The court heard on Saturday that Prince Andrew’s accuser was “available” to give evidence at Ms Maxwell’s trial – but nobody called her. The defence had the option subpoena Ms Giuffre, as they did with at least two other witnesses.

The decision then not to call Ms Giuffre, who now lives a quiet life with her husband and children in Queensland, has baffled even her attorneys.

“The government is not telling us what they are doing,’’ said David Boies, whose firm, Boies Schiller Flexner, is working pro bono on Ms Giuffre’s case. “They haven’t asked her to come from Australia, so it doesn’t look like she is going to testify. As you know, they are only bringing charges with women who were under the age of consent at the time. You will have to ask them why they did that.”

One theory is that the prosecution may have felt that testimony from Ms Giuffre may have complicated matters.

She was 16 when she met Ms Maxwell and Epstein in Florida, but 17 when she alleges she was sexually assaulted by the Duke in London, so any sexual encounter would not be statutory rape. 

However, two of the four accusers in the trial have similar issues surrounding the age of consent.

Records, witnesses and photos back up many parts of Ms Giuffre’s account of her time with Epstein (including the infamous picture of Prince Andrew with his hand around her waist at Ms Maxwell’s London townhouse), but she has acknowledged getting key details wrong in her story over the years, including initially falsely saying in a lawsuit that she had been 15 when the now-dead financier first abused her.