[0:05]The time is 10.05 and we'll go on the record.
[0:08]This is a deposition of Mr. Darren Indyke conducted by the House Committee on Oversight
[0:13]and Government Reform under the authority granted to it pursuant to House Rule 10.
[0:19]Accordingly, House Rule 10 grants the committee broad jurisdiction for the committee to conduct
[0:24]investigations of any matter at any time.
[0:28]On January 7th, 2026, the committee voted to approve a motion directing the chairman
[0:32]to authorize an issue of subpoena to you for a deposition.
[0:37]On January 23rd, 2026, Chairman Comer issued a subpoena for Mr. Indyke to appear today
[0:43]for a deposition in furtherance of the committee's investigation into the actions and investigations
[0:48]of Mr. Jeffrey Epstein and Ms. Ghislaine Maxwell.
[0:53]I will enter the subpoena and corresponding cover letter as Exhibit 1.
[1:00]The committee noticed the deposition for Mr. Indyke on March 4th, 2026.
[1:05]I will enter the notice for this deposition as Exhibit 2.
[1:11]Can the witness please state his name and spell his last name for the record?
[1:15]Darren Indyke, I-N-D-Y-K-E.
[1:22]Thank you, Mr. Indyke.
[1:23]My name is Jack Emmer and I am the Chief Counsel for Investigations for Chairman
[1:27]Comer.
[1:28]Under the Committee on Oversight and Government Reforms rules, you are allowed to have a
[1:32]counsel present to advise you during this deposition.
[1:35]Do you have a counsel representing you in a personal capacity present with you today?
[1:41]I do.
[1:43]Will counsel please identify themselves for the record?
[1:47]Mark Weinstein from Hughes, Hubbard & Reid.
[1:50]Daniel Weiner, also from Hughes, Hubbard & Reid.
[1:53]Thank you.
[1:54]Now, starting with the majority staff, can the additional staff members please introduce
[1:58]themselves with their name, title, and affiliation?
[2:01]Billy Grant, Deputy Chief Counsel for Investigations for Chairman Comer.
[2:06]Peter Spector, Deputy Director of Oversight for Chairman Comer.
[2:09]Daniel Ashworth, General Counsel for Chairman Comer.
[2:12]Brian Giacchetti, Chief Counsel for Chairman Comer.
[2:15]Will Harnas, Professional Staff and Deputy Chairman Comer.
[2:18]Ellison Toland, Counsel for Chairman Comer.
[2:20]Brittany Grignac, Senior Counsel for Chairman Comer.
[2:23]Emily Fierrovin, Counsel for Chairman Comer.
[2:26]Will Pathy, Professional Staff and Deputy Chairman Comer.
[2:29]Jack Ferla, Counsel for Chairman Comer.
[2:31]Melvin Soto, Digital Director for Chairman Comer.
[2:37]Thank you all.
[2:39]Mr. Indyke, before we begin, I would like to go over the ground rules for this deposition.
[2:44]The questioning will proceed in rounds.
[2:46]The majority will ask questions for an hour and then the minority will have an opportunity
[2:50]to ask questions for an hour if they choose.
[2:54]To the extent members have questions for the witness, they will be propounded during
[2:58]their side's respective rounds.
[3:00]The clock will stop if you need to confer with counsel.
[3:03]Your counsel is speaking and when members or staff are speaking during the opposing
[3:07]side's rounds of questions.
[3:10]We will alternate back and forth until there are no more questions, do you understand?
[3:16]There is a court reporter taking down everything I say and everything you say
[3:19]to make a written record of the deposition.
[3:22]For the record to be clear, please wait until the staff are questioning you finishes
[3:26]each question before you begin your answer and the staffer will wait until you finish
[3:31]your response before proceeding to the next question.
[3:34]Further, to ensure the court reporter can properly record this deposition, please
[3:39]speak clearly, concisely and slowly.
[3:42]Also, the court reporter cannot record nonverbal answers such as nodding or shaking
[3:47]your head, so it is important that you answer each question with an audible, verbal
[3:52]answer, do you understand?
[3:54]I do.
[3:56]Exhibits may be entered into the record.
[3:58]Majority exhibits will be identified numerically.
[4:00]Minority exhibits will be identified alphabetically, do you understand?
[4:04]I do.
[4:06]We want you to answer our questions in the most complete and truthful manner possible
[4:10]so we will take our time.
[4:12]If you have any questions or do not fully understand the question, please let us
[4:15]know.
[4:16]We will attempt to clarify, add context to or rephrase our questions.
[4:21]If we ask about specific conversations or events in the past and you are unable
[4:25]to recall the exact words or details, you should testify to the substance of those
[4:30]conversations or events to the best of your recollection.
[4:34]If you recall only a part of a conversation or event, you should give us your best
[4:39]recollection of those events or parts of conversations that you do recall, do
[4:44]you understand?
[4:45]I understand.
[4:47]You are required, by law, to answer questions from Congress truthfully.
[4:52]This also applies to questions posed by Congressional staff in this deposition, do
[4:57]you understand?
[4:58]I do.
[4:59]If at any time you knowingly make false statements, you could be subject to criminal
[5:04]prosecution including but not limited to perjury, do you understand?
[5:09]I do.
[5:11]This includes both knowingly providing false testimony but also stating that you
[5:16]do not recall or remember something when in fact you do, do you understand?
[5:20]I do.
[5:22]Furthermore, you cannot tell half-truths or exclude information necessary to make
[5:26]statements accurate.
[5:28]You are required to provide all information that would make your response
[5:32]truthful.
[5:33]A deliberate failure to disclose information can constitute a false statement, do you
[5:39]understand?
[5:40]I do.
[5:41]Is there any reason you are unable to provide truthful testimony in today's
[5:45]interview?
[5:46]No.
[5:48]Please note, if you wish to assert a privilege over any statement today, that
[5:51]assertion must comply with the rules of the Committee on Oversight and Government
[5:55]Reform.
[5:56]Pursuant to that, Committee Rule 16C-1 states, for the Chair to consider
[6:00]assertions of privilege over testimony or statements, witnesses or entities must
[6:04]clearly state the specific privilege being asserted, and the reason for the
[6:08]assertion on or before the scheduled date of testimony or appearance for the
[6:15]purposes of this deposition, objections must be stated concisely in a
[6:19]non-argumentative and non-suggestive manner.
[6:23]If the witness refuses to answer a question to reserve a privilege, the
[6:27]Committee may seek a ruling from the Chair.
[6:30]If the Chair overrules any such objection, the witness shall be ordered
[6:34]to answer.
[6:35]If the witness continues to refuse to answer a question despite being
[6:39]ordered to do so, the witness may be subject to sanction, do you
[6:42]understand?
[6:43]I do.
[6:44]Ordinarily, we take a five-minute break at the end of each hour
[6:48]questioning, but if you need a longer break or a break before that, please
[6:52]let us know, and we will be happy to accommodate.
[6:55]However, to the extent there is a pending question, we would ask that
[6:59]you finish answering the question before we take the break, do you
[7:02]understand?
[7:03]I do.
[7:04]Finally, I will note for everyone here today that the contents of what we
[7:09]discuss in the deposition today is confidential under the House Deposition
[7:14]Regulation.
[7:15]Under the rules, the Chairman and ranking minority members shall consult
[7:18]before any release of testimony or transcripts, including portions
[7:22]thereof.
[7:23]This means it is a violation of House and Committee rules to
[7:26]disclose the contents of the deposition prior to its official release.
[7:33]For this reason, the marked exhibits that we will use today will
[7:36]remain with the court reporter so that they can go into the official
[7:40]transcript, and any copies of those exhibits will be kept at the table or
[7:44]returned to us when we finish.
[7:47]Can the reporter please swear in the witness?
[7:49]Here is your right hand.
[7:51]Do you solemnly declare or affirm under penalty of perjury that the
[7:56]testimony you give today will be the truth, the whole truth and
[7:58]nothing but the truth?
[7:59]I do.
[8:02]Do you have any questions before we begin?
[8:05]I do not.
[8:07]We understand that you have an opening statement that you would
[8:09]like to read into the record?
[8:10]I do, by the way.
[8:12]Thank you.
[8:14]Good morning, everyone.
[8:21]I'd like to thank the Committee for working with the Epstein estate over
[8:24]the past six-plus months.
[8:26]As a co-executive of the estate, I have done my very best to
[8:30]cooperate with the Committee and to respond to the Committee's
[8:33]requests for documents, photographs and other information relating to
[8:37]Jeffrey Epstein.
[8:39]As you know, the estate produced voluminous materials in response to
[8:43]the Committee's subpoena and communicated regularly with both the
[8:46]Committee's majority and minority staffs on the timing, scope and
[8:50]content of the estate's responses.
[8:53]My appearance here today, as with my co-executor's testimony before
[8:57]the Committee last week, represents our continuing cooperation with
[9:01]the Committee's efforts to investigate matters regarding Mr. Epstein.
[9:06]In addition, since we were appointed in 2019 by the United States
[9:09]Virgin Islands Probate Court as co-executors of Mr. Epstein's estate,
[9:14]we have fully cooperated with the U.S. Department of Justice's
[9:17]investigation of Epstein-related matters.
[9:21]I'd also like to note the extensive efforts that my co-executor
[9:24]and I have made to address the wrongs committed by Mr. Epstein
[9:28]during his lifetime.
[9:29]At our direction, the estate initiated, developed and funded the
[9:34]Epstein Victims' Compensation Program, the first of its kind
[9:37]established by an estate which provided a private, voluntary and
[9:42]non-confrontational means to compensate women who suffered sexual
[9:46]abuse by Mr. Epstein.
[9:48]Independently administered by preeminent figures in the field of
[9:51]victims' compensation, the EVCP awarded more than $121 million
[9:57]to 136 women, all of which the estate funded, pursuant to our
[10:03]express direction that, one, there was to be no cap on monies
[10:06]awarded either individually or in the aggregate, and two, even women
[10:11]whose claims were time barred or who had previously signed releases
[10:15]could participate.
[10:17]The estate has also directly settled claims by an additional 59 women
[10:21]for a total of more than $48 million, including the recently
[10:26]proposed settlement in a putative class action lawsuit filed in 2024
[10:31]on behalf of all women abused by Mr. Epstein, a settlement that
[10:34]the court preliminary approved earlier this month.
[10:37]My co-executor and I have authorized payment by the Epstein
[10:41]estate of more than $200 million to women who assert they were
[10:45]abused or trafficked by Mr. Epstein.
[10:49]Let me be clear.
[10:50]I had no knowledge whatsoever of Jeffrey Epstein's wrongdoings.
[10:55]My complete lack of involvement in that misconduct is a matter of
[10:59]record.
[11:00]Not a single woman has ever accused me of committing sexual
[11:03]abuse or witnessing sexual abuse, nor claimed at any time that she
[11:07]or anyone else reported to me any allegation of Mr. Epstein's
[11:11]abuse.
[11:12]I did not socialize with Epstein, and I reject as categorically
[11:16]false any suggestion that I knowingly facilitated or assisted
[11:20]Mr. Epstein in his sexual abuse or trafficking of women, or
[11:24]that I was aware of his actions while I provided legal services
[11:27]to him.
[11:29]Far from being Mr. Epstein's lieutenant or chief of staff, as I
[11:33]have been incorrectly described by plaintiff's lawyers and
[11:36]uninformed journalists, I was one of many attorneys who Mr.
[11:40]Epstein regularly consulted, including such noted luminaries as
[11:44]Kenneth Starr, for entirely legitimate purposes.
[11:48]My primary role was to provide corporate, transactional, and
[11:52]general legal services to Mr. Epstein and his companies, and
[11:55]yes, I did so.
[11:58]The press and plaintiff's counsel have mischaracterized cash
[12:00]withdrawals I made from Mr. Epstein's bank accounts from
[12:03]2013 to 2017.
[12:06]Entirely ignored in that reporting is the fact that the
[12:08]bank involved knew full well that these accounts belonged to
[12:12]Mr. Epstein.
[12:13]Neither I nor he made any effort to disguise his name or
[12:16]identity, and as part of its standard policy, the bank
[12:20]itself imposed a $7,500 limit on daily cash withdrawals.
[12:25]I was not attempting to structure such withdrawals to
[12:28]avoid federal reporting requirements.
[12:30]Quite the contrary, I simply sought to comply with the
[12:33]bank's internal requirements and limits with the bank's
[12:36]full knowledge.
[12:38]It is undisputed that during this time, Mr. Epstein had
[12:41]difficulty assessing credit cards from major banks.
[12:44]Instead, he and his staff required cash to pay for a
[12:48]wide variety of expenses, including maintenance, repairs,
[12:52]and daily household needs for his residential properties in
[12:55]New York, Florida, New Mexico, Paris, and the USVI,
[13:00]as well as meals, gifts, fortuities, and fuel for his
[13:04]private aircraft.
[13:06]For a person of Mr. Epstein's financial position
[13:09]with five multi-million-dollar residences,
[13:11]staffed by dozens of employees, and with an
[13:15]extensive travel itinerary, it did not strike me as
[13:18]unusual that Mr. Epstein's business, household, and
[13:21]personal needs required large amounts of cash on a
[13:24]regular basis.
[13:26]I never believed that the cash I withdrew from Mr.
[13:28]Epstein and his staff was used by Mr. Epstein or his
[13:32]staff for any improper purposes.
[13:36]There have also been allegations of my supposed
[13:38]involvement in facilitating forced or sham marriages
[13:41]between women in Mr. Epstein's life.
[13:44]Those allegations, too, are 100% untrue.
[13:47]I did not arrange, assist, or facilitate any marriages
[13:51]between acquaintances of Mr. Epstein.
[13:53]Nor was I aware in advance that such marriages took place.
[13:57]Same-sex marriage has been legal in New York since
[14:00]2011 with this passage of the Marriage Equality Act.
[14:04]I did not consider it appropriate to interrogate
[14:06]anyone as to the reasons for their decisions to
[14:09]marry or the bona fides of their relationships.
[14:14]I don't mean in any way to condone or excuse Mr.
[14:17]Epstein's reprehensible conduct.
[14:19]Quite the opposite, I condemn it wholeheartedly.
[14:23]Had I known that he was abusing or trafficking women,
[14:25]I would have quit working for him at once and
[14:28]severed all ties to him.
[14:30]The truth is that I did not know what Mr.
[14:33]Epstein did after hours, what he did behind closed
[14:36]doors, and what he did in places where I was not present.
[14:40]I first met Epstein in 1996, when he was
[14:43]already a highly successful businessman.
[14:46]After he pled guilty in 2008 to procuring a
[14:48]person under the age of 18 for prostitution,
[14:51]Mr. Epstein appeared to me to be devastated and
[14:54]extremely contrite.
[14:55]He was adamant that he had no idea that anyone
[14:58]involved was underage, and personally assured me
[15:01]that he would never again let himself be in that position.
[15:04]I believed him.
[15:06]And I made the mistake of believing that Mr.
[15:08]Epstein would not again commit a crime.
[15:11]I deeply regret doing so.
[15:14]Most importantly, I feel horrible for the women
[15:17]whom Mr. Epstein abused.
[15:20]While my professional association with Jeffrey
[15:22]Epstein has subjected my family to death threats
[15:24]and malicious personal attacks, I don't expect
[15:26]the members of the committee or of the public
[15:28]to feel sympathy for me.
[15:31]But I am left trying to explain what many people
[15:33]who knew Jeffrey Epstein have noted after his death.
[15:36]He led two entirely separate lives, his
[15:39]professional one and the other, a private,
[15:42]personal one that caused many others to suffer.
[15:45]That I did not know what my client did in his
[15:47]private life.
[15:49]It'd be difficult for some to believe, but it's true.
[15:53]Thank you.
[15:55]Starting with the majority, may all individuals,
[15:59]members and staff who have since joined us
[16:02]since the beginning, please announce themselves
[16:04]for the record.
[16:05]James Culler, chairman of Kentucky.
[16:07]Andy Bigg Scott from the Arizona Five.
[16:10]William Timmons, Southern House
[16:11]4th Congressional District.
[16:15]I, Dave Mann, 147.
[16:18]James Washington, Virginia 11.
[16:22]Thank you.
[16:24]The time reads 10.22 and the majority's time
[16:27]will begin now.
[16:29]Mr. Indyke, let's begin by discussing
[16:32]your education and experience.
[16:34]Where did you attend undergraduate school?
[16:36]Colgate University.
[16:38]And what degree did you graduate with?
[16:40]A degree in education and economics.
[16:42]What year did you graduate?
[16:43]1986.
[16:45]And where did you attend law school?
[16:48]Cornell Law School.
[16:49]And when did you graduate law school?
[16:52]1991.
[16:54]When were you admitted to practice law?
[16:57]1992.
[16:58]In what states were you admitted?
[17:00]New York, initially.
[17:03]Where have you since been admitted?
[17:05]In 2019, I was admitted to practice law
[17:08]in the state of Florida.
[17:10]Is your license currently in good standing?
[17:13]I believe my license is in both New York
[17:15]and Florida are in good stand.
[17:17]Can you briefly go through your professional career
[17:20]up until now?
[17:22]Sure.
[17:25]When I graduated Cornell Law School,
[17:27]I worked as first a clerk and then as an associate
[17:32]for the law firm of Golden Wachtel.
[17:35]I did that until I think it was 1994.
[17:41]In 1995, I joined the law firm
[17:44]of Greenberg Trawick in New York City.
[17:47]I worked there until sometime in 1996
[17:49]towards the beginning of 1996,
[17:52]at which point I was asked by someone
[17:57]who was a former partner at Golden Wachtel
[18:00]to go work for him and with him
[18:03]to represent Jeffrey Epstein and his company.
[18:09]And since then, I have been working
[18:14]to represent primarily Jeffrey Epstein,
[18:17]both as an employee
[18:21]and then subsequently in my capacity
[18:28]as a law firm, my own law firm.
[18:30]Prior to your employment with Mr. Epstein,
[18:33]what areas of law did you practice?
[18:36]Corporate securities and trademark law.
[18:41]When did you first meet Jeffrey Epstein?
[18:46]Sometime in 1996, towards the beginning of 1996.
[18:57]And Mr. Endike, I understand
[18:59]that you're hard of hearing,
[19:00]so we're gonna try to speak up.
[19:02]But if you could also speak up as well
[19:06]for everyone in the room.
[19:07]Sure.
[19:08]So let's begin again.
[19:09]When did you first meet Jeffrey Epstein?
[19:12]It was, I believe, towards the beginning of 1996.
[19:17]Where did you meet him?
[19:19]At his office in New York City.
[19:23]And why did you meet him at that time?
[19:27]Prior to my meeting Mr. Epstein,
[19:30]the partner that I worked for at Golden-Wachtel
[19:33]had asked me to come work with him
[19:38]to represent Mr. Epstein.
[19:40]And as part of me doing that,
[19:45]he wanted me to meet Mr. Epstein in his office.
[19:48]So I did so.
[19:49]And for the record, I miss this.
[19:52]Who else was present during this meeting?
[19:57]I don't recall, it was many years ago.
[20:00]That partner may have been there.
[20:05]So it would have been him and Mr. Epstein.
[20:08]I think I don't recall anybody else.
[20:12]And what did you discuss with Mr. Epstein at this time?
[20:18]I can't recall specifically,
[20:20]but basically he asked me questions about my background,
[20:26]corporate and securities background,
[20:29]about the work I did at Golden-Wachtel
[20:30]and the work I did at Greenberg Charik.
[20:34]Told me I'd be doing similar work for him.
[20:37]Prior to meeting Mr. Epstein,
[20:39]what did you know about him?
[20:42]Very little.
[20:45]When I worked at Golden-Wachtel,
[20:46]I understood that he was a client of Golden-Wachtel.
[20:52]And I understood that the partner
[20:56]that I worked for at Golden-Wachtel
[20:58]had done some work with him,
[20:59]along with one of the name partners, Bob Gold.
[21:04]But that's the extent of what I knew about him.
[21:07]And what you testified to was all related to his business.
[21:11]Did he have any reputation outside of his business
[21:15]as it related to young women or girls at this time?
[21:17]Not that I knew of.
[21:21]What were your first impressions of Mr. Epstein?
[21:26]I was slightly intimidated
[21:27]because he was explained to me to be a very wealthy man.
[21:33]I was not very wealthy.
[21:38]And I was very young at the time.
[21:40]And he was explained to me
[21:41]to be a very successful businessman.
[21:44]My impressions for him was that he was no nonsense.
[21:48]He seemed pleasant enough.
[21:52]Nothing more than that.
[21:55]What did you understand his job to be at this time?
[21:58]I understood that I would be providing support
[22:02]and assistance to the partner that brought me in,
[22:05]in connection with representing
[22:08]Mr. Epstein's business interests.
[22:11]And you mentioned that...
[22:13]I think, Jack, could you ask,
[22:14]what did you understand, his job to be or your job to be?
[22:18]Mr. Epstein's job.
[22:19]Oh, I'm sorry.
[22:21]Forgive me.
[22:23]Mr. Epstein's job, my understanding was that
[22:26]he was a financial consultant for wealthy individuals.
[22:34]Did you know who his clients were at this time?
[22:38]No.
[22:43]Just because you mean before he took the job?
[22:45]Correct.
[22:50]We've had a member join.
[22:56]Mr. Indyk, recognizing that we'll discuss
[22:59]more specifics later,
[23:00]can you briefly describe the nature and extent
[23:02]of your relationship with Mr. Epstein?
[23:05]I was one of Mr. Epstein's many attorney.
[23:10]My goal, my goal, my role was primarily a role
[23:16]as a transactional, corporate and transactional attorney.
[23:22]My role was to review documents,
[23:27]summarize documents, analyze documents,
[23:31]critique documents, draft documents,
[23:35]in a wide variety of areas.
[23:41]Investment documents,
[23:48]private placement memorandum,
[23:49]subscription agreements, option agreements,
[23:52]warrant agreements.
[23:56]Let's see what else.
[23:58]Registration rights agreements,
[23:59]stock purchase agreements.
[24:02]Rights of first refusal agreements,
[24:05]all of those in the kind of side letters for investments,
[24:09]all of those in the investment field.
[24:13]There were times when he would do some trading
[24:19]and my role was to review the trading confirmations.
[24:23]And to the extent there were documents required
[24:26]as a precursor to the trading,
[24:27]like interest swap agreements, things like that,
[24:30]I would review the interest swap agreements
[24:32]to the extent that I had any comments on those.
[24:34]I would give my comments on those agreements.
[24:40]If Epstein was going to buy or sell a business,
[24:46]there were times when I would be required
[24:49]to draft basic business agreements or letters of intent,
[24:53]or if he was, or review a purchase agreement
[24:57]or a sale agreement and then critique it and summarize it
[25:01]and provide any evaluation on it.
[25:06]Epstein had aircraft and his clients had aircraft.
[25:12]I was involved as an attorney
[25:16]and in connection with the acquisition and sale
[25:18]of aircraft, fixed wing aircraft,
[25:21]helicopters, rotorcraft,
[25:23]both new builds from manufacturers like Sikorsky
[25:26]and sometimes when there were resales of the aircraft.
[25:30]Also, there was lots of real estate
[25:32]that was being acquired and sold during this time.
[25:35]So, I would work with local council.
[25:44]If it wasn't in New York, for example,
[25:46]I would work, and sometimes even if it was,
[25:48]I would work with local real estate council
[25:51]in the acquisition or sale of real estate,
[25:55]anything from large acreage branches to islands,
[26:01]to townhouses, to apartments, to homes,
[26:07]any number of parcels of real estate.
[26:11]And in connection with some of the real estate
[26:13]that was acquired, there was a lot of construction
[26:15]going on during the course of my representation.
[26:18]And that construction would require architects and design.
[26:22]So, I would review AIA architectural
[26:24]and design agreements, again, summarize, critique, evaluate.
[26:30]I would review proposals, just make sure
[26:33]that the proposals for any particular building or design
[26:39]were incorporated all of what I understood
[26:42]to be the kind of the roles or the program
[26:47]for the building that was to be done.
[26:50]There was construction management agreements
[26:52]that had to be reviewed.
[26:54]General contractor agreements that had to be reviewed.
[26:56]Sometimes liens would come up.
[26:58]So, all of those things would have to be reviewed.
[27:03]From time to time when a new asset like an aircraft
[27:12]or a helicopter or even a large boat would be acquired,
[27:19]a new entity would be formed for that asset.
[27:24]Because that asset was a large,
[27:27]tended to be as an aircraft.
[27:29]Aircrafts can fall out of the sky.
[27:31]They could cause serious damage.
[27:32]So, kind of it's corporate law 101
[27:37]that makes sure that when you have
[27:38]a kind of a liability type asset,
[27:40]you put that asset in a separate entity.
[27:42]So, other assets held by the person
[27:47]can't be subject to the liability
[27:49]that was created by that asset.
[27:51]The same holds true for, again,
[27:53]it's kind of normal operating procedure,
[27:55]particularly for people in high net worth situations.
[27:59]When you would take on a new investment
[28:02]or there would be an investment program,
[28:04]you would form a separate entity
[28:05]for that investment program.
[28:08]For new businesses, because you didn't want to mix
[28:11]a new business with an old business,
[28:13]you would form an entity for that new business.
[28:17]So, part of what I did is either
[28:23]if it was someplace in the jurisdiction
[28:25]where I was admitted,
[28:26]and I knew of a corporate service company to do it,
[28:28]I would have the corporate service company form the entity.
[28:34]If not, I would have the local attorney do the same.
[28:37]So, we did those things.
[28:41]Just kind of the type of things
[28:45]sometimes are very, very complex.
[28:47]There was, just to give you an example,
[28:50]there was a project that required connecting
[28:54]one of Epstein's Island's, because he had two,
[28:58]that island to the St. Thomas mainland.
[29:02]And that required the manufacture of a 15 KB cable
[29:05]with fiber optic capabilities by this Italian manufacturer.
[29:09]So, I would have to work on that agreement
[29:12]with the manufacturer.
[29:13]And then we'd have to do,
[29:16]I'd have to work on a separate agreement
[29:20]for the installation of that cable across the span
[29:25]from St. Thomas mainland to the island.
[29:28]And then you'd have to work on the local
[29:31]to step down the cable, all the work
[29:33]that the electrical contractors had to do
[29:35]to connect the cable to the island.
[29:39]And then there was also permitting
[29:40]that I had to work with local council
[29:42]who handled the permitting,
[29:43]the local environmental consultants
[29:48]to do the permitting, to lay the cable
[29:49]on the ocean bedside.
[29:51]So, lots of different things like that.
[29:54]It was, yes.
[29:58]I just have a couple of questions related
[30:00]to the number of attorneys.
[30:03]You've mentioned there were a number of attorneys
[30:05]working in house essentially for Mr. Epstein.
[30:08]Is that correct?
[30:09]No, it was a number of attorneys
[30:13]that Mr. Epstein engaged.
[30:14]Okay, so how many were actually working in house?
[30:18]At which time, sir?
[30:20]Give me an example, early on.
[30:22]Early on, three attorneys.
[30:25]And then as time went on?
[30:27]Two attorneys.
[30:29]And then ultimately, nobody was working in house.
[30:34]Ultimately, he was using outside counsel,
[30:37]including me as outside counsel
[30:40]and other attorneys as outside counsel.
[30:42]When you had the three attorneys,
[30:44]are you one of those three?
[30:45]I was one of the three attorneys.
[30:46]You got down to two, obviously.
[30:47]You were one of them.
[30:48]I was still, yes, one of the attorneys there.
[30:49]Okay, and then you continued on until?
[30:53]I continued on with the other attorney.
[30:57]I was there, but the other attorney formed an entity
[31:05]to serve Epstein and other clients.
[31:11]And I worked for that entity
[31:11]and I was a junior member of that entity.
[31:15]And then ultimately, I formed my own law firm.
[31:19]Did you have any associates in that law firm or partners?
[31:22]No.
[31:23]You were still a provider?
[31:23]I was.
[31:27]Sure.
[31:28]We've had more members and staff join.
[31:30]Can they please announce themselves for the record?
[31:33]Sure, Robert Garcia,
[31:34]I'm the ranking member for Oversight Democrats.
[31:37]Roe Connick, California 17.
[31:44]Gassman Nasari, Aaron Osberg.
[31:51]I wanna stick with asking general questions to start.
[31:53]So during the course of your representing Mr. Epstein,
[31:58]how often did you communicate with him?
[32:02]Towards the beginning, infrequently.
[32:05]I mean, I saw him from time to time.
[32:08]I spoke to him from time to time,
[32:10]but mostly his communications were with the partner
[32:13]that I worked with.
[32:14]And then the partner that I worked with
[32:16]would speak to me about assignments that I had,
[32:18]specifically.
[32:20]Over time, I would have some interactions with him.
[32:26]I would get direct assignments from Mr. Epstein.
[32:29]And you mentioned the partner,
[32:30]that's the same partner you referenced before.
[32:32]Yeah, it's the partner who kind of asked me
[32:34]to come and join him representing Mr. Epstein.
[32:37]For the record, what was his name?
[32:38]His name was Jeffrey Shantz.
[32:40]And how would you typically communicate with Epstein?
[32:47]At which time?
[32:50]During the course of your relationship.
[32:52]So kind of multifaceted.
[32:58]Sometimes I would get messages.
[33:02]Sometimes I would get a communication through the partner.
[33:11]Sometimes he would be in the office
[33:13]and I would meet with him for two minutes,
[33:16]not much, not a lot of face time.
[33:20]And get a specific assignment.
[33:23]And then sometimes I would get a message
[33:24]from his assistant saying something
[33:28]that Epstein wanted from me.
[33:31]And towards the later end,
[33:35]I would meet with him
[33:37]when he no longer had an office in New York.
[33:40]Towards the later end, I would meet with him.
[33:48]I would meet with him on the ground floor
[33:49]in the dining room of his residence.
[33:55]How often would you meet with him at the residence?
[33:59]It really depends when.
[34:01]So towards the beginning, not at all.
[34:06]As time went on once a month,
[34:12]sometimes twice a month.
[34:15]If he was in town and there was a transaction going on,
[34:19]could have been more,
[34:20]but typically it was about twice a month.
[34:23]How long would your meetings last
[34:25]when you would visit his residence?
[34:30]Typically an hour or so, maybe two, most.
[34:35]Who typically would be present?
[34:46]There was no kind of typical thing
[34:48]about who would be present.
[34:49]It really depended on the transaction
[34:51]and the specific matter that was,
[34:54]or the matters that I was meeting with him about.
[34:58]And I can hear you just fine,
[35:00]but there's a lot of people in the room
[35:01]that are struggling to hear you.
[35:03]Oh, I'm sorry, sorry.
[35:04]However much you can speak of, very helpful.
[35:07]Yes.
[35:07]But I just want to focus on who was present.
[35:11]There are women that have been identified
[35:13]and deemed as assistants of Mr. Epstein.
[35:15]Do you recall them being present at these meetings?
[35:19]I recall women coming into the meeting
[35:24]delivering a message to him,
[35:26]sometimes bringing some food to him,
[35:30]but generally his personal assistants
[35:33]were not in the meetings.
[35:36]And you mentioned that early on
[35:39]you'd have meetings at your office
[35:42]and then it seemed that it became more common
[35:45]that you'd meet at the residence.
[35:46]When did this shift occur?
[35:51]I think it was 1998
[35:53]when Mr. Epstein moved his residence,
[35:58]his primary residence to the U.S. Virgin Islands
[36:01]and his business to the U.S. Virgin Islands.
[36:05]So he no longer maintained an office in New York.
[36:08]And so when he came to New York,
[36:13]the requirement was to meet at his residence.
[36:20]And I'm gonna ask you a general question here.
[36:23]What were the nature of your communications
[36:25]with Mr. Epstein?
[36:27]Didn't you rephrase the question?
[36:29]What were the nature of your communications
[36:31]with Mr. Epstein?
[36:37]I'm trying to understand.
[36:38]That's very general and I don't really know.
[36:41]Were the nature of your communications
[36:43]always related to the furnishing of legal services?
[36:47]Yes.
[36:48]So for the record,
[36:50]did you ever have any communications with Mr. Epstein
[36:53]related to young women or girls?
[36:55]No, absolutely not.
[37:03]How would you characterize your relationship
[37:05]with Mr. Epstein?
[37:08]It was strictly a business relationship,
[37:10]strictly a legal relationship.
[37:12]For the record, at any point,
[37:14]did you consider Mr. Epstein to be a friend?
[37:17]No.
[37:18]Did you ever spend time with Mr. Epstein
[37:20]apart from your duties as his attorney?
[37:23]I never socialized with Mr. Epstein.
[37:25]I never spent any time with Mr. Epstein
[37:27]other than when I was there for a status report
[37:31]or a legal project for Mr. Epstein.
[37:34]Did you ever consider Epstein to be a mentor?
[37:38]I did, initially.
[37:39]And I could tell you a little story about that.
[37:43]When I first started working for Epstein,
[37:50]I got this assignment,
[37:51]I can't remember the transaction that I was working on,
[37:55]but I got this agreement
[37:59]and he told me I needed to get it reviewed and critiqued
[38:03]and I mark it up, it's the word that they use,
[38:05]mark it up and give me your comments to it.
[38:09]I think I had 24 hours to do it.
[38:12]So I went back to my office,
[38:15]spent a very long time in my office,
[38:17]probably like 11 o'clock, 12 o'clock that night,
[38:20]marking the thing up,
[38:21]and when I gave it to him, it was full of red.
[38:23]It was completely red
[38:24]and I thought I had done a fabulous job
[38:26]in marking up an agreement
[38:27]and showing all the ways the agreement was defective.
[38:31]When he looked at it,
[38:32]kind of looked at it and said,
[38:33]well, what am I supposed to do with this?
[38:35]So I have a transaction
[38:37]and I have to get done within the next week.
[38:39]This is never gonna,
[38:42]first of all, I don't know what's real,
[38:43]what's not real here,
[38:44]what's important, what's not important here.
[38:46]This, I can never get a transaction done
[38:48]if this is what I have to do.
[38:49]So then I'll take this back
[38:50]and go find me the 10 most important things
[38:53]and rank them in order of importance to me.
[38:58]And I learned a huge lesson from that.
[39:00]And he taught me about being a practical lawyer,
[39:03]not just a lawyer that's finding
[39:08]every possible theoretical kind of loophole in an agreement.
[39:13]So in that respect, I thought he was very helpful.
[39:19]And so that's,
[39:20]and he had other kind of advice to me like that.
[39:23]Those types of things in being a lawyer to,
[39:28]don't guess at things
[39:30]that I don't know, tell them what I don't know,
[39:31]tell them what I do know.
[39:33]And if I don't know, tell them I don't know.
[39:35]Those are the types of things
[39:37]that he taught me to do as a lawyer,
[39:40]which were helpful to other people
[39:42]that I was working with as a lawyer.
[39:46]Mr. Indy, would you,
[39:48]I mean, that's helpful advice.
[39:50]You don't be just technically proficient.
[39:52]You help facilitate the deal like that.
[39:57]When you were working with him,
[40:00]you never sat down and had a drink.
[40:02]He's never sat down and smoked a cigar with him.
[40:05]No, never.
[40:07]Two things, he doesn't drink, doesn't smoke,
[40:10]but that wasn't our relationship.
[40:13]He didn't ever say come along to have a cocktail party
[40:16]after work, come on, nothing like that.
[40:18]He was never invited to a single dinner party
[40:20]that he hadn't had a few.
[40:22]Thank you.
[40:33]Did you ever ask Mr. Epstein for personal favors?
[40:40]Let me see how to answer that question.
[40:42]I asked him for help when I was,
[40:48]I think it's my first year or so, sorry,
[40:51]my first year or so when I worked for him.
[40:54]I don't remember the exact time period.
[41:00]My wife and I were having fertility issues
[41:05]and infertility treatments were quite expensive
[41:10]and they weren't covered by insurance.
[41:13]So I had asked him if it was possible for me
[41:18]to forego the insurance.
[41:22]And in lieu of the amount of money
[41:24]that he was paying for insurance at the time,
[41:28]if I could take that money and apply it
[41:31]towards the cost of infertility treatments.
[41:35]And at that time his response to me was absolutely not,
[41:40]you should keep your medical insurance
[41:43]and I will pay for your infertility treatment.
[41:46]Subsequent to that, it didn't work
[41:49]and it didn't work I think four other times.
[41:53]Subsequent to that, without me having to ask,
[41:56]he would tell me when are we doing the next one?
[41:59]And so Epstein paid for all of our infertility
[42:04]treatments until we were able to conceive.
[42:10]This time I'd like to introduce
[42:12]what will be marked as Majority Exhibit 3.
[42:17]And this is a letter sent in 2008
[42:19]by Mr. Epstein's criminal defense lawyers
[42:21]to prosecutors in Florida
[42:23]when Epstein was under investigations
[42:25]for crimes committed against minors.
[42:27]This is a compilation of statements
[42:29]from various employees of Mr. Epstein,
[42:31]all attesting to his good character.
[42:36]This document is based under EFTA 2857458.
[42:44]And I would like to direct your attention to page 13.
[42:48]We're specifically looking at the bottom and page 14.
[42:51]And I will give you a moment to reveal.
[43:05]So page 13.
[43:07]Thank you.
[44:17]And for the record,
[44:19]we're reviewing the italicized portion.
[44:22]Did you write this Mr. Indyk?
[44:26]I believe I did.
[44:27]And why did you contribute a statement
[44:31]for this, for this filing?
[44:41]We'll see.
