It seems its very different when that security is the pffical uk police force though
It shouldn't really make a difference imo in the long term, as if they're his security they should be able to be deemed to be able to hand the documents over to someone responsible.
They certainly should not be being used to prevent the legal process from going ahead.
IIRC all US courts have processes to deal with people who are actively refusing/avoiding to receive court papers, and they usually don't count in the persons favour as it's wasting court time and so they gradually reduce the requirements from handing the papers over in person to simply posting them*, especially when there is no way the person avoiding them can be unaware of the attempts (say if it's splashed all of the news**). I think the key thing is the attempts have to be properly documented, and in that case handing them over to a police officer on the gates is definitely going to get documented (both by the process server and almost certainly by multiple official records from the police including body cam footage).
So hiding behind the police may stop in person service, but just opens the gate for the next level to be done.
I suspect Andrew is simply trying to waste his accusers money and attempting to either force her to give up due to lack of funds to continue (a very common issue with rich defendants/litigants who are in dispute with someone who doesn't have the resources), or for some clock to run out in terms of time to make claims/follow them through.
I also suspect it's not going to work in his favour, especially if it ever gets to a US court as either he's going to risk a default judgement, going up against a Jury who will see it potentially as a sign of guilt, or end up with his legal team dealing with an increasingly annoyed judge who is possibly going to keep reducing the requirements for process to have been deemed served and award costs for those failed attempts.
If he's as innocent as he claims he's doing a fine job of making himself look increasingly guilty with his silly interviews and attempting to use his position and official protection to avoid the court.
*Much the same way that in the UK notifications of speeding offences are deemed "served" if sent by post after X days.
**Apparently a lot of US courts allow notice to be "served" by simply posting an advert in the local paper for the area. I can imagine the Queen being very unamused if say a full page advert was taken out in all of Andrew's local papers and the likes of the Times and Telegraph etc.
