Lady Victoria Hervey Criticises the Hounding of Ex Prince Andrew: Who Is She to Him?

The name on everyone’s lips is Andrew’s. But the voice slicing through the fury this week belongs to a woman who insists Britain is getting something badly wrong.

Lady Victoria Hervey has launched a fierce defence of the Duke of York, condemning what she describes as the relentless pursuit of the disgraced royal as scrutiny over his ties to Jeffrey Epstein surges yet again.

Speaking on "Piers Morgan Uncensored," the British aristocrat and socialite claimed the public appeared to be "enjoying this purge," warning that the spectacle has curdled from accountability into something far more sinister. She described the treatment of Andrew as “hounding,” arguing that it has spiralled into something cruel and excessive.

Her intervention, and the immediate on-air backlash it triggered, has reignited a familiar question that clings to her name whenever Andrew returns to the headlines.

Who is she to him, and why is she so determined to stand by him now?

The Link to Andrew That Refuses to Fade

Hervey’s connection to Andrew is not official, but it is undeniably personal and well-documented in the celebrity press. According to HELLO!, after Andrew’s split from Sarah Ferguson in 1996, one of the first women he was linked to was Lady Victoria Hervey around three years later.

The magazine reports that Hervey later confirmed on "Good Morning Britain" in 2019 that she and Andrew had briefly dated in 1999 before the romance fizzled out.

The same profile describes Hervey as the eldest child of the 6th Marquess of Bristol and his third wife, Yvonne Marie Sutton, and notes she was born on her father’s 61st birthday.

It is a detail that may seem minor, but in royal circles, proximity is everything. That short-lived link places Hervey in a category she now appears keen to inhabit. Not merely a commentator, but someone who can speak as a former romantic connection and long-time fixture in the same glittering social orbit.

'Shameful' and 'Sick': Her Fury Over the Public Pile On

On "Piers Morgan Uncensored," Hervey made clear she was not arguing Andrew should be shielded from scrutiny. Her outrage, she said, lies with what she sees as public glee at his humiliation.

She condemned photographers for capturing him after he left a police station, branding the image “shameful” and suggesting it was grotesque to savour a man’s collapse.

Then she sharpened her language further.

“I think it’s sick, I think it’s demented,” she said, describing what she perceives as a gloating atmosphere surrounding his downfall. She likened the relentless media attention to historic cases of press harassment, warning that sustained pursuit can end in catastrophe. Where, she asked, is the line?

Morgan pushed back hard. He argued that the royal family benefits from positive publicity and cannot demand privacy when the headlines turn hostile. A senior royal photographed outside a police station, he insisted, is unquestionably newsworthy.

The clash widened into a debate over Andrew’s titles, his standing, and whether the monarchy can realistically claim to remain “above politics” when senior figures become engulfed in scandal. But Hervey kept circling back to a single point: his mental health. She said:

“How do you think he’s feeling? At this point he’s literally being crucified. It’s like a blood sport… he’s being hounded. When is this going to stop? No one is actually thinking about his mental health right now."

For some viewers, it was a startling moment of open empathy for a man long engulfed in allegations and public disgrace. For others, it was a plea that felt jarringly misplaced in a scandal rooted in far more vulnerable lives.

The Victim Question That Ignites Outrage

If Hervey expected sympathy, she instead found herself accused of something far more explosive. Morgan challenged her directly, accusing her of “victim trashing” and pressing her over past comments regarding Virginia Giuffre’s allegations.

Hervey maintained she has sympathy “for any real victims out there,” but argued that some high-profile accusers were amplified by lawyers and media narratives despite what she considers inconsistencies.

Morgan rejected that claim outright, referencing material he said appeared in the Epstein files discussed during the programme, and insisting it contradicted her stance.

This is where Hervey’s defence detonates most violently. To supporters, she is one of the few voices willing to speak about the psychological toll of public disgrace. To critics, she appears dangerously dismissive of women whose allegations underpin one of the most disturbing scandals in modern royal history.

The divide is stark. On one side stands the argument for compassion toward a man under siege. On the other stands the enduring trauma of alleged abuse victims whose experiences cannot be separated from Andrew’s long shadow.

Her Own Epstein Encounter Complicates the Story

Hervey’s past comments about Epstein add another unsettling layer. During her "Good Morning Britain" interview, she did not portray Epstein as benign.

She described him as charismatic and powerful, while characterising Ghislaine Maxwell as the social gatekeeper armed with the “black book” of contacts, and Epstein as the financial force behind it all.

She recounted a London dinner she said included Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, Epstein, and Prince Andrew, admitting she believed her purpose at such a gathering was simply to look pretty.

She also revealed she once stayed at an Epstein apartment in New York after Maxwell arranged it. According to Hervey, she left early because she felt uneasy, believing she was being watched and fearing hidden cameras.

She insisted she did not see underage girls coming and going, but described herself at the time as young and impressionable, and said the revelations following Epstein’s death left her shocked.

In another contentious moment, she questioned whether “sex trafficking” is the correct term, only to be challenged robustly on air regarding underage exploitation.

In a separate appearance on LBC, she offered another glimpse into her perspective on Epstein’s social reach. “He knew everybody that was very powerful,” she said, adding:

"If you weren’t in those files, it would be an insult because it just means that you were a bit of a loser.”

Asked directly whether she herself appeared in the files, she replied, “Of course I am, because it’s any journalist that wrote about it.” T

The remark drew audible disbelief from the host and only deepened criticism that she was minimising the gravity of the scandal.

Why Her Defence Matters Now

Hervey holds no official role. She is not a witness in proceedings, nor a palace spokesperson. She speaks only for herself.

But she is also, by her own account and as reported in the celebrity press, someone who once shared a fleeting romantic link with Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor during the early years following his marriage breakdown. She is someone who later moved within the same rarefied social world that now casts such a long, dark shadow over him.

That proximity gives her voice a certain resonance, and a certain risk.

At its core, Hervey’s argument is simple. Public accountability, she suggests, should not morph into public entertainment. Yet in making that case, she tests whether any reservoir of sympathy remains for a prince many believe exhausted it long ago.

And that is why the question refuses to disappear. Who is she to him?

Because in a scandal defined by access, influence, and the murky intersection of privilege and power, even a brief romantic link can become both a credential and a curse.