[44:41]This was for, I believe I was asked
[44:55]by defense counsel to contribute a statement for him.
[45:03]So there's a part where you mentioned
[45:05]that Mr. Epstein had provided emotional
[45:07]and financial support,
[45:09]is that in reference to what you previously described
[45:13]as help for infertility issues?
[45:16]Yes.
[45:18]And for the record, again,
[45:19]why did Jeffrey Epstein offer to pay for these services?
[45:26]I can't tell you what was in his own mind,
[45:28]but I can tell you my perception was
[45:30]that he was being generous to me.
[45:33]He didn't really know me very long
[45:35]and there was no kind of obvious benefit to him
[45:40]at that stage in my career with him.
[45:42]So I guess he was being generous.
[45:48]I will say this, that in the years that followed his,
[45:54]he did this kind of thing for other employees,
[45:59]friends, acquaintances, he appeared to be generous.
[46:04]He appeared to understand that his money
[46:06]could do good things and he appeared to use his money
[46:09]to do things like that for people.
[46:12]Did he provide you any other support
[46:15]besides the infertility or support?
[46:20]Can you be more specific in terms of a time frame?
[46:23]Well, we're looking at this character reference
[46:26]around this time, 2008.
[46:31]No, but that was a big deal, obviously.
[46:36]It was a very difficult time for my wife and I
[46:40]and it was very meaningful to me
[46:44]to have that support.
[46:46]We've had another member of Congress join.
[46:48]Can she please identify herself for the record?
[46:52]George and Congresswoman Melanie Sandsbury
[46:54]from New Mexico.
[46:58]Mr. Indyke.
[46:59]Yes.
[47:00]It's a poignant letter that you wrote here.
[47:04]Did you see in the whole packet that was submitted
[47:07]as for Stratstein before the submission?
[47:13]I don't recall.
[47:15]Were you aware of what the charges were pending?
[47:20]At the time that you wrote your statement?
[47:23]I'm trying to remember when this statement was written.
[47:30]It was kind of fluid at that time.
[47:32]Well, you knew that there was some kind of criminal
[47:35]allegation against him, which is why you,
[47:37]there was a criminal defense attorney
[47:39]that was asking you to write the letter, right?
[47:41]Yes, there were criminal allegations, again.
[47:43]You know what the allegations were?
[47:48]Again, it depends at what time we're talking about.
[47:54]Can you please speak up for the mic so I can...
[47:56]I'm sorry.
[47:57]I'm sorry, Mr. Indyke.
[47:57]No, no, my apologies.
[47:59]I'm sorry, I'm not speaking well enough.
[48:01]My understanding, basically,
[48:02]that the allegations against him at the time,
[48:06]I think at the time that this was going on,
[48:08]forgive me, it was a while ago,
[48:11]but I think the allegations at that time,
[48:13]this is the state investigation in Palm Beach,
[48:18]were that there were massages at his house.
[48:22]Some of those massages wound up sexual in nature,
[48:28]and that at times, it wound up being the case
[48:34]that some, there were some underage women there
[48:38]in the massages.
[48:40]So you understood that,
[48:42]that those were the allegations
[48:44]or the charges at the time you wrote your letter?
[48:49]I did understand that those were the allegations,
[48:51]but if I could talk a little bit more about that,
[48:54]I'd like to, if that's okay.
[48:56]I'm sure they're gonna get into that.
[48:58]I just wanna ask one other question.
[49:00]You wrote the letter,
[49:02]criminal defense attorney asked you to write the letter.
[49:05]Did you ever discuss the charges with Mr. Epstein
[49:08]before you wrote your statement?
[49:10]No.
[49:12]You never talked to him once
[49:13]about these allegations before,
[49:16]even though you just described somewhat
[49:18]of what you knew about him,
[49:20]you did not discuss that with him at all
[49:22]before you wrote a good character reference for him.
[49:27]To the extent that there were discussions with Epstein,
[49:31]they were always in the presence of defense counsel.
[49:34]There were many lawyers there,
[49:36]and I was a member of that group.
[49:41]So I never had a personal conversation with him
[49:45]like that, like the one that you're suggesting.
[49:48]And during those conversations,
[49:51]I assume that Mr. Epstein wasn't mute.
[49:54]He was speaking perhaps about the charge.
[49:58]So, well, a couple of things.
[50:04]I wanna talk to you about them, but I will say this.
[50:10]I have a balance of privilege here,
[50:12]but I also don't want it to be
[50:14]that I'm trying to withhold anything from you.
[50:17]So at the time that this was going on,
[50:21]what I was learning from the defense people
[50:23]who were investigating it,
[50:25]was that the investigation was full of allegations
[50:32]that were in many ways untrue,
[50:36]contradicted by recorded transcribed statements
[50:39]from the witnesses.
[50:41]What I understood from the attorneys
[50:45]was that the police investigation was flawed
[50:48]and somehow either biased
[50:51]or the facts of that investigation
[50:54]as described in the police report
[50:56]were inconsistent with recorded statements
[50:59]from the witnesses,
[51:00]omitted information that the witnesses gave them
[51:03]in recorded statements.
[51:04]There was even, if I recall,
[51:06]there was even in the police report
[51:12]reference to a trash poll
[51:14]where the police report indicated
[51:16]that they found a sex toy in the trash poll.
[51:20]And it later turned out that what was identified
[51:22]as a sex toy was in fact a broken salad utensil.
[51:26]And so, but when the police use the information
[51:31]from their report in their affidavits
[51:33]and their arrest warrants,
[51:36]they kept the part about it being a sex toys
[51:40]in the garbage bowl,
[51:42]but never mentioned the fact
[51:43]that it was later found to be a salad utensil.
[51:45]There's also no mentioned in that police report
[51:48]about the fact that Epstein had been adamant
[51:52]that he didn't know that anybody was underage.
[51:55]In fact, there was, as I understood it,
[51:58]because I didn't do it,
[51:59]but as I understood it,
[52:00]there was a lie detector test,
[52:03]a polygraph test where Epstein,
[52:05]which indicated that Epstein was being truthful
[52:08]when he said he didn't know about the age.
[52:10]So Mr. Indy, let's go back to an earlier question
[52:14]that I asked you about when in context of that charge,
[52:19]when in context to his adjudication of guilt
[52:22]and his sentencing,
[52:25]I assume, and you can correct me if I'm wrong,
[52:28]that you wrote this in connection with the sentencing
[52:32]or the pre-sentencing report on behalf of the defense.
[52:35]Is that accurate?
[52:36]I don't know for a fact,
[52:38]but that's not what I recollect.
[52:41]Okay.
[52:42]I think this was done previously.
[52:45]So before, so what I find intriguing
[52:49]about what you just testified to,
[52:51]you read some of the other lengthy detail
[52:55]about the theory of the defense of Mr. Epstein,
[53:02]which I'm in trouble contextualizing
[53:04]when you wrote this particular document.
[53:06]I find that intriguing and a little bit difficult
[53:09]for me to understand why.
[53:11]May I just say that the doc,
[53:13]I mean, he didn't write the document,
[53:14]he wrote that excerpt.
[53:16]No, that's correct.
[53:18]Okay.
[53:20]Well, over the course of,
[53:22]the reason I can provide as much detail
[53:25]about the defense position
[53:27]is because that detail has been argued
[53:28]over and over and over again by the defense counsel.
[53:31]So it's something that has stuck in my mind.
[53:35]When this was written, it was written once.
[53:39]I don't, it was also a very long time ago.
[53:43]And so I can't tell you precisely when it was written.
[53:46]And I can't tell you,
[53:49]I just can't tell you the full context
[53:53]when this was submitted.
[53:55]In your opening, you said that after 2008,
[53:59]after his guilty plea,
[54:00]you thought that he was contrite
[54:01]and that he learned from his mistake.
[54:05]And you said that you were horrified to learn
[54:08]of the crimes he committed after.
[54:11]What crimes are you referencing after 2008?
[54:15]So, now with hindsight.
[54:20]Was he ever charged or,
[54:22]I'm unaware of any charged
[54:23]or referencing times post-2008.
[54:26]Is there, what charges are you referencing?
[54:29]What crimes are you referencing?
[54:30]I'm not referencing any charges after 2008.
[54:34]After he was...
[54:37]What conduct after 2008 was criminal?
[54:41]Because you said that you were horrified
[54:43]to learn of his criminal activity after that.
[54:45]In your opening.
[54:46]I'm not sure, I don't think I said
[54:47]I was horrified to learn of his criminal,
[54:50]I was horrified that he hurt people.
[54:52]But all of that is in the context
[54:53]of statements that have emerged since his death.
[54:57]What criminal activity occurred post-2008?
[54:59]I'm unaware of what criminal activity
[55:00]occurred post-2008.
[55:04]I don't specifically know
[55:05]what criminal activity occurred post-2008.
[55:07]I wasn't there.
[55:09]I didn't see any criminal activity.
[55:10]But what I've seen now are allegations
[55:13]by a number of women that have come to light
[55:15]after he died where they settled
[55:17]because these things happened.
[55:18]And while I've never seen him do anything that way,
[55:23]nobody's ever reported anything to me that way.
[55:27]Clearly with all of these women saying this happened
[55:30]after the fact,
[55:32]I cannot say that he didn't do a lot of bad things.
[55:35]And so learning this after his death,
[55:41]I feel horribly.
[55:42]And that's what I said, I do feel horrible.
[55:44]Mr. Indyk, just go back to the statement
[55:47]you wrote that was inserted in the defense statement.
[55:52]I just,
[55:56]wondering if it's,
[55:57]was it your normal practice
[55:59]to write such a letter of recommendation
[56:03]on behalf of someone without full understanding
[56:08]of the ramifications of what you were saying
[56:11]and the allegations and the context
[56:14]with which you were being asked to write that?
[56:16]I mean, did you know
[56:18]why you were being asked to write that specific statement?
[56:22]I knew that people were saying,
[56:25]were making allegations against him
[56:27]which were contrary to what I had observed in him.
[56:32]And the truth is that I felt they asked me
[56:38]for what he had done that was generous to me.
[56:41]And I felt like I could be honest about that.
[56:44]And so that's why I did it.
[56:48]So I'm aware that you were a transactional attorney,
[56:51]probably did general ramifications,
[56:53]but you understood, I would guess,
[56:56]as an attorney somewhere along the pike,
[56:59]I had to understand something about criminal law
[57:02]that your statement
[57:06]was going to be used
[57:07]to facilitate a reduction sentence,
[57:11]reduction in charges,
[57:13]or some benefit to Mr. Epstein
[57:16]in light of the substantial charges
[57:19]which you described in some detail that you were aware of.
[57:23]At the time, first of all,
[57:25]this is the first time anything like that ever happened to me.
[57:28]So to some extent, it's all very new to me.
[57:33]I am still representing the person.
[57:37]The person that I represented
[57:39]and who never exhibited this kind of conduct to me
[57:43]was very generous to me.
[57:47]And at the time...
[57:48]But even though he was generous to you,
[57:53]you understood this was going to be used
[57:55]to facilitate either reduction in sentence
[57:57]or reduction in charges.
[57:58]But I also understood that the answer is,
[58:02]I understood that it was going,
[58:04]I didn't know it was going to be used
[58:05]for reduction of charges or reduction of sentence.
[58:08]I understood it was going to be used
[58:09]to give Pinge law enforcement
[58:12]as a character reference for him.
[58:15]Okay, I did understand that.
[58:16]And so why would you give a character reference
[58:19]if not for reduction in sentence
[58:22]or reduction in charges?
[58:25]I mean, that's why you give something like that
[58:27]to a police agent, is it not?
[58:29]That's not what was going on.
[58:30]That's not what I was thinking at the time.
[58:32]All right.
[58:33]It wasn't.
[58:35]Okay.
[58:37]Mr. Indyk, you referenced attorney-client privilege.
[58:42]I just bore the record.
[58:43]If you wish to assert any privilege,
[58:46]you must say so on the record.
[58:50]So far, there hasn't been a very specific question.
[58:54]If that does arrive, I'll let you know.
[58:57]And we're going to jump around a little bit here,
[58:59]but you had mentioned that the allegations
[59:01]that were made against Mr. Epstein
[59:04]during that 2006, 2008 period,
[59:07]you had mentioned they were untrue.
[59:10]Who, did you make that determination yourself?
[59:13]No, that was communicated to me.
[59:15]Who communicated that to you?
[59:16]And it was communicated through defense counsel.
[59:20]And the reason I can discuss it is
[59:21]it's the same statements that defense counsel made
[59:25]in documents they delivered to the,
[59:28]excuse me, to the government.
[59:30]And for the record, who was the defense counsel?
[59:33]Epstein had a lot of defense attorneys at the time.
[59:38]Off the top of my head, Jerry Lefkort was one,
[59:41]Gerald Lefkort was one.
[59:43]I believe Jack Goldberger was one.
[59:46]I believe Mike Teane was one.
[59:54]Dershowitz, Alan Dershowitz, I think I mentioned.
[59:58]Lily Sanchez, I don't, I'm trying to remember
[1:00:02]who was involved at that particular time.
[1:00:08]Cheryl Reich, I believe, was a lesbian attorney,
[1:00:10]a criminal defense attorney at the time.
[1:00:16]Guy Lewis also.
[1:00:21]Marty, Martin Weinberg, but I, you know,
[1:00:24]the attorneys came on at different times,
[1:00:26]so I can't tell you exactly who came on when.
[1:00:28]In addition to defense counsel,
[1:00:30]did Mr. Epstein hire private investigators?
[1:00:35]I don't know that Mr. Epstein
[1:00:37]hired private investigators.
[1:00:38]I believe the defense counsel hired private investigators.
[1:00:41]Why were private investigators?
[1:00:43]Sorry, Roy Black, I wanna add to that.
[1:00:44]Roy Black was part of this as well.
[1:00:46]Why was, were defense or private investigators hired?
[1:00:53]Not being a criminal defense attorney
[1:00:57]and not being participating at the time
[1:01:00]that they did this, because I came in at,
[1:01:02]I didn't hear anything about the allegations
[1:01:04]until about 2006 or so.
[1:01:07]Many of the attorneys, much of the attorney's work
[1:01:09]had already been done by that time,
[1:01:12]including, I think, the hiring of private investigators.
[1:01:17]So the actual reasons as to why, I don't know,
[1:01:22]but I think my assumption at the time
[1:01:24]is that's kind of what you do
[1:01:25]as a criminal defense attorney is you bring on
[1:01:28]a private investigator to find out information
[1:01:31]so that you can have a full idea of what you're fending.
[1:01:34]For the record, did you ever work
[1:01:36]with these private investigators?
[1:01:39]At some point, I did communicate
[1:01:41]with private investigators, I think, for payment.
[1:01:48]And I'm sure I must have had conversations
[1:01:52]at some point in the process, not early on,
[1:01:54]but I just don't remember.
[1:01:56]But you yourself, as far as the work
[1:01:59]that the private investigators were conducting,
[1:02:00]you didn't direct them?
[1:02:02]For the criminal work that you're talking about,
[1:02:06]absolutely not.
[1:02:09]And earlier you mentioned that you never socialize
[1:02:13]with Mr. Epstein.
[1:02:14]Did Mr. Epstein ever invite you to social events?
[1:02:21]I was invited one time, and it was the only time,
[1:02:26]not a social event with him, frankly,
[1:02:28]but it was a Victoria's Secret fashion show.
[1:02:33]I was invited one time, and that was the only time.
[1:02:36]I think I saw him there once,
[1:02:38]but I certainly didn't socialize with him there.
[1:02:42]And it wasn't just me, it was me,
[1:02:44]Jeff Shands, who I worked with.
[1:02:48]So the attorneys were invited.
[1:02:53]But other than that, no.
[1:02:55]I never was invited to a dinner.
[1:02:57]I never was invited to a show.
[1:02:59]I never invited to any movie or anything with him, no.
[1:03:03]And I want to return back to the statement
[1:03:06]that you provided for Epstein's defense.
[1:03:09]Is it true that you made Mr. Epstein
[1:03:11]a godfather of your children?
[1:03:14]Yes, it was an honorary appellation.
[1:03:19]I had no expectation because I didn't have
[1:03:21]that kind of relationship with him,
[1:03:22]but I wanted to show gratitude,
[1:03:24]do something to show gratitude for how he helped my wife
[1:03:28]and I have our children.
[1:03:30]And so I had asked him, would it be okay?
[1:03:34]And he wouldn't have any obligation to do anything,
[1:03:36]but as a way of honoring him,
[1:03:39]if I could make him honorary godfather, and I did.
[1:03:43]Sorry.
[1:03:44]Based on your testimony,
[1:03:47]your children did not have any relationship
[1:03:49]with Mr. Epstein.
[1:03:49]No, I think in total, they met him twice in the office
[1:03:58]and they were very, very young at the time.
[1:04:02]My wife was there, they were in the office,
[1:04:04]I think it was two times.
[1:04:14]Would you have entrusted Mr. Epstein
[1:04:16]to care for your children?
[1:04:19]To care for my children?
[1:04:20]No, I wouldn't have trusted anybody
[1:04:21]to care for my children.
[1:04:24]Who is Ghislaine Maxwell?
[1:04:27]I, Ghislaine Maxwell was an associate of Jeffrey Epstein.
[1:04:32]When did you first meet Ghislaine Maxwell?
[1:04:36]Sometime after I started working
[1:04:39]representing Epstein in 1996.
[1:04:42]What did you understand her relationship
[1:04:44]to be with Mr. Epstein?
[1:04:49]My understanding in it,
[1:04:51]at the time, my understanding was that
[1:04:53]she was largely kind of an overall household manager.
[1:05:00]Epstein, even then, would travel from different households
[1:05:05]and Ghislaine was responsible for making sure
[1:05:09]that the households were managed properly,
[1:05:12]they were supplied properly,
[1:05:14]that the employees there were doing the cleaning
[1:05:17]and things like that.
[1:05:18]That was my understanding of her role.
[1:05:20]I learned at some point that she had been a girlfriend
[1:05:25]of his, though I do not believe at the time
[1:05:28]that I was there that she was a girlfriend of his.
[1:05:31]And you mentioned that she would manage
[1:05:35]Mr. Epstein's properties.
[1:05:36]Did you ever understand her to have any role
[1:05:38]in arranging or scheduling masseuses for Mr. Epstein?
[1:05:43]No.
[1:05:44]She never talked to you about paying masseuses?
[1:05:47]No.
[1:05:49]How often did you interact with Ghislaine Maxwell?
[1:05:54]When I worked in the office in New York City
[1:06:02]on Madison Avenue, she had an office there.
[1:06:05]So she appeared from time to time.
[1:06:07]She wasn't in my section of the office,
[1:06:09]but she was there.
[1:06:11]So I would say hello, that kind of thing.
[1:06:15]And it wasn't super frequent, but I saw her.
[1:06:21]I saw her there.
[1:06:22]As far as your day-to-day
[1:06:23]and the legal services you were providing,
[1:06:25]did you have any interactions with her?
[1:06:29]At times I did.
[1:06:30]Again, most of my stuff was very specific.
[1:06:33]It was transactional.
[1:06:35]So there were times I believe
[1:06:37]Maxwell purchased a townhouse.
[1:06:40]So I did work for that townhouse,
[1:06:44]the purchase of that townhouse.
[1:06:47]I believe she had me look at an agreement or two
[1:06:56]I can't recall which agreements off the top of my head,
[1:06:58]but I believe she had me look at agreements or two.
[1:07:01]And sometimes she would convey requests by Epstein
[1:07:06]for me to do some kind of a transactional
[1:07:09]or corporate work for her.
[1:07:11]And you mentioned the acquisition of the property.
[1:07:14]This past week we had Mr. Kahn testify
[1:07:16]and he said that there were accounting work
[1:07:18]that he did for Ms. Maxwell
[1:07:21]and she don't want to mischaracterize this testimony,
[1:07:24]but said effectively that she didn't pay.
[1:07:27]Did she pay you for the work that you did for her?
[1:07:31]No, it was done to the extent I did work for her
[1:07:35]was at the authorization of Epstein.
[1:07:42]Would you consider Glenn Maxwell
[1:07:44]at any point to be a friend of yours?
[1:07:46]No.
[1:07:50]Do you believe that Maxwell facilitated Epstein's
[1:07:53]access to minor victims?
[1:07:56]I don't know.
[1:08:14]Mr. Indyk, I want the record to be clear
[1:08:16]so I'm gonna ask you some questions related
[1:08:19]to the investigation of Mr. Epstein in 2005.
[1:08:25]When did you first become aware that
[1:08:27]there was an investigation into Mr. Epstein's conduct
[1:08:30]in Southern Florida?
[1:08:33]Not entirely certain.
[1:08:35]I believe it was 2006, 2007.
[1:08:38]And for the record, you did not have any knowledge
[1:08:41]of the illegal activity by Mr. Epstein
[1:08:45]prior to his arrest.
[1:08:46]I'd worked for him for a decade
[1:08:48]and I had no knowledge of anything,
[1:08:50]any allegations being made against him like that.
[1:08:53]On October 20th of 2005,
[1:08:55]police executed a search warrant
[1:08:57]for Mr. Epstein's Palm Beach, Florida home.
[1:08:59]Do you recall this occurring?
[1:09:03]Can you tell me the date again?
[1:09:05]October 20th, 2005.
[1:09:13]I don't think I knew contemporaneous.
[1:09:17]Palm Beach detective, Joseph Ripper,
[1:09:19]spoke out about his belief that Epstein
[1:09:21]was tipped off about the raid
[1:09:22]since multiple computers expected to be at his house
[1:09:25]were missing when the search warrant was executed.
[1:09:28]To your knowledge, did anyone tip off Jeffrey Epstein
[1:09:31]to the October 20th search warrant in Palm Beach?
[1:09:34]I don't know.
[1:09:41]When you visited Mr. Epstein's properties,
[1:09:43]did you notice cameras?
[1:09:50]Did we specify which property?
[1:09:54]Well, you mentioned the Manhattan property
[1:09:57]at one point.
[1:09:58]Sure.
[1:09:59]So let's break it down, the Manhattan property.
[1:10:03]My understanding about the cameras,
[1:10:05]there were cameras in the Manhattan property.
[1:10:09]My understanding is that they were external cameras.
[1:10:13]There was a security room
[1:10:15]when you first walked in to the right
[1:10:17]that had monitors of the external cameras
[1:10:21]that were all around the perimeter, the outside,
[1:10:24]the outside of his townhouse.
[1:10:30]I later found out,
[1:10:32]and by later I mean,
[1:10:36]I think,
[1:10:39]after things start to get conflated,
[1:10:41]but I think I found this out
[1:10:43]after he got arrested the second time,
[1:10:48]that there was one camera,
[1:10:52]and this was probably even after he died,
[1:10:55]he had a safe room in the house.
[1:10:59]I didn't even know there was a safe room in the house,
[1:11:01]but he had a safe room in the house,
[1:11:03]and there was a camera outside the safe room in the house.
[1:11:07]Those are the cameras that I knew about in New York.
[1:11:12]In Florida,
[1:11:15]there was much made about,
[1:11:17]I think it was in the press,
[1:11:18]again, a lot has gone on
[1:11:22]and lots of reports have come out since then,
[1:11:24]but I believe in Florida,
[1:11:26]there was a reference to cameras in his house,
[1:11:31]but there were cameras, as I understand it,
[1:11:33]that the police helped put in there
[1:11:37]because there was concern
[1:11:40]that somebody was stealing from him.
[1:11:42]So they put the cameras, I think,
[1:11:45]in his desk on the ground floor,
[1:11:48]and I wasn't sure if there was maybe one
[1:11:50]in the garage as well,
[1:11:53]but those are the cameras that I knew about.
[1:11:55]There have been allegations
[1:11:57]that Mr. Rapsine would record visits
[1:12:00]at various properties,
[1:12:02]as you don't know anything about that?
[1:12:05]I've heard the allegations.
[1:12:08]I know of no recordings.
[1:12:11]I don't know of cameras that would have done that.
[1:12:19]Mr. Indyk, excuse me.
[1:12:22]Yes.
[1:12:23]The majority has about five minutes,
[1:12:25]and I just want to make sure the record is clear,
[1:12:27]and I'm going to ask you numerous yes or no questions.
[1:12:32]First, how did Mr. Rapsine,
[1:12:35]or this is not a yes or no question,
[1:12:38]how did Mr. Rapsine act towards the young women
[1:12:40]or girls that he surrounded himself with?
[1:12:46]The question assumes that I saw him surround himself
[1:12:49]with young women or girls.
[1:12:50]It's not true.
[1:12:51]Did you ever witness Mr. Rapsine
[1:12:53]engage in sexual conduct?
[1:12:56]I never witnessed Mr. Rapsine engage in sexual conduct.
[1:12:59]Did you ever witness Mr. Rapsine
[1:13:01]have sexual conduct of any kind
[1:13:02]with young women or girls?
[1:13:04]I never witnessed Mr. Rapsine
[1:13:06]have any sexual conduct, period.
[1:13:08]Did you ever witness Mr. Rapsine
[1:13:10]sexually abuse or assault young women or girls?
[1:13:13]I never witnessed that, no.
[1:13:16]Did Mr. Rapsine ever discuss
[1:13:18]sexual acts of any kind with you?
[1:13:20]No.
[1:13:22]Was it common for Mr. Epstein or Miss Maxwell to bring young women or girls to any other place where the two of you meet?
[1:13:31]The only women that were ever in my presence
[1:13:34]to my recollection with one exception
[1:13:36]I'll get to that in a second
[1:13:38]were women who were either in their 20s or in their 30s who were assistants
[1:13:43]who I understood to be personal assistants of Epstein.
[1:13:47]He says you had an exception.
[1:13:49]I'm sorry and the exception is he had a goddaughter and I
[1:13:55]this is a
[1:13:57]I don't know that I feel comfortable giving her name, but he had a goddaughter
[1:14:03]that I believe he had seen from time to time and I had met from time to time
[1:14:10]a couple of times I think because she would when I was in his
[1:14:13]when I was in his home
[1:14:16]in his dining room. She had come into the dining room.
[1:14:18]Can I just be clear that the exception was that's the only person who you saw as a minor female in the present?
[1:14:24]Correct. Okay, just to be clear.
[1:14:26]Who are the assistants that you're referencing?
[1:14:38]Ratlana Pazadeva
[1:14:45]There was a woman by the name of
[1:14:51]there was
[1:14:56]Another woman by the name of if you have some names I could I could tell you if I recall them or not
[1:15:05]and we'll have more specific questions. Okay. Um, did Mr. Epstein have children of his own?
[1:15:11]Of my knowledge, no
[1:15:19]Did Epstein or Maxwell ever ask if you wanted them to bring women or girls to you?
[1:15:24]Never
[1:15:26]Did you ever have any sexual contact with young women or girls in the presence of Epstein or Maxwell? Absolutely not
[1:15:34]Did you ever have sexual contact with any young woman or girl introduced to you by Epstein or Maxwell? Absolutely not
[1:15:42]Did you ever witness Mr. Epstein receive a massage from a young woman or girl? No
[1:15:50]Did you ever receive any massages from any young woman or girl brought to you by or introduced to you by Mr.
[1:15:57]Epstein or Ms. Maxwell? No
[1:16:07]We'll go off the record
[1:16:23]You can go on the record
[1:16:26]Mr. Endicke, good morning. Good morning. I understand that. Um, Ms. Crockett has a statement just briefly
[1:16:31]Um as you go through your line of questioning
[1:16:34]Yes, when you reference someone if you say the assistant if you say the partner
[1:16:39]Can you also make sure that you reference their name after you label their title for clarity of the record?
[1:16:46]I'll try to remember that. Yes. Thank you. Sure
[1:16:48]Um
[1:16:50]Mr. Endicke
[1:16:51]I'm going to revisit some of the areas that you discussed with my majority colleagues in the previous round
[1:16:57]In doing that, I don't want to make you repeat yourself. I just want to make sure that we have as clear a record as possible
[1:17:03]okay, um, so
[1:17:05]Going back to the time when Mr. Epstein first hired you did you have a title?
[1:17:13]Attorney
[1:17:16]um and
[1:17:17]If I understood your testimony correctly, you were the sole proprietor of an entity
[1:17:23]Called Darren Endicke PLLC. Is that right? Darren K. Endicke
[1:17:31]And I don't think I
[1:17:32]Did I give that name? But that is that is thank you
[1:17:37]and
[1:17:38]If I also understand correctly, Jeffrey Epstein was the sole client of Darren K. Endicke PLLC. Is that right?
[1:17:46]He was a the primary client
[1:17:48]um
[1:17:49]from time to time
[1:17:52]He was the primary client and from time to time I would do things
[1:17:56]For him and for his clients
[1:17:59]But he was a primary client and there were times when friends or acquaintances or somebody else would come
[1:18:06]um, I wouldn't take on
[1:18:08]jobs
[1:18:09]very often because the expectation was that I would be
[1:18:13]available
[1:18:15]Uh at all times and that I would get projects
[1:18:20]For Epstein and sometimes it's for Epstein's clients
[1:18:23]I would get a project and the expectation was as soon as that project came to me
[1:18:27]That would be the most important thing we did and I would get it done very quickly
[1:18:33]so
[1:18:34]It wasn't you know part of
[1:18:37]What I had to do was be available to make sure that I could respond to those things on that basis
[1:18:42]And if I brought on more clients that would interfere with that
[1:18:49]Are you familiar with an entity called Jay Epstein and co?
[1:18:53]um
[1:18:55]Yes, I I
[1:18:57]I am familiar with that entity. I believe it's called Jay Epstein and company
[1:19:01]And were you associated with it in any way?
[1:19:05]A long time ago, but I believe that's the entity that initially employed me
[1:19:12]And over what period of time did Jay Epstein and company employ you?
[1:19:18]I don't remember the exact end date, but it was from 1996
[1:19:22]for
[1:19:24]Three or so years
[1:19:27]And was there another entity that employed you following Jay Epstein and company there was another entity called new york strategy group
[1:19:34]Which was primarily owned by shants
[1:19:38]Why i'm sorry by jeffrey shants the partner that brought me in there
[1:19:42]I
[1:19:43]Believe I had a minority ownership of that LLC was an LLC
[1:19:48]And over what period of time were you employed through new york strategy group?
[1:19:55]I believe that
[1:19:58]New york strategy group
[1:20:00]was my
[1:20:02]employer until
[1:20:06]I want to say
[1:20:15]2006 or 7
[1:20:17]and at some point um
[1:20:20]I became
[1:20:21]The primary owner of new york strategy group
[1:20:25]And when did darren endike pll sorry darren k endike pllc come into existence that came into existence
[1:20:33]I believe in 2008 again. It was some time ago, but I believe it was in 2008
[1:20:40]Does jay epstein and company still exist? No
[1:20:43]When was it
[1:20:44]Wound down
[1:20:47]I believe jay epstein and company
[1:20:50]Was wound down
[1:20:52]when epstein moved his primary residence to the u.s virgin islands
[1:20:56]And formed a company
[1:20:59]there
[1:21:01]I don't I don't remember the date exactly but I think the company's name is financial trust company inc
[1:21:07]and um
[1:21:10]Jay epstein company was discontinued at that point. I believe
[1:21:14]Did you have any association with financial trust company inc? I believed
[1:21:19]Uh, I was at some point a corporate secretary
[1:21:24]May have been a a vice president in an administrative sense
[1:21:37]You were asked earlier about your communications with
[1:21:43]Jeffrey epstein. Are you aware of jeffrey epstein ever using
[1:21:47]Encrypted messaging software or an encrypted messaging app such as signal as part of the things that I did for epstein
[1:22:02]once he became a uh a registered sex offender, um, I had to
[1:22:08]report
[1:22:10]Or include in a report to the to the new york sex offender registry
[1:22:16]Um apps that he had used or that that he had a presence on
[1:22:22]I want to say that at some point
[1:22:25]um
[1:22:26]I remember signal
[1:22:29]Being used and maybe what's app though
[1:22:36]I don't I can't tell you one at the time you started working for jeffrey epstein
[1:22:49]What was his net worth to your knowledge and approximate number is fine. I don't know
[1:22:55]Um, did you come to know that later in time? Um
[1:23:00]Well, I certainly I know it when he died because i'm the co-executor of the state I had to know it
[1:23:06]um
[1:23:07]and um
[1:23:10]There were times that I could recall over the you know before I became executor hearing
[1:23:17]Net worths around, you know half a billion
[1:23:21]Sometimes less sometimes 300 million but you know account his accounting for his assets and his
[1:23:28]His wealth
[1:23:29]That wasn't that wasn't my role
[1:23:32]So if I heard it I heard it in passing not
[1:23:36]necessarily something that I would
[1:23:38]That I would be kind of investigating or reporting and whose role was it to keep track of that?
[1:23:44]the accounting department
[1:23:46]and specifically who
[1:23:49]I I I think it's rich con would do that. Um, I think that was part of his role when he when he joined
[1:23:59]and
[1:24:00]Over the period of time during which mr. Epstein employed you what to your understanding were the sources of his wealth
[1:24:08]um
[1:24:10]Primarily they were um clients
[1:24:13]that he worked for
[1:24:15]And investments that he made he was he he was um, they did very well with investment funds
[1:24:23]You know
[1:24:24]I'm i'm not a a financial markets kind of person
[1:24:28]Um, was it my that was it my
[1:24:31]kind of skill skill set but
[1:24:35]My understanding was the reputation that he had was that he was
[1:24:39]skilled with understanding financial markets currencies
[1:24:42]options
[1:24:44]securities trading
[1:24:45]but that um
[1:24:48]He didn't his business wasn't as an investment advisor. His business was a market financial consultant
[1:24:54]um, but he made um, but he did um
[1:24:58]Have participations in funds
[1:25:01]And those funds those funds yielded him pretty pretty
[1:25:05]Solid results. So between the funds
[1:25:08]And the clientele that he had that paid him
[1:25:12]Fees over time. That's that's where his wealth came from from my understanding if we could focus on the client servicing piece
[1:25:18]How many clients did he have during the time that you worked for him?
[1:25:23]um
[1:25:26]I'm trying to I can I can name them. I never actually thought about how many but um
[1:25:33]Wes wexner clearly
[1:25:36]Um when I first joined he was doing or he'd given me some kind of an assignment to do for david rockefeller
[1:25:42]I don't know if rockefeller was a paying client
[1:25:45]I wouldn't you know, that's not something I I wasn't again. That wasn't my role, but it did work for david rockefeller
[1:25:51]um
[1:25:53]Um
[1:25:55]I believe
[1:25:58]elizabeth johnson
[1:26:05]And um, I know there was work done for mort zuckerman leon black
[1:26:22]um, I know
[1:26:24]the what the rothschilds
[1:26:28]Trying to remember which of them or what entity but I don't that be ariana rothschild
[1:26:33]I know the name ariana rothschild and it's possible that it was for ariana, but i'm not 100% certain
[1:26:41]um glenn dubin
[1:26:44]So glenn dubin, I don't
[1:26:47]Think glenn dubin was a client like a like a client in the same sense that wexner was a client
[1:26:54]um
[1:26:55]Dubin as I understand it
[1:26:57]That you know, there are a couple of different ways that he was connected with david
[1:27:02]um
[1:27:03]dubin had
[1:27:05]Funds that he invested in that he needed to get your money off these funds
[1:27:09]Uh, I think dubin if I recall
[1:27:13]He referred jeffrey to invest in a fund called I think it's db's worm
[1:27:21]I don't remember the full name, but that's that's the fun name and there was a dispute about db's worm
[1:27:27]uh that got fairly
[1:27:31]Fairly elevated
[1:27:32]Uh, and as part of the resolution of that dispute there was a settlement that came about came about
[1:27:39]It's part of the resolution of that dispute because it was glenn's
[1:27:43]dubin's
[1:27:44]referral
[1:27:46]to that fund
[1:27:48]dubin had
[1:27:50]some kind of um compensation
[1:27:53]Payment to epstein to settle that case
[1:27:57]And the last thing that I recall is
[1:28:01]Dubin had a company
[1:28:03]You don't remember the name of the company right now. It's a city here, but um
[1:28:07]That company was purchased by jp morgan
[1:28:10]I believe and I believe
[1:28:14]Epstein got a um
[1:28:16]Got a finder sheet for that, uh, and that was a one-off thing. It wasn't it wasn't like, you know
[1:28:21]I've seen most
[1:28:23]Uh kind of representing dubin all the time or things like that. I mean, what about stephen sonovsky?
