Andrew and Tristan Tate allegedly raked in more than £1 million from a teenager who was just 17 when she was pulled into their webcam business, Romanian prosecutors claim. The case centers on serious allegations involving human trafficking, and it’s part of a larger pattern of misconduct that authorities are investigating.
The controversial brothers are now facing a sprawling new case involving allegations of human trafficking, money laundering, witness intimidation and the illegal sale of luxury cars, according to Romania’s organized crime agency, DIICOT. This investigation represents one of the most comprehensive efforts to hold them accountable for their actions.
Andrew, 39, is accused of manipulating the teenager into working for the business between November 2014 and December 2021. Prosecutors say she was later placed under the control of Tristan, 37, who allegedly ran her webcam account, set strict financial targets and sexually exploited her—and that the brothers made approximately £1.1 million through her exploitation.
Tristan is also accused of recruiting three other women using the so-called “lover boy method,” allegedly showering them with lavish gifts before using those gestures to “emotionally blackmail” them into sex work.
Prosecutors further allege Tristan pressured 11 witnesses to lie or abandon their statements. The pattern of intimidation is part of what makes this case so serious.
Andrew, meanwhile, is accused of trying to silence alleged victims and witnesses with threats of lawsuits and demands for “exorbitant compensations.” DIICOT also claims he sold five luxury vehicles while knowing they were under seizure orders.
The brothers separately face 21 charges in Britain, including rape, human trafficking and actual bodily harm. These parallel investigations show how widespread the allegations have become.
Andrew has dismissed related civil accusations as a “pack of lies” and “gross fabrications.”
A spokesperson said the brothers “categorically deny every allegation,” adding, “This is not a conviction, nor a judicial finding of fact.”
★m★
