There was a lot of fuss a couple of years ago about Prince Andrew's connections with a financier called Jeffrey Epstein. He had lent Sarah Ferguson £15,000 to help with her debts, which she subsequently returned saying she had made a gigantic error of judgment. The furore was such that the Prince gave up his position as the UK's special trade representative.
Seems a bit heavy for a £15k loan? Yes, well there was more to it than that. Epstein was being chased over allegations that he kept a harem of women, many of them teenagers, and Andrew was photographed with his arm around a woman who is now claiming that Epstein sexually abused her.
Guy Adams's spread says that a lawyer called Jack Scarola delivered a bundle of evidence marked Exhibit D to court in Palm Beach three months ago. This, he writes:
"could drag new and ugly skeletons related to this inglorious affair from the closet. It also questions how much the prince actually knew about his one-time friend's sexual peccadillos.
In the past, whenever the Epstein case has been reported, it has been claimed there is no suggestion that Andrew was ever aware that the tycoon paid under-age girls for sex.
But in Exhibit D Roberts alleges otherwise. [Virginia Roberts is the woman making the legal claim who was photographed with the Prince]
Asked whether the Prince would have 'relevant' information about "Jeffrey's taking advantage of under-age girls", she replies 'Yes, he would know a lot of the truth.'
"It should at this stage be stressed that the Mail has no evidence to corroborate this and other claims made by Virginia Roberts in the documents."
So we have a bombshell that may not be true - and on top of that it's not even new. If Adams had done a bit of googling, he might have turned up this from Jon Swaine, who was reporting for the Telegraph from America in June 2011:
Virginia Roberts told lawyers in Florida that the Duke could give a `valuable` insight into the behaviour of Epstein, a convicted sex offender....
Miss Roberts...revived the case in February when...she claimed she had met the Duke three times.
She was interviewed was interviews last month by a lawyer and read a short list of Epstein's male friends and asked "which would have relevant information about Jeffrey's taking advantage of under-age girls"...
'Prince Andrew', suggested the lawyer Jack Scarola. 'Yes, he would know a lot of the truth,' she said.
Both Swain and Adams emphasise that there is no suggestion that the Duke was involved with young girls. The story was live when Swain was reporting in 2011, but why is Adams digging it up now?
That seems a familiar question. Oh yes, it's the one SubScribe asked in February when he wrote screeds of old material about Harriet Harman, Jack Dromey and Patricia Hewitt. That had been in the Telegraph before too.