[1:28:31]I know the name
[1:28:32]um
[1:28:33]they don't
[1:28:35]Know and I believe that that there was a payment from sonovsky
[1:28:40]I just don't know. I don't know the nature of that relationship
[1:28:45]And just going down
[1:28:48]The roster
[1:28:49]To the best of your recollection how much each of these people pay epstein for the services he provided to them
[1:28:56]Then i'll start with les wexner
[1:28:58]I I really don't know how much wexner paid him. That was a lot. It was a lot
[1:29:01]But I just don't know how much
[1:29:03]And what was the nature of the work that epstein did for les wexner, um a variety of things
[1:29:10]As I understood it
[1:29:12]And his relationship with wexner predates my arrival there
[1:29:16]But as I understood it
[1:29:19]Sometimes people who obtain kind of this ultra high net worth standing
[1:29:24]Um get there gradually over time
[1:29:27]And they kind of build their
[1:29:30]their
[1:29:31]offices
[1:29:32]Gradually over time and when they do that
[1:29:34]It becomes inefficient. There are people who are not
[1:29:38]Necessarily doing things and getting paid to do things
[1:29:41]uh, and there are people doubling up on things and so part of the thing that epstein did
[1:29:46]At least for wexner that I can recall being told about was kind of cleaning house a little bit
[1:29:52]um
[1:29:53]also
[1:29:54]They would do things for wexner like for example, even you know
[1:29:59]somebody at that level of wealth has
[1:30:01]lots and lots and lots of assets and
[1:30:05]All of those things are jewelry all of that stuff require insurance
[1:30:09]but
[1:30:10]Unless you're unless you're kind of born into it
[1:30:13]You don't know what how you're supposed to deal with that and how you're supposed to deal with that is photograph it
[1:30:19]And and appraise it so so all of that so that all of that's for record government something happens to it
[1:30:25]um
[1:30:26]You have good records to justify your insurance money
[1:30:30]So they helped organize it helped organize it that way
[1:30:34]um
[1:30:38]Jeffrey did tax work estate planning work not to interrupt you i'm receiving another request for you to speak up
[1:30:42]I think i'm sorry some of our members are having to apologize hearing you
[1:30:46]Um, is it if I move this closer would it help? Let's try it. Yeah, let's do that. Sorry my voice is not
[1:30:52]I think it's for the people in the room just a little yeah, right the mic's gonna so I apologize to everybody. Um
[1:30:59]Let's see. So Epstein also did estate planning
[1:31:03]work, um did
[1:31:05]um tax tax planning help people kind of
[1:31:09]Achieve kind of better tax results more tax-efficient results for themselves
[1:31:13]um, I don't know that too much of the detail behind
[1:31:18]This but it was my understanding that um
[1:31:22]Um with respect to rexner
[1:31:25]Epstein helped him
[1:31:27]um gain
[1:31:29]Greater liquidity with the wealth that he did have because um things like that
[1:31:34]um
[1:31:35]Help but that's a that's a helpful picture and I I appreciate that
[1:31:40]That's why yeah
[1:31:42]um
[1:31:43]Moving down the list and I think if we could just
[1:31:45]Cabin the answers to
[1:31:47]The amount that each one of these people paid Epstein to the extent you recall sure. Um, the next name is leon black
[1:31:54]um
[1:31:56]The way I know this
[1:31:58]Is it's not because I I kind of tracked it or reported on it
[1:32:02]That is based upon what I kind of read through the papers. So
[1:32:06]Liam black he did work for I can confirm that
[1:32:09]I heard
[1:32:10]Reports that it was something like 158 million dollars and that wouldn't seem
[1:32:15]un
[1:32:16]Unreasonable to me
[1:32:18]And david rockefeller. I don't know
[1:32:21]Elizabeth johnson. I also don't know was it she wasn't she was like
[1:32:26]A different lawyer by the name of um
[1:32:30]Mandy ellison was the lawyer that worked on uh on her account
[1:32:34]And mort zuckerman. I don't know how much money if any um that he that he got from work and then the roth childs
[1:32:42]Uh, also don't I don't know
[1:32:50]Shifting back to the period in time when epstein hired you. Yes
[1:32:56]Were you aware that he had an affinity for young women?
[1:33:00]No
[1:33:01]Or for teenage girls. No, absolutely. No
[1:33:04]Did you become aware of that over time?
[1:33:08]The only way I became aware of the allegation that he had an affinity for teenage girls
[1:33:13]Was to was once I was kind of learned about the investigation in palm beach
[1:33:21]Did you become aware at any point that epstein sexually abused young women and teenage girls?
[1:33:28]um
[1:33:30]I became aware of the allegation in in palm beach that
[1:33:35]um
[1:33:37]There were
[1:33:39]Massages
[1:33:41]Which at times ended up sexual and that in some cases there were underage people in those massages
[1:33:50]Um, my understanding at the time was that he was unaware of their age
[1:33:56]um
[1:33:59]That my understanding is that the statements given by the people who gave police statements were that
[1:34:06]um
[1:34:07]There wasn't force used
[1:34:09]There wasn't coercion used
[1:34:11]Those are the statements being made not I i'm not testifying it to myself as to what I know because I don't
[1:34:17]um, but those are the statements no force no coercion
[1:34:22]um and that
[1:34:24]that
[1:34:27]The the conduct was voluntary
[1:34:33]um, but again, i'm not
[1:34:35]Commenting underaged. Okay. I'm not making any comment on it
[1:34:38]But underage can I just ask if you were asking if he was ever personally aware for he's talking about allegations, but
[1:34:45]We veered off a bit. So yeah, I was I was focused on the personal knowledge
[1:34:50]I'm, sorry. I have no personal knowledge of that. We'll come back to that. Um
[1:34:54]Um
[1:34:55]During your employment. Mr. Khan, um with jeffrey epstein. Did you ever mr. Endyke? I'm so sorry
[1:35:02]That's okay
[1:35:03]I beg your pardon during your employment. Mr. Endyke with jeffrey epstein
[1:35:07]Did you ever discuss with him his sexual activity with young women whether consensual or otherwise? No
[1:35:13]Did you ever discuss that topic with anyone else?
[1:35:19]The topic generally i'm sure came up during the legal conversation conversations
[1:35:23]Um
[1:35:27]You were speaking during the previous round about mr. Epstein's arrest in florida
[1:35:34]When did you learn about his arrest?
[1:35:38]Again
[1:35:39]The timing is a little bit
[1:35:41]It's a little bit clouded to me. I I don't believe I knew about it until 2006
[1:35:48]How did you become aware of it?
[1:35:58]I believe
[1:36:02]Trying to remember back. I believe epstein told me
[1:36:11]And did that conversation happen in person? It was an in-person conversation. I I want to say it was um
[1:36:19]It was sorry it was an in-person conversation
[1:36:23]And I want to say it was
[1:36:30]In new york. I just don't remember where in new york
[1:36:38]And how long after the arrest did that conversation take place?
[1:36:43]I don't know
[1:36:45]What did mr. Epstein tell you during that conversation that he was charged that
[1:36:52]the
[1:36:54]He didn't really go into the details of the charges
[1:36:57]This is such that this is more substance of it because I don't remember the specific conversation
[1:37:03]And then he told me that there were lawyers working on it with him and that I should work with it
[1:37:11]What was your reaction?
[1:37:14]Surprised and shocked to be honest
[1:37:16]Did you ask him for any additional details about the arrest or the nature of the charges?
[1:37:21]I think I was so surprised that I I didn't think to and also my relationship with him wasn't
[1:37:26]So that I could get so deeply personal
[1:37:29]And I had never been involved with anything like that before so I didn't really know what to do
[1:37:35]Was the rest of mr. Epstein's staff informed of the arrest at some point
[1:37:41]Yes at some point. I I don't remember when
[1:37:45]um
[1:37:47]When to your knowledge was mr. Conn informed of the arrest
[1:37:58]I don't know
[1:38:01]Did you ever discuss it with him?
[1:38:04]In passing, but nothing nothing in details
[1:38:07]What was the conversation in passing?
[1:38:11]Just
[1:38:13]um the arrest
[1:38:14]Uh, I think maybe when he lost banking privileges there was must have been about the arrests
[1:38:20]you know, um
[1:38:24]Nothing
[1:38:26]Rich con and I do not get into detail about Jeffrey Epstein's arrests. What did you discuss with respect to the loss of banking privileges?
[1:38:35]Um again
[1:38:40]Substance not detail that the banking privileges that chase were lost that um
[1:38:48]And then again, I don't I don't know if if
[1:38:52]Actually other than that the banking privileges lost. I don't know that I have enough detail to
[1:38:57]They give you more than that. Was it your understanding that the privileges that chase were lost as a result of mr
[1:39:03]Epstein's arrest
[1:39:05]It was an assumption
[1:39:07]More than an understanding because I don't know if anybody's experienced this but when banks deny
[1:39:14]Services to you. They don't as a as a general rule tell you why they just say no
[1:39:19]I don't know
[1:39:21]But your assumption was that it was linked to the arrest as opposed to a different cause yes
[1:39:28]There was lots of publicity at the time
[1:39:31]I think that this happened and so
[1:39:37]And I also understand from your testimony during the previous round that you ultimately represented mr
[1:39:43]Epstein along with other counsel in connection with his arrest and prosecution in florida
[1:39:48]I was never the direct defense counsel
[1:39:51]But I was brought on as a group of people that were
[1:39:55]So it would be fair to say that you were a member of his defense team
[1:39:58]Yes, very loosely, but yes
[1:40:01]so
[1:40:02]I think that anticipates my next question. Was there an allocation of responsibility among the members of the team did
[1:40:09]Certain lawyers have responsibilities that differed from others
[1:40:16]You can't talk about how he allocated responsibility among the lawyers. There wasn't a group wasn't a group meeting like
[1:40:22]Let's you do this. You do that. You do the other thing based on your observation my observation was that
[1:40:29]There was a group of lawyers at the time all of whom kind of shared information and did things together
[1:40:36]um
[1:40:37]I my role was
[1:40:39]Kind of specific tasks. Excuse me task oriented
[1:40:47]Sometimes I would um
[1:40:50]if
[1:40:51]if
[1:40:52]Epstein would ask me did
[1:40:54]So-and-so do this yet. Could you ask them to do this or ask them when they're going to do this?
[1:40:58]um
[1:41:00]but um
[1:41:02]I believe it was more like a group a group thing
[1:41:06]Um, some people some people were better writers and others marty marty lineberg was a very good writer
[1:41:12]Um jay lefkowitz also a very good writer
[1:41:16]But I think as as a rule everybody kind of worked together and
[1:41:27]What to your understanding were the crimes that jeffrey epstein ultimately fled to
[1:41:33]Um, my understanding was that there were two charges
[1:41:38]One charge was a solicitation of prostitution
[1:41:41]And the other charge was procuring prostitution of someone under the age of 18
[1:41:49]And
[1:41:51]You know, please correct me if i'm wrong. I understand from your testimony earlier
[1:41:55]Um that you were aware of the requirement that jeffrey epstein register as a sex offender in various states as a result of his plea
[1:42:03]Is that right? Yes, I became aware of that. Yes, um, and that included new york state
[1:42:09]Yes, there was an initial registration in new york
[1:42:12]Um, and you were involved in the registration. Is that right? Uh, yes, I believe, uh, I was involved in the registration
[1:42:21]Um, and did you become aware in connection with that that jeffrey epstein was designated a level three sex offender in new york state
[1:42:29]um
[1:42:32]The answer to your question. Yes
[1:42:34]um, but that was after um
[1:42:37]a whole
[1:42:38]A a round of a litigation the issue was litigated the issue was litigated
[1:42:43]Yes, and were you part of the legal team that represented him in connection with that litigation loosely loosely
[1:42:49]um
[1:42:51]and
[1:42:52]Was it your understanding at the time that level three under new york state law meant that there had been a determination that epstein?
[1:42:59]posed a high risk of a repeat offense and a threat to public safety, um
[1:43:05]I understood he had a it was a different designation, but I don't I didn't understand that
[1:43:13]Broadly speaking were you troubled by mr. Epstein's guilty plea at incarceration in florida?
[1:43:20]Um
[1:43:23]Was I
[1:43:24]troubled, um
[1:43:29]I was troubled
[1:43:31]I guess the answer is
[1:43:33]Yes, I I it was troubling
[1:43:36]um
[1:43:37]the
[1:43:39]The problem I have in grasping and kind of tackling the question you have is is not really knowing
[1:43:44]What it is?
[1:43:45]you know
[1:43:46]It has come as as it's come to pass clearly he did something
[1:43:51]But at the time what I was struggling with is what it is that that she actually did do
[1:43:56]um
[1:43:57]I think I went into the previously I went into how the police reports were
[1:44:02]Inconsistent with recorded statements how there were references to items as sex toys
[1:44:07]Which weren't were broken salad utensils. There was even a statement in
[1:44:12]from
[1:44:13]I never heard the statement directly
[1:44:15]But I was made aware of a statement made by the lead prosecutor in florida
[1:44:21]Um
[1:44:22]Who was a female?
[1:44:24]Experienced sex crimes prosecutor that uttered a statement to the effect that there were no real victims there now
[1:44:30]I'm not saying there weren't i'm just saying that that's what I heard at the time
[1:44:34]So I grew up, you know struggling with these things and not knowing
[1:44:38]What allegations are true or what allegations aren't true?
[1:44:41]and
[1:44:42]and I know that um
[1:44:45]with respect to
[1:44:47]his sex sex offense
[1:44:49]the sex offender charge
[1:44:51]Which was required
[1:44:54]not by the state
[1:44:55]It was required by the u.s. Attorney's office
[1:44:59]After the after the state had had kind of convened a grand jury
[1:45:03]The grand jury came back with something that I don't remember the charge, but it wasn't that charge
[1:45:08]and the the
[1:45:10]Consequence for that charge was mandatory pti, which was much less than obviously the police chief line
[1:45:17]and so
[1:45:19]so
[1:45:20]What happened during the course of the of the federal investigation?
[1:45:24]is
[1:45:25]the the u.s attorney's office wanted something more than that
[1:45:29]And wanted him to plea to and wanting to plead to charges that would one put him in jail
[1:45:36]and two
[1:45:38]Pleaded charges that for which there would be a sex offender registration requirement
[1:45:45]and
[1:45:46]The charge that they the charge that they ultimately said
[1:45:50]You should go back to the state and make them charge you this
[1:45:54]Was a charge that the defense team had been saying that they didn't have the factual predicate to actually have that charge
[1:46:02]But that will do it because that's what you want to get this thing resolved
[1:46:06]So the the troubling part of it
[1:46:10]It's hard for me to under to know for sure what actually happened what was true what was not true a lot of the allegations
[1:46:18]Turned out not to be true. What about now? Did you have a belief as to whether girls and women were abused in florida?
[1:46:25]well again, you know after he
[1:46:29]Went to uh after he was arrested the second time and then died
[1:46:33]Um, lots of people have come forward
[1:46:36]One of them come forward who didn't come forward before who said that they hadn't come forward
[1:46:40]But but you know since then as the co-chair executive of the state
[1:46:44]I've been made aware of many many claims
[1:46:48]And so with that number of claims being made
[1:46:52]It's really hard to say that no, he didn't do anything. Obviously. He did a lot of terrible things
[1:46:56]So my view is I don't know exactly what he did
[1:47:00]And i'd say this again because I want everybody to be clear about this I didn't see it
[1:47:04]I didn't see anything and nobody complained to me about anything
[1:47:08]So I don't know but all these people came forward
[1:47:11]so
[1:47:12]Obviously, there's something there
[1:47:14]So your question is what are what do I believe? No, I believe he did bad things
[1:47:21]at any
[1:47:23]Point after you learned about mr. Epstein's arrest in florida
[1:47:28]Did you ever consider quitting your job?
[1:47:33]With all of the discussion about how the answers
[1:47:38]I don't think I did
[1:47:39]You know i'm going back in time. I don't think I did and the explanation for that is twofold
[1:47:45]with all of the discussion about
[1:47:47]the the defects in the investigation
[1:47:50]and statements from like the lead prosecutor and all this stuff and and
[1:47:54]And the lie detector test and all this and all of these other things
[1:47:57]I think there was even a a psychological evaluation that said he was in a pedophile
[1:48:02]So all of these conflicting reports came it sounded to me it seemed to me who was very inexperienced with this stuff
[1:48:09]and maybe
[1:48:10]It wasn't what they were saying. And so I so
[1:48:14]When taking into consideration all of that information, it sounds like you were weighing the question
[1:48:20]No, i'm putting the question now the question then was
[1:48:24]I was
[1:48:26]I you know, I drank the kool-aid at the time
[1:48:30]Is I think that's the answer is I drank the kool-aid at the time
[1:48:40]I think our members have some questions for you. So
[1:48:43]Sir, I have a couple questions this before just to follow up
[1:48:46]Do you personally believe that girls and women were abused by jeffrey epstein in palm beach?
[1:48:52]I do believe that that epstein engaged in bad conduct with women. Yes. Do you believe that girls and women were abused?
[1:48:59]I believe so. Yes raped
[1:49:01]I don't know. Okay. Let me get a couple questions. I want to ask a few questions related to jane doe four
[1:49:07]From the case doe versus jeffrey epstein out of the southern district of new york
[1:49:12]now jane doe four alleged
[1:49:14]That she met epstein in south carolina in the 1980s
[1:49:18]And through him was introduced to president trump
[1:49:21]Who we know
[1:49:23]The allegation was that he abused her when she was 13 and these are allegations made by jane doe four
[1:49:28]Are you aware of jane doe four?
[1:49:32]i'm aware of the the
[1:49:34]Jane doe the the case jane doe you're aware of jane doe four aware of the the case jane doe four
[1:49:40]I'm not aware of the person. Do you know who do you know the identity of jane doe four in this case?
[1:49:46]I don't so you you do not know the identity of jane doe four
[1:49:50]Okay, have you ever seen a document with the identity of jane doe four?
[1:49:55]I'm sure I must have you so you have seen a document. I'm sure I must have now last week
[1:50:00]Mr. Kahn who's a co-executive of the estate testified that jane doe four had received a settlement
[1:50:06]From the epstein estate of which you're a co-executor now later in the deposition
[1:50:10]when oversight staff attorneys asked about the settlement involving jane doe four
[1:50:15]Mr. Kahn's attorney clarified on the record according to his team that mr
[1:50:19]Kahn's earlier testimony had been mistaken
[1:50:22]And that neither he nor mr. Kahn recognized jane doe four as someone who had filed the claim against
[1:50:29]The epstein estate now since then there's been additional
[1:50:32]Back and forth and confusion about the details of jane doe four and her interactions with the estate
[1:50:37]There's a back and forth and clarification. So I just want for clarity since you're a co-executor now
[1:50:44]Mr. Kahn and given your position as a co-executive of the estate for both
[1:50:48]Did jane doe four receive a settlement from the estate to be clear?
[1:50:51]As your position of the co-executive of the estate did jane doe four receive a settlement from the estate?
[1:50:56]So congressman carsey, I just have to say two things about anything with jane does
[1:51:01]The first is we're bound by court orders not to say anything about the identity to the extent someone has
[1:51:07]sued under a jane doe
[1:51:10]Name
[1:51:11]We're not permitted by court orders to say who the person is at all
[1:51:16]Secondly putting aside whether it's someone as a jane doe or somebody specifically identified
[1:51:22]We are bound in confidentiality requirements in any settlement
[1:51:26]We are as the estate and the co-executors to not identify if someone has settled or anything about the settlements
[1:51:33]Having said that any of those claimants who have settled
[1:51:37]Typically, they are not bound by that. So, you know, you're free to ask them if they want to identify things but we cannot
[1:51:43]Do that
[1:51:45]aside from the identity and disclosing the identity to us of jane doe four
[1:51:51]any
[1:51:52]Nda's or non-disclosure agreements as we have made clear in prior cases congress does not recognize and we have the ability
[1:51:59]To determine whether we do and do not recognize in this case
[1:52:03]Given that you were under subpoena we would ask that you provide us information whether jane doe four
[1:52:08]Percent so and let me I heard you let me continue. Yeah, but let me just say to that quickly that
[1:52:14]Putting aside whatever order may come out
[1:52:16]Requiring them to disclose I believe but I'd have to look at each particular settlement agreement
[1:52:21]We likely have notice provisions to the person settling
[1:52:25]If we were bound to disclose it to first notify that person because they could probably take
[1:52:31]To be clear you're not confirming
[1:52:33]Or denying we cannot settle with jane doe four. Is that correct? We cannot so mr
[1:52:37]Mr. Indyke was was there a settlement paid from the epstein victim compensation program?
[1:52:42]To to to any jane doe or jane doe four. We have the same
[1:52:46]Confidentiality restrictions so you're not unwilling to answer if there was actually a payment from the epstein victim compensation
[1:52:53]It's not a willingness issue. It's a bound by confidentiality
[1:52:57]I'm not going to take that premise, but I understand your position. Mr. Indyke
[1:53:01]Do you have any additional information on jane doe four that you can provide us?
[1:53:06]No
[1:53:09]Okay, great, uh, mr. Mr. Indyke, yes, uh
[1:53:15]The epstein estate has provided documents and productions to this committee per subpoena as you're aware and we have
[1:53:22]Welcomed those of course and we've gone through those and we have
[1:53:26]Continued to go through it what's been provided not all the documents have still been provided to the committee
[1:53:31]There's still some documents we believe that are in your possession. Is that correct?
[1:53:35]um
[1:53:38]In my possession, that's going to be a state
[1:53:42]In response to the subpoena
[1:53:45]I think based on conversations that council has had with both minority and majority staff
[1:53:50]We've complied with what everyone was expecting if there's more that people were expecting that are let us know
[1:53:55]Are there additional documents with the estate that have not been provided to the committee?
[1:54:00]within the bounds of the subpoena
[1:54:02]Within the bounds of the subpoena based upon the response of my understanding from council is that
[1:54:08]Whatever was agreed upon to be provided has been provided
[1:54:11]Are there additional documents within that?
[1:54:14]The estate is what has outside the dates of the subpoena of the subpoena was given that are in possession of the of the estate
[1:54:20]I'm sorry outside the dates. So they're
[1:54:23]The subpoena obviously has dates
[1:54:26]Of when to produce documents period of time. Are there documents in the possession of the estate outside the period of time?
[1:54:33]within the subpoena
[1:54:35]That are in the possession
[1:54:38]Of you and mr. Conn as the co-executors of the estate
[1:54:42]Uh, i'm a little bit of a loss here because you know what I did is
[1:54:47]What I did and so what you're saying is you won't answer the question if there's additional
[1:54:52]I'm trying to answer your question, sir
[1:54:54]um
[1:54:56]The estate essentially gave the documents to council
[1:55:01]Um, so i'm a little bit of a loss
[1:55:04]as to
[1:55:05]How to answer that question without without conferring with council and council tell me what was it
[1:55:10]I think that I mean, I think the question is pretty simple. The subpoena has a period of time
[1:55:15]We should be producing documents within that period of time
[1:55:18]Specified documents, right?
[1:55:21]We gave you all the documents that were specified correct. So my question is is
[1:55:25]Are there additional documents related to jeffrey epsilon communications outside?
[1:55:30]The period of time specified in subpoena that are in the possession of the epsilon estate that you didn't ask for that
[1:55:36]We didn't ask for so the subpoena you're saying gave us all the documents and the question's really clear
[1:55:41]Are there additional documents outside the period of time specified in subpoena that are in possession of the epsilon estate?
[1:55:47]I assume so yes, you assume so yes. Yes. Okay. Thank you
[1:55:56]Really next is
[1:55:58]Yeah, thank you for being here. Um, thank you
[1:56:01]My first question during your employment by jeffrey epstein. Did you ever become aware of a relationship between epstein and donaldson?
[1:56:10]The answer to that question is yes
[1:56:13]Aware of a relationship that existed before my time
[1:56:18]Okay, did you ever become aware of donald trump socializing with epstein during your employment?
[1:56:24]No, um
[1:56:26]again, my relationship with epstein was not
[1:56:29]social relationship like that, um, uh, and I
[1:56:33]I don't believe donald trump was ever in the office when we were there
[1:56:37]um
[1:56:38]in new york, uh
[1:56:41]and
[1:56:42]I don't
[1:56:44]Recall off the top of my head whether or not epstein
[1:56:47]Specifically met with him while I was employed
[1:56:50]As an attorney for epstein and to confirm you began your employment with mr. Epstein in 1996
[1:56:57]1996 yes, you said before your time so you're not aware of any relationship between the two men after 1996
[1:57:06]I am not
[1:57:07]personally aware
[1:57:09]Of the relationship they had between the time that I was there, you know from the time that I was there going forward
[1:57:14]Do you believe they had a relationship?
[1:57:17]What I recall
[1:57:19]Is that at some point whatever relationship did exist?
[1:57:23]No longer existed and I recall that it no longer existed
[1:57:28]Because of some dispute relating to some property in palm beach
[1:57:33]But I can't tell you what that relationship was from the time I was there going forward
[1:57:38]Because I don't know
[1:57:40]So you're saying you were not aware of donald trump socializing with epstein. What about with any women connected to epstein?
[1:57:50]I believe
[1:57:51]that
[1:57:52]I had learned
[1:57:54]through a subsequent lawsuit
[1:57:56]that there was um an allegation that um
[1:58:00]that trump
[1:58:02]that president trump
[1:58:04]and um
[1:58:06]Well, not president trump at the time but donald trump at the time
[1:58:09]um
[1:58:10]had um some kind of
[1:58:13]Interaction with uh with the
[1:58:16]Person alleging abuse some type of interaction. I don't I don't recall specific details
[1:58:23]When did you become aware of this allegation?
[1:58:29]I believe that I believe that I received a copy of a lawsuit
[1:58:36]So when that lawsuit was filed then I became aware
[1:58:40]Of any sense of when that was what year that was years ago. I don't I really don't
[1:58:45]It was years ago. Um
[1:58:48]But you first said you're you believe that post 1996 donald trump and epstein did not have a relationship
[1:58:53]But at some point after that you became aware of a lawsuit
[1:58:57]Yes, thank donald trump and jack reacting and an allegation made
[1:59:01]I believe the allegation in that lawsuit predated
[1:59:05]The time that I was working
[1:59:07]For epstein I believe
[1:59:10]I mean if somebody could show me the lawsuit I could read it and see the
[1:59:15]That lawsuit was 2009 the lawsuit was in 2009. That's when trump was deposed and that's when i've seen the schedule should be
[1:59:23]Okay, do you recall the allegation right the date of the allegation?
[1:59:27]Have you ever yeah, yeah, exactly. They are 90s. Have you ever discussed donald trump's connection to epstein with anyone?
[1:59:35]other than privilege conversations that I've had
[1:59:39]meaning with his lawyers not
[1:59:41]Correct
[1:59:43]During your employment by epstein did you ever become aware of donald trump visiting a property owned by epstein either in new york new mexico
[1:59:50]paris island
[1:59:51]you know
[1:59:55]During your employment by epstein. Did you ever become aware of the relationship between epstein and howard letnick?
[2:00:03]No, I I
[2:00:06]Didn't know that there was a relationship between epstein and howard letnick
[2:00:10]So you weren't aware that mr. Letnick was epstein's next-door neighbor in manhattan
[2:00:15]Yes, but that I was aware that he was a neighbor in manhattan, but I wasn't aware that they actually had a relationship
[2:00:20]Okay, I believe that's my time
[2:00:23]Thank you. I'm gonna hand you a copy of uh
[2:00:26]an exhibit exhibit a
[2:00:30]And this is a consent order issued by the new york state department of financial services regarding the georgia bank of the live 2020
[2:00:37]I'd like you to turn to page 16 paragraph 48
[2:00:42]And that reads several of mr. Epstein's employees or agents had authority to conduct transactions in the accounts on mr. Epstein's behalf
[2:00:51]One of them at mr
[2:00:52]Epstein's personal attorney was active in withdrawing cash from mr
[2:00:55]Epstein attorney one on behalf of mr
[2:00:57]Epstein made a total of 97 withdrawals from the bank park avenue new york city branch from 2013 to 2017
[2:01:05]personal accounts belonging to mr. Epstein's
[2:01:07]uh, so my first question for you mr. Indyk is
[2:01:10]Attorney one here listed is that you I believe that's me. Yes, and can you explain why you were making these withdrawals?
[2:01:16]um
[2:01:19]At this at this time
[2:01:24]There was
[2:01:26]A great deal of negative publicity about done at the correction of mr. Epstein. I guess i'll start there
[2:01:32]All right. Well, I would like to answer the question if the question is asked
[2:01:35]I know but but he has an answer to a serious allegation
[2:01:39]First were these at the direction of mr. Epstein? Okay
[2:01:43]Um, no, I do not believe that they were at the direction of mr. Epstein. Okay, you know what the cash was used for
[2:01:49]They don't have a specific knowledge of what the cash in each instance was used for but I know generally
[2:01:56]Or believe generally that when I made cash withdrawals they were for things
[2:02:02]for petty cash
[2:02:04]to supply the households
[2:02:06]for supplies
[2:02:08]um
[2:02:09]for
[2:02:10]cleaning supplies food
[2:02:13]You gave the cash to who then just to be clear. I don't think he was done. That's okay
[2:02:17]I just want the record clear
[2:02:19]I know but but you can't but if he's not allowed to answer the questions, it's it doesn't matter
[2:02:25]Okay, but just to be clear. He wasn't done if you want to go on. That's fine
[2:02:28]I'm asking a follow-up question here, which was the cash who actually received the cash the cash went to the accounting department
[2:02:34]accounting department of mr. Epstein
[2:02:37]Uh the so there was a an office down the hall for my office where the accounting function for mr. Epstein
[2:02:46]Uh, and his homes was prevalent
[2:02:50]Somebody from the accounting office would ask me for
[2:02:53]Um to go to the bank to get money for the petty cash and the petty cash would serve as
[2:02:58]The various households there were five different households
[2:03:01]Um, and I would go to the bank with a check drawn on mr. Epstein's account
[2:03:08]Um, the bank knew what was from mr. Epstein's account
[2:03:11]And I would get the cash and give it back to the accounting department. This is a lot of cash
[2:03:15]I just want to note a seventy five hundred dollars per withdrawal
[2:03:18]and um
[2:03:19]That would be 97 withdrawals that is over the course of 16 months a total of over seven hundred twenty five thousand dollars
[2:03:26]In cash just to be clear that paragraph says it's four years not 16 months sixty sixty i'm talking
[2:03:33]Thank four years or sixty months. That's um, that's a lot of cash seven hundred twenty five thousand dollars
[2:03:38]It's a large amount of cash as a lawyer. Did that not concern you or raise any red flags?
[2:03:42]Well, if if you knew that mr. Epstein had five multi-million dollar residences or six actually with the other island
[2:03:49]Had dozens of staff members didn't have use of credit cards
[2:03:53]All of those residences had lots of rooms
[2:03:56]Lots of people working there that needed food that needed supplies that needed equipment that needed tools
[2:04:02]Your knowledge was any of that i'm only saying this sir because i'm running out of time
[2:04:05]Was any of that money used for to give cash payments to women or young girls?
[2:04:10]I just want the record to be clear that he had not finished his prior answer, but
[2:04:13]so
[2:04:14]I did not believe that any any amount of cash that I gave to the accounting parts department was was
[2:04:22]Going to be used for an improper purpose
[2:04:24]I believe that that there were legitimate reasons to to bring that cash in and I did so
[2:04:30]Now, uh, I want to switch topics here
[2:04:31]Do you have any kind of written representation agreement with mr. Epstein for the scope of your services an attorney a retainer agreement anything like that?
[2:04:40]I believe at some point I I did that's not available in the file so produced
[2:04:45]I don't know that I actually have
[2:04:47]You don't have any more, okay
[2:04:48]What were the terms of your scope of representation and also your payment agreement with mr. Epstein?
[2:04:55]The payment was was decided on an annual basis. It wasn't decided not up front not based on our no
[2:05:01]Just whatever he decided to pay you. That's what you're seeing
[2:05:06]The answer is yes. Um, but you know, he had always been generous with me. So I didn't have any reasons to doubt
[2:05:12]Um, he was very generous with you. So I from 2003 to 2013 according to public reports
[2:05:18]Your personal bank account received more than 2.4 million dollars from Epstein while your business account received over 8.3 million dollars
[2:05:25]you also
[2:05:27]received a loan that was never repaid of
[2:05:30]seven million dollars and
[2:05:33]A copy of mr
[2:05:33]Epstein's trust showed that he planned to leave you 50 million dollars five zero
[2:05:38]Which was matched only by his girlfriend Karina truly at
[2:05:42]Um, you what were you doing for him that made him so generous here?
[2:05:46]I think i've already discussed all of the things that I did with mr. Epstein, which were all legitimate legal legal tasks
[2:05:54]I was working for him at least six days a week sometimes seven days a week
[2:05:58]I was on call 24 hours a day with him
[2:06:01]And I was not at liberty to take on other clients in a way that
[2:06:05]Other lawyers in private practice would want to take on clients to continue their business
[2:06:12]Thank you thank you
[2:06:15]Hi
[2:06:16]And so I represent albuquerque new mexico and zora ranch is just north of my congressional district
[2:06:22]And as you're probably aware
[2:06:24]Um new mexico has opened a truth commission and reopened the criminal investigations into what happened at the ranch
[2:06:31]So my questions are primarily fact-finding
[2:06:34]Less so much about your specific role, but really about the ranch and the investigations and why doj
[2:06:41]Um ask the state to drop their case. I also have a follow-up question about trump as well as um
[2:06:47]the
[2:06:48]Um your work on the defense team
[2:06:50]So that's kind of the scope of what I want to ask about
[2:06:52]So as I understand it you helped to manage the assets or a ranch is that correct?
[2:06:58]I wouldn't say I helped to manage the assets. I think that's
[2:07:01]Were you involved in any
[2:07:03]Executor or back then were you involved in any legal or financial matters?
[2:07:09]Over the course of your employment with jeffrey epstein and zero ranch. I was yes. Did you ever travel there? I traveled to the ranch
[2:07:17]I want to say two or three times
[2:07:20]Are you aware that there are multiple allegations that were
[2:07:25]Taken by the fbi of sexual abuse at the ranch. I have been made aware of those allegations
[2:07:31]Yes, were you involved in any way legal or financial?
[2:07:35]in
[2:07:36]The defense of mr. Epstein either in a state case or a federal case at the ranch. No
[2:07:44]Civil a civil case
[2:07:46]You were involved in a civil case in a civil case in there and I believe
[2:07:50]There was a
[2:07:52]There was a case relating to wanting to there was a grazing lease that was taken away
[2:07:58]But in any of the sexual abuse cases
[2:08:00]No
[2:08:01]Do you have any personal knowledge and or can you share with us?
[2:08:05]Why doj asks the state of new mexico to drop its investigation into sexual abuse?
[2:08:10]I have no personal knowledge about okay. I want to move on to a follow-up question on trump and this
[2:08:16]this
[2:08:18]suit that was filed by
[2:08:20]a young woman
[2:08:22]Against both trump and Epstein for abuse at her house
[2:08:26]As I understand it looking at both the responsive documents that the estate sent us
[2:08:31]As well as separately the doj's files. It appears to me that these are two separate cases
[2:08:37]Is that true?
[2:08:38]Could you repeat the question? So it appears to me that the jando for fbi files that the federal government
[2:08:46]Um is tracking
[2:08:48]In which a young woman was interviewed four times by the fbi for abuse at jeffrey epstein's new york estate as a separate case
[2:08:56]From the lawsuit that was filed in 2009 against jeffrey epstein and donald trump. Is that true? I don't know
[2:09:02]You don't okay in the did you help to process the files from the estate that were sent to the committee?
[2:09:10]The answer your question is I did yes, okay
[2:09:13]So you're aware that in the files there's no that I did not you did not
[2:09:18]The the files all of the files from the estate went over to the lawyers with instructions that comply with all lawful requests
[2:09:24]So it was handled by an outside firm rather than you was handled by the by the law firm
[2:09:29]Okay, did you review the documents?
[2:09:35]But you are aware as was just established that there was a lawsuit in 2009 and there's documentation in the
[2:09:42]files that were transmitted from the estate that actually
[2:09:46]State that epstein was scheduled for a deposition in that case, correct?
[2:09:51]I'm trying I am aware certainly aware now. Um, and I was aware. I was aware generally of the case. Yeah, I
[2:10:01]I think I was aware of at some point that there was a request for a deposition
[2:10:09]These are scheduling documents that came from the estate was he deposed in that case. I don't believe he was
[2:10:15]Do you know why? I don't
[2:10:16]Okay, so that goes to my final set of questions which is
[2:10:20]Did you personally or anyone that you've worked with make any?
[2:10:25]payments or financial transfers to any
[2:10:28]lawyers law enforcement officers doj or state
[2:10:32]Attorneys involved in cases against jeffrey epstein for sexual abuse
[2:10:38]Say that one more time because it's it's that's a lot to unpack
[2:10:41]so
[2:10:42]I think just because you asked lawyers, so you do mean lawyers for the some government in that question
[2:10:47]Okay
[2:10:48]Okay, i'll ask it slightly slower because we are on a time constraint here
[2:10:53]Really what i'm trying to establish if I may have a moment to establish it because it's an important piece of the question
[2:11:00]That we're trying to get to the bottom
[2:11:02]the overall point here is
[2:11:05]Why did doj and state entities not prosecute these crimes in a more timely manner?
[2:11:11]And it has been alleged by survivors that they receive some sort of payment
[2:11:16]Maybe there were transfers of money involved and so let me ask specifics did alex acosta
[2:11:22]As the u.s attorney for the department of justice ever received any money from jeffrey epstein
[2:11:29]Is the state or any of its business entities?
[2:11:33]My knowledge no
[2:11:36]To your personal knowledge you're saying no, but is it possible that he did I don't know
[2:11:40]Did any other law enforcement agents that to your knowledge? I don't believe so, but I don't
[2:11:46]But you don't know
[2:11:47]Okay. Thank you. Thank you representative walkinshaw. Thank you. Mr. And I i'm going to go back to compensation
[2:11:53]So when you started working for mr. Epstein
[2:11:57]What was your compensation? It was an annual salary. You're going to roughly be amounts or was it hourly?
[2:12:04]No, when I started it was around
[2:12:07]I want to say 450 or 400 or so
[2:12:11]450 000 a year. Yes. Okay
[2:12:15]And did you in addition to that receive any kind of bonus compensation or incentive structure?
