him vulnerable to a similar charge. It's very delicate matter for the king, isn't it?

WILLIAMS: It's a very delicate matter, saying that, you know, Andrew, is to be investigated. He said that just recently, didn't he? Just before he

said he would support the investigation of Thames Valley Police.

Now there are eight different police forces, I understand, investigating Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor.

[15:55:04]

So, there are many police forces investigating. We saw Gordon Brown, our former prime minister, saying he'd given a dossier of evidence to various

police forces, including Essex police force, who investigating trafficking, because that goes through Stansted airport, which is in their vicinity.

You know the king has a difficult line to walk. He now has to really stay out of it. But this is the question. Is that enough? Because we've seen the

royal family try and draw a line between themselves and Andrew, ever seen - - ever since his Epstein allegations came out, which really has been since 2010. And, you know, I think for many people, the royal family didn't do

this fast enough.

And of course, Andrew is no longer a prince. He stepped back from his title duke of York, but he hasn't been formally deprived of it because that's for

parliament. But he also is in the line of succession. He still could possibly be king.

FOSTER: Yeah, extraordinary. He is in the line of succession.

Kate Williams, appreciate you putting this into context for us.

I'm Max Foster. That is WHAT WE KNOW. Do stay with CNN for further coverage

END

TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS