Virginia Giuffre Reportedly 'Not in Possession' of Photo Showing Her and Prince Andrew

In a "car crash" interview with the BBC in 2019, Prince Andrew questioned the authenticity of the image of him and Virginia Giuffre, saying that he doesn't believe the photograph "was taken in the way that has been suggested".

The original of a photograph showing Virginia Roberts Giuffre standing with Prince Andrew's arms around her waist appears to have been lost, according to the Daily Mail.

The photo in question is said to have been taken in 2001 in Ghislaine Maxwell's London home, where the now-late convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein was also in attendance. The image was purportedly captured the night the then-17-year-old Giuffre was allegedly sexually assaulted by Prince Andrew for the first time.

Prince Andrew faces a civil lawsuit from Giuffre, who argued that she was trafficked by Epstein to have sex with Prince Andrew on three occasions when she was still a minor according to US law. The Duke of York vehemently denies any wrongdoing.

The Daily Mail cited an unnamed source close to Giuffre as saying that "the picture is not in Virginia's possession".

Another unnamed insider told The Daily Beast that they weren't even sure if the original of the picture "still existed". Maxwell, the former girlfriend and "madam" of the embattled financier, was convicted in December 2021 of trafficking underage girls for Epstein. She faces sentencing on 28 June, with the prospect of spending up to 60 years in a US jail.

The Daily Beast reported that Giuffre's attorneys are not in the know about the photograph's whereabouts and that no one in her legal team has actually ever seen the original image.

The picture is understood to have gone missing between 2011 and 2016, when Giuffre emigrated to Australia from Colorado. She claimed at the time that the image could be in moving boxes at her in-laws' home in Sydney, which was allegedly full of “nerf guns, kids' toys, photos".

When asked whether it seems strange that the 38-year-old misplaced a picture that was of interest to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), one of the sources said: "Remember at the time that she was being interviewed by the FBI she was not suing anybody".

"She was not getting legal advice. She has now been through six or seven years of litigation and has lawyers advising her and I'm sure she would behave differently, but then she was just a young girl", the insider noted, adding that they think the failure to produce the original image will not affect the picture's admissibility as evidence.

According to the source, the case does not rest on the image, and this is "a reason [Giuffre's lawyer] David Boies is not worried" about showing the original of the photo.

Prince Andrew's lawyers, who earlier requested access to the original photograph, currently argue that without the hard copy original, it's impossible to prove the image wasn't manipulated, according to The Daily Beast.

The Daily Mail, in turn, cited an unnamed source as saying that it was "productive" for Prince Andrew to contest the picture's authenticity because "that would destroy their credibility".

"The photo does not show them having sex. But it shows they were together. It shows they met. The more he fights about that photograph, the more he underscores the fact that the real credibility issue for him now is whether he ever met her. That's a losing battle for him", the sources asserted.

Admitting to his relationship with Epstein in his so-called car crash interview with the BBC in November 2019, Prince Andrew also cast doubt on the authenticity of the photo.

"From the investigations that we've done, you can't prove whether or not that photograph is faked or not because it is a photograph of a photograph of a photograph. So it's very difficult to be able to prove it but I don't remember that photograph ever being taken", he said.

New Zealand-based photographer Michael Thomas, author behind the version that has been reproduced multiple times since being taken in 2011, has meanwhile, told The New Zealand Herald that he has "always believed" the image "was real".

"As I have said before it was just an ordinary photo you would have got from a chemist in the days of negatives. Surely if it was fake every media outlet in the world would be getting sued for using it. The fact that isn't happening, to me says everything", he added.

The claims came after The Telegraph reported that Prince Andrew is due to give evidence under oath in London on 10 March as part the Giuffre sex assault case against the Duke of York. The royal's deposition, which is expected to last two days, will reportedly be conducted by Giuffre's lawyers, David Boies and Sigrid McCawley. The Telegraph also claimed that despite repeated requests, Giuffre herself "still hasn't committed to a date or location for her deposition".