[2:12:23]I don't I don't recall on a year-to-year basis. I
[2:12:29]When I when I went back to think about it what I remember at the beginning was about 450 000 dollars
[2:12:35]Okay, and that salary I presume increased over time over the course of 23 years. It did okay
[2:12:42]and from the time that you were hired until
[2:12:46]Epstein's death
[2:12:48]Could you tell us roughly ballpark? How much you were paid total ballpark between?
[2:12:55]27 to 30 million dollars
[2:12:57]for 23 years
[2:13:01]Roughly comes out to about a million or three years ago
[2:13:05]And there's been reference already to
[2:13:08]One loan you received from mr. Epstein. It was a series of loans for that one. How many?
[2:13:14]Hey
[2:13:15]It total, I think seven seven million. I believe that's
[2:13:19]Seven million and and what was the purpose of of the loans? Why did you need the loans? Why did he give you the funds?
[2:13:28]Ultimately, the idea was that I was going to do investing
[2:13:31]online
[2:13:33]Did you end up doing it? I invested in one thing
[2:13:36]What did you do with the rest?
[2:13:39]I wanted to be using it. You spent it
[2:13:42]Okay, and can you give us roughly the years that you received these loans
[2:13:51]13 to 2013
[2:13:55]to
[2:13:57]2018
[2:14:00]So seven million dollars in five years you
[2:14:04]made some
[2:14:06]Minimal investment and you spent the rest. I mean, what did you spend it on?
[2:14:11]I support a lot of people in my household. I support both mothers
[2:14:15]Uh all of their health expenses I support my sister in law who's got
[2:14:19]Who's got a granddaughter that she also takes care of I support her as well
[2:14:24]um
[2:14:25]I had I needed the money. He needed all of it. I used the money
[2:14:33]And how many of these loans or how much?
[2:14:36]Of the total loan amount was ultimately forgiven by mr. Epstein
[2:14:41]um
[2:14:41]Before we get there, you should know that i've been paying interest all the way through for the time that he died
[2:14:47]Interest on that's actually one of my next questions. So why don't you
[2:14:51]And and the answer to your question is that
[2:14:54]according to the estate plan
[2:14:57]All of the loans are to be forgiven upon his death or when the state when the estate is
[2:15:06]um, well
[2:15:07]Right now it's up in the air because there has to be enough money in the estate to cover it
[2:15:14]Did Epstein ever pay you for anything beyond the legal services you've described here today?
[2:15:19]You know, he never did did he give you anything else of value gifts real estate?
[2:15:23]We already talked about the ivf anything else. He helped me purchase a house the first time
[2:15:28]That money was paid back
[2:15:30]um the second time he helped me purchase a home
[2:15:34]um by putting a
[2:15:37]Like purchasing my my private my home in new jersey
[2:15:40]Um putting going to contract to the home in new jersey
[2:15:43]Did he ever make any payments directly to your wife or other family members?
[2:15:47]Um as part of the the discussion that we were just having yes as part of this part of this money
[2:15:54]Seven million some of that seven million went directly to your wife
[2:15:58]the house
[2:15:59]For the house for the house
[2:16:02]um
[2:16:03]And you were asked earlier
[2:16:06]Shared the ivf treatment funding. Yes. I'm sorry. Yes
[2:16:10]That definitely took that I don't think you gave an amount roughly in terms of what he
[2:16:16]Paid for the ivm treatment. It's five times
[2:16:20]I know
[2:16:21]I know I I recall
[2:16:24]that at the time the treatments the medical portion of the treatments for something like ten thousand dollars
[2:16:31]And there were there's also um the hormones that required to be purchased as well. They don't remember what they call
[2:16:39]Okay, so ten thousand times five is what you can remember. I believe so I guess
[2:16:44]Thank you
[2:16:45]We're we're gonna our our time here is done
[2:16:48]But it's one thing just to put into the record and just want to just be clear
[2:16:51]Yes, it's our it's our committee's um opinion understanding that within the subpoena that the up to the state
[2:16:58]Uh has to actually provide us documents. There are actually two sections
[2:17:03]Section 15 and section 16, but we have not received those documents now the majority may have
[2:17:11]directly dismissed
[2:17:12]Uh, those those sections with all of you directly we understand that perhaps the majority feels that the state has been fully responsive in the subpoena
[2:17:21]But it's our understanding that we are still waiting for sections 15 and 16
[2:17:26]in the subpoena
[2:17:27]And we've the minority still wants access to those documents. We believe that they're important
[2:17:32]So I want to be sure I say that for the record that we don't believe the subpoena
[2:17:35]It's actually been fully complied with. Yeah. Thank you. I suggest congressman
[2:17:39]That you talk to the majority because they know the answer to the question
[2:17:42]We are awaiting instruction from the majority on those two sections
[2:17:45]We are prepared to respond to them fully. We have responded fully to every request
[2:17:50]From the majority and the minority we are awaiting instruction from the majority which has been promised to us and not yet delivered
[2:17:56]Okay
[2:17:56]Well, we're we look forward to the majority providing their response. We get those those five such documents. Thank you
[2:18:01]We'll offer
[2:18:16]We will go back on the record
[2:18:19]chairman comar
[2:18:20]Thank you a couple of questions you had mentioned earlier you in your legal capacity help
[2:18:27]Work some deals on stock transactions
[2:18:32]Do you know anything about how he determined his investment strategy?
[2:18:35]Maybe not necessarily just with stocks but with real estate that he just come to you or did he
[2:18:41]or in in conversations did he say
[2:18:46]how he
[2:18:47]decided to purchase this property and and
[2:18:50]Europe or this property in the united states
[2:18:52]I mean it just it's strange to me that a guy that went from being a substitute teacher
[2:18:58]to advising
[2:19:01]The richest and most powerful people in the world on their finances and and taxes
[2:19:06]Do you
[2:19:07]Know of or recall any conversations he had about how he determined which investments he would make
[2:19:14]no
[2:19:15]jeffrey was a
[2:19:16]jeffrey ebstein was somebody who
[2:19:19]Made all of the decisions he made on his own without he would consult individual people
[2:19:25]um like for his attorneys he pulled pretty much
[2:19:28]Every time he had an issue all the issues that were working on a project. He would ask them questions
[2:19:34]Specific questions that he wanted answers to but then he would go out make his own decisions. He never discussed strategies. In fact
[2:19:40]um
[2:19:42]That was decidedly not something that he ever wanted to hear from me about
[2:19:46]Um, and that's something he ever discussed with me
[2:19:48]I would take direction after decisions were made after conversations he had with his clients directly with his clients
[2:19:55]I would take direction after that fact and not be part of their kind of
[2:19:59]Um thought processes to get there
[2:20:01]So and so the answer to your question is no, okay
[2:20:05]so
[2:20:07]You'd mentioned he consulted with other people. Do you know which other people he consulted with?
[2:20:13]Did he ever say bill gates told me to buy microsoft?
[2:20:17]Did you fix it split or anything like that?
[2:20:24]This is over a long period of time and there's not a conversation that I would say
[2:20:28]Stood out in my mind where that's where he got the information for something
[2:20:32]Most people who who interacted with them
[2:20:36]It's my impression that they thought he was very very smart
[2:20:39]They thought he knew a lot of stuff that he was very knowledgeable about tax law
[2:20:44]Barely barely knowledgeable about estate planning and people and about currencies and people
[2:20:49]Went to him for advice. Do you did he just pick that up on his own?
[2:20:53]I mean, he obviously didn't study it in in school. I I don't know you don't know
[2:20:58]But I know that he worked at bare stearns for a period of time
[2:21:01]um and
[2:21:03]Did as I understand it
[2:21:05]um
[2:21:07]That's it's all kind of anecdotal to me
[2:21:09]um was
[2:21:11]Learned option trading or or became very very successful at option trading there at a time when option trading wasn't such a right
[2:21:18]A well-known thing right? Um, so he had he had a head for this stuff
[2:21:24]Okay, at least that's the that's the understanding that I
[2:21:29]And I don't think I don't I don't think pretty sophisticated
[2:21:33]In your own time clock there like miss pelosi's the
[2:21:39]most recent uh
[2:21:41]Offender of my opinion of stock trading. That's a big issue in congress and pelosi does stock options
[2:21:46]And most people congress don't know what stock options are
[2:21:49]but
[2:21:51]The the concern about members of congress or I would include epstein trading options is
[2:21:59]you almost have to
[2:22:02]Have a
[2:22:03]Great deal of confidence that that stock's going to move in one direction or the other very soon
[2:22:09]And that's where a lot of obviously insiders trade naked options and things like that. You you don't ever recall
[2:22:16]Epstein saying i'm i'm
[2:22:18]Purchasing this stock option because I know it's fixing the crash and you know, wait
[2:22:23]No, i'm sorry. That's not the thing. That's not something he would ever discuss with me
[2:22:28]You had mentioned you set up a bunch of the llcs and I understand what you're saying to protect
[2:22:33]Liability and things like that. Did he ever say why he needed to have
[2:22:37]So many llcs to protect for for liability. I don't think he
[2:22:42]I
[2:22:43]One the answer your question is no there was never a conversation. I need llcs to protect liability
[2:22:49]it was just it was
[2:22:51]For the clients that he had for example, like wexner had a bunch of llcs a bunch of corporations set up
[2:22:58]And that was it was just considered. That's what you do. You have a new business
[2:23:02]You set up a company for it. You have a new asset like a plane. You set up a company for it
[2:23:07]Never
[2:23:08]Appeared to me to be anything other than a legitimate reason to
[2:23:13]To set up an entity and for somebody who has a lot of money and a lot of assets and a lot of business ventures
[2:23:19]There's go if you're setting up separate entities for each. There's just going to be a lot of
[2:23:23]I don't it was never meant to be a kind of avail and the truth of the matter is that
[2:23:28]That anybody who interacted with any of these entities always knew that it was him that they were
[2:23:33]Interacting with or at least my understanding was to my recollection
[2:23:37]They knew that they were interacting with him as the beneficial owner of the entity the banks did certainly after 9 11
[2:23:43]The banks definitely knew so that it was him. How many llcs would you estimate?
[2:23:49]everything has
[2:23:50]I don't think like I don't think I could tell you that more than 50
[2:23:59]I didn't maybe I don't know. I don't know if some people would suspect he had a lot of llcs
[2:24:05]It's you know different every property was a different llcs to protect themselves from liability
[2:24:11]And this is a guy that now we know and you say you didn't know at the time but was you know potentially
[2:24:17]abusing women or maybe
[2:24:20]underage women and and uh, obviously that would be a
[2:24:24]An obvious reason to to form a llc on each separate property
[2:24:30]You can respond to that if you like I don't I don't think that really works, okay
[2:24:35]Because it's a personal tort if he engages in a personal court for which he is simply liable
[2:24:40]It doesn't matter which entity
[2:24:43]That would that it had that only property that it happened on you can go after him
[2:24:47]For engaging in the personal tort
[2:24:49]Okay
[2:24:51]Go back just a couple of questions
[2:24:57]He pled guilty in
[2:25:00]2007 and received 18 months sentence
[2:25:04]You wrote a letter for his
[2:25:07]plea for a new sentence, but you wrote a part of the letter
[2:25:11]Who were his attorneys that represented them during that time?
[2:25:16]It's it's a it's a lot of like, you know, and I and I gave you a list and I'll list them again
[2:25:21]Did you know that did you recommend them or no?
[2:25:24]They came they were they were in place and then newly ones came into place they predate you
[2:25:29]You've obviously been there for close to 20 years
[2:25:32]But the whole but
[2:25:35]I don't know that they predated me. I don't I don't know
[2:25:39]Um, I know that they were there
[2:25:42]You said that there were three lawyers and there were two lawyers then you were
[2:25:46]Lawyer, yeah at that in 2007 were there was it just you or were there two or three?
[2:25:52]2007 I think
[2:25:54]It was just I think jeff shanson was no longer
[2:25:57]Associated with him
[2:25:59]So it was just me
[2:26:01]And I and I think the other the other attorney that was handling it involved in whatever the situation he had that allowed him to leave
[2:26:09]Jail six days a week for 12 hours a day
[2:26:11]That would have been
[2:26:13]His his defense team. Uh jack old was the problem
[2:26:17]I mean
[2:26:18]Not a lot of people get to go to jail for 18 months only serve 13 and get out 12 hours a day
[2:26:23]Six days a week. So my understanding and again
[2:26:26]This is not something I do sure but my understanding at the time
[2:26:30]Yes, but it's but you know
[2:26:32]You know criminal defense versus transactional work on a on a stock purchase agreement of different things
[2:26:39]But wait, you were going to explain I am going to explain that
[2:26:43]My understanding
[2:26:45]from the defense lawyer
[2:26:47]Was that they were asking?
[2:26:49]And they said it I said it in response to I think claims
[2:26:54]Even by the assistant u.s attorney that they were that this was not appropriate and and my understanding from the defense lawyers
[2:27:01]Is they requested and received?
[2:27:03]Only that which any other similarly situated
[2:27:07]Person in jail would be entitled to at the time. That's that was my understanding
[2:27:12]Um, and that's how beach county had a very interesting system for work release
[2:27:17]Okay, that's just something that I think the american people are like that's kind of strange but
[2:27:21]Um moving on this morning. There was a cbs news article that published
[2:27:28]uh
[2:27:29]that
[2:27:30]you
[2:27:32]I'll read it and i can con recently set up a lawsuit accusing of facilitating sham marriages in which foreign-born victims married americans
[2:27:39]We have seen abused for immigration purposes. Can you tell us anything about the?
[2:27:45]Uh the settlement who was it with?
[2:27:48]Um
[2:27:50]This settlement was in this uh, it was just a
[2:27:53]Putative class
[2:27:55]action lawsuit
[2:27:57]that in the settlement, um was by
[2:28:01]The estate as well as us it was uh
[2:28:04]upwards of 35 million dollars
[2:28:07]To be paid to those who were abused by mr. Epstein. How many plaintiffs were there? Can you tell us that how many how many plaintiffs?
[2:28:15]um
[2:28:16]There was
[2:28:17]one initially
[2:28:19]That plaintiff was dismissed out of the case
[2:28:23]another plaintiff
[2:28:24]came on
[2:28:25]And then the second plaintiff after that came up is the settlement public or is it private?
[2:28:31]it's
[2:28:32]I mean, I believe that they filed a um
[2:28:35]uh notice of the settlement in the court and I think the documents
[2:28:39]the allegations underline the
[2:28:42]Can I just make one thing clear because he makes me about the number of plaintiffs
[2:28:45]So that's the named plaintiffs, but it's a class action. So it's supposedly on behalf of
[2:28:49]Some unknown number right and that class hasn't been certified. What were the allegations underlying the claim?
[2:28:58]I would refer you to the document itself, but in substance
[2:29:02]It seemed to me
[2:29:04]that
[2:29:06]What was being said was that in in providing accounting services and in providing legal services?
[2:29:11]that we did for blister epstein that we facilitated his conduct of
[2:29:17]um a sex trafficking enterprise, so it seems that there were foreign-born
[2:29:23]women that
[2:29:26]Their visa was going to expire and they were going to have to leave or they were going to be overstaying their visa and
[2:29:33]the
[2:29:34]The scheme was to get
[2:29:36]the
[2:29:37]woman to marry an american
[2:29:40]I mean, I guess there's a lot of documentation associated with that and the allegations that you
[2:29:45]And con facilitated the underlying documents for that. Is that what the allegations were?
[2:29:50]I I don't think that's I don't think that's accurate. And again, I tell you to go look
[2:29:54]Please read the complaints and see what they were
[2:29:57]um
[2:29:58]and and again, I can tell you that I
[2:30:02]I never arranged I never facilitated
[2:30:05]I didn't even know about the marriage. What's your information until they asked the properties?
[2:30:09]What's that? What's your relationship with osa properties?
[2:30:12]Um, I don't have a direct relationship with those. I don't have any relationship with those. Did you ever do any legal work associated with those properties?
[2:30:20]For example creating leases for individuals of the living name
[2:30:25]I obtained a lease from osa properties. I were a tenant of 301 e 66 street at one point. I was a tenant. Yes, okay
[2:30:33]um
[2:30:42]I'll ask the rest of my questions later
[2:30:44]Okay, thank you
[2:30:47]Yeah, mr indyce. Yes, uh, we appreciate your patience. We're gonna be jumping around
[2:30:52]Obviously, we have the minority and majority asking questions and we would like to avoid repeat questions
[2:30:59]But I want to follow up first on chairman comers questions as it related to the llc
[2:31:05]From your testimony. It sounds like a lot of the time when mr. Epsi would solicit opinions. He
[2:31:13]Would it be fair to say he already had his mind up of how he would want to proceed
[2:31:17]Whether it was a particular transaction or the creation of an entity
[2:31:22]I don't know that that's true or not true and it would I think it would depend on each circumstance
[2:31:28]did
[2:31:29]Mr. Epsi never create llcs or any other entities himself and then later inform you
[2:31:37]I have no recollection of him ever doing
[2:31:39]That
[2:31:41]Did you ever create llcs for people that were employees of epstein
[2:31:46]Did I ever create an llc for people that were employees of epstein?
[2:31:51]There was an llc called linen jojo llc
[2:31:55]That was an llc that acquired a home
[2:31:59]that linen jojo
[2:32:01]um
[2:32:02]Who were staff members of his resided in?
[2:32:05]um
[2:32:07]I believe I had something to do with the creation of I don't know if I actually did it or or
[2:32:11]There was a corporate service company that did it
[2:32:13]But I believe I had something to do with creating that the entity that owned that house
[2:32:17]Is that the only llc that was created?
[2:32:20]um
[2:32:23]I think if that's an llc, um
[2:32:26]I
[2:32:27]I think hbrk was an llc that for rich collin it seems the post 2009 scheme was to entrap women and
[2:32:35]Create a complicated financial legal emotional
[2:32:41]Web that they couldn't get out of and there's allegations that you created llcs for some of those women which then
[2:32:50]Have you ever operated someone's llc without their knowledge
[2:32:54]Well, can we address this this idea of this this scheme I I know nothing about a scheme
[2:32:59]That was never if I was asked to form an llc I formed an llc
[2:33:05]And if if I was asked that that form in llc
[2:33:09]um, I would have been told like in the case of um in jojo
[2:33:12]I'll say this is for the purchase of the house
[2:33:15]And I would have been told this is for the purchase of the house
[2:33:18]Now would it surprise to know that i've seen was operating llcs for people that he ostensibly employed without their knowledge
[2:33:28]Yes, that would surprise me
[2:33:30]And it would you agree that it would be illegal to do things like file taxes and
[2:33:34]Operate that llc without the individual's knowledge and if that person had asked
[2:33:39]For information surrounding that withholding that would also be
[2:33:42]Uh problematic. I before I I wouldn't want to express an opinion on something like that unless I actually saw what you're talking
[2:33:54]During our previous hour we talked about
[2:33:58]Whether abscede may have been tipped off to assert a search warrant as residents you had said
[2:34:04]Uh that you did not know
[2:34:06]Is that a fair characterization of your testimony? That's a fair characterization of my testimony. Do you think he was tipped off?
[2:34:15]I really don't know
[2:34:24]Did you understand mr. Epsing to have close relationships with government officials in southern florida?
[2:34:33]no
[2:34:36]did
[2:34:37]Jeffrey Epsing ever inform or represent to you that he was working with any intelligence service of any nation including the united states
[2:34:46]No, did glenn maxwell ever inform or represent to you that she was working with any intelligence service of any nation including the united states
[2:34:55]No
[2:34:56]During your relationship
[2:34:58]Did you ever suspect epsing or maxwell of being affiliated with any intelligence agency?
[2:35:05]I never I never suspected either of them. No
[2:35:09]At any time have you had any affiliation with any intelligence agency?
[2:35:14]No
[2:35:15]You've never
[2:35:18]Lived at 301 east 66th street while you were there
[2:35:27]I recall though. I'm not 100 certain but I recall
[2:35:31]That a good brock may have stayed
[2:35:35]At an apartment in 301 east 66th street. Um, there were several apartments there that guests would come into town
[2:35:43]People that he knew that he would make available for people to stay out for a short period of time
[2:35:49]It is possible
[2:35:51]And i'm not 100 certain that a hood brock
[2:35:54]Did in fact stay at the apartment at that one time or another
[2:35:58]Would it surprise you to know the property? I can show that your brock's wife lives there from 2019 to today
[2:36:04]It would surprise me. Yes. Okay
[2:36:09]And just because you heard brock was brought up. Did you have any relationship with that individual?
[2:36:15]um
[2:36:17]I believe that one, you know on one of those occasions when I was visiting epstein
[2:36:23]at
[2:36:24]Turned up one. I think two maybe three but
[2:36:28]limited number of occasions when I was doing
[2:36:30]Work at at epstein when I was uh doing going over status or going over an assignment with him
[2:36:35]In his dining room on the ground floor of of his townhouse
[2:36:39]Uh brock had come to the townhouse or it was just leaving and I believe I
[2:36:44]I
[2:36:45]You know said hello. I was introduced once maybe twice
[2:36:50]What was your understanding of mr brock's relationship with mr? Epstein?
[2:36:55]I didn't really have an understanding of their relationship. Uh, I knew that there was a relationship
[2:36:59]I didn't really have an understanding about what it was. Did you ever have any understanding that mr? Ehud brock?
[2:37:06]Uh had ties to intelligence
[2:37:10]Uh
[2:37:13]From what you know as a general matter what what one reads in the news. I thought
[2:37:18]As a former prime minister of of israel probably
[2:37:22]I didn't didn't know more than that
[2:37:25]And outside of mr. Ehud brock
[2:37:28]Is there anyone that you know of affiliated with mr. Epstein or maxwell that you suspected to have ties to intelligence?
[2:37:39]No, the answer is no and again for the record you have
[2:37:43]Never had any relationship with any intelligence service. I have not no you have never visited cia headquarters in Langley, virginia
[2:37:51]No
[2:37:57]During the previous hour the minority
[2:38:00]Asked you
[2:38:02]Questions related to your role as mr. Epstein's attorney. I believe that they discussed at length the compensation structure
[2:38:10]I just want to focus on your hiring
[2:38:13]And again recognizing i'll probably make you repeat yourself, it's okay
[2:38:17]I is our understanding that you were working with this partner on mr
[2:38:23]Epstein's accounts and subsequent to that you and that partner went to
[2:38:27]J. Epstein and company is that a fair characterization? No, it didn't happen that way. Okay
[2:38:33]I worked at a I worked first as a paralegal then as an then as a clerk and then as a
[2:38:39]An associate at a law firm by the name of golden wachtel at which that partner was a partner
[2:38:45]By the time he left he left golden wachtel
[2:38:49]Before I left golden wachtel
[2:38:52]After he left golden wachtel. I then went to greenberg trarig for about a year or so
[2:38:59]And when I was at greenberg trarig for about a year, I received a call from that partner
[2:39:05]Um to consider come working for him with him
[2:39:10]um for uh
[2:39:12]for representing mr. Epstein
[2:39:15]and
[2:39:17]Initially, what was your compensation for mr. Epstein with mr. Epstein? It's it
[2:39:24]A long time ago, but I believe it was around 450 450 tells
[2:39:30]What were you making at the law firm?
[2:39:33]Prior to moving to working with mr. Epstein a little bit less than that, but um, probably in the 300s. I don't
[2:39:42]It's a guess. It's I don't recall a hundred cents, but it was less
[2:39:59]How were you compensated?
[2:40:01]by mr. Epstein
[2:40:04]Well, it depended if I was working as a an employee
[2:40:09]Like I was from J. Epstein and company when I was compensating directly by the company J. Epstein and company
[2:40:15]When I was working for the company new york strategy group new york strategy group would get paid by Epstein and then
[2:40:21]New york strategy group would pay me
[2:40:24]Whatever it paid me at the time
[2:40:27]And when I was working
[2:40:28]with my home law firm
[2:40:31]I received the
[2:40:34]Forms directly from Epstein
[2:40:37]Or Epstein or or it could have been one of his entities like um
[2:40:43]Um southern trust company
[2:40:46]And you mentioned
[2:40:47]Previously that you started around 450 000 a year. Yeah
[2:40:52]What was your compensation by the time that you had?
[2:40:55]You finished representing
[2:40:57]Mr. Epstein during his life my last compensation that I received for him
[2:41:02]Before he died was or maybe it was just after he died. He was pursuing an unemployment agreement that he signed
[2:41:10]was
[2:41:11]Uh, the payment was 200 million dollars. I'm sorry 2 million dollars not too much
[2:41:16]2 million dollars. Sorry
[2:41:18]Did you find your compensation to keep to be commensurate with your?
[2:41:23]Experience I did
[2:41:26]I remember I so
[2:41:28]I went to cornell law school. I had a background in corporate and securities law
[2:41:31]I worked for an amla 100 law firm. I was on call 24 seven for seven days a week
[2:41:38]Um, and I was expected to get things done very quickly and very carefully
[2:41:43]Uh transactions were very complicated. They involved high dollar amounts
[2:41:47]So given and and given all of that
[2:41:50]Yes, I believe I was compensated commensurate with my experience and with the skill level that I exercised
[2:41:56]Did you receive equity interest as part of your compensation? No
[2:42:04]Did you ever receive gifts outside of your base pay?
[2:42:07]Um, I received loans as we've discussed and I received um
[2:42:14]He helped me purchase
[2:42:16]My house in new jersey
[2:42:18]Which ultimately got paid back?
[2:42:20]uh, and then when I went to purchase the house in florida
[2:42:24]he
[2:42:25]um agreed to purchase my house in new jersey
[2:42:29]On a deferred basis gave me the money in advance
[2:42:32]um
[2:42:34]Which was used then to purchase the house in
[2:42:37]In florida, uh, and that ultimately because he died that never came to pass and according to the estate plans
[2:42:45]Um, that contract was was basically
[2:42:48]no
[2:42:50]um
[2:42:51]Obviously if there's no money in the estate that there will be an accounting that has to happen but
[2:42:58]Well, that's the ivf treatment. What's that? That's the ivf treatment. Oh, that's the ivf treatment. Sorry. Yes
[2:43:04]Um
[2:43:07]That wasn't good. Yes
[2:43:10]And during the minority's hour, I recognize that they talked to you at length about the loan
[2:43:17]Was the seven million provided at one time or was it over time? Okay
[2:43:22]And between 2013 to 2017 is what I believe you testified to 17 or 18
[2:43:28]Yeah
[2:43:29]and
[2:43:30]Did you approach mr. Epson and ask him for these loans? I did. Yes. What did that look like?
[2:43:37]I told him that I i'd like some more money and i'd like to do it that you know, I was thinking about doing investments
[2:43:44]And he would tell me okay, I'll run you this and that
[2:43:49]And it was it was very definitely a loan
[2:43:53]and
[2:43:54]Chairman comar had discussed
[2:43:57]It and mr. Epson's
[2:43:59]Investments, did he have an opinion on the specific investment that you're looking to make? No, he never discussed investments checking
[2:44:11]Did you receive any other?
[2:44:13]Renumeration we did not cover
[2:44:18]I don't think I did
[2:44:30]In your in performing your roles and responsibilities for mr. Epson
[2:44:35]I'm gonna ask you if you communicate with the following individuals. Okay
[2:44:40]first
[2:44:41]Mr. Richard con
[2:44:43]Yes
[2:44:45]Mr. Harry beller
[2:44:47]Yes
[2:44:49]Miss leslie groff
[2:44:51]Yes
[2:44:53]Miss sarah kellen
[2:44:55]Yes
[2:44:57]Miss nadia mersinkova
[2:45:00]Yes
[2:45:02]Miss karina shulyak
[2:45:04]Yes
[2:45:06]Miss bella climb. Yes
[2:45:08]Yes
[2:45:10]Mr or emad hanna. Yes
[2:45:23]For the um in regards to all these individuals, how would you typically communicate with them?
[2:45:30]Sometimes personally
[2:45:33]For example emad and
[2:45:35]Even at one point emad and and rich con and bella
[2:45:40]And they were in the same office on in new york city
[2:45:43]Um harry too if i go to harry beller, um, I don't believe leslie was also there
[2:45:53]And is that the 301 address no, um, originally there was an address on madison avenue and then
[2:46:07]But there were there was an address
[2:46:11]When ebstein was in jail
[2:46:17]Um
[2:46:18]means
[2:46:20]Each of us moved to different offices
[2:46:23]In 301 e 66 street for a period of time
[2:46:28]And then after he came out of jail each of us moved to offices in an executive office space
[2:46:35]on lexington avenue
[2:46:37]What was mr. Con's role?
[2:46:40]He was an accountant
[2:46:44]I don't know if he actually had an official title, but
[2:46:48]I
[2:46:49]I have heard him referred to as a cfo
[2:46:52]But I don't know if he actually had an official title
[2:46:57]Also
[2:46:58]How closely did you work with mr. Con?
[2:47:02]We had offices near each other we talked about
[2:47:06]Um, there was a specific job that required
[2:47:09]Um me telling him something or him telling me something
[2:47:13]We communicated that way
[2:47:15]But you know, we weren't we weren't close, uh, I think
[2:47:20]There there's at least
[2:47:22]A few occasions where we socialized. I think he went to my kids about mitzvah
[2:47:28]And I think when
[2:47:31]One of the office people was leaving we had a dinner
[2:47:35]We went to together
[2:47:38]That was the relationship
[2:47:41]What role did harry beller play?
[2:47:44]harry beller was
[2:47:46]As I understand that a bookkeeper
[2:47:50]and
[2:47:52]And he was in the accounting department again. My my role was more legal accounting
[2:47:58]so the specifics of what was done in the accounting department was not something that I
[2:48:02]like
[2:48:03]Knew as much about but you mentioned mr. Con you'd worked
[2:48:08]In close proximity to him was that true for mr. Beller as well
[2:48:12]Mr. Beller worked in the same office
[2:48:15]Again, not in the same office office but in the same floor
[2:48:20]We had we had offices on the same floor. So so we saw each other from time to time
[2:48:24]I didn't sit within
[2:48:26]And if he had a question about something I would answer his question
[2:48:29]I had a question about something and I can't tell you specifically what the question would be about
[2:48:34]I would ask him a question
[2:48:37]Outside of work. Did you socialize with mr. Beller?
[2:48:42]I'm i'm trying to remember if mr. Beller was invited to my and attended my daughter's but that's for he may
[2:48:49]But other than that, no
[2:48:52]What was bella klein's role?
[2:48:54]She was also in the accounting office
[2:48:56]also a bookkeeper
[2:48:58]Plus the specifics of what her job was. I didn't I don't know
[2:49:02]Did you socialize with miss klein also, uh, I went to one wedding with her
[2:49:09]Um, and I believe she was invited to the bat mitzvah my kids bat mitzvah
[2:49:14]What about emad
[2:49:16]Anna emad hannah
[2:49:19]He was a a purchasing person
[2:49:23]Purchased a lot of equipment and tools
[2:49:26]heavy heavy machinery
[2:49:28]particularly for the
[2:49:30]If I recall for the for the island little st james when there was a lot of construction projects going on
[2:49:37]Did you socialize with him
[2:49:41]He may have gone to the buttons, so I don't remember
[2:49:45]I think he did
[2:49:48]While working with these individuals, did you ever discuss?
[2:49:52]Anything related to mr. Epstein's personal life? No
[2:50:03]during litigation with jp morgan there's been
[2:50:07]documents that have shown
[2:50:10]jp morgan staff
[2:50:12]making comments
[2:50:14]that
[2:50:15]Tend to show that they may have had some awareness into mr. Epstein's personal life one in particular
[2:50:22]was referencing
[2:50:24]Him hanging out with mildly cyrus is your testimony today that you do not recall ever having any conversations
[2:50:31]With the people you worked with that related to mr. Epstein's affinity with young women or girls
[2:50:39]My recollection is I never had a conversation
[2:50:43]with anybody
[2:50:47]In the accounting office about
[2:50:50]Epstein's affinity for younger girls
[2:50:53]They don't know that he had an affinity for younger girls
[2:50:56]They don't recall ever having any kind of conversation like that
[2:51:00]He had a name
[2:51:01]art of asgardis
[2:51:03]asgardis
[2:51:04]Art of asgardis was a an immigration lawyer what degree and frequency did you interact with him?
[2:51:10]I interacted with him
[2:51:12]a number of times
[2:51:13]uh how many
[2:51:15]Separate instances
[2:51:17]Are we talking a dozen maybe a dozen maybe a little bit more was that surrounding?
[2:51:25]Immigration cases for teens with assistance or other group other other individuals
[2:51:32]Assistance it may have been um for
[2:51:36]Like some of the island managers were were from from like south africa may have been for them
[2:51:42]Um, so that would have been
[2:51:45]um
[2:51:46]A couple from south africa
[2:51:48]um
[2:51:50]What percent of the immigration cases that you worked on were
[2:51:53]young attractive women
[2:51:56]I don't think it's appropriate for me to comment on attractive women between the ages of 15 and 30
[2:52:05]I would say
[2:52:07]Um, that's a that's a wide range. I must say that
[2:52:10]Qualifies for that range
[2:52:13]I don't recall there being any underage women
[2:52:16]Ever that I that I did work for how many women between the ages of 18 and 30
[2:52:21]Did you work with art of asgardis to facilitate immigration paperwork?
[2:52:26]Range, I think the the less than 10 more than 20 first
[2:52:31]The verb facilitate immigration paperwork
[2:52:34]To the extent that I did anything it was to look over
[2:52:38]A document or to add a request from a person to provide a document
[2:52:44]Um, but I wasn't facilitating immigration
[2:52:49]That's not an appropriate word
[2:52:51]I'm, sorry if art of asgardis asks you for documents to beef up an immigration
[2:52:57]application
[2:52:58]I would use the word facilitate, okay
[2:53:02]Just to be clear that wasn't a question. All right, so he's not going to answer but I think he would have
[2:53:06]Take an issue with that statement. Yes
[2:53:09]Keep your voice up
[2:53:12]Yeah, sorry
[2:53:14]Continuing on the the list I previously brought up leslie groff. What was her role? She was mr
[2:53:20]Epstein's assistant
[2:53:21]Um for a while one of you was in jail. She also helped me with some of my legal work
[2:53:27]Can you elaborate on that legal work?
[2:53:30]um
[2:53:32]Nothing sticks out in my in my in my head today, but to the extent I needed
[2:53:38]documents copied or or
[2:53:40]um
[2:53:42]I'd like to send an email to somebody
[2:53:44]um
[2:53:46]I would give her I would tell her to please send an email to somebody so you're just referring to administrative work. Correct
[2:53:53]Did you socialize with miss groff outside of work miss groff also was invited to my
[2:53:59]my
[2:54:00]Kid's spot misva and I believe that miss groff went to that dinner
[2:54:05]that one dinner
[2:54:08]With when one of the workers in my office was leaving
[2:54:12]uh, but beyond that now
[2:54:14]So that's that's the extent of my socialization
[2:54:18]Who is sarah kellen?
[2:54:20]sarah kellen
[2:54:22]um
[2:54:23]To my knowledge was one of jeffrey epstein's assistants
[2:54:29]And what were your interactions with miss kellen?
[2:54:35]From time to time sarah kellen would relate a request
[2:54:38]Request
[2:54:39]Nothing comes to my mind about what request that that jeffrey had relating to some
[2:54:46]some legal legal issue
[2:54:48]um sarah kellen also as I understand it was doing um
[2:54:54]Interior design work for epstein epstein had a lot of properties as we know
[2:54:58]uh and was constantly
[2:55:00]Um
[2:55:02]Constantly redecorating and and changing them and sarah was doing a lot of the procuring
[2:55:09]uh
[2:55:11]And for the decorating that he was doing on those properties
[2:55:15]And I believe the and the entity that she did it through was an entity serve business with sarah
[2:55:21]SLK does slk designs. I think it's something like that. It was called
[2:55:25]Did you create that entity?
[2:55:28]I don't recall, but it is possible. Did you socialize with miss kellen outside of work? No
[2:55:36]Who is kareena shulyak?
[2:55:39]I have come to to know kareena ultimately
[2:55:43]As somebody who was a a girlfriend of mr. Epstein
[2:55:48]But I did not have that realization until
[2:55:52]I want to say
[2:55:56]2015 2016 around there and we discussed her in the context
[2:56:01]One of the alleged sham marriages
[2:56:05]I was not aware that it was a sham marriage. I'm still not sure that it's a sham marriage, but
[2:56:13]But
[2:56:14]She was one of the people that was married. Yes, but you came
[2:56:19]To learn that mr. Epstein had a romantic relationship with kareena after this
[2:56:25]marriage
[2:56:28]So the word romantic is for me is it's kind of loaded
[2:56:32]I understood her to be his girlfriend whatever that meant and I didn't know what that meant
[2:56:37]I don't know what kind of what his actual intimate relationship with her was
[2:56:44]Did you socialize with miss shulyak outside of your official role? No
[2:56:52]We talked about
[2:56:54]Miss groff miss kellen and miss shulyak. You understood all of them to be assistants of mr. Epstein. Is that right?
[2:57:02]Say to get was this miss groff miss kellen and miss shulyak, you're right
[2:57:08]um
[2:57:09]Yes, and and sarah as I as I explained sarah also did decorating and design work for me
[2:57:16]Was nadia marsinkova in a system
[2:57:22]To the extent that I the same extent that I don't know what that meant
[2:57:27]I understood at some point I became aware that nadia was a girlfriend
[2:57:31]of his
[2:57:32]Of epstein's but she was also an assistant
[2:57:36]When did you meet?
[2:57:37]nadia marsinkova
[2:57:40]If you had something to show me I I can tell you but I don't I don't recall when I met her
[2:57:51]You may not recall when you met her
[2:57:53]But do you know how old she may have been when you met her? She was well above age well above the age of 18
[2:58:01]I guess I should take this point. I have heard stories referred to her as a child sex slave or something like that
[2:58:08]and that I will
[2:58:10]I will tell you that
[2:58:13]That I do not believe that to be true. I don't think that was true
[2:58:17]and as part of the defense council's kind of
[2:58:21]Disclosures to the federal federal and state
[2:58:25]Governments in connection with the Epstein investigation. They made it clear that that wasn't true
[2:58:31]Actually in his 2019 indictment
[2:58:36]You're familiar with the allegations
[2:58:39]If you have a specific allegation
[2:58:43]He was accused of engaging in sex trafficking human trafficking
[2:58:46]If you were on the jury and that had gone to trial would you would you vote to convict him given all of your
[2:58:52]information you have
[2:58:55]I'm sorry. Can you repeat the question?
[2:58:58]I'm sorry for which for which for 2002 2005 the indictment that you probably have read
[2:59:04]if that went to trial and you were on a jury would you have
[2:59:08]Been in favor of convicting him for the charges with which he was
[2:59:11]Alleged to have committed
[2:59:14]Based upon what I knew then the answer would have been no. What about now? I don't know
[2:59:23]750 million dollars have been paid in settlements close
[2:59:27]and
[2:59:28]You don't know whether it's 750 million. We're in boy scams america
[2:59:33]bank america
[2:59:34]I mean
[2:59:35]So okay, that's that was helpful. I don't know
[2:59:41]Mr. Indyk, I I want to return back to I characterize those women as assistants
[2:59:49]What would you
[2:59:50]And i'm going i'm about to ask more questions related to mr. Epstein's various assistants
[2:59:56]Do you disagree with the committee's characterization and some of these women as his assistants?
[3:00:05]Well
[3:00:06]To the extent that I that I knew what their role was
[3:00:10]They appeared to me to be assistants. They appeared to be taking messages for him making travel plans for him
[3:00:16]Running errands for him. So they appeared to me to be assistants
[3:00:21]In the time that you worked for mr. Epstein
[3:00:25]Roughly, how many assistants did he have?
[3:00:34]I don't I don't
[3:00:36]I don't know. I've been 10 15. It's a guess. I don't know. We could go through them if you want
[3:00:47]As his corporate attorney, did you advise him on
[3:00:52]employment
[3:00:53]Employment matters related to their hiring
[3:00:58]Typically no
[3:01:02]Were all of his assistants female
[3:01:09]office assistants, I would say yes, but he did employ
[3:01:13]people
[3:01:14]Um through the system with like architectural stuff
[3:01:18]I can think of one person that was at least one person that was a man
[3:01:22]His chefs were uh, largely men
[3:01:28]House household staff where there were there were men as well as women
[3:01:34]So I think the answer is no
[3:01:38]Personal assistants in the in the sense of you know taking messages and getting coffee
[3:01:47]And things like that I would say yes, except that extent there was overlap with household functions like you know
[3:01:57]Bringing meals and things like that what percent of the women lived at 301 east 66th street. I don't know
[3:02:08]Your office was there for a while and you don't know what percent of his assistants lived at 301 east 66th street
[3:02:15]So my office was in one apartment in 150 unit building
[3:02:19]I was not in the accounting office. I to the extent that the afstein provided apartments to those people
[3:02:26]That's not something I did
[3:02:28]So the answer is no
[3:02:31]The answer is you don't know
[3:02:33]Right, the answer is I don't well I was answering the other question. The answer is I don't know correct
[3:02:40]Did you find it suspicious that his personal?
[3:02:44]Assessants were women
[3:02:47]No
[3:02:49]In my experience
[3:02:52]In my exposure to other
[3:02:56]Men in
[3:02:58]in the business world
[3:03:00]Oftentimes the assistants were women even in the lawyers these the assistants were women
[3:03:05]You didn't find it suspicious that the guy that just went to prison for
[3:03:09]prostitution of a liar had seven different female assistants
[3:03:14]And had a very strange situations around the home. That's not suspicious
[3:03:19]That's a lot to unpack there. So
[3:03:22]The guy that just went to prison for
[3:03:25]So if I can answer the question, I'd like to answer the question
[3:03:28]The guy just went to the question went to prison was registered as a sex offender
[3:03:32]He was under intense scrutiny
[3:03:35]So no, I didn't think that if he had women also he was under intense scrutiny and it was publicly about him
[3:03:40]So no, I never made the assumption that women were working for him were engaged in a sexual relationship with him
[3:03:46]And I never and I never believed that he would be engaging in conduct
[3:03:51]Which with all the scrutiny on him could put him back in the place where he said he was never going to go to
[3:04:00]How were these assistants compensated?
[3:04:08]I assume they were paid by check or or
[3:04:13]You know either as as independent contractors or his
[3:04:16]Or as salaried employees or various entities
[3:04:20]To be clear. Did you ever provide cash payments to?
[3:04:24]epsilon's assistants
[3:04:26]Not that I recall. No
[3:04:27]Did you ever witness mr. Epson giving cash to?
[3:04:31]his assistants
[3:04:36]For their personal payment
[3:04:40]The answer is no not that I recall
[3:04:43]Is it possible that I was in a room where he handed cash to them in order to?
[3:04:47]Pay tip somebody who showed up
[3:04:50]Or to pay for a particular thing that he asked them to get that's possible. I don't have a specific recollection
[3:04:56]But it's certainly possible
[3:04:58]Did you ever witness mr. Epson pay women for massages? No
[3:05:17]During the previous hour
[3:05:20]I believe you testified that you visited Zorro ranch. Is that correct? That's correct
[3:05:25]And how many times did you visit Zorro Zorro ranch?
[3:05:30]Two or three times. What were the nature of your visits to the ranch?
[3:05:36]Usually if i'm visiting a property and and I believe in this instance
[3:05:41]It had to do with some kind of either construction project
[3:05:44]taking place
[3:05:46]Taking place on the property. Oh and there was one other time now that i'm thinking about it
[3:05:54]When my family and I took a vacation out in new mexico
[3:05:59]Epstein wasn't there at the time but my family and I visited the ranch just to see it
[3:06:11]Did you visit the palm beach residence?
[3:06:15]I did
[3:06:16]How many times did you visit that residence?
[3:06:19]Well after he was in jail
[3:06:22]When I went to see him in jail, I actually stayed at the palm beach residence in one of the rooms one of the bedrooms
[3:06:28]And how long did you reside at that residence?
[3:06:31]I didn't reside at the residence. I stayed in the residence
[3:06:35]When I would go visit him, I would go there for a day
[3:06:38]Stay overnight and come back to to new york new jersey
[3:06:46]Did you visit his residence in paris?
[3:06:51]I visited the residence in paris
[3:06:54]Once um when I was on a family trip when he wasn't there
[3:07:00]um
[3:07:03]Do you think it once when he was there?
[3:07:07]For I don't remember it was a business related trip and I don't remember the nature of the business. It was quite some time ago
[3:07:13]Was mr. Epstein present? He was there. Yeah, who else was present?
[3:07:18]Valveson
[3:07:19]um is ballet
[3:07:23]and
[3:07:24]One personal assistant. I don't remember
[3:07:29]That it was somebody who was his personal assistant at that time
[3:07:33]Recognizing that you just testified you don't recall
[3:07:37]Why you visited paris with mr. Epstein? Is it possible that it may have been related to meeting with jean louis brunel?
[3:07:46]No
[3:07:47]And for the record
[3:07:48]Do you know john louis brunel?
[3:07:51]I I did interact with john with brunel on one
[3:07:57]Probably a handful of occasions. Yes, well were the nature of your interactions with mr. Brunel um brunel
[3:08:05]Had had traveled to the office one or one or two times
[3:08:09]um
[3:08:11]I understand that he and Epstein were social acquaintances
[3:08:13]So when I was visiting Epstein for whatever reasons I was visiting Epstein I would see him
[3:08:19]um
[3:08:20]um
[3:08:21]as it relates to
[3:08:25]mc squared had some kind of a payroll tax issue if I recall
[3:08:31]Oh and in connection with that payroll tax issue. There was some kind of a letter of credit that was required for it
[3:08:37]and
[3:08:38]I interacted I think with him and with his
[3:08:42]his staff
[3:08:44]I think it was an accountant or controller
[3:08:47]With respect to that
[3:08:50]Issue and and Epstein providing science security for the letter of credit
[3:08:56]Did you socialize with mr. Brunel outside of I did not socialize with mr
[3:09:01]Brunel outside and you mentioned period not outside of I didn't socialize it
[3:09:05]you mentioned uh the entity and I do not have my notes in front of me, but
[3:09:11]What was that entity?
[3:09:14]Mc squared mc squared was a modeling agency
[3:09:18]Uh, and to my knowledge was a legitimate modeling agency with with the bookers and employees
[3:09:25]um
[3:09:27]So that was a that was an agency that I believe he was a principal
[3:09:31]Did you have any role in organizing that modeling and uh agency?
[3:09:37]I recall that I
[3:09:40]Did the the the
[3:09:43]I don't know if it was a corporation or the loc the incorporation work
[3:09:47]Or had something to do with the incorporation work
[3:09:51]What was mr. Epstein's role in with the agency?
[3:09:55]I don't know that he had a a a role
[3:09:59]I don't know that he was a i'm pretty sure he wasn't a a principal of mc squared
[3:10:04]During the time that you knew mr. Epstein. Did he ever represent himself to be a talent scout for models?
[3:10:11]Not in my presence. No
[3:10:13]Did you ever subsequently learn that he represented himself to be a victoria secret model scout
[3:10:19]Through allegations in in legal papers. What did you think of those allegations?
[3:10:25]Didn't know what the thing as far as the resident or the properties that mr. Epstein
[3:10:47]Owned that you said he visited and
[3:10:50]You can correct me if i'm wrong palm beach manhattan new mexico and paris
[3:10:55]Did you have keys or security access to any of these properties? No
[3:11:01]At any time did you have office space inside any of these properties? No
[3:11:08]Didn't you observe any massage tables?
[3:11:15]after he died
[3:11:17]When we did a tour of the new york
[3:11:21]I think it was the co-executive and i rich collin
[3:11:25]We did a tour
[3:11:26]Of that property and I believe I saw a massage table there
[3:11:31]So then just for the record can you be clear that before he died before he died
[3:11:36]I did not see any massage tables
[3:11:38]you never
[3:11:40]During your representation
[3:11:43]Were you ever a part of?
[3:11:47]Uh any purchases of massage tables or equipment? No
[3:11:57]It's been reported and
[3:12:00]We've seen from the epsi files transparency act that mr. Epstein
[3:12:06]Had weird taste in artwork and many of his properties
[3:12:12]Had betrayed nudity
[3:12:15]Did you notice
[3:12:16]Any unusual artwork when you visited the properties?
[3:12:20]I saw
[3:12:22]You know, there's the blue dress that everybody refers to in the press. I've seen that in the new york property in the
[3:12:29]Control room where the where the security person was located. I've seen that in that room
[3:12:35]Uh, I remember seeing
[3:12:38]eyeballs glass eyeballs
[3:12:42]I forget which house that was in but it was a glass eyeballs. It was hung in a frame and hung up
[3:12:47]But that was kind of an odd thing
[3:12:50]I remember in the new york
[3:12:54]The new york townhouse
[3:12:56]When you walked in on your way to go to the dining room
[3:13:00]There was a rope with I think like an acrobatic
[3:13:04]woman
[3:13:05]dangling from the rope
[3:13:07]So that that struck me as kind of an odd
[3:13:10]piece of art
[3:13:12]um
[3:13:15]He he also had an american flag on the dining room table at some some point
[3:13:20]I think that was art. I don't I don't know
[3:13:23]Did you ever discuss any of those?
[3:13:26]Or
[3:13:29]Choices with mr. Ebsen, you know, my relationship with mr. Ebsen was not such where I would have a conversation but artistic places
[3:13:43]Have you heard the phrase if you can speak it don't write it and if you can read it don't speak it
[3:13:49]No, okay. It's a dc phrase people always talk about not good, but you get the general gist
[3:13:57]I think so. I mean, okay, I think so. Okay, um
[3:14:02]Epstein has a very
[3:14:04]documented
[3:14:05]History of putting things in writing that people would generally not want put in writing that it seems intentional. It seems systematic either
[3:14:14]Have you followed that at all?
[3:14:16]Do you realize that the obscene transparency act shows us all these emails and the way that he documents things
[3:14:21]Really intentionally to create it seems like he's creating leverage. I mean, do you have any
[3:14:27]Insight into that practice I don't have any insight into that practice. I've never seen his emails
[3:14:33]Why would why do you think he would?
[3:14:36]Document so much so many things that the people that he was communicating would clearly probably not want that stuff in writing
[3:14:43]I wouldn't speculate. I don't know
[3:14:49]To be clear on the artwork. Did you ever see nude photos displayed at mr. Ebsen's properties? I've seen
[3:14:57]In inventorying the estate i've seen
[3:15:03]The there's um, there's naked paintings naked women in paintings
[3:15:09]I believe there was one there was a book of
[3:15:13]Moods like a photographic clip one of those big kind of coffee table books. I saw something like that
[3:15:19]um
[3:15:21]I think I think
[3:15:27]I'm trying to remember if it's only because I heard tell of it after the fact after he died
[3:15:33]I don't think I saw anything else
[3:15:36]Did you ever travel on mr. Epstein's plane?
[3:15:40]I've traveled on
[3:15:42]Planes that were owned by mr. Epstein beneficially. Yes, how many times?
[3:15:48]over the course of 23 years
[3:15:53]maybe
[3:15:54]One a year maybe less than that. Maybe it doesn't i'm not sure
[3:15:58]But but it was it was not frequent was mr. Epstein always present
[3:16:04]uh
[3:16:05]Uh on every trip that I went I think he was present with the exception of one
[3:16:11]when um
[3:16:13]I had um
[3:16:15]I'd gone to
[3:16:18]I'm not sure if it was dc or boston with mr. Epstein on it. I'm sorry
[3:16:22]I had gone um
[3:16:25]Either to boston or or dc with mr. Epstein
[3:16:30]uh on a day when I had told him that I was celebrating my my anniversary
[3:16:36]With my wife and he asked me to go. Nevertheless
[3:16:39]Uh, and when we came back to tederberg for that trip, he said I should take my life
[3:16:44]To atlantic city and take the plane. So that was the one time
[3:16:47]That I did not travel with him
[3:16:50]What were the nature was it business related you were always traveling on his plane every trip that I took with mr
[3:16:57]Epstein was business related
[3:16:58]On his plane. It's been alleged that mr
[3:17:03]Epstein would use his plane or would conduct sex parties on his plane. You never witnessed or heard anything
[3:17:10]Related to sex parties on his plane. I never witnessed any kind of sexual conduct on this plane when I was on it
[3:17:22]We're
[3:17:23]Coming to the end of our hour. So i'm going to ask you some questions to close
[3:17:27]Have you ever declined to provide legal services for legal or ethical reasons?
[3:17:37]No, I don't
[3:17:38]I don't think
[3:17:40]I don't think that occasion came up
[3:17:44]Have you ever declined to participate in a transaction for legal or ethical reasons?
[3:17:49]um
[3:17:51]While I was employed with Epstein
[3:17:55]Epstein
[3:17:57]Um declined to participate in transactions that he thought were inappropriate for either legal reasons or that he thought
[3:18:04]Could potentially be scams or frauds
[3:18:07]Um, so in that respect. Yes, personally, I never had occasion
[3:18:12]To make that call
[3:18:14]Have you ever advised a client to not tell you something?
[3:18:18]No
[3:18:20]Have you ever advised clients about human trafficking statutes?
[3:18:27]um
[3:18:30]In connection with
[3:18:36]Did I answer the question actually? Sorry in connection with the legal defense team
[3:18:42]um
[3:18:43]The team and I certainly reviewed the sex trafficking statutes
[3:18:55]Mr. Indyke
[3:18:57]Or your lawyers you discussed this committee subpoena of documents of the Epstein estate last hour with the ranking member
[3:19:04]I believe it was stated that the subpoena is closed out except for items 15 and 16 in the subpoena schedule
[3:19:11]Is that correct?
[3:19:13]15 has sub parts a and b
[3:19:15]So one of them is closed out and one of them is not
[3:19:19]I will enter the subpoena and schedule as majority exhibit four
[3:19:35]The subpoena is addressed to the estate of Jeffrey Epstein care of darren indyte and richard con
[3:19:42]And it was sent on august 25th of 2025
[3:19:55]item 15
[3:19:57]And I will read it into the record it requests all documents and communications to or from and or referring or
[3:20:04]Or relating to the following individuals
[3:20:07]A is numbers one through 92 defined by jufray verse maxwell
[3:20:13]Plaintiff virginia jufray's fourth revised disclosure pursuant to the federal rules of civil procedure in the southern district of new york on January 5th of
[3:20:22]2024 and
[3:20:24]b
[3:20:25]all presidents and vice presidents of the united states not otherwise listed in
[3:20:30]Request 10a from january 1st 1990 through august 10th 19 or 2019
[3:20:40]Number 16 says all documents and communications referring or relating to the following entities
[3:20:47]a
[3:20:48]co u q foundation
[3:20:51]b
[3:20:52]n e s l l c
[3:20:54]c d york strategy group
[3:20:57]d
[3:20:58]j e g e l l c
[3:21:01]e
[3:21:02]j e g e ink
[3:21:04]and f l s j l l c
[3:21:10]My understanding is that the committee council discussed with the estate lawyers the need to further clarify items 15a and 16
[3:21:19]I want to be very clear
[3:21:21]The committee does not consider 15a or 16 to be closed out
[3:21:26]As additional clarification was sought by the estate the committee intends to provide that clarification
[3:21:32]But is first continuing its investigation and review of materials produced by banks
[3:21:38]And doj which relate to these requests and assist the committee's clarification
[3:21:43]And again to be clear the estate communicated to us that item 15b is completely completely closed out
[3:21:50]And the estate possesses no additional documents responsive to that request
[3:21:55]We can go off the record we can go back on the record
[3:22:14]Good afternoon. Mr. Indyk. Good afternoon
[3:22:17]Are you familiar with the florida science foundation?
[3:22:21]Um, yes, I know the florida science foundation. Okay. Were you involved in setting it up?
[3:22:28]um the florida science foundation
[3:22:31]is the
[3:22:32]um a trade name for lack of a better term
[3:22:36]Of the couq foundation which was an existing foundation that predated. Um, mr. Epstein's, um
[3:22:44]Conviction in 2008
[3:22:52]Was there a separate incorporation of the
[3:22:56]Entity that subsequently it was known as the florida science foundation as you just explained it
[3:23:02]I believe that initially
[3:23:05]um
[3:23:06]I'm not sure why it was done but um, one of the florida attorneys formed a separately florida science foundation
[3:23:16]Um, but that I believe that one was never used
[3:23:21]um, I believe
[3:23:23]The foundation that was in existence was the one that they used
[3:23:27]Um, and you don't have an understanding as to why the florida science foundation was incorporated
[3:23:33]um
[3:23:35]As i'm sitting here today. I don't
[3:23:37]I think somebody just did it quickly because they knew there was something going to be called the florida science foundation
[3:23:42]They didn't and I don't think that they kind of got direction from anybody and they just did it
[3:23:48]I can represent to you that i've seen um articles of incorporation for the florida science foundation
[3:23:55]That were filed on november 1st of 2007. Does that sound right to you?
[3:24:00]Sounds about right. Yes
[3:24:02]And that to my chronological understanding was after
[3:24:06]Jeffrey Epstein was arrested and during his plea negotiations with the u.s attorney's office in florida. Is that right?
[3:24:14]um
[3:24:16]After it's
[3:24:18]november 2007
[3:24:20]Would have been after he was arrested
[3:24:22]And what was the second part of the question during his plea negotiations with the u.s attorney's office
[3:24:29]I think so. Yes
[3:24:31]To your understanding was the foundation created whether in whole or in part
[3:24:37]To give jeffrey epstein a place to perform his work release
[3:24:42]I think
[3:24:44]The answer to that question is I believe that
[3:24:48]Epstein wanted work release
[3:24:51]I believe that he wanted during his work release to do the scientific work that he was doing he was a
[3:24:59]Um an avid supporter of of scientific research and academic research and I believe that that
[3:25:06]that
[3:25:08]He wanted to continue that work
[3:25:10]um, if he were to get work work release
[3:25:13]and so
[3:25:14]I I think in anticipation of that though
[3:25:18]I think it was a florida law firm that I think it's a florida entity
[3:25:23]The one that was incorporated was a florida entity. Is that right? That is my understanding
[3:25:27]I believe the florida the florida law firm just set it up
[3:25:31]without kind of
[3:25:34]Discussing that with with in in detail
[3:25:37]and then once it once
[3:25:41]The the conversation ensued further
[3:25:44]I believe
[3:25:45]That it was determined that the the foundation that was already doing that kind of work like the cou foundation was
[3:25:53]Should be the foundation. That's that's doing it
[3:25:56]in in florida
[3:25:58]I understand that the foundation had offices at 250 australian avenue in west palm beach. Is that accurate?
[3:26:06]That sounds right. Yes
[3:26:08]Were you ever present in those offices? I was in those offices. Um, I wasn't
[3:26:14]I wasn't stationed in those offices. My my office was up north
[3:26:19]but from time to time
[3:26:22]When epstein was on work release
[3:26:26]And I would come down and have kind of the status conversation as to what's going on
[3:26:31]With the transactions that i've been working on
[3:26:34]Um, it would be at that office. How often did that happen?
[3:26:42]I don't recall sitting here today
[3:26:47]more than 10
[3:26:49]Is there for it? Yeah, I mean that's that's probably true
[3:26:55]Um during any of those visits, did you see any women present in the offices? Um, I believe there was a personal assistant
[3:27:03]present
[3:27:06]I don't remember which one
[3:27:08]Did you ever become aware of epstein sexually abusing women in those offices?
[3:27:15]I became aware
[3:27:19]I i'm not sure if the allegation happened after he died
[3:27:23]But I became aware of the allegation after the fact
[3:27:28]That he did
[3:27:30]Did any woman ever tell you that she had been sexually abused by epstein while he was on work release? No
[3:27:37]Did any woman ever ask for your help in connection with sexual abuse by epstein? No
[3:27:45]And just the the idea that that was taking place i'm not saying it didn't
[3:27:50]But
[3:27:51]It would have surprised me because when epstein was on work release there was a deputy
[3:27:57]sitting in the front desk
[3:28:00]And the office wasn't that big so
[3:28:03]That would have surprised me if that was going on
[3:28:07]When you say deputy you mean law enforcement like a law enforcement a deputy sheriff
[3:28:12]Did you at any time ever tell any woman making allegations about epstein
[3:28:18]Not to communicate with law enforcement
[3:28:20]I would never have told them
[3:28:22]Not to communicate with law enforcement
[3:28:26]Did you visit epstein in prison in florida I did
[3:28:31]What was the reason for those visits? Uh, the reasons for those visits is that
[3:28:36]While he was in jail
[3:28:38]There were five properties
[3:28:40]There were there was construction going on on properties there were investments that were outstanding at the time
[3:28:45]there were things going on that
[3:28:49]required
[3:28:50]um
[3:28:51]Me to get instruction on me to talk to him about to give him status updates on and
[3:28:55]That was the basis of the of the conversation
[3:28:59]You were asked by the majority earlier today about um
[3:29:08]Tip off um to mr. Epstein
[3:29:11]Of an fbi search. Um, I don't want to belabor the point
[3:29:14]But i'm just going to ask the question in a slightly different way for clarity of the record
[3:29:18]Okay, do you have any reason to believe that epstein was tipped off about an fbi search?
[3:29:27]I don't have a specific reason to believe that i've heard the allegation a bunch of times
[3:29:33]And having learned things after he died about him
[3:29:39]I would be less certain that it didn't happen
[3:29:44]Um
[3:29:45]Do you have any knowledge of the removal of video equipment from any of mr
[3:29:51]Epstein's properties prior to execution of an fbi warrant?
[3:30:00]I need to speak to you about this
[3:30:04]Yes
[3:30:05]And do it here we can go off there
[3:30:18]Back on the record
[3:30:20]Mr. Endicke i'll repeat the question. Um, do you have any knowledge of the removal of any video equipment from any of?
[3:30:28]Mr. Epstein's properties prior to the execution of an fbi warrant
[3:30:33]Of video equipment video equipment
[3:30:38]No
[3:30:40]So my next question is do you have any knowledge of the removal of any computer equipment?
[3:30:45]From any of mr. Epstein's properties prior to the execution of an fbi search warrant
[3:30:50]So just before we get to that can we can not you're the one asking the question is not me
[3:30:54]but can we first ask if he has any personal knowledge and then
[3:30:57]If you want to follow up we can
[3:31:00]Do you just qualify the question by adding the word personal well, that'd be helpful. Yeah, sure. Um, so
[3:31:08]Mr. Endicke do you have any personal knowledge of the removal of any computer equipment from any of jeffrey epstein's properties prior to the execution of an fbi search warrant?
[3:31:18]I don't know if we're gonna if we can talk about a waiver here. All right, so um
[3:31:24]I think he's prepared to tell you what he
[3:31:27]Well, that's why I asked for personal knowledge I want to be clear about
[3:31:30]Did you have personal knowledge?
[3:31:32]So the answer is I don't have personal knowledge of the removal of computer equipment
[3:31:38]Um, it wasn't part of anything like that at the time. I have no knowledge that it was done
[3:31:43]And by personal knowledge, you mean firsthand knowledge firsthand knowledge. Do you have knowledge from another source?
[3:31:50]Okay, so no if I can um, I think he's he's happy to answer the question
[3:31:56]Um, I it may implicate a privilege but to the extent that it's not going to be deemed as some broader waiver of privileges
[3:32:03]He's ready to answer the question. So unless someone's going to claim that that is a
[3:32:07]waiver of any privilege that might exist
[3:32:11]So I think for for
[3:32:13]Clarity, um, i'll just read for the record the minority's position as to
[3:32:18]privilege assertions today
[3:32:21]Um
[3:32:22]That is as a general matter congress does not recognize common law privileges including the attorney-client privilege
[3:32:28]I will further note that the elements of the attorney-client privilege do not appear to be present as to the entirety
[3:32:34]Of mr. Endyke's communications with mr. Epstein
[3:32:38]Among other reasons jeffrey epstein was a serial sexual offender and abuser as such many if not most of his communications
[3:32:46]With mr. Endyke were utilized to further his crimes
[3:32:49]Such communications are subject to the crime fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege
[3:32:55]Moreover the attorney-client privilege is in essence a policy choice
[3:33:00]The minority does not believe that this policy supports maintaining any privilege that may exist with respect to a former client
[3:33:07]Such as jeffrey epstein who is both deceased and perpetrated horrific crimes against numerous victims
[3:33:14]Okay, so look at that
[3:33:16]I respect the minority's views. I think the supreme court differs with the minority's views on on attorney-client privilege having said that
[3:33:23]um
[3:33:24]One I don't believe he's going to be talking about conversations with mr. Epstein
[3:33:29]um, that's not the privilege he'd be asserting it's in the context of uh doing defense communications
[3:33:36]um
[3:33:37]And as I said, he's actually prepared to give you the answer. So it's not that we're now asserting privilege over it
[3:33:44]But we i'm stating for the record
[3:33:48]This is not in our view redeemed as some broader waiver of privilege regardless of whether you may recognize privilege
[3:33:55]If you do
[3:33:57]Then we may have a different response
[3:34:02]Sorry, just so we're clear on your position. Are you?
[3:34:07]Willing to answer or is your client willing to answer the question on condition that we
[3:34:12]Accept your premise that the privilege applies but that his communication is not subject to it or just
[3:34:20]No, I i'm not asking you to accept
[3:34:22]That okay does or doesn't apply because I understand your view to be it doesn't in this context. We disagree
[3:34:29]Um, i'm asking you whether or not a privilege applies
[3:34:32]Are you going to take a position that if he answers this question and he does have privileges to assert?
[3:34:38]That by answering the question he has more broadly waived any potential privilege
[3:34:43]In his communications with mr. Epstein or anyone else
[3:34:46]on subjects related to mr. Epson
[3:34:48]um, I think
[3:34:51]Off the record for a sec, please on the record
[3:35:05]We have consulted with counsel for the majority who is going to articulate the committee's position on this question
[3:35:11]Yeah, um just to make clear
[3:35:14]All objections are reviewed on an individualized basis
[3:35:18]on based on the assertion of privilege at a given time
[3:35:22]and
[3:35:23]The chairman makes those determinations
[3:35:26]The minority or or even majority staff
[3:35:30]in this situation the chair
[3:35:34]We direct the witness to answer the question and understand the issue raised by counsel as to
[3:35:41]Assert that they don't view this as a blanket waiver and has stated all way all
[3:35:48]Responses from the chairman related to objections or assertions of privilege are done on an individualized basis
[3:36:02]Yeah
[3:36:03]If I may ask just to be clear, um
[3:36:06]And I understand that the decisions are made on a
[3:36:10]case by case basis. I think the issue we're raising is
[3:36:14]whether
[3:36:15]People can say that
[3:36:17]Because he answers a question in the context of the one that was asked
[3:36:22]um
[3:36:24]Putting aside whether what people's positions are on
[3:36:27]privilege generally
[3:36:29]That the answer to this particular question, which is a pretty limited scope question
[3:36:34]Will not be deemed
[3:36:36]by chairman coma or the majority
[3:36:38]to be a broader waiver with respect to
[3:36:41]Attorney coin privilege that might apply to other issues
[3:36:44]Given that each individual issue raised is done. So on an individualized basis and in this case
[3:36:52]The decision
[3:36:55]Here
[3:36:56]Is it specific to the question that has been asked?
[3:37:01]and so
[3:37:04]that
[3:37:10]the
[3:37:12]chairman
[3:37:13]Cannot
[3:37:14]Will review all further
[3:37:17]Objections should they be raised
[3:37:20]Regarding any privilege that is asserted solely on the basis of the facts in that objection raised in that objection
[3:37:28]And will not
[3:37:32]Will not hold facts related to other objections raised
[3:37:37]Including the circumstances
[3:37:56]Okay, um
[3:37:58]So we
[3:37:59]Will permit mr
[3:38:00]Inducted to answer the question with the understanding that we have that is answering that question will not be deemed
[3:38:07]a broader attorney client privilege waiver with respect to other
[3:38:11]Topics, even if they relate to mr. Epstein and on that basis
[3:38:16]You can answer the question. Thank you
[3:38:19]um, so
[3:38:20]during the course of
[3:38:23]after
[3:38:24]Epstein's conviction
[3:38:27]um after he's
[3:38:30]After he served jail time through conversations with defense counsel
[3:38:35]Uh, I became aware that there were computer hard drives in the possession of private investigators
[3:38:41]Not having done them
[3:38:44]Not having been participated in that in any way
[3:38:47]I don't know when they were when they were moved
[3:38:49]When they came in their possession if they were I just don't know how they came into possession, but I knew of the existence
[3:38:55]of hard drives
[3:38:59]And did you come to know what was contained on those hard drives? No
[3:39:10]um
[3:39:12]Mr. Enick up until now we've been talking about the
[3:39:15]Investigation and prosecution of jeffrey epstein that were conducted in
[3:39:19]Florida, um, as you know, mr. Epstein was subsequently investigated and prosecuted in the southern district of new york
[3:39:26]Were you ever contacted by the department of justice or the fbi in connection with that investigation?
[3:39:32]No
[3:39:34]Were you ever contacted by the department of justice or the fbi in connection with the investigation or prosecution of gilain maxwell
[3:39:42]In the southern district of new york
[3:39:44]um
[3:39:45]I was not personally
[3:39:47]contacted
[3:39:49]I can't recall if the estates council was was contacted
[3:39:57]Do you have reason to believe that the estates council may have been
[3:40:05]Sitting here today would be a guess and I don't really want to guess I don't I don't recall
[3:40:13]And I don't recall any conversation subsequent to that
[3:40:19]Mr. Enick i'm going to shift gears a bit
[3:40:21]um
[3:40:21]And as we go forward i'm going to ask you some questions about interactions with women linked to jeffrey epstein
[3:40:28]Okay, before I do that
[3:40:29]i'm going to request of the majority that prior to any public release of the transcript or video of today's deposition
[3:40:37]Uh the names of any actual or potential epstein survivors that appear in any of the questions I pose
[3:40:43]Or any of the answers to those questions
[3:40:46]As well as any other information in the record today from which a survivor could be identified be fully redacted
[3:40:53]um and with that
[3:40:55]You you spoke uh during the previous round about um
[3:41:00]So just so I'm clear so I can be comfortable that if we're using the names of a of a potential victim
[3:41:06]And I use the names here that will be redacted and I don't have to worry about so this is a this is a request
[3:41:12]I'm making to the majority which controls, um redactions of the transcript prior to its public release
[3:41:20]So 301 east 66th street, yeah
[3:41:27]There were as I understood from your previous testimony women connected to jeffrey epstein living in that building. Is that right?
[3:41:34]That's my understanding. Yes
[3:41:37]How many I don't know
[3:41:41]Did you ever interact with those women
[3:41:45]Um never in the building to my recollection elsewhere
[3:41:50]If they were in his office, yes
[3:41:53]and
[3:41:54]Who were those women?
[3:42:01]It's happened a while ago and I and i'm having trouble recalling
[3:42:05]Who lived in the building which is why I can't answer your question about how many i'm having trouble recalling
[3:42:11]I think
[3:42:12]I think sue hamlin may have lived in the building
[3:42:15]Uh, and I interacted with her
[3:42:18]Um
[3:42:19]when um
[3:42:21]In the office
[3:42:23]And and at times when I visited at mr. Epstein's home in new york in dining rooms
[3:42:29]um
[3:42:31]On the ground floor. I I saw I believe I saw her there and interacted with her there
[3:42:37]I'm sorry. I I believe I saw her there and interacted with her there
[3:42:41]um
[3:42:42]I'm trying to think if there are other people
[3:42:49]I don't know
[3:42:52]This is very hard because I don't know who's living there. Um
[3:42:56]and
[3:42:58]If you had names that you could give me it would be helpful
[3:43:01]We can put that aside for the moment. Um
[3:43:06]Did jeffrey epstein own the apartments at 301 66 that these women were living in
[3:43:13]I'm not 100 certain about the relationship because it was it was a little vague
[3:43:18]osa properties, um
[3:43:20]jeffrey had a uh
[3:43:22]And a relationship of those properties
[3:43:25]Which owned the apartments?
[3:43:27]um, I think his brother was an owner of osa properties
[3:43:31]in some in some form
[3:43:33]and
[3:43:35]I don't know if if
[3:43:37]I believe
[3:43:38]I'm not 100 certain because this is not
[3:43:42]Not something that I did
[3:43:43]but I believe
[3:43:45]that um
[3:43:47]the
[3:43:48]the
[3:43:50]Epstein was leasing a certain number of the apartments
[3:43:54]Was epstein paying
[3:43:57]Rent for these women
[3:43:59]Um, I believe epstein was paying rent for the apartments
[3:44:04]The apartments where these women were living
[3:44:07]Assuming there were women living there. Yes. Um, but again, I don't I can't tell you who was living there
[3:44:14]You don't recall. I as I said, I do recall sue hamlin there
[3:44:18]I don't recall who else was living there, but um, um
[3:44:24]Uh, I I also think because um, I remember there were leases for
[3:44:33]Was there
[3:44:34]Now that i'm thinking it through
[3:44:37]um
[3:44:41]Was there as well
[3:44:43]and shuliat
[3:44:46]and
[3:44:51]And those were leased those were in
[3:44:53]Some apartments, but I don't know if they were leasing directly
[3:45:00]I remember getting a copy of the lease
[3:45:02]But I don't know who was paying for the lease
[3:45:07]What was your understanding as to how these women came to know epstein?
[3:45:11]They don't have an understanding as to how they came to know it. You'd ever discuss that with him. No
[3:45:16]Did you ever see epstein in the building?
[3:45:22]I'm trying to remember when I was living there
[3:45:25]Or uh when I was working there if they wouldn't have been to the building when I was living there
[3:45:32]I don't think I ever saw him in the building. Do you know lana pozedayeva?
[3:45:44]I think that name refers to svetlana pozedayeva
[3:45:49]I do know or did know svetlana pozedayeva and who is miss pozedayeva is how i'm pronouncing it
[3:45:57]Okay
[3:45:58]Uh, I believe that she worked
[3:46:02]as an assistant for mr. Epstein
[3:46:05]I believe she was somebody who did
[3:46:10]Marketing work for one of the foundations one of the scientific foundations
[3:46:19]I don't know of of the relationship beyond that
[3:46:25]What was your understanding of her relationship to jeffrey epstein?
[3:46:30]What I just told you was my understanding of the relationship. Did you ever understand it to be sexual? No
[3:46:37]Um, it's my understanding that miss pozedayeva had a business. Is that correct?
[3:46:43]um
[3:46:45]It was a woman empowerment business with that
[3:46:48]We something or other be we talks
[3:46:52]We talks. Yeah, I think I think that's what it was about. Um, and I believe that she was
[3:46:58]Um, I think that business
[3:47:00]was
[3:47:01]doing
[3:47:03]Like presentations conferences things like that
[3:47:06]and at some point
[3:47:08]later on
[3:47:10]Miss pozedayeva had asked me to do some trademark work for that business
[3:47:15]Did you do that work? I think I did. Yes. Did she pay you for that work? No
[3:47:22]Did miss pozedayeva ask you to do that work directly or did that request come from?
[3:47:27]Epstein she asked me to do the work directly
[3:47:30]um, what about
[3:47:36]I know the name and I think I know the person I think I know that person as an assistant
[3:47:43]um
[3:47:44]Have you met her?
[3:47:47]I believe yes, I believe i've met her
[3:47:50]probably a handful of times
[3:47:52]And again, did you ever understand that she was in a romantic or sexual relationship with jeffrey epstein?
[3:47:58]I had no understanding of any romantic or sexual relationship with mr
[3:48:08]I'm gonna ask the court reporter to mark as exhibit
[3:48:12]a
[3:48:13]B I apologize b
[3:48:22]a
[3:48:23]Fact stated march 14th
[3:48:26]2019
[3:48:27]Um, it appears to be drawn on
[3:48:30]jeffrey epstein's deutsche bank account
[3:48:34]Um in the amount of three hundred and seventy-five dollars
[3:48:38]Made payable to women's health of manhattan
[3:48:44]Okay, mr. Endicke have you seen this check before
[3:48:48]um
[3:48:50]I don't specifically remember this check
[3:48:53]Is that your signature?
[3:48:55]It appeared to be my signature. Yes. Do you recall ever writing a check on behalf of jeffrey epstein to women's health of manhattan?
[3:49:02]I have no specific recollection of writing a check to women's health of manhattan. Do you have an understanding as to what women's health of manhattan is?
[3:49:11]No, other than what seems to be implied by its name
[3:49:15]Which is some kind of a health service?
[3:49:18]Um as you sit here today, do you have any
[3:49:22]Recollection or understanding as to why you would have been writing this check to women's health of manhattan?
[3:49:28]um with
[3:49:29]Name appearing on the memo line
[3:49:33]um
[3:49:35]Again, I don't have any specific recollection as to why but I can tell you that it was not uncommon
[3:49:42]For epstein to pay for um
[3:49:47]medical visits
[3:49:49]Tuition payments for people both men and women who worked for him, uh, who he knew were acquainted with him
[3:49:57]um
[3:49:58]so
[3:49:59]a check for 375 and the likelihood of
[3:50:03]The likelihood of this check came to me by itself
[3:50:06]Is probably very limited the likelihood is probably very limited
[3:50:11]The likelihood is probably in a stack of checks if I was if I was signing checks at that time
[3:50:15]I would have gotten a stack of checks and there would have been something on there and the person that
[3:50:20]Provided to me had authority
[3:50:22]To request the check then I simply would have signed the check. So this this was not
[3:50:28]that was not a big part of my my role it was a role that I had as a
[3:50:34]Um, you know just as an administrative function
[3:50:38]um
[3:50:39]so
[3:50:41]That's that's the best I can give
[3:50:43]to your knowledge were any of the payments that
[3:50:46]Uh jeffrey epstein made to women's health of minhattan in connection with reproductive health services
[3:50:54]I have no idea
[3:50:56]No further questions on six of them, thank you
[3:51:08]15 years again, um in november of 2018
[3:51:12]The miami herald published a series of articles about epstein
[3:51:17]As crimes and allegations by additional women were you aware of that series?
[3:51:23]I became aware of the series short
[3:51:26]Um, and it's been reported that in the wake of the miami herald series additional banks including deutsche bank
[3:51:33]Dropped jeffrey epstein as a client. Is that consistent with your understanding?
[3:51:41]The time frame of that story
[3:51:44]Makes sense, you know in the wake of that, I don't I don't know if that's a correct characterization
[3:51:50]I I I know that the articles came out and I know that subsequently the bank dropped epstein as a as a client
[3:51:58]Um, it's also my understanding that after that happened
[3:52:03]Uh jeffrey epstein started transferring money to you and to mr. Khan. Is that correct transferring money to me? Yes
[3:52:18]or
[3:52:19]either you or to um
[3:52:21]Your entity darren and dyke pllc
[3:52:24]So there was a moment and I think the moment that money was transferred to my to my entity
[3:52:31]If i'm remembering this correctly is after he was arrested again
[3:52:36]and in jail
[3:52:37]And money needed to come to my entity because that was the entity that was paying the law firms that were defending him
[3:52:47]I believe that's that's
[3:52:48]That's what happened were there any other reasons for financial transfers from mr. Epstein either to you or to entities that you owned?
[3:52:57]Um this other than to pay compensation to me
[3:53:07]Um non-minimal work
[3:53:12]um
[3:53:13]Mr. Endicke i'm going to shift gears once again and ask you some follow-up questions regarding les wexner. Okay
[3:53:20]um
[3:53:22]To begin with did you ever meet mr. Wexner in person?
[3:53:27]I've met mr. Wexner on a couple of occasions. Yeah
[3:53:30]What about abigail wexner and abigail wexner on a couple of occasions and abigail wexner is les wexner's wife
[3:53:37]Um, yes, she is les wexner's wife
[3:53:41]To your understanding when did jeffrey epstein come to know les wexner?
[3:53:46]Pre-dated my arrival
[3:53:47]So I don't know when
[3:53:50]um
[3:53:52]We spoke earlier about the work that jeffrey epstein did for les wexner. Yeah, um
[3:53:58]To your knowledge apart from their business relationship. Did jeffrey epstein also have a social relationship with mr. Wexner
[3:54:06]Not having a social relationship either with mr. Epstein or was with mr. Wexner
[3:54:12]I don't know the nature of their relationship. I know that
[3:54:17]From a business standpoint, they communicated frequently
[3:54:20]Um
[3:54:23]And on a
[3:54:25]Isolated occasion a rare occasion. I may have overheard a kind of overheard
[3:54:31]A conversation though not the detail of it, but it seemed like a friendly tone
[3:54:36]um
[3:54:37]But I don't have a full understanding of their kind of interactions outside of the business sets
[3:54:43]Did there come a time when epstein and wexner had a falling out?
[3:54:48]Yes
[3:54:49]When did that happen?
[3:54:53]my understanding at the time that it was happening, which is about the time that he was he was
[3:54:58]dealing with the um
[3:55:00]in negotiation with the u.s attorney's office and looking
[3:55:05]Looking that it was likely he was going to going to go to jail
[3:55:10]And it may have been a little bit before then and my understanding at the time has expressed to me
[3:55:16]Was that because of wexner's relationship as a principle of victoria's secret
[3:55:22]um
[3:55:23]It would be inappropriate for him to continue a relationship with epstein
[3:55:28]Um, and as a result of that there was going to be an unwind
[3:55:33]Who told you that?
[3:55:39]and
[3:55:40]And I believe it it it was it was epstein. I believe it was epstein
[3:55:47]Did you tell you anything else about their falling out?
[3:55:50]It wasn't at the time that it was communicated to me. It wasn't a falling out
[3:55:55]Subsequent to that time
[3:55:58]I came to understand that
[3:56:02]there was
[3:56:05]I don't know if that allegation may be too strong the word, but there was a concern about some of the tax planning
[3:56:11]that epstein was doing
[3:56:13]for wexner in the context of
[3:56:16]Um how certain properties wexner was applying were to be held
[3:56:22]um
[3:56:24]I believe that
[3:56:28]Abigail wexner didn't like or understand what what it was thought it was improper
[3:56:35]My understanding at the time was that everything
[3:56:39]At least as it was explained to me by epstein
[3:56:42]Everything that epstein did was with knowledge and consent of wex of mr. Wexner
[3:56:48]but
[3:56:49]You know subsequent to that. It's now come out
[3:56:52]that that Mr. Wexner has said that he did this fraud involved and
[3:56:58]at the time what I understood to be was
[3:57:02]unwind because of the
[3:57:05]Associational problem because of epstein's
[3:57:08]um the tenor of epstein's
[3:57:10]Offenses that he was going to plead to
[3:57:13]Um
[3:57:15]and
[3:57:17]Wexner's relationship with the victoria's secret, um, and then subsequently there was this notion that
[3:57:23]Some of the ways the properties were kind of were held
[3:57:26]were improper
[3:57:28]And then then that became a bigger deal
[3:57:32]And then there was this unwinding. So
[3:57:35]That's that's what I recall from it
[3:57:37]Are you familiar with the wexner foundation?
[3:57:40]i'm familiar
[3:57:42]To an extent the wexner foundation. Yes
[3:57:44]It's my understanding that you served as secretary of the wexner foundation
[3:57:50]In an administrative capacity. Yes, for the purpose of signing
[3:57:55]Signing documents, you know secretary certificates things like that. How did you come to take on that role?
[3:58:01]as part of my work for
[3:58:03]Mr. Epstein, I
[3:58:04]Did take on work for mr. Wexner
[3:58:07]Was that at epstein's request?
[3:58:09]Yes
[3:58:11]with wexner's knowledge
[3:58:15]Um, it's also been reported that abigail wexner gave you power of attorney
[3:58:21]In connection with her condominium on the west side of manhattan. Is that correct?
[3:58:27]At some point I was asked to
[3:58:30]represent
[3:58:32]um
[3:58:33]The wexner's in connection with the acquisition of that property if this is what i'm thinking
[3:58:39]I think I think that's what it was and in connection with that transaction
[3:58:43]I was given power of attorney
[3:58:45]I don't specifically recall being given power of attorney
[3:58:48]But it would have made sense because I would have had to sign documents because the wexner's wouldn't be troubled to sign documents
[3:58:55]They would have given me power of attorney so that I could sign the documents and do the closing
[3:59:02]Did you
[3:59:04]Have become aware of less wexner sexually abusing any women no
[3:59:11]um
[3:59:12]I'm gonna ask you another question and this may have been
[3:59:15]the um conflict that you were describing earlier with respect to
[3:59:19]the wexner's assets, um public reporting has suggested that
[3:59:24]Jeffrey Epstein stole significant sums possibly hundreds of millions of dollars from less wexner
[3:59:30]By selling stock of wexner's limited company through wexner affiliated trusts
[3:59:36]And then misappropriating the proceeds for personal use
[3:59:40]Are you familiar with that?
[3:59:41]I'm not familiar with that. Is that the situation that you were describing a few minutes ago?
[3:59:49]My level of of this
[3:59:52]of this particular
[3:59:54]split
[3:59:55]Was not at that at that high level
[3:59:59]Like other things with mr
[4:00:00]Epstein and his clientele the conversations he would have with the clientele would be between him and the clientele
[4:00:07]And then I would get direction subsequent to that
[4:00:10]so um
[4:00:12]What abigail wexner thought epstein did or didn't do was not something that I had personal knowledge of
[4:00:20]I knew that
[4:00:21]There was an elevated tenor at the time and I knew that there was a need to unwind
[4:00:28]um
[4:00:30]And that it became more
[4:00:33]I want to say urgent
[4:00:36]Because of that elevated sense of things
[4:00:40]Are you familiar with a friend or neighbor of less wexner named jack kessler
[4:00:47]I'm familiar with a name. I don't know jack kessler
[4:00:52]We understand
[4:00:54]That jeffrey epstein, uh at one point bought a house in new albany ohio from mr kessler
[4:01:02]Are you aware of that transaction? No
[4:01:06]The likelihood is that predatedly
[4:01:10]Have you ever visited new albany?
[4:01:13]Uh when I first started working for epstein and also started doing work for the wexner family I did yes
[4:01:19]How many times?
[4:01:23]A handful
[4:01:25]I don't know exactly. That's it's a guess
[4:01:30]Um moving on from mr. Wexner. Um, you were asked about gillian maxwell earlier
[4:01:36]I just had a few follow-up questions with respect to her
[4:01:40]It's been reported that at one point miss maxwell offered to look into the possibility of adoption for you and your wife
[4:01:47]Is that correct?
[4:01:49]It was more of a jester, you know now looking back on it was more of a gesture that
[4:01:54]uh
[4:01:55]I was
[4:01:56]Very upset at the time. Um and visibly upset by the whole process and we had gone through it a bunch of times
[4:02:02]We lost a child in the interim
[4:02:05]And every time we would go through a subsequent treatment it failed
[4:02:10]so at some point
[4:02:12]what I
[4:02:13]What I perceived to be sensitivity to the plight that I was going through
[4:02:18]um
[4:02:20]Epstein had
[4:02:22]asked gillian to kind of
[4:02:24]Again as I perceived that she was a good at
[4:02:27]Organizing things because she was organizing his household
[4:02:32]He he asked her to kind of meet with me and michelle my wife
[4:02:37]um
[4:02:38]And talked to us about about what we were looking at what kind of options we had and you know, is there something that?
[4:02:45]Could be done to help with with any adoptions
[4:02:48]I don't think she had any specific
[4:02:51]Knowledge of adoptions or anything like that, but it was meant to be a a gesture of sympathy
[4:02:57]At least that's how I perceived
[4:03:04]Did you ever discuss with miss maxwell epstein's relationships with women?
[4:03:10]no
[4:03:18]it's
[4:03:19]Been reported that you served as a trustee of a foundation that maxwell ran. Is that accurate?
[4:03:26]In an administrative capacity
[4:03:28]there's typically
[4:03:31]Foundations required a number of trustees
[4:03:36]Would that be the max foundation?
[4:03:40]It was some time ago, but that sounds familiar
[4:03:43]And how did you come to take on that role?
[4:03:45]and
[4:03:47]I believe I was requested to do so by miss maxwell
[4:03:56]When did you become of miss maxwell's arrest?
[4:04:01]I'm sorry. Could you repeat the question, sir? When did you become aware of miss maxwell's arrest?
[4:04:06]When it was reported in the paper or on the media?
[4:04:10]Did you ever speak to her about the charges against her? No
[4:04:15]Did you ever speak to anyone else about them?
[4:04:19]In the context of conversations with counsel I had conversations
[4:04:25]When was the last time you communicated with gillian maxwell?
[4:04:31]I want to say
[4:04:35]before epstein's death
[4:04:38]I think
[4:04:43]They don't remember exactly when
[4:04:51]That's okay am I is this loud enough? Yes. Yes
[4:04:59]um I
[4:05:00]understood from your prior testimony just to make sure I have a correct understanding that um your communications with jeffrey epstein
[4:05:09]were um
[4:05:11]Related either to corporate or securities work or the real estate matters that you described earlier today. Is that right or aircraft?
[4:05:20]or
[4:05:21]business acquisitions
[4:05:23]Or investment um acquisitions and funds and summarizing the funds
[4:05:29]um
[4:05:32]but it was legal advice relating to other transactions or
[4:05:36]um
[4:05:38]Subsequently
[4:05:40]some some discussions with
[4:05:42]You know counsel regarding uh regarding the the issues that he was facing because of his charges and what about social matters
[4:05:51]Um, I never spoke to mr. Epstein about his social
[4:05:54]social
[4:05:56]Relationships and social activity
[4:05:58]So it wasn't my place wasn't my role
[4:06:01]I'm going to ask the court of order to mark as exhibit
[4:06:04]theme
[4:06:06]um and email that we obtained from the website jmail
[4:06:12]um, it's dated
[4:06:14]It's a thread dated may 25th of 2007
[4:06:17]It's a thread dated may 25th of 2007
[4:06:22]Please take the opportunity to review this document in its entirety. I'm only going to be asking you about the
[4:06:33]Emails, uh at the top and the one right below it on the first page
[4:06:42]I'm sorry. Tell me again what i'm what what you want me to focus on
[4:06:45]Yep, so i'm just going to ask you about the email at the top and the one right below it. So
[4:06:51]3 36 p.m. And previous uh 10 27 a.m
[4:06:58]You mind if I read the whole chain to not at all get a sense of it
[4:07:02]Can I read from back to the front start the back? I'll just front the back
[4:07:18]Go back to the front. I was that's what it is. Okay. That's what we do. Thank you
[4:07:24]There'll be no moment please
[4:07:27]Sure
[4:08:07]What?
[4:08:09]Little I remember about this. I don't think it's a question
[4:08:13]All right
[4:08:15]Go ahead
[4:08:18]I'll start with the um, the second email 10 47 a.m
[4:08:24]in which
[4:08:25]You write to mr. Epstein regarding the issue of your close friends being in palm beach
[4:08:31]So my first question is what was that issue?
[4:08:37]I think this I think this related to
[4:08:41]When I think this related to
[4:08:44]Um
[4:08:45]putting together a list of friends for
[4:08:49]the defense counts
[4:08:52]um and
[4:08:54]The lead I was asked to go find it to get that list
[4:08:59]And how did you determine which names to include in this list? I don't recall how I did it but
[4:09:06]My guess would have been my guess is that I would have told
[4:09:10]his assistant at the time
[4:09:12]and who
[4:09:14]Asked you to compile the list
[4:09:20]I really don't remember. I don't remember. It was him or his defense council
[4:09:26]And
[4:09:28]What use?
[4:09:30]um
[4:09:31]was
[4:09:33]This list intended to
[4:09:36]Be put to
[4:09:38]I don't think I ever got that far
[4:09:51]No further questions on this document. Thank you. Thank you
[4:09:54]Um, have you ever met um, andrew mount batten-winsor formerly prince andrew
[4:10:01]Yes
[4:10:02]when
[4:10:04]Um
[4:10:06]It's difficult for me to say it was obviously before he died
[4:10:11]and it was also in the context of me going to the
[4:10:14]The new york townhouse before mr. Epstein died before mr. Epstein died. Yes. Sorry not
[4:10:22]Also in the context of me
[4:10:24]Going to mr. Epstein's house for status updates on the matters that I was working on for him
[4:10:32]uh
[4:10:35]I guess no longer prince andrew. Um that
[4:10:38]person was
[4:10:39]either
[4:10:40]Then coming after a meeting or just leaving prior to a meeting
[4:10:46]um
[4:10:46]And either I was introduced to once or twice to that person
[4:10:52]Um
[4:10:53]The former prince andrew correct
[4:10:56]So, sorry was are we talking about more than one occasion?
[4:10:59]twice
[4:11:01]and were
[4:11:02]both of these
[4:11:03]Encounters in mr. Epstein's home. Yes in the new york townhouse and they were passing encounters
[4:11:11]um was
[4:11:13]The former prince andrew in the company of women when you met him
[4:11:17]No
[4:11:20]Did you ever become aware of?
[4:11:23]The former prince andrew having a sexual relationship with any women connected to jeffrey epstein
[4:11:28]I became aware of allegations made against prince andrew subsequent
[4:11:32]At what point in time?
[4:11:36]um
[4:11:42]I don't even know how to how to triangulate that
[4:11:45]Before jeffrey epstein's death. Yes
[4:11:53]Before his florida arrest
[4:11:57]No
[4:12:00]Have you ever met and and I mean if that's that's helpful for me
[4:12:05]Um, not before the arrest not before the conviction
[4:12:09]either
[4:12:11]I think it was subsequent to this to the jail time
[4:12:15]Have you ever met just staley?
[4:12:17]I met just staley also about two times. Maybe three times also
[4:12:23]once in passing and once um
[4:12:26]I was delivering a document a trust document to to
[4:12:31]To mr. Staley to mr. Staley. Yes. Why was that?
[4:12:34]Mr. Staley was a signatory
[4:12:36]on a on a trust
[4:12:38]Which from mr. Epstein you recall which trust?
[4:12:42]It was a prior iteration of an estate planning trust
[4:12:47]Did you ever become aware of mr. Staley having a sexual relationship with any women connected to jeffrey epstein
[4:12:54]I have no personal knowledge of that never observed anything like that. Um
[4:12:59]Um
[4:13:00]After epstein's death, I became aware of their allegations. I think in the bank litigation
[4:13:06]That staley had a relationship
[4:13:08]Mr. Staley had a relationship and no
[4:13:11]Way of knowing whether that's true or not
[4:13:16]um
[4:13:17]Mr. Rendick if I could return to the topic
[4:13:21]um
[4:13:24]of private investigators
[4:13:30]Sorry, i'm going to i'm going to table this one for the moment and come back to it. Um
[4:13:43]skipping ahead
[4:13:45]To mr. Epstein's death
[4:13:49]And subsequent developments when was the last time you spoke with jeffrey epstein a couple of days before he died
[4:13:56]What did you talk about?
[4:13:58]um
[4:14:01]The just to be clear on that
[4:14:03]I it's privileged and it was it was not personal. It was privileged. It was based upon
[4:14:08]His being in in the jail at the time
[4:14:12]Um
[4:14:13]And it was regarding
[4:14:16]Subjects that one would talk about
[4:14:18]Um like bail and things like that
[4:14:21]So I i'm going to ask the witness for the substance of those conversations
[4:14:28]Those are subject attorney client privilege, I think yeah, I think I don't be able to answer the details on that
[4:14:34]Okay, so just i'm going to refer that one to the majority for a ruling and for the record the question is
[4:14:41]What did jeffrey epstein say to you during your last conversation with him those two days before he died?
[4:14:51]And you have a generic description of them already for the witness
[4:14:57]the
[4:14:58]Will um as we discussed earlier today. Mr. Endyke named you and Mr. Kahn as co-executors, correct?
[4:15:06]correct
[4:15:08]um
[4:15:09]It also provides
[4:15:11]As I understand for jeffrey epstein's assets to ultimately be transferred to the 1953 trust, is that correct? That's also correct
[4:15:20]and the let's
[4:15:22]Take a moment on that. That's only after
[4:15:25]The the will and the estate is fully probated which means that all claims are paid
[4:15:31]All of those issues have to be resolved before any assets if there are any remaining
[4:15:36]Go to that trust and then um are subject to the terms of that trust
[4:15:42]And it's
[4:15:43]Also, my understanding that you and kareena shulyak are the largest beneficiaries
[4:15:50]Under the trust with bequests of 50 million dollars, respectively. Is that right?
[4:15:56]Not exactly right. Um
[4:15:58]I believe that kareena has several several bequests under that will including the properties
[4:16:05]Including an annuity
[4:16:07]And including another disposition
[4:16:09]Um
[4:16:11]the the total amount of the dollar amounts
[4:16:14]I believe are like a hundred million dollars to her plus all of the properties go that were to go to her
[4:16:21]But obviously they didn't that didn't happen
[4:16:24]But I am correct that the trust includes a bequest to you with 50 million dollars trust
[4:16:29]Includes a bequest to me for 50 million dollars
[4:16:33]Yes
[4:16:34]But that again that only comes to play
[4:16:37]if
[4:16:39]um, any money is distributed to that trust and then
[4:16:43]And as it stands right now
[4:16:45]Certain bad amounts not not coming to the trust if anything
[4:16:49]Did you
[4:16:51]discuss with jeffrey epstein
[4:16:53]The subject of his making you a beneficiary of the trust
[4:16:57]Just briefly other than that he was doing it and I should give direction to the attorney that was working on it to
[4:17:03]Um make the changes do you have an understanding as to why he named you as a beneficiary?
[4:17:09]um
[4:17:11]No, I I I can't tell you what what was in his mind. Did it surprise you?
[4:17:15]No, I was I was a beneficiary in previous iterations
[4:17:19]but I like many people and many of the
[4:17:23]um of professionals
[4:17:26]assistants
[4:17:27]Um colleagues many people were in in the document
[4:17:32]Well, I think to come at it another way
[4:17:34]Um the question i'm sure you can understand arises
[4:17:39]given as you've
[4:17:41]Testified earlier that your relationship with mr. Epstein was
[4:17:47]professional rather than social
[4:17:50]Why would he
[4:17:52]Include you as a beneficiary in his estate to the tune of 50 million dollars
[4:17:59]I can only speculate and I don't want to speculate too far into it
[4:18:03]um a couple things
[4:18:05]Epstein had a brother
[4:18:07]Didn't have a lot of uh friends that he communicated with regularly which is why the assets in his estate
[4:18:13]It seemed to me or distributed to people that were associated with him on a professional level
[4:18:19]um
[4:18:20]I think and you know
[4:18:22]I think that the bequest to to me
[4:18:26]As well as to mr. Kahn
[4:18:28]Or or a large bequest
[4:18:30]Um
[4:18:32]Because there was a lot of work to be done in just a very complex state
[4:18:37]A lot of work and that and the the estate planning documents didn't provide for payment to us
[4:18:42]uh, and I
[4:18:44]I think the idea was for the bequest
[4:18:48]To be payment
[4:18:50]and you know
[4:18:51]For estates of this size
[4:18:54]typically the the more direct way the more direct route for this
[4:18:58]is
[4:18:59]paying the the the trust the administrators
[4:19:04]A percentage of the assets in this case well over 600 million dollars for the assets in this
[4:19:09]in this estate
[4:19:10]um
[4:19:11]And paid over time
[4:19:13]in addition
[4:19:17]It's anticipated in many instances that both the
[4:19:21]The the executives will also be doing other services sometimes accounting work and legal work and things like that
[4:19:26]um
[4:19:28]so I I
[4:19:30]believe
[4:19:31]That part of this was an understanding
[4:19:34]That mr. Kahn and I would be providing substantial services for a very very complex document
[4:19:40]a very complex estate
[4:19:42]um and services
[4:19:45]again, it's a lot of I don't mean to imply that's not a lot of money but
[4:19:49]Uh other folks who would have gotten paid for managing the state of this size would have gotten
[4:19:55]Given the complexity of the estate and given the amount we've been working on this for seven years
[4:20:01]Um seven years is probably another three to go and maybe more by the time all the claims are resolved
[4:20:06]um
[4:20:08]You know, I think even the complexity and the size the compensation is a lot
[4:20:12]but
[4:20:13]In that context you have a different view
[4:20:17]I think we will end our hour there as we go off the record
[4:20:35]We'll go back on the record
[4:20:40]Oh, uh the minority wishes to make a statement
[4:20:46]Yeah, just to clarify um for the record, uh
[4:20:49]Three days probably with council over the assertion of privilege of as to the question
[4:20:56]What did jeff rehebski tell you during your conversation with him?
[4:21:01]Two days prior to his death
[4:21:03]We would like to refer that question to the chairman of the committee
[4:21:08]Has to be flippantly. Thank you. Mr. Timmons
[4:21:17]In the case that was recently settled, um shaned of three
[4:21:23]the indicted con
[4:21:25]it's my understanding that
[4:21:27]you all sought to
[4:21:30]Not disclose communications under attorney-client privilege and
[4:21:35]the judge ruled that
[4:21:37]Those communications were not protected because of the crime fraud, uh the crime fraud exception incorrect
[4:21:44]What's your next question?
[4:21:49]so the judge never
[4:21:52]Ordered you all to turn over
[4:21:54]any documents
[4:21:56]Because he deemed them not protected because of the crime fraud exception, correct
[4:22:01]Okay
[4:22:09]Mr. Indyke, I would like to briefly return to the loans that mr
[4:22:14]F seen extended to
[4:22:17]Yourself and other employees if is it fair to say that it was customary that he would provide these loans
[4:22:24]To employees he was generous to many of his employees
[4:22:28]And yes, it did loan money to his employees
[4:22:32]Would you have drafted the loan agreements it would have been a promissory note, yes
[4:22:39]Um
[4:22:40]But after there was a form promissory note that was circulating around the office
[4:22:44]We'll keep your voice up. Sorry. There was a form promissory note that was circulating around
[4:22:50]As far as the loans themselves
[4:22:54]Were the loans ever used to justify large movements of money?
[4:22:58]No
[4:22:59]Were loan agreements ever used to
[4:23:02]Make illicit funds appear legitimate. No
[4:23:14]Mr. Indyke, have you ever advised clients to destroy documents?
[4:23:18]No
[4:23:22]Have you ever been instructed to destroy documents?
[4:23:29]No, I've never been instructed to destroy documents. There are
[4:23:34]In the context of corporate law, there are document retention
[4:23:38]programs after a certain number of years you
[4:23:42]Can feel comfortable destroying documents, but no never never instructed and never received instructions to destroy this
[4:23:51]So I want to return to the discussion the previous during the previous hour
[4:23:58]As it related to computers that were removed it was your testimony
[4:24:02]You had no personal knowledge of that and you learned subsequently. Is that correct? That's correct
[4:24:10]and
[4:24:11]during our first hour I asked you if you had
[4:24:16]If you had any knowledge
[4:24:19]That anyone would have tipped off mr. Epstein to the october 20th search warrant in palm beach. I believe that you testified
[4:24:27]No, is that right? That's correct. Did you subsequently
[4:24:31]Subsequently learn that mr. Epstein was tipped off to the search warrant
[4:24:36]No
[4:24:42]Were you aware that mr. Epstein had storage units?
[4:24:51]I don't I don't
[4:24:52]can you tell me when and which storage unit you're referring to because
[4:24:57]I have storage units, but not for mr. Epstein
[4:25:01]So i'm just I want to make sure we're talking about the same thing. Mr. Indite
[4:25:06]It has been reported that mr. Epstein directed private detectives to hide secret files and storage units across the us
[4:25:14]Do you have any knowledge of that? I have no knowledge of that and you haven't subsequently learned that he
[4:25:20]had any such
[4:25:23]Process for hiding or concealing correct. I have not learned that
[4:25:36]Earlier you testified that mr. Epstein maintained a safe room
[4:25:42]Can you elaborate on what the safe room was?
[4:25:46]I was I was not in the safe room. I actually never went inside it, but it was pointed out to me
[4:25:53]That it was a safe room and by safe room what that means is if
[4:25:57]As I understand it
[4:25:59]What that means is that if somebody is coming into your house to do you harm you go into this room and they can't get
[4:26:04]In the room and you are there locked in and protected in the safe room
[4:26:09]That's what I meant by safer
[4:26:12]And as I understand it it is
[4:26:15]Fairly typical on the outside of the safe room to have a camera pointing down
[4:26:20]So that you can see if people are trying to get into the into the safe room
[4:26:31]Did you advise him there?
[4:26:33]To get a safe room
[4:26:35]No, I had no idea. He's had a safe place
[4:26:39]until after he died and
[4:26:42]and
[4:26:42]I toured the residence
[4:26:45]Now during the previous hours, it's come up numerous times. Mr. Epstein hired private
[4:26:52]Investigators as a result of the 2006 investigation. Is that right?
[4:26:57]My understanding is that his defense counsel hired private investigators. Who were the private investigators?
[4:27:06]um
[4:27:10]I
[4:27:11]I believe
[4:27:13]Riley Corrali was a private investigator
[4:27:18]Did you have any interactions with?
[4:27:21]The investigators or mr. Krupp
[4:27:24]Curly
[4:27:25]I have no specific recollection of an interaction with him
[4:27:31]Now I asked you during the first hour if you had ever directed
[4:27:35]The private investigators in any way I believe you testified that you had not
[4:27:41]But in connection with the investigation, correct?
[4:27:45]Correct
[4:27:46]Did you subsequently learn about the directions that they were receiving from other councils?
[4:27:58]Not in any kind of any real substance of matter
[4:28:03]I knew that there were communications already became aware of their communications
[4:28:08]That had happened between them, but I wasn't privy to the content of the communication
[4:28:12]It's been alleged that the private investigators
[4:28:19]Were acting in such a way that was intimidating towards those that they were following. You didn't know anything about that
[4:28:27]I remember seeing that allegation
[4:28:30]And I don't recall where I saw that allegation and that was
[4:28:36]I think that happened
[4:28:40]I think that happened
[4:28:47]During
[4:28:49]The
[4:28:50]The the investigation by the u.s attorney's office if i'm not mistaken
[4:28:55]He's asked if you have personal knowledge that I have no personal knowledge of it
[4:28:59]That's if it's personal knowledge. The answer is no. Sorry. Thank you
[4:29:03]and you mentioned the
[4:29:06]Private investigators that you knew of do you know what company they were with? No
[4:29:13]Does roadrock investigation sound familiar to you that name sounds familiar to me
[4:29:23]It does sound familiar to me. Yeah
[4:29:25]I don't know that it's because of that but the name sounds familiar to me
[4:29:36]And I think I could supplement that a little bit. I believe roadrock was used for background background checks on your employees
[4:29:47]Are there any storage units that were at any time in possession of the truss?
[4:29:52]After j or jeffrey epstein's death
[4:29:56]Can you repeat the question, please?
[4:29:59]After following mr. Epstein's death were there any storage units?
[4:30:04]in possession of the trust
[4:30:07]Estate as a command estate estate excuse me the estate so
[4:30:14]After mr. Epstein's death there were storage units
[4:30:18]But the storage units happened after we inventoried the assets
[4:30:22]And then moved them out of the houses into storage
[4:30:25]They were they were relationships created after his death
[4:30:29]based upon, you know furniture and
[4:30:34]Whatever clothing and all the stuff that that's put into the house
[4:30:46]I'm gonna zoom out a little bit and just talk about why we're here. It seems that
[4:30:52]Almost 300 victims have been documented and just been possibly up to another hundred out there and
[4:31:00]Free 2008 200 have been documented of which 70 percent of those these are all proximate or underage
[4:31:07]post 2008
[4:31:09]There have been 70 documented
[4:31:11]My understanding is zero percent were underage
[4:31:16]To compensate those victims. There's been around three quarters of a billion dollars in settlements from
[4:31:23]JP morgan deutsch bank
[4:31:24]estate bank of america
[4:31:27]And I think the purpose of this entire
[4:31:30]Exercise is additional accountability the american people are best and I think appropriately so a very wealthy man has
[4:31:38]taken advantage and ruined a lot of lives and so
[4:31:42]I kind of view the whole purpose of this as being five five different things. We're doing number one
[4:31:47]It seems there was there's allegations that
[4:31:49]pre 2008 underage women were
[4:31:53]Engaging in sex with rich old dudes and we want a list of those names. We're trying to figure that out
[4:31:58]Second
[4:32:00]There's possible undue influence associated with the guilty plea and the fact that he never really went to jail for
[4:32:06]Stuff that put him on the sex finner registry. I was a prosecutor for five years
[4:32:09]I know people that um did less than him that got a very long time in jail
[4:32:13]And it seems that he was given a sweetheart deal
[4:32:16]Number three, uh, we want accountability for the people that conspired to continue the same scheme that he had pre 2008
[4:32:24]And honestly, i'll get back to that in a minute, but that's the number one reason you're here
[4:32:28]um
[4:32:29]Number four whether a foreign government or federal agency was involved in any of this
[4:32:33]Why he was doing the things that he was doing it didn't make sense
[4:32:36]And then last but certainly not least deterrence
[4:32:39]To future perpetrators make sure this doesn't happen again
[4:32:44]back to number three
[4:32:45]the american people want accountability for people that
[4:32:48]conspired with jeffrey epstein to destroy these lives and
[4:32:53]You have been his attorney for decades
[4:32:56]And you were instrumental to
[4:32:58]His operations his estate's operations and you've received millions and millions of dollars for that
[4:33:03]So you're here answering questions. We appreciate that
[4:33:07]i'm going to walk you through
[4:33:08]the scheme that occurred post 2008 and
[4:33:12]It's really hard for me to believe that you were not complicit. You were not a a an instrumental part
[4:33:18]of his human trafficking operation, so
[4:33:21]So
[4:33:22]For purposes of words the only assistant he had was leslie gruff
[4:33:28]Everyone else is a survivor or a victim whichever one you want to use he may have called them assistants
[4:33:33]But he had this a scheme his scheme was to get
[4:33:36]Get them into the united states somehow some some of them. Uh, it was uh promise of education. Some of it was promise of
[4:33:44]modeling careers or jobs
[4:33:46]Whatever it was and once he got him in he used a pretty complicated scheme to
[4:33:53]Trap up
[4:33:54]And you actually were a part of every single one of those things immigration was one
[4:34:00]I want to talk to you about that because you said that while you have had interactions with arda buscardi's
[4:34:09]There was just a lot of really shady things were going on and so
[4:34:13]You communicate with him about the two marriages
[4:34:17]For the assistants, um to each other and it's your
[4:34:22]It's your testimony here today under oath that you did not realize those were sham marriages
[4:34:27]It just to be clear because that was a long statement and and I know there's a question at the end
[4:34:34]Just to be okay
[4:34:35]Well, but that's not fair to set a table not giving them a chance to react
[4:34:38]But then say so after that I have a very simple question just to be clear before you just want them to answer
[4:34:43]The simple question back up back up
[4:34:46]Okay
[4:34:48]Remove my question
[4:34:51]For the purposes of the rest of my questions leslie groff is an assistant everyone else is a victim or survivor
[4:34:56]And i'm going to ask you about
[4:34:58]The scheme that occurred after that if you want to argue with anything that I just said before I ask you questions
[4:35:03]About the scheme that occurred that you seem complicit in by all means say say whatever you'd like
[4:35:08]That's not a question. I mean come on. So I just so just ask one question and see if the question is this
[4:35:14]Um
[4:35:16]Do you believe
[4:35:18]that the
[4:35:19]Two marriages that you helped facilitate with arta buscardis were legitimate marriages or not
[4:35:26]I don't know
[4:35:28]But but just because I think you asked that you helped facilitate the marriages. He's already testified
[4:35:34]He didn't even know in advance of the most
[4:35:36]Email in the abstain files that I can get for you that says from abstain to him copying both of you
[4:35:41]I think that arta buscardis is going to flip on us
[4:35:44]So, I mean what was he going to flip on?
[4:35:46]How was he what information did he have that would have caused him to flip on you?
[4:35:50]Okay, I have no recollection of that email and let me be clear
[4:35:54]I have no no belief at the time that I get anything
[4:35:59]For these marriages that they were share marriages. I didn't believe it wasn't just the marriage
[4:36:03]I didn't believe let me finish please sir. I didn't believe them to be share marriages
[4:36:07]I did not I didn't have any reason to believe they were
[4:36:10]These are women these are women who I believed were associated with these are women I believe to be associated with each other
[4:36:18]I wasn't part of their social world
[4:36:20]I did not question them why they got married, but they did get married and I wasn't part of arranging those marriages
[4:36:29]Absolutely was not did abscine ever talk to you about trying to arrange marriages with members of the ops sex to his
[4:36:35]The women you call assistants, but we're actually survivors or victims. No
[4:36:39]Okay, I mean i'm not even sure what that question was
[4:36:42]Did jeffrey abscine talk to you about marrying his
[4:36:46]Assistance to other people in an attempt to address immigration fraud. No
[4:36:54]did you create leases for the
[4:36:58]six victims survivors
[4:37:00]at
[4:37:02]301 east 66 street
[4:37:04]for the purpose of
[4:37:06]immigration fraud
[4:37:08]I did not create leases number one
[4:37:11]It wasn't for immigration fraud that I obtained a copy of the leases from osa properties
[4:37:16]To give to arta buscata's I was requested by the women to get a copy of the lease
[4:37:22]So that they could give it to arta and I did so did leases exist prior to that moment
[4:37:26]Or were they just staying there without a lease?
[4:37:30]I don't know when the leases were created. I don't know when the leases were created but given but given
[4:37:36]That this was
[4:37:38]properties
[4:37:39]That epstein had an ownership or a leasing interest interest in
[4:37:44]It doesn't surprise me that if they were living in that property
[4:37:47]They didn't have a written document and they needed a written document in order to give it to
[4:37:53]Immigration, so when they asked me for their written document, I asked also do you have a lease?
[4:37:58]Can you get me a lease?
[4:37:59]Did you ever change the lease for one individual to include two for the purposes of the immigration application?
[4:38:07]Was one person on a lease and then because the idea was saying all right, we're going to marry these two
[4:38:14]I don't want it. Did you change?
[4:38:16]A lease that had one person's name on it to change at least to put two people's name on it
[4:38:20]For the purpose of then giving it to arta buscata's for the purpose of then uh filing for
[4:38:25]immigration documents
[4:38:29]I I think I probably did. Yeah, I think I did. Yeah
[4:38:33]You said earlier that you didn't know where let's let's talk about that for a minute because I know you want to jump to the
[4:38:37]Next conclusion let's talk for that for a minute
[4:38:39]If somebody gives me a lease and tells me this I need to give for immigration
[4:38:44]And it doesn't have both parties to the to the lease on the lease
[4:38:47]I would have said to them you should put both parties on the lease. Let me we're going to walk through a bunch of questions
[4:38:52]But that's not an answer to all of them
[4:38:54]But that's important when you listen to these answers you're going to say oh that's interesting
[4:38:57]That could be true in this little narrow scope
[4:39:00]But then when you put them all together it creates a different story
[4:39:02]So we're going to keep going your story is based upon a hindsight that's that's based upon allegations that are made now looking back
[4:39:09]Correct and and your story assumes that I had knowledge that these women had sexual relationships with jeffy
[4:39:16]That these women had said that these women didn't have relationships with each other and I absolutely did not
[4:39:22]Okay, so you can you can piece together however you want. We're going to piece it together however you want
[4:39:28]Okay, so you cannot you cannot make something that's not true these six or seven survivors
[4:39:34]when they got to this country under the promise of a job of
[4:39:41]Education of modeling whatever it is they didn't have an immigration issue
[4:39:45]So I don't know I don't know how they got to this country. I don't know about those promises. I know nothing of that
[4:39:51]A lot of this is public record and
[4:39:53]That doesn't mean that I have knowledge of it
[4:39:55]I'm sorry, but that's but you were you were imputing knowledge to me that doesn't exist
[4:40:00]So then they have to find a way to stay here and the way to stay here was through this immigration
[4:40:07]Scheme, which you were not overtly complicit in according to you, but it seems that there's a lot of
[4:40:14]Variables that cause a lot of questions. So let's go to the next one businesses
[4:40:19]You previously said you did not set up businesses for any of these victims
[4:40:23]And i'm going to ask you again
[4:40:25]Did you set up llcs for any of the people that you call assistants that have been deemed victims by many courts?
[4:40:32]I believe that I testified that slk designs is something that I that I formed any I testified that
[4:40:39]Any other llcs you created I don't recall any other any other
[4:40:43]Recall creating any other llcs for the victims that you call assistance
[4:40:49]Are they
[4:40:50]I don't recall setting up an llc for a victim. Number one
[4:40:54]Do you know if you have an llc that you want me to ask?
[4:40:58]I have the artist's corporation
[4:40:59]But i'm not going to tell me tell me what they are and i'll and i'll answer whether or not I formed them
[4:41:04]Or had something that I know you formed them because you're on the document that well, then tell me what they are
[4:41:09]We're going to move on. Um
[4:41:12]Did you take out loans on behalf of the assistants?
[4:41:16]I'm going to keep calling them assistants, but they're not the only assistant is leslie gruff
[4:41:20]Can you did I take out loans?
[4:41:24]Using their social security numbers using their names using their llcs that you created on behalf of these
[4:41:31]Assistants no
[4:41:34]So it would surprise you to say that some of the victims some of the assistants have said that
[4:41:39]Loans were taken out using their social security number and then held over them
[4:41:43]In addition to the leases that you created that you say you didn't create
[4:41:47]Um, so there's this complex immigration fraud scheme that you knew nothing about there's this complex web of financial
[4:41:55]control
[4:41:56]Um, and then we're not we're just getting to the phone and the computers. Is there a question here?
[4:42:01]i'm
[4:42:01]showing you why it's
[4:42:04]Incredulous that you're sitting here and saying that you had no knowledge of this
[4:42:07]You're actually not showing him anything. You're just making a lot of statements and then just calling him a liar
[4:42:12]So if you actually want to show him something that'd be great, but you haven't yet
[4:42:17]I've asked him under oath whether he created llcs for the victims and he's saying that he did not except for one
[4:42:23]firstly, you
[4:42:24]You don't even say who you're talking about
[4:42:26]So you're just sorry i don't say what i'm talking about because I don't want to use names because they deserve their privacy
[4:42:31]I totally agree. We have been on the same page, but the american people also deserve accountability
[4:42:36]But but you're asking if he's done something for somebody and not saying who it is and he's supposed to remember
[4:42:43]You're putting him in a very difficult position
[4:42:45]There's seven people there's seven people that he knew the names of
[4:42:48]What's seven people? First of all, I don't know that's
[4:42:52]Which people are you talking about tell me the congressman is clarified. I believe that his question applies
[4:42:59]To the assistants at the time if there was anyone who had the title or role of assistant
[4:43:05]Being granted a lease
[4:43:07]Or a loan if that can be the world of which we're working through for the purpose of this question
[4:43:18]Ask the thing about the loans because I don't really understand the question
[4:43:21]Uh, some of the assistants have alleged that loans were taken out in their name for their LLCs
[4:43:27]That they never signed off on they never did their taxes
[4:43:30]They had nothing to do with these LLCs and they were operated by you and con
[4:43:34]Did they allege that I took out the loan? Your name is on the document
[4:43:39]Did they allege that I took out loans for them? You signed it
[4:43:42]I mean, i'm not going to sit here now. What what show me a document because I don't know what you're talking about
[4:43:48]We'll
[4:43:49]We will follow up
[4:43:51]I'm not gonna i'm not gonna out people that want to be um want to move on with their life
[4:43:56]but uh
[4:43:58]We'll see what happens
[4:44:02]Mr. Indyke. Yes, when I asked you about the storage units you
[4:44:07]asked
[4:44:07]Uh us to be more specific. Yes. Do you recall any storage unit in palm beach florida?
[4:44:16]I have a storage unit or had a storage unit for the
[4:44:20]estate
[4:44:21]In palm beach florida when the house when we emptied the house because it was going to be sold
[4:44:27]Um, all the contents of the of the house were taken out of the house and put in the storage unit
[4:44:34]So what years would the that storage unit doesn't exist anymore. Yeah
[4:44:38]But what years would the contents of the house have been moved into the storage unit?
[4:44:44]Say that again, please
[4:44:46]You said that it was all in furtherance of the estate. I'm just asking a clarifying question
[4:44:51]Yeah, are we talking?
[4:44:53]2019 that all the content or everything from the house would have been moved to this 2019 or 2020. Yeah
[4:44:59]What about west palm beach?
[4:45:02]The storage unit in palm beach for the excuse me for the palm beach house
[4:45:08]Was in west palm beach
[4:45:12]Were there any storage units in new york state?
[4:45:16]Um when the house was being prepared for sale in new york
[4:45:23]of a moving company
[4:45:27]Uh also packed the belongings from that house and put them in a storage unit
[4:45:32]I don't sitting here and know that know where the storage unit unit was located
[4:45:36]Whether it was new york. It may have been on long island city. It may have been
[4:45:39]May have been, you know across the river in new jersey. I don't know
[4:45:43]I'm going to save this time and just ask are you aware of any story storage units?
[4:45:49]That were used prior to storage units
[4:45:54]for the estate
[4:45:55]No
[4:46:15]I believe I asked you in a previous hour
[4:46:17]But i'm going to ask you again for the sake of these questions. Did mr. Epstein ever discuss receiving massages with you?
[4:46:27]with me no
[4:46:28]in the context of
[4:46:33]Conversations with defense council they discussed them but
[4:46:38]But he never discussed the motion
[4:46:41]Were you aware that mr. Epstein was receiving massages?
[4:46:45]My understanding based upon what I learned from defense council and the statements that were in the police report was that there were massages
[4:46:53]That some of them ended in sexual conduct and that some of them involved
[4:46:58]underage people
[4:46:59]That Epstein claimed they didn't know that they were underage
[4:47:04]Was adamant about it. There was a lie detector test
[4:47:09]In substance that said that
[4:47:11]Um
[4:47:13]And again the statement suggested there was no or indicated there was no no force no coercion
[4:47:21]after
[4:47:22]Mr. Epstein's incarceration
[4:47:26]Are you aware of whether he continued to receive massages?
[4:47:31]No, i'm not aware at this time i'd like to introduce will be march's majority exhibit
[4:47:38]five
[4:47:45]This is base number EFTA
[4:47:47]326543
[4:47:50]And it is itinerary email from april 3rd
[4:47:54]Uh from april april 13th 2016
[4:48:22]Okay
[4:48:28]Mr. Indite
[4:48:30]the sender
[4:48:32]baby
[4:48:33]Baby adieu. Yep. Are you familiar with her? I am who is she? She was my assistant
[4:48:40]and at times
[4:48:43]And at times when
[4:48:45]Epstein's assistants
[4:48:47]Uh were not available
[4:48:49]I think leslie in particular leslie
[4:48:52]Um bb would fill in for leslie
[4:48:55]Her her office was
[4:48:58]down the hall from mine
[4:49:01]When did baby start her name is bb bb start an employment with you?
[4:49:12]Um i'm not sure. Um
[4:49:22]Somewhere around the mid and mid
[4:49:25]2000 and you know mid 2010 I think 2014
[4:49:30]15 around there
[4:49:32]and you
[4:49:33]Mentioned that she would fill in for uh, jesus
[4:49:38]For mr. Epstein. Did mr. Epstein direct you to hire her? No
[4:49:43]I will give you their uh got her name from I think indeed
[4:49:47]Are one of those job search places
[4:49:51]She had previously worked for a law firm
[4:49:54]Um
[4:49:56]Now I want to direct your attention just to the april 15th 2020
[4:50:01]2016
[4:50:02]and it references a Thai massage course
[4:50:09]Would it be was it typical that?
[4:50:13]Or I actually let me back up. Who do you understand this itinerary to be prepared for?
[4:50:20]I don't have an understanding of who is prepared for sense of bb. Would you presume that it was for mr. Epstein?
[4:50:29]It seems like it you know, that seems like that's right. Yeah
[4:50:39]would it
[4:50:41]It appears that your legal assistant had a role in scheduling massage courses. Would you disagree with that characterization?
[4:50:51]It would surprise me if that were true. This looks to me to be
[4:50:55]simply
[4:50:56]um acknowledging
[4:50:58]As a reminder to him that that this was scheduled this it's not something I ever received
[4:51:04]um
[4:51:05]And it doesn't doesn't indicate that she prepared it for him
[4:51:10]This is in 2016 after mr. Epstein's incarceration
[4:51:14]Which was based on inappropriate conduct that was a result of massages. Would this strike you as unusual or concerning?
[4:51:24]Inappropriate conduct with underage women, right?
[4:51:29]um
[4:51:31]Yeah, knowing what I know now. Yes, of course this is this is this is this is this concern
[4:51:37]Who else worked at dki?
[4:51:41]Um
[4:51:43]As I said leslie groff worked for me for some time
[4:51:48]Um when Epstein was in jail
[4:51:58]and during the minority's hour
[4:52:00]You talked about performing legal work
[4:52:03]for
[4:52:04]that
[4:52:05]Related to the wetsners. Did you ever
[4:52:09]Perform legal work for leon black
[4:52:12]some
[4:52:13]What was your relationship with leon black?
[4:52:15]Only through mr. Epstein
[4:52:17]What were was the nature of the work you did for mr?
[4:52:22]Mr. Epstein did a did tax planning and estate planning for him
[4:52:26]and
[4:52:27]The the transactional work
[4:52:29]That I did it was an offshoot of that
[4:52:32]Network did you have any interactions with mr. Black outside of the work that you did for him?
[4:52:39]No, I did not
[4:52:58]We discussed
[4:53:00]Bebe previously, but was she on an employer sponsored visa. Oh bb. No bb was
[4:53:41]During the previous hour
[4:53:43]It was mentioned that there was a joint defense agreement
[4:53:47]Can you elaborate on what that is?
[4:53:50]um
[4:53:51]I believe that was referring to the agreement among all of the defense council
[4:53:56]in connection with the um
[4:53:58]the investigation and
[4:54:01]negotiation of
[4:54:03]Mr. Epstein's issues
[4:54:05]in florida
[4:54:35]We've discussed mr. Epstein's arrest in july of 2006
[4:54:40]But I want to make sure the record is clear
[4:54:43]Following his arrest did you have any discussions with mr. Epstein related to his arrest?
[4:54:51]Any discussions that I would have had would have been amongst council in in relation to some of the civil claims
[4:54:58]um
[4:54:59]That I had with him, so um, but it would have been in a joint defense context
[4:55:08]Was that seen present?
[4:55:10]um
[4:55:16]There were a number of those conversations. Um
[4:55:24]Yes, I would assume I can't tell you how many but I assume he was present
[4:55:33]Did mr. Epstein ever discuss the allegations with you?
[4:55:37]No, and there was no discussion of the allegations. It was
[4:55:42]the discussion centered on the
[4:55:45]incorrectness of
[4:55:47]of other people's statements
[4:56:00]Mr. Endike with the benefit of hindsight were there things you witnessed or observed about mr
[4:56:06]Epstein that could have suggested he was trafficking and sexually abusing young women and girls
[4:56:15]I mean
[4:56:17]At what period of time?
[4:56:21]During the entirety of your relationship
[4:56:28]No
[4:56:34]I had no knowledge of any allegations before 2006
[4:56:39]And after 2006 when he ultimately went to jail
[4:56:43]and was back
[4:56:45]Um, my understanding was that the issue was underage people
[4:56:50]Sex with underage people. I understanding was that it was limited
[4:56:53]to
[4:56:54]florida
[4:56:56]um
[4:56:57]And when I was in new york
[4:57:00]Which is where I spent my time
[4:57:02]I never saw any underage people. I never saw any
[4:57:06]Any sexual activity nobody ever complained to me about sexual activity
[4:57:11]I had no reason to believe that there was engaging in sexual activity and frankly given
[4:57:15]The amount of scrutiny that Epstein was under I didn't believe he would do something like that
[4:57:20]Particularly after he told me he was going to be in that position again
[4:57:23]He was by all counts a very smart man
[4:57:26]I couldn't imagine he would do anything to put himself back in that position again. So no, there's nothing that I saw
[4:57:35]That would lead me to believe that he was engaging in misconduct
[4:57:38]And you've discussed that length the pastor that was
[4:57:43]withdrawn that
[4:57:45]I believe you had a role and in retrospect would that have been something that should have
[4:57:50]Raised concerns not with the size of his households
[4:57:54]Not with all of the things that that was that that was needed for that cash
[4:58:00]I mean the island the island alone they were buying tools
[4:58:04]And supplies and furniture and all manner of things
[4:58:09]Food they had they had construction workers on the island pools were breaking down all the time. They had
[4:58:16]machine shops they needed
[4:58:18]Lubricating supplies for for for the machine shop
[4:58:22]You know any number of things like that, you know, given the size and scope of his households
[4:58:29]And the number of people involved and the fact that there wasn't a lot of credit cards available at the time
[4:58:35]Because banks were basically
[4:58:37]Shutting him down that way
[4:58:40]No
[4:58:41]The cash the the cash that was being
[4:58:45]Asked for me seemed to be for legitimate purposes and I had no reason to think that they were for illegitimate purposes
[4:58:51]Did you also handle his taxes? No
[4:58:55]Did you ever review his tax returns?
[4:58:58]I reviewed his tax return
[4:59:00]The answer is no not while they were being done in connection with
[4:59:05]The estate I reviewed the tax return
[4:59:10]Hundreds of thousands of dollars were given every year out in cash. I mean technically you have to file a
[4:59:15]1099 if you exceed six hundred dollars an year for services, so
[4:59:20]Let me just not are you aware that 1099s were not they were not filed
[4:59:28]We'll look into that and get back to you. Okay
[4:59:31]But that's not my role. That wasn't what I did. I believe in
[4:59:51]Previous hour you were asked questions related to visits to the palm beach jail while he was incarcerated. Yes
[5:00:01]What were the purpose of these visits?
[5:00:04]I think I explained previously but i'll say it again
[5:00:07]While he was in jail, there are households that were that were running there were projects that were going on on
[5:00:16]Little st. James
[5:00:20]I was
[5:00:22]Handling
[5:00:24]Lots of those kind of lots of those kind of projects and lots of those kind of transactions
[5:00:29]And I would go to him and report to him on the status he would give me requests to take care of
[5:00:35]Those types of projects and I would I would implement those requests
[5:00:40]And report back to him
[5:00:43]Did you provide Epstein with cash during these visits?
[5:00:47]in jail
[5:00:48]Correct. No
[5:00:54]Did you ever bring any other items or packages to mr. Epstein while he was incarcerated?
[5:01:00]There was
[5:01:01]When he first went into jail, I'd never been to jail before so when he first went to jail
[5:01:06]I believe I had a muffin that somebody wanted me to give him
[5:01:10]And maybe a sweatshirt. I'm not sure if I had this if somebody gave me to give him the sweatshirt
[5:01:14]but I I believe I brought that in and that and and
[5:01:19]If that was that was something that I brought
[5:01:25]Did he ever ask you to deliver money or property to anyone outside of jail?
[5:01:30]No
[5:01:33]Other than in the context of a transaction that we're working but not in the context of anything illicit or improper
[5:01:42]during
[5:01:43]the committee's investigation
[5:01:45]We've been interested in the circumstances surrounding the non-prosecution agreement in 2008 and spoke with
[5:01:54]Alexander Acosta this past summer. Did you have any role in the 2008 non-prosecution agreement?
[5:02:01]Um
[5:02:02]Very very minimal role. I I looked at it once and I looked at some of the language
[5:02:07]And made a suggestion about some of the language. I don't remember exactly which line
[5:02:12]Did you settle victims claims associated with the crimes pre-2008 did I settle the claims
[5:02:19]Were there dozens of victims that were underage that ended up suing?
[5:02:25]Epstein or the estate and did you settle those claims?
[5:02:28]I don't know the number of people that were underage, but there were there was a list
[5:02:34]Of of
[5:02:37]Of people
[5:02:39]That the government provided
[5:02:42]And
[5:02:43]I believe there were a number of those a number of those people that filed claims
[5:02:49]Against Epstein and those claims were ultimately settled. Yes, were those settled in 2009 10 or were they settled post-death?
[5:02:56]uh 2009 and 10
[5:02:58]Okay
[5:03:01]so you
[5:03:02]in fact did have to get somewhat involved in
[5:03:05]the
[5:03:06]Alleged criminal activity prior to that to settle the claims. I wasn't involved in his criminal activity
[5:03:11]Well, you had to understand the depths of it because you had to settle the claim on behalf of the state
[5:03:16]So so so that we're clear people settle claims for all kinds of reasons
[5:03:20]all kinds of reasons including
[5:03:22]the cost of litigating
[5:03:24]the
[5:03:25]The time spent litigating how much it interferes with your your your current
[5:03:31]Business so wait, did he go to jail because he didn't do anything wrong. I didn't say that. Okay, so he did something wrong
[5:03:36]He settled his claim
[5:03:39]You're saying he didn't I mean no no i'm not saying that and you're putting words into my mouth and it's and it's actually unfair
[5:03:45]What i'm saying is on a case by case that on a case by case basis
[5:03:50]You can look at a settlement and and see whether or not the the claims in in those cases have merit or they don't
[5:03:56]Have merit and and while I will never be in a position
[5:03:59]I will never want to be put to the task of saying that any particular woman
[5:04:04]Who's claiming abuse wasn't abused. I won't do that
[5:04:07]I will say that there were facts that came to light during the the defense counsel's investigation of many of these claims
[5:04:13]Which suggested that some of these claims that some of these allegations in these claims were not accurate
[5:04:20]So which claims were true which claims are not true. I don't know. I wasn't there. I wasn't in florida
[5:04:26]I don't know what was true or was not true, but but let me finish what I was saying, please
[5:04:30]What I what I have said is that?
[5:04:34]Now it's clear that there was con there was misconduct
[5:04:37]Okay
[5:04:38]I also was clear that when he was in jail and he looked devastated and told me he wasn't
[5:04:44]Ever going to be in that position again and told me he didn't know that there were people that were underage
[5:04:50]And said this was never going to happen again. I believed him and I told you in my opening statement that that was a mistake
[5:04:57]And I do feel horrible about that
[5:04:59]I had I known that he was doing it. I would have walked away
[5:05:05]But in the context of of all of this all of the the information that was provided
[5:05:10]Which suggests that a lot of what was being said was not true
[5:05:15]And a lot of what was being claimed about happened in the past
[5:05:19]After he had gone to jail and after he said he wasn't going to do it again
[5:05:23]I didn't have a reason to believe after he got out that he was doing it again
[5:05:27]I started out the first question asked was about this because in your opening statement you said
[5:05:33]I made the mistake of believing. Mr. Epstein that he would not again commit a crime
[5:05:38]Um, he has never been indicted charged
[5:05:41]I don't even know if he's been investigated for anything after 2009. I mean the indictment in 2019 was 2002 2005. So
[5:05:49]What what criminal activity are you aware of that occurred after he got out of prison that violated your trust?
[5:05:55]but that that is what you're talking about here when he died
[5:06:00]And
[5:06:01]it it precipitated the kind of a
[5:06:04]flow of
[5:06:06]People coming and making claims against it claims against epstein
[5:06:10]And there were lots of people that made claims against epstein
[5:06:13]And there were lots of people that went to the epstein victims compensation fund to get to to make claims against epstein
[5:06:20]with the with that benefit
[5:06:22]And as you said, how could how could I possibly say that nothing happened with with that number of claims out there?
[5:06:29]And given given that
[5:06:32]Given that that's what I was talking about
[5:06:36]I don't know what's true. What's not true, but I know there's stuff there
[5:06:40]What are the crimes that have been alleged or sex assault or sex trafficking human trafficking?
[5:06:46]What's the other what's what else is on the list?
[5:06:49]I don't know if the crimes are sex trafficking or human trafficking. What I know is that people claimed that he
[5:06:56]He he abused them. He sexually abused them
[5:07:00]There were claims I believe in some of the complaints that were filed after he died about rape
[5:07:08]Those are the claims that I did not know about
[5:07:13]How many of the victims that?
[5:07:17]Have made claims and have recovered from the different funds
[5:07:21]post 2008
[5:07:23]Did you interact with on a regular basis in your capacity as his lawyer a very small minority of them?
[5:07:30]doesn't
[5:07:32]And the the only people that I would have interacted with were people who were
[5:07:37]Ostensibly assistance ostensibly assistance
[5:07:47]You had mentioned
[5:07:49]That your role with the non-prosecution agreement was related to
[5:07:54]making
[5:07:55]Single suggestion. Is that right reviewing reviewing the agreement for language?
[5:08:01]And I don't remember specifically what the language was but I was one of
[5:08:06]You know, I wasn't I wasn't a criminal attorney
[5:08:08]There were criminal attorneys like roy black and lily sanchez and people who were
[5:08:13]Celebrated criminal counsel that were looking this thing over. So my my input was
[5:08:19]margin with best
[5:08:21]What suggestion did you make? I don't recall
[5:08:24]It was a linguistic one
[5:08:28]For the record, did it have anything to do with those?
[5:08:33]Identified to be co-conspirators
[5:08:39]With the language of that. Yeah, I think maybe it did. Yeah
[5:08:47]Did it have in relation to the co-conspirators did it have to do with
[5:08:53]Creating a list of individuals who would be protected as co-conspirators. No
[5:09:04]it's
[5:09:06]Been alleged repeatedly that mr. Epstein used his influence his connections to powerful figures
[5:09:14]to curry favor and
[5:09:17]Receive this
[5:09:18]the
[5:09:20]Non-prosecution agreement
[5:09:22]Is there anything that?
[5:09:24]as far as the circumstances surrounding the non-prosecution agreement
[5:09:28]That would be
[5:09:31]Concerning in that regard
[5:09:35]I don't I don't think so because my view of the non-prosecution agreement
[5:09:40]although although
[5:09:42]based upon what I was
[5:09:45]Positions laid out by defense counsel
[5:09:49]Was
[5:09:50]Was probably different than other people
[5:09:52]The non-prosecution agreement was based upon
[5:09:58]Attempts to charge
[5:10:00]Epstein for what the defense counsel were or telling the government were or state crimes
[5:10:08]And that and what the defense counsel was saying at the time was that the the the crimes that that was
[5:10:15]that were actually
[5:10:18]Testified to
[5:10:19]The crimes the the the the act the actions that were actually testified to
[5:10:25]were activities which
[5:10:27]Which weren't what was in according to the according to the defense counsel weren't what was intended by the the sex trafficking statutes
[5:10:39]and so
[5:10:40]my understanding
[5:10:42]subsequently saying that
[5:10:46]After after they reached this agreement which
[5:10:50]None of the defense counsel was satisfied with
[5:10:53]That even after they reached the agreement they were fighting it
[5:10:57]with acosta's office
[5:10:58]a lot
[5:11:00]There we go. They were explaining they they explained that
[5:11:04]They went back and talked about how the record was defective. They went back and talked about how the petite policy
[5:11:10]uh
[5:11:10]Shouldn't they should make it so that the the federal government doesn't get involved in this case
[5:11:16]They mentioned the fact that there was a state sex crime prosecutor that that made a determination that there was a grand jury determination
[5:11:22]a grand jury convened that had a determination and that the the federal government shouldn't be involved in this and again
[5:11:30]um listed why the
[5:11:33]the statutes
[5:11:34]That were being cited by the government were not
[5:11:37]intended to be used in this way
[5:11:39]and I think
[5:11:41]Based on what I recall acosta saying was that acosta wanted to get something out of this. He was concerned
[5:11:48]That maybe epstein would would be able to beat
[5:11:52]the charges and wanted to make sure that epstein actually did jail time and also wanted to make sure that epstein had to
[5:12:00]plead to um
[5:12:03]Plead to an offense that would require him to register as a as a sex offender
[5:12:08]And registration as a sex offender is a lifetime
[5:12:13]And those were his goals and
[5:12:16]And the defense counsel was not particularly crazy about
[5:12:20]What his goals were given what the the state outcome was?
[5:12:23]um and acosta
[5:12:25]As I understood and and were challenging
[5:12:28]The deal that was made
[5:12:30]So the defense counsel didn't look at this as a sweetheart deal and that's the view that I had based upon what they were
[5:12:35]saying to me
[5:12:36]Outside of acosta, are you aware of any?
[5:12:40]efforts to talk to his superiors or any
[5:12:44]Other government officials related to the claims against mr. Epstein. No
[5:12:50]Did you have any role in
[5:12:54]Negotiating mr. Epstein's work release no
[5:12:58]During the previous hour the minority asked you about the florida science foundation. Is that right?
[5:13:04]Yes, and I believe that you had mentioned that it its purpose was in the furtherance of
[5:13:10]Scientific endeavors. Is that a fair characterization? Yes
[5:13:15]What specific scientific endeavors? It's really that's something that epstein was as as I think has been reported epstein is was
[5:13:23]Very interested in scientific and academic research in a lot of different areas
[5:13:28]um, it wasn't something that I that I did much in the way of but um
[5:13:34]The idea was to to search out and find
[5:13:38]These types of projects that were worthy of funding and then fund them
[5:13:45]I can't tell you the specific kinds
[5:13:47]Do you know any?
[5:13:49]Entities or individuals that he would have interacted with in the furtherance of will foundation
[5:13:54]Couple universities, I think have been reported. I think princeton was one there was one
[5:14:00]In the southwest, I can't remember where harvard was one
[5:14:05]Um stuff about the brain that that he was he was looking at
[5:14:10]um
[5:14:12]There's some academic research that I wasn't really familiar with that. I know that he was looking at as well
[5:14:17]And when he was on this work release, did you have meetings with him at the office that they were working out of?
[5:14:23]In the same way that I would go to his house in new york
[5:14:27]When he was on work release, I would travel to florida and meet with him at the office
[5:14:32]Um to report on the status of things that I was working on for him
[5:14:36]And for the record because I don't believe it was asked. Where was this office?
[5:14:41]I think it was stated by someone that it was on 250 australian avenue or south australian avenue
[5:14:52]Did you ever?
[5:14:53]When you visited him at this office, did you ever see young women or girls?
[5:15:00]um
[5:15:01]I saw
[5:15:02]People that I understood to be his assistants
[5:15:05]at the office
[5:15:11]Did you have to deal with any issues associated with him registering as a sex offender relative to his different properties?
[5:15:16]In south carolina, you can't live in like
[5:15:18]Most places so did he have any issues with that?
[5:15:21]Ask me again
[5:15:23]Once he was registered as a sex offender. He still already owned all these properties in south carolina
[5:15:27]You're not allowed to live a lot of places parks schools
[5:15:31]Just there's no-go zones. Did you have to deal with any of that associated with his existing properties? I did a little bit. Sure
[5:15:38]um, but usually with in conjunction with criminal counsel, um, so um
[5:15:45]Obviously we had to make sure that where he lived in palm beach was was clear and it and as I understood it then it was
[5:15:55]um
[5:15:57]The the new mexico ranch was isolated from other places. The island was isolated from other places
[5:16:02]So that wasn't it and new york also from what I understood was not was not a problem
[5:16:10]Are you aware?
[5:16:12]of whether obscene
[5:16:14]sexually abused young women or girls while on work release
[5:16:21]I was not aware at the time that he was doing anything like that
[5:16:25]And as I said had somebody even mentioned that to me
[5:16:29]I would have been surprised by it given that there was a sheriff's deputy sitting at the reception desk
[5:16:34]Every time that I went to that office and the reception desk was
[5:16:39]You know maybe the distance from those chairs over there from the office from where the offices were
[5:16:45]So that would have surprised me
[5:16:47]Um, I have since learned after his death there were I think it was after his death that there were allegations made
[5:16:54]That he was having sex with somebody in one in his office
[5:17:00]To be clear
[5:17:02]Mr. Absin did have privacy at this office
[5:17:06]The office had a door it did
[5:17:15]Did you ever see any woman there that you later identified to be a victim?
[5:17:22]That I later I later identified that was later identified that later played should be a victim. Yes
[5:17:29]who
[5:17:30]Is it okay that we say it?
[5:17:33]uh
[5:17:34]I believe
[5:17:41]How many times did you see her though?
[5:17:43]I don't I don't recall
[5:17:46]Do you recall having any conversations related to her with mr. Epson?
[5:17:51]There at any time
[5:17:57]Nothing, nothing remarkable. No
[5:18:01]Did bruce reinhardt have an office?
[5:18:04]At the florida science foundation bruce reinhardt did not have an office at florida science foundation
[5:18:11]He did however have an office in the building
[5:18:14]um, he was an attorney at a
[5:18:18]At a firm called I think atterbury goldberger, I think was the name of the firm
[5:18:27]Did he do any work for mr. Epson? Um
[5:18:30]I don't recall if he did any work for mr. Epson, but
[5:18:35]there were um
[5:18:37]I believe
[5:18:39]He he did some representation of people who were associated from the starts with mr. Epson
[5:18:44]Relating to the claims that were made against the states, I think
[5:18:49]Did you ever have conversations with mr. Epson about his requirement to register as a sex offender?
[5:18:55]Yes
[5:18:56]What were the nature of those?
[5:18:58]conversations
[5:19:00]Where where he had to register?
[5:19:02]Or where he was going, you know any number of different things that I was where did he have to register?
[5:19:07]What state he registered in new york?
[5:19:11]He registered in the u.s virgin islands. He registered in in florida
[5:19:20]Went to the registry in new mexico, but was old for some reason
[5:19:24]Uh that that registration wasn't required
[5:19:29]Um
[5:19:30]Based upon something with the statute, I think i'm not familiar with I would assume was primary place of residence
[5:19:35]But that's not the case. It's you stay somewhere for longer than a certain period of time
[5:19:39]It does convert it to a primary. He never stayed in in mexico very long
[5:19:46]And in new york, he wasn't there long enough apparently. Um, there was a specific a specific
[5:19:51]Um statement made by the whoever was handing the registry that
[5:19:57]um
[5:19:58]That he wasn't he wasn't he wasn't required to register that as a primary residence
[5:20:05]Are you aware?
[5:20:07]That leslie groff and bella cline facilitated cell phones computers
[5:20:14]for the
[5:20:16]Survivors victims that you have referred to as assistants
[5:20:20]The word facilitated it. Are you aware that they gave them cell phones and computers?
[5:20:25]um for assistance
[5:20:28]We now know that weren't assistants, but yeah, I knew them as assistants. Okay
[5:20:33]Are you aware that jeffrey epstein would use that to monitor their actions? No
[5:20:39]Would surprise you to know that he monitored their cell phone communications to control them
[5:20:45]Now
[5:20:46]After what we know now
[5:20:49]No
[5:20:50]That would not surprise me. Are we about done?
[5:20:56]I guess I just have one question
[5:20:58]It seems like working for him was a huge pain in the ass. I mean
[5:21:02]At some point were you like maybe I should do something else
[5:21:06]I was compensated very well and I worked very hard to do the things I did for him and those things I did were
[5:21:12]all business transactional work experiences that I wouldn't get
[5:21:16]necessarily anywhere else I was working with with
[5:21:20]People who were billionaires on transactions that were you know, really interesting transaction
[5:21:26]So yeah
[5:21:32]Sir are you a lawyer?
[5:21:34]Yes, sir. Okay. So, you know that when you become a lawyer, you're you're destined to work long hours
[5:21:40]For demanding people doing doing difficultly i'm in congress to see more so i'm sure i'm sure that's true
[5:21:47]So given that that was the case
[5:21:51]One for me
[5:21:54]Why not I was there
[5:21:57]And I know, you know, you have your own views on that but
[5:22:02]And I know you want to try to hold me accountable
[5:22:05]I think we all have roles to play. I'm just I understand that
[5:22:09]I understand that well, you're following your your spin on the evidence. Not not really the evidence
[5:22:15]It is your spin on the evidence because the evidence doesn't everything makes it pretty clear
[5:22:19]That nobody said anything to me that I never saw anything. Nobody alleged that I saw anything time will tell
[5:22:25]All right. I'm glad you guys are having a conversation now, but I don't think there's questions pending
[5:22:30]We will go off the record
[5:22:47]We can go back
[5:22:49]Mr. Redake I wanted to return if I could to the topic of the conversation you had with jeffrey epstein two days before his death
[5:22:58]And for the moment i'm not going to ask you
[5:23:01]to tell me about the substance of that conversation, but I would like to
[5:23:06]Understand some of the details surrounding that communication
[5:23:11]To begin with where did it happen? Was this over the phone or in person? No, it was at the jail. It's at the prison
[5:23:17]And how long did the conversation last?
[5:23:21]I don't remember how long I was there was and there were there was other attorneys and a paralegal there at the time
[5:23:28]So
[5:23:30]This conversation involved more than just you and mr. Epstein. There were other people present. Yes other attorneys. Yes and anyone else
[5:23:39]No, just the attorneys. I'm sorry. I said a paralegal too. I believe there's one paralegal. There's a paralegal
[5:23:44]Who were the other attorneys?
[5:23:49]These were these were might have been michael miller
[5:23:53]from step toe
[5:23:56]There may have been another step toe attorney there and um Epstein had some other lawyers who were new to the
[5:24:03]To the thing. I don't know if marty weinberg was there or not
[5:24:07]I don't I don't remember them
[5:24:10]There was more there was and there were some um
[5:24:13]Kind of associate level attorneys from from criminal firms there too. I just don't remember who they were
[5:24:19]Okay, and other than the one paralegal you mentioned were there any non-attorneys present? No
[5:24:26]And
[5:24:27]I understood you to say that you don't have a specific recollection of how long you were in the prison
[5:24:33]Different question. Do you have a recollection of how long the conversation with mr. Epstein lasted?
[5:24:40]They were just continuing conversations about items that were of relevance
[5:24:47]At the time, um
[5:24:49]So there was not like a specific conversation or his
[5:24:54]Talk stop talk stop. So we're talking about a meeting. Yeah, and and
[5:24:59]Not to belabor the point but the duration of the meeting an hour
[5:25:04]More or less maybe an hour maybe two. Okay possibly
[5:25:09]um and
[5:25:10]Again without getting into the substance of the communications. What were the topics that were discussed?
[5:25:17]um
[5:25:18]fail
[5:25:21]Um
[5:25:22]requirements
[5:25:25]So
[5:25:27]This is not my thing. So um requiring some requirements procedural requirements with respect to
[5:25:34]um
[5:25:36]What what what needed to happen there like a like um
[5:25:41]I'm not exactly sure what the procedural requirements were but they were procedural related procedural requirements
[5:25:47]um
[5:25:49]There was um, you say procedural requirements were those legal in nature. Yes
[5:25:54]In connection with with the the criminal case
[5:25:58]um
[5:26:00]Trying to think what else? Um
[5:26:03]I believe um roles of different the different attorneys
[5:26:11]um
[5:26:17]That's what that's what comes to mind
[5:26:20]And again, just so we're all clear. Are you
[5:26:24]Asserting the attorney client privilege as to the entirety of the communications that took place during that meeting
[5:26:31]I think I have to
[5:26:33]because I I can't
[5:26:35]remember specifically things that were said and I so I think the answer is yes, I have to
[5:26:42]and
[5:26:44]Again, just so we're all clear
[5:26:46]Is that based on your?
[5:26:49]Participation and the legal representation of mr. Epstein in his criminal case
[5:26:55]Yes
[5:26:56]And any other legal representations that come into play during that meeting or is that the only one?
[5:27:02]um
[5:27:04]I would i would think during that meeting there was probably some kind of
[5:27:08]um
[5:27:10]status of
[5:27:12]You know projects that were going on
[5:27:14]So I'd imagine that that came up as well
[5:27:27]Um, I appreciate that mr. Rendez. Um
[5:27:30]I'm going to shift back to yet another topic that we discussed earlier. Okay, and that is the um
[5:27:40]Hard drives that you learned um through your communications with the joint defense group that um had
[5:27:46]Ended up in the possession of private investigators. Okay
[5:27:50]Um, just some follow-up questions to make sure we have a complete understanding with respect to that issue
[5:27:57]um to
[5:27:59]To begin with I understand from your testimony during the previous round that the private investigator you were referring to
[5:28:05]Was the firm riley kurali, is that correct? I think so though
[5:28:10]I'm i'm not 100 certain but that's a name that that stands out in my head
[5:28:14]To your knowledge, were there any other private investigators involved?
[5:28:19]Based upon what you know based upon what what I heard today roadrock
[5:28:28]To your knowledge, how did the private investigators obtain those hard drives
[5:28:33]I don't know. I have no personal knowledge
[5:28:37]Um, and when to your understanding did they obtain the hard drives again, I don't know
[5:28:43]Um, and at whose direction to your understanding did they obtain the hard drives?
[5:28:50]Anyone else to your knowledge knew that the investigators had the hard drives other lawyers in the defense group
[5:28:58]You can keep your voice up. Sorry other lawyers in the defense group
[5:29:02]And how many hard drives in total did the private investigators have I don't know
[5:29:09]Um, and to your knowledge were those hard drives ever provided to law enforcement. I don't know I
[5:29:15]but my my
[5:29:18]My sense is that no that they weren't
[5:29:21]Were the contents of the hard drives ever described to you? No
[5:29:27]As you sit here today, do you have an understanding of what they contain? No
[5:29:33]Um, I also asked you
[5:29:37]Earlier this afternoon about the removal of
[5:29:41]Video equipment from any Epstein home in advance of a search warrant being executed
[5:29:47]Just wanted to be even more specific and ask you the same question with respect to audio equipment
[5:29:53]But did you ask sure I know it so I know it's a question. Yes
[5:29:58]Um, do you have any knowledge of any audio equipment being removed from any of mr
[5:30:03]Epstein's properties prior to the execution of a search warrant? I have no
[5:30:08]Personal knowledge of it. I don't have any other
[5:30:16]Do you have any
[5:30:19]personal knowledge or other kind of knowledge
[5:30:22]Of any other type of electronic equipment being removed from any residents of jeffrey epstein prior to the execution of a search warrant
[5:30:31]Electron electronic equipment. So we've talked hard drives talked video equipment audio equipment
[5:30:40]any other bowl of
[5:30:42]Conversation of like understanding conversations or
[5:30:47]I'm casting a wide net certainly any any any type of electronic equipment anything that's electronically operable
[5:30:53]That could be that could be a printer or anything. I don't know. I don't know. I mean
[5:30:59]I don't have any knowledge of it, but I don't I don't want to like give a broad
[5:31:04]I I don't know because maybe did somebody took out a washing machine or something. I I don't I don't know but
[5:31:10]I don't like answering questions for stuff that I don't know what the universe is that we're talking about
[5:31:16]Yes, it's just it's that broad broadly defined category that I just described any any type of electronic equipment
[5:31:23]It sounds like your answer is you do not have such nothing jumps out in my mind
[5:31:28]And and again, I don't know how far back we're talking. You know, it's like you said before
[5:31:32]That I was talking about within within, you know
[5:31:37]What period of time also because that's also an issue
[5:31:40]Let's say within a year before the search warrant was executed
[5:31:44]Nothing jumps jumps in my mind
[5:31:48]Um, and the same question except as to
[5:31:51]Records of any kind do you have any knowledge whether firsthand or otherwise than any records of any kind?
[5:31:57]Removed from any of mr. Epstein's residences prior to the execution of a search nothing to nothing to like
[5:32:05]Just not to say that I I don't know I had no personal knowledge or that I've never heard anything
[5:32:11]Did you ever hear any other person express a belief that any
[5:32:16]hard drive
[5:32:18]Video equipment audio equipment or other type of electronic equipment had been removed from any of mr
[5:32:23]Epstein's properties prior to the execution of a search warrant other than the hard drives that we've talked about. Yes
[5:32:30]No
[5:32:35]Um, so the hard drives
[5:32:37]To your knowledge, where are they now?
[5:32:40]I don't I have no idea
[5:32:45]Did you come to learn?
[5:32:48]Which Epstein properties specifically the hard drives were obtained from?
[5:32:54]My sense because it was the palm beach investigation that was
[5:32:57]Being talked about that it was on beach
[5:33:01]but
[5:33:02]Do you have specific knowledge? No
[5:33:11]Did you ever become aware or did you ever hear?
[5:33:14]That the hard drives were withheld from law enforcement. I believe in the context of the the discussions
[5:33:27]with
[5:33:28]the u.s attorney's office there were conversations about
[5:33:32]Our drives and the u.s attorney's office not having those hard drives
[5:33:37]The u.s attorney's office in florida in florida
[5:33:42]And I believe i'm not 100 certain that I believe that's I I believe that's what we call
[5:33:50]And when you say the u.s attorney's office did not have the hard drives
[5:33:54]Was it to your understanding their expectation that they should have received them?
[5:33:58]You know, there was a there was some discussion back and forth between the defense counsel and them about it
[5:34:11]just shifting again to um the topic of
[5:34:15]Of Epstein survivors, um, and the um
[5:34:21]Allegations that they have made against Jeffrey Epstein and his estate
[5:34:25]Since mr. Epstein's death. Have you had any contact with any women who made allegations against Jeffrey Epstein?
[5:34:33]Personal contact no
[5:34:36]With the exception I was at
[5:34:40]A couple of mediations where those people appeared
[5:34:46]But beyond that no
[5:34:48]Have you instructed or engaged anyone else to contact any women who have made allegations concerning Jeffrey Epstein?
[5:34:57]No
[5:34:59]Have you engaged any private investigators in connection with allegations of sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein?
[5:35:08]They don't I have not personally done that
[5:35:11]um
[5:35:13]And I can't recall if one of the uh, the civil lawyers
[5:35:17]representing the estate
[5:35:19]uh may have
[5:35:21]I remember discussions. I don't know if they actually
[5:35:24]Actually did so and do you recall which lawyer that is?
[5:35:27]um
[5:35:34]maybe
[5:35:37]Bennett moskowitz's team in troutment
[5:35:41]um
[5:35:42]I was with his team and bennett moskowitz's team at troutman. Thank you
[5:35:49]He I think that I think um, you know, we have multiple attorneys so we're
[5:35:55]And there's a lot of claims obviously
[5:35:59]To your knowledge, um have any private investigators working
[5:36:04]On behalf of Jeffrey Epstein or his estate
[5:36:08]Themselves contacted any survivors
[5:36:12]I don't think so. No
[5:36:14]And can we go back to the previous question you talked about?
[5:36:17]Um private investigators, uh, it's just after he's that after he died right at any time. I believe that
[5:36:25]Just to amend this a little bit. I believe that prior to his death
[5:36:29]Or maybe just as he died
[5:36:32]there was um
[5:36:34]a private investigator
[5:36:36]that
[5:36:39]In connection with the civil case to find out about the uh, the plaintiff
[5:36:43]That was retained I believe I may have had I think I did have communications with the private investigator about it
[5:36:50]I think um
[5:36:51]I think I I got I got
[5:36:54]Communications with the private investigator about it to do some background research
[5:36:58]Was that private investigator? I don't I don't remember the name and you said the engagement was to provide background research
[5:37:04]Yeah, what do you know about this person?
[5:37:08]in many instances we we
[5:37:11]Don't know about we you know
[5:37:13]The the co-executive and I in most instances, we don't know who's the
[5:37:17]What do you say these people are you talking about the plaintiffs the plaintiffs? Yes
[5:37:21]and
[5:37:23]How did this private investor investigator go about conducting this background research? I don't know
[5:37:29]I got a I got a report. I think they got a report at some point
[5:37:33]and
[5:37:33]What did the report say?
[5:37:37]I think it's privileged number one, but I don't recall it's tough right now
[5:37:41]Did the report contain any indication that this investigator had contacted any Epstein survivors or plaintiffs?
[5:37:49]No, I don't think that they would have done that
[5:37:54]To your knowledge has either this private investigator or any other private investigator conducted surveillance of Epstein survivors or plaintiffs
[5:38:03]I'm trying to remember if the if the one that i'm talking about did
[5:38:09]um
[5:38:14]It's possible it is possible
[5:38:17]But um, I don't I don't know for sure
[5:38:21]To your knowledge have any women who have made allegations of sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein been threatened?
[5:38:28]No
[5:38:29]My knowledge no
[5:38:30]To your knowledge have any women who have made such allegations been pressured in any way not to pursue their allegations?
[5:38:37]Not to my knowledge
[5:38:54]If I could return um to um
[5:38:56]The topic of an individual you were asked about um several rounds ago, and that's Howard Lutnick. Um the question
[5:39:04]I believe was whether you ever became aware of a relationship between Jeffrey Epstein and Howard Lutnick and
[5:39:11]As I understand your answer was you did not know of such a relationship. Is that right?
[5:39:16]Um up until recently I had no I had no knowledge other than that Lutnick was a neighbor
[5:39:21]Um, i'm just going to quickly ask the court reporter to mark um as examples
[5:39:30]D as a dog d
[5:39:33]Um an email dated may 28th 2018
[5:39:54]It is a thread between uh Jeffrey Epstein and
[5:39:58]An individual with an email address bearing the initials h w l
[5:40:03]um
[5:40:04]Given that it appears to originate from Cantor Fitzgerald. We believe that to be Howard Lutnick
[5:40:10]um the
[5:40:12]message um down below from mr. Epstein
[5:40:17]Reads tell your lawyer that darren my lawyer will contact him
[5:40:21]Um, and then the response up above from h w l meeting is tomorrow morning
[5:40:27]Do you are not on this email? But do you have any recollection of meeting with?
[5:40:33]Howard Lutnick's attorney
[5:40:36]No, I have I have no
[5:40:39]No recollection of meeting with Lutnick's attorney at all
[5:40:43]And I don't have a recollection of any instruction to contact the Lutnick court
[5:40:48]So, um if he had said this, I don't recall him ever saying to me
[5:40:54]Thank you
[5:41:10]Mr. Randolph, thank you. Um, before we go off the record, um
[5:41:16]I'm going to note that based on your uh responses to my questions regarding your conversation with
[5:41:23]Mr. Epstein prior to his death. We are no longer seeking a ruling from the chair regarding your meeting with mr. Epstein
[5:41:31]Um, thank you
[5:41:32]Thank you
[5:41:33]We can go off the record
[5:41:49]We'll go back on the record
[5:41:58]During the previous hour we discussed
[5:42:01]Mr. Epstein's registration as a sex offender
[5:42:04]Did you ever do any work in relation to his status as a sex offender as it related to?
[5:42:11]Being granted visas to travel
[5:42:17]I recall there was a request at some point to go to
[5:42:21]Canada
[5:42:23]And I recall that because of his status
[5:42:26]That was not going to be possible. I don't know. They actually didn't work on
[5:42:30]Uh other than to to advise that I didn't think that was going to be possible
[5:42:35]Did mr. Epstein get special
[5:42:38]Privileges to travel to the u.s virgin islands as a sex offender
[5:42:43]Special privileges, I'm not sure I understand the question. Was he able to travel to the virgin islands?
[5:42:49]The u.s virgin islands. He was registered in the u.s virgin islands
[5:42:53]That was his primary residence and he was registered as a sex offender in the in the u.s virgin islands
[5:42:59]You mentioned canada
[5:43:01]Did mr. Epstein apply for a visa to visit russia?
[5:43:07]I have
[5:43:10]No independent recollection of this I have since learned that
[5:43:15]And I forget where?
[5:43:17]That that application was made that i'm talking about very recently
[5:43:22]And for the record you said you have since become aware. Are you aware of emails involving you?
[5:43:29]Related to a visa application to travel to russia. No
[5:43:51]did
[5:43:52]Epstein ever discuss any business that he had in russia with you generally I knew there were there
[5:44:00]they were
[5:44:02]Though I don't know the names but there were people that he did business with
[5:44:06]That had russian relationships
[5:44:09]Generally, there were people that I understood that he did business with that had some russian russian connection
[5:44:16]Were they in
[5:44:18]Affiliated with the russian government
[5:44:23]I don't think so, but I don't I don't know but I don't think so
[5:44:28]My sense was that they were businessmen
[5:44:32]Over the course of your representation. Mr. Epstein. Did you have signatory authority over his personal and business accounts?
[5:44:39]Yes, did anyone else within Epstein's orbit have signatory authority?
[5:44:44]I believe at times
[5:44:46]There were people who did why were you granted this authority?
[5:44:50]Um
[5:44:52]two reasons that I that I recall one was as um
[5:44:57]To make sure
[5:44:59]that
[5:45:01]people who were requesting
[5:45:03]money on behalf of Epstein
[5:45:05]Had authority to request the amounts
[5:45:08]So and I guess they didn't want the accounting to be the same people writing the checks. So
[5:45:16]um, I had a series of
[5:45:19]My understanding is there are these these conditions
[5:45:22]This person and I don't remember who but you know, this person could have had five thousand dollars
[5:45:27]This household manager could have three thousand dollars
[5:45:33]And so if the request was made they'd have to be within that threshold or there had to be some kind of a
[5:45:40]an email from Epstein saying
[5:45:43]Pay this or something
[5:45:46]And so part of my job was to is to make sure
[5:45:50]That checks that were going out or going out within these conditions
[5:45:56]Did you ever sign off on payments?
[5:45:58]to women or young girls for services
[5:46:04]um, I recall I think I discussed this earlier svetlana pasadena was a um
[5:46:11]Um, I had some kind of a marketing relationship with one of the foundations and I remember the foundation
[5:46:18]Was writing checks
[5:46:19]to her on a monthly basis
[5:46:23]And I believe I signed those checks
[5:46:27]For what reason were checks being sent it was she was a marketing rep for the for the foundation
[5:46:33]Did you ever authorized wires to the girls in eastern europe?
[5:46:40]Nothing you have something that you can show me because nothing nothing that I recall do you have anything that I could look at?
[5:46:51]I'm
[5:46:52]This is a tricky well tightrope trying to protect victims and I understand
[5:46:57]Anything I show you is going to create issues, but yeah
[5:47:02]Did you ever sign off on
[5:47:04]Actually, let me back up as it related to the woman you previously mentioned in her marketing business
[5:47:11]Did you ever question the legitimacy of that marketing business?
[5:47:15]No, she had she had a resume which was fairly fulsome. She had a
[5:47:21]Business degree. I think it was a business degree. She had a degree
[5:47:25]And so her role was consistent with what was in her degree
[5:47:32]Did epsi pay for that degree?
[5:47:35]I don't think so now this is before that
[5:47:38]Generally again, did you ever sign off on payments for women's health care visits?
[5:47:45]There's nothing not that I I don't know that I didn't but there's nothing that I that I recall
[5:47:51]Did you ever sign off on tuition or donations of schools?
[5:47:56]Um
[5:47:57]I recall
[5:48:01]I recall tuition. I don't know if I signed off on them or not, but I recall it
[5:48:07]um
[5:48:08]It was as I as I explained not unusual for epsi to pay tuition for
[5:48:14]Employees for colleagues for associates
[5:48:21]So
[5:48:24]It certainly is possible
[5:48:27]How many bank accounts did you manage for epsi and epsi and related entities? They didn't manage bank accounts
[5:48:33]I wouldn't say I managed any bank accounts. That was a that was an accounting function
[5:48:38]Not my function
[5:48:39]I was a signatory on many accounts. I don't know how many
[5:48:43]Does 140 sound about right?
[5:48:46]I honestly I don't know
[5:48:48]And if you're talking about at one time that doesn't sound right
[5:48:52]If you're talking about over the years when when banking arrangements were lost and then gained and now lost
[5:48:58]And then new new ones are created
[5:49:01]I think that that could be possible
[5:49:03]Did mr fc maintain any accounts in foreign countries?
[5:49:08]I believe there was there was in paris a bank account
[5:49:12]Maybe more than one
[5:49:14]Did you have signatory authority over those accounts?
[5:49:17]I don't recall if i did or if I didn't
[5:49:26]Are you aware of whether he had any accounts in switzerland?
[5:49:33]I seem to remember hsbc
[5:49:37]But I don't know if he had an account or that was an account of one of his clients
[5:49:42]But I seem to remember their hsbc accounts. I just
[5:49:46]I'm not i'm not sure again. My function wasn't
[5:49:49]Wasn't the accounting department. That's not something I've ever done
[5:49:54]Generally though, are you aware of any accounts with in grand camp came in? No
[5:50:03]I'm not personally aware and I don't have any recollection
[5:50:09]It's been reported that you provided cash and log costs for fc's coverage of doctor visits rent lingerie from victoria's secret
[5:50:17]And haircuts from luxury salons. Is that true that I hear can I get that question?
[5:50:22]I can the first part of it cash and
[5:50:25]Somewhere in it said cash and logged costs for fc's coverage of doc
[5:50:30]What's the log cost?
[5:50:34]Let me rephrase the question
[5:50:37]Well logged costs kept a ledger
[5:50:45]Repeat it again
[5:50:46]It's it's been reported. Mr
[5:50:47]Indyke that you provided cash and logged costs for fc's coverage of doctors visits rent lingerie from victoria's secret
[5:50:55]And haircuts from luxury salons. Is that true?
[5:50:59]So it's been reported that I did that
[5:51:02]Correct
[5:51:03]That's not true
[5:51:19]It's been reported and alleged that in february and march of 2016 you authorized approximately
[5:51:24]60,000 in wire transfers to young women at foreign beneficiary banks
[5:51:29]Mr. Indyke, did you initiate these wires?
[5:51:33]I don't know what they're referring to
[5:51:35]I'm not saying I didn't but I don't know what they're referring to
[5:51:44]Did you ever initiate wires to foreign beneficiary banks for young women?
[5:51:56]Could you tell me a bank? Could you tell me something?
[5:51:59]Are there young women?
[5:52:01]And can you tell when you say young women you mean women?
[5:52:04]Are there women that today you can identify that you that were recipients of wires that you transfer to foreign banks
[5:52:11]I don't recall any and any
[5:52:14]thing in particular
[5:52:17]Show me something if you could show me something
[5:52:19]I could tell you whether or not I did it the victims that you refer to as assistants all
[5:52:24]most of them came from eastern europe they were
[5:52:28]Financial incentivized to come here and they got wired transfers between 2010 and 2013
[5:52:33]so
[5:52:34]those you're not aware of those wire transfers to eastern european banks to facilitate the travel of
[5:52:40]The people you now call assistants with your victims. Okay, so
[5:52:45]There's a lot in that question and I don't
[5:52:48]You're doing it again to me and i'm trying to answer your question and there's a lot in there
[5:52:52]And I don't know how to answer the question. So have you wired money to eastern europe?
[5:52:56]I don't believe i've wired money to eastern europe
[5:53:04]Have you wired money to russia?
[5:53:06]I don't believe so
[5:53:20]I mean is it possible over the course of however many years that something like that happened, I guess
[5:53:26]But unless you show it to me, I can't tell you
[5:53:33]Have you subsequently learned that money that was wired was used?
[5:53:38]Or intended to compensate women for sexual services
[5:53:43]So i've not learned anything like that
[5:53:47]I've heard allegations here and and after he died that that that that happened
[5:53:53]But I don't know that that's true
[5:53:56]I have no idea
[5:54:02]As it relates to foreign wires generally did you ever have concerns with the volume of?
[5:54:08]Wires that were being sent overseas
[5:54:11]I don't recall doing a volume of foreign wires
[5:54:17]so
[5:54:20]I don't recall any concerns
[5:54:23]And are you sure that these that these questions are directed at me?
[5:54:27]Because I guess wire transfers were not generally something I did
[5:54:55]Has any bank ever requested explanations from you for suspicious payments?
[5:55:11]I'm not sure if it was from me
[5:55:13]But I do recall
[5:55:14]A deutsche bank requesting information about payments
[5:55:18]I don't recall what the subject matter of the or the amount of the payment or when the payment was due
[5:55:24]um
[5:55:29]I believe
[5:55:40]There are times if I if I'm if I am doing a transfer
[5:55:45]That i'll get a request. What's this for?
[5:55:48]But not because they were suspicious
[5:55:51]um
[5:55:53]You know that happens from time to time when I do wires for any transaction
[5:55:58]With respect to suspicious transfers, I don't
[5:56:04]I don't know that I got one
[5:56:06]If I guess it's possible, but um
[5:56:11]I don't think so
[5:56:15]Do you consider western union to be a wire transfer?
[5:56:22]I don't know. I guess I don't I don't know. I don't
[5:56:25]I'll re-ask. Have you sent any western union units to eastern europe or russia? No
[5:56:35]reportedly jp morgan raised concerns with
[5:56:39]Checks signed by beller
[5:56:41]Do you have any recollection of?
[5:56:44]JP morgan raising concerns to you related to
[5:56:49]Checks signed by beller. No
[5:57:03]Why did
[5:57:04]No, i'm sorry. Why did why did jp morgan chase drop epsi and as a client in 2013?
[5:57:10]I don't know. I think I said this before but i'll say it again
[5:57:14]When the bank drops you as a client when they dropped him as a client
[5:57:19]We didn't get a reason why they don't tell you why
[5:57:22]Um, there were assumptions made on this end that it had to do with his um criminal conviction
[5:57:30]But beyond that
[5:57:32]Did not know why after he was dropped what did you do or did you have any role in transferring his
[5:57:40]Mr. Epstein's money to another financial institution when they opened up new accounts
[5:57:46]I believe I became a signatory of of accounts
[5:57:50]And I had to sign documents for accounts opening documents
[5:58:00]But the actual transfer of funds was not done by
[5:58:04]Mr. Epstein maintaining accounts at deutsche bank thereafter. Is that right?
[5:58:09]I believe that was what what it happened after
[5:58:13]Yes, sorry
[5:58:14]Sorry. Yes
[5:58:21]Do you have any recollection of deutsche bank ever raising concerns with the financial activities of mr. Epstein's accounts?
[5:58:28]um
[5:58:30]I received a call from deutsche bank once
[5:58:33]Um asked me about an interaction I had at the bank
[5:58:41]I believe I believe the interaction was
[5:58:45]Relating to the fact that I had gone in on one day
[5:58:49]with one of these
[5:58:50]7500 checks
[5:58:52]And told the bank when I was there
[5:58:55]That I thought I would be coming in within a day or two
[5:58:59]To withdraw money for my own firm's account
[5:59:02]Cash for their for the petty cash of that firm
[5:59:05]And specifically to be transparent
[5:59:08]Told them that if they needed to somehow aggregate this because the total would be more than 10 000
[5:59:13]I wanted to tell them now because I did not want it to be considered something wrong
[5:59:20]um
[5:59:22]And then I got a call from a one of the client relationship managers. I don't remember who it was
[5:59:28]Asking me about what happened
[5:59:31]I explained that very thing and the client relationship manager was satisfied and then I didn't hear about it again
[5:59:40]But for the record what you were inquiring
[5:59:47]What
[5:59:49]Why did you make this inquiry?
[5:59:52]We had gotten fired from the bank, right?
[5:59:56]Um, I wanted to make sure that I did not do anything that would get us fired from another bank
[6:00:04]So I wanted to be transparent
[6:00:07]And if there was something that had to be done
[6:00:08]I didn't want people to think that I was doing something that wasn't supposed to do
[6:00:16]it what
[6:00:18]So one was for 7500 dollars one was for I think four thousand dollars. The total was over 10, right?
[6:00:25]So if that was aggregated and they thought I was trying to get under 10
[6:00:29]But taking out 10 within within the same week. I didn't want them to think that's what that was the case
[6:00:35]So I told them in advance so if they had told them if they had to report it they should
[6:00:40]I didn't know if they had to report it
[6:00:41]But I told them if they do they shouldn't because I didn't want people to be suspicious of me
[6:00:46]That wasn't the only time you took 7500 out. Is that right? That's correct
[6:00:51]How many times did you take out that specific amount?
[6:00:54]The number has been quoted here. It's like 97 times. I don't know if that number is accurate, but
[6:00:59]It's possible
[6:01:01]And remember that limit was a limit that the bank imposed
[6:01:04]That's 7500 dollar amount. I would have I would have done fewer times more money because that's what the accounting department wanted
[6:01:11]They wanted money in their petty cash safe
[6:01:16]And every couple of weeks I would get a request. We need more money for the petty cash thing
[6:01:29]By doing so were you actively trying to avoid complying with the bank secrecy act? Absolutely not
[6:01:37]That's just not possible
[6:01:39]The limits were imposed by the bank itself not by me
[6:01:55]I want to go back to the immigration issue. Okay, so
[6:01:58]2013
[6:02:00]there were
[6:02:03]Assistants that we now know are victims
[6:02:06]living
[6:02:07]at 301e66 or with
[6:02:11]Mr. Epstein and his house two of them one of them Karina
[6:02:17]And then the other
[6:02:23]Both both of them lived at 301e66 streets your knowledge
[6:02:28]To your knowledge. Yes, you said you said that one of them lived at his house
[6:02:31]But it's my understanding kareena lived in his house. That's true. I don't think that's so you think they both lived at 301
[6:02:38]Yes, I do
[6:02:39]and
[6:02:41]Was a u.s. Citizen
[6:02:42]My understanding was that she was a u.s. Citizen. Yeah, and kareena's bella russia
[6:02:47]I think I think that's right. Yes, and mr. Epstein asked you to
[6:02:52]well
[6:02:53]Those people got married
[6:02:55]Correct and mr. Epstein asked you to help arna buscardi's
[6:03:02]Apply for
[6:03:04]kareena's citizenship
[6:03:06]That's not true at all. They didn't ask me to ask arna buscardi's sorry
[6:03:12]Sorry, that's not true. Did mr. Epstein ask for you to provide documents to the immigration attorney that's facilitating kareena's
[6:03:19]citizenship application, I believe
[6:03:22]either
[6:03:24]kareena asked me to provide documents
[6:03:30]What documents did you provide?
[6:03:33]At their request, I believe it was a lease
[6:03:39]any other
[6:03:40]All that you remember is a lease. That's what I remember
[6:03:44]Did you ever communicate with mr. Epstein regarding?
[6:03:47]the
[6:03:50]Application for citizenship citizenship for kareena
[6:03:53]I believe I did
[6:03:56]But not at his request you just he you just updated him on it or what was the nature of that?
[6:04:03]He was concerned that his employees ostensible employees were
[6:04:07]um
[6:04:08]You I believe I believe
[6:04:12]This is some time ago
[6:04:18]And then I don't remember that I I want to be
[6:04:22]I want to be helpful, but I don't remember. I don't
[6:04:24]So then four years later, did you file for their divorce? I didn't file for their divorce. No
[6:04:30]Did you facilitate us did you connect them with people that
[6:04:34]Help them get the solution four years later as I understand it
[6:04:38]um
[6:04:43]At a divorce attorney that um filed for the divorce
[6:04:49]Uh, how long do you have to be married in order to maintain your citizenship after divorce? I have no idea
[6:04:56]It's three years
[6:04:58]Um, did you provide documents for another couple that?
[6:05:03]Got married in 2013
[6:05:06]I believe also at least
[6:05:09]Any other who was that? Um the um the
[6:05:14]I believe their last name was okay and one
[6:05:17]Again, one was a u.s. Citizen correct and one was not correct
[6:05:24]and again
[6:05:26]Add to the request one of them requested for you one of them requested that I do it. Yes
[6:05:31]Okay
[6:05:34]I feel like earlier you said that you weren't involved with 301 e 66 street substantially
[6:05:39]Correct. You just were a tenant
[6:05:41]I was a tenant
[6:05:43]Um, I had an office I had office space there
[6:05:46]Why wouldn't they go to a property manager for that?
[6:05:49]What do you mean?
[6:05:51]If you're not the property manager of the building
[6:05:54]um
[6:05:55]Because Jeffrey had a connection with with 301
[6:05:59]Okay, so Jeffrey's which is which is how they found the building
[6:06:03]Okay, so jeffrey jeffrey's brother owned ossa properties. I believe he was a principal at ossa property
[6:06:10]and so
[6:06:12]And I believe epstein leased space. I just don't know if the space that he leased was those apartments or no
[6:06:22]This is very convoluted
[6:06:24]All right. So
[6:06:26]You were a tenant in 301
[6:06:28]I was a tenant in 301 you were not the property manager not the property manager
[6:06:33]Uh, did you control any units other than your own? No
[6:06:37]So what role did you have in providing a lease for a company that your employer didn't?
[6:06:42]oh
[6:06:44]There was a relationship between jeffrey and 301
[6:06:48]Um, did you sign the lease or did somebody else sign the lease? 301 signed the lease I think
[6:06:55]Did you sign on behalf of 301 or did somebody 301 sign? I don't have that relationship with 301. No, I did not
[6:07:02]Okay, again, this is just confusing because you're not the property manager your employer doesn't own the building and
[6:07:07]What role did you have in creating a lease for a building that you have no association with?
[6:07:11]No, I never created the lease. I requested the lease. I told you I requested the lease
[6:07:15]Okay, so you requested from the property manager from the property manager. Yes, and that the purpose of that was to
[6:07:23]Get a lease that had two names on instead of one. I was requested to get a lease with them
[6:07:28]by
[6:07:30]Karina or
[6:07:34]Did you give it to the uh
[6:07:38]To the women or did you give it to art of scardis? I don't I don't recall
[6:07:44]If I would have given it to art I was probably asked to give it to her
[6:07:49]By mr. Epstein or by the women by the way
[6:07:54]I'm just going to circle back to the email and I wish I had it on me but
[6:07:58]um, there's an email on the five million documents it says
[6:08:02]From Epstein to you and con saying that he's worried that art of a scardy is going to turn on you. What does that mean?
[6:08:11]I have no idea
[6:08:22]Did mr. Epstein ask you to
[6:08:24]apply for visas for him or any of his
[6:08:28]People that you refer to as assistants
[6:08:32]No, I don't think he asked me to apply for any visas
[6:08:35]Not to japan
[6:08:37]I don't think so
[6:08:55]real quick
[6:08:57]You just discussed the marriage between miss juliac and the other
[6:09:04]victim
[6:09:05]did either one of them ever approach you to
[6:09:09]ask for
[6:09:12]Assistance in obtaining a divorce. Yes. Did you ever advise either one of them to not get a divorce?
[6:09:19]No, I never advised anybody not to get a divorce came to me
[6:09:27]Came to me
[6:09:29]And said would I help her get a divorce?
[6:09:33]I told her that one I wasn't a matrimonial attorney. So that's not something I ordinarily did
[6:09:39]And I also expressed concern to her
[6:09:43]Based upon my understanding that she had just filed some kind of an application
[6:09:48]for
[6:09:49]kareen and a juliac
[6:09:51]That what I knew about divorce in new york was that you are either filing for something called irreconcilable differences
[6:09:58]Or abandonment or something like that and that seemed to me that would be
[6:10:02]Inconsistent with statements that she likely made to the government in the application and I expressed concern about doing that
[6:10:09]and and
[6:10:10]Pausians were about it. Yes. That's what I said there
[6:10:14]And now I just want to briefly focus generally did any victims
[6:10:20]Individuals identified as victims ever come to you to ask for help as it related to
[6:10:26]Being sexually abused by mr. Epstein. No on july 6 of 2019. Mr. Epstein was arrested
[6:10:46]on federal sex trafficking charges
[6:10:50]When did you become aware of those charges
[6:10:58]at some point
[6:10:59]So Epstein was seized at the airport. I'm not sure if it was new york or teterboro
[6:11:05]But he was seized at the airport and at some point after that
[6:11:08]I forget who told me that I was told that that he was arrested
[6:11:12]And
[6:11:16]We discussed your role
[6:11:19]During the 2008 prosecution. Did you have any role whatsoever as it related to his arrest?
[6:11:27]in 2019
[6:11:32]I went to the jail a couple of times
[6:11:36]I understood that
[6:11:40]That
[6:11:41]He needed his criminal defense team
[6:11:43]And I think I contacted them and I think I I contacted them about it
[6:11:56]And
[6:12:00]I believe I had did some kind of research or legwork in connection with the bail application
[6:12:12]I don't know and
[6:12:15]And then participating in meetings with defense counts
[6:12:19]During the previous hour
[6:12:22]I believe the minority had asked you if you ever had any contact with victims
[6:12:28]I believe you answered no
[6:12:30]Is that right?
[6:12:32]That's I think I think I think so. Yes, I think that's when you say contact other than assistance, right?
[6:12:37]So for the record you never
[6:12:40]Told victims not to contact or speak with law enforcement. Is that right?
[6:12:47]I can so the answer is yes. I never told anybody not to not to speak with law enforcement
[6:12:53]I remember
[6:12:55]One or two occasions and I don't know when and I think this was in the early investigation of the later investigation
[6:13:01]that
[6:13:03]There were there were people who?
[6:13:06]Were concerned that law enforcement was calling them and the defense counsel who they didn't know
[6:13:13]Um
[6:13:14]Asked me to call them and tell them that they could have a lawyer if they want
[6:13:19]That they didn't have to speak to them if they didn't want
[6:13:23]But I never told them not to speak to one. They simply they related the
[6:13:27]Statement from the defense counsel that if they wanted a lawyer they could have one provide
[6:13:33]We will briefly go off the record
[6:13:40]We'll go back on the record
[6:13:44]So I just want to finish that that answer. So
[6:13:48]I built and it's been it's been a long time now
[6:13:50]But I believe I would have said and did say something
[6:13:53]To the effect that you don't have to speak to them without a lawyer present and if you want counsel would be provided for you
[6:14:02]And the reason
[6:14:03]That I was asked to do that is that people were expressing
[6:14:06]Fear about having to talk to law enforcement
[6:14:09]they didn't know they've never done it before and scared them and
[6:14:13]They wanted to know
[6:14:17]Great question. Do you know the name ramsey el coli?
[6:14:22]No, big allegations that i've seen paid him to recruit women, but if you don't know the name, I don't know that
[6:14:32]Mr. And I do you believe that jeffrey absin killed himself?
[6:14:37]Um
[6:14:40]It's it's a tough question to answer
[6:14:42]Um on the one hand the the answer is I don't know
[6:14:45]Really at the end of the day, I just don't know
[6:14:48]I could see reason just and I could see reason for
[6:14:51]The
[6:14:53]Concerns that he didn't kill himself
[6:14:57]I really don't know
[6:14:59]Did he appear suicidal when you met with him? No
[6:15:06]Did he ever say he was depressed?
[6:15:09]No
[6:15:10]It's not something he would have said to me
[6:15:23]What is the 1953 trust?
[6:15:25]it is
[6:15:27]What's colloquially called a pour-over trust from the will?
[6:15:32]It's the trust
[6:15:34]After the will is completely probated and all claims are settled
[6:15:38]um
[6:15:39]If there are assets and funds left over
[6:15:43]They would go over they would be transferred over
[6:15:46]From the estate to that trust
[6:15:53]And why was the 1953 trust created?
[6:15:58]uh, it is a to my understanding because I
[6:16:01]I am not the the trust in the state's lawyer per se but to my understanding
[6:16:07]as a generalist
[6:16:08]um many times
[6:16:10]you um
[6:16:13]Because
[6:16:14]You don't want your dispositions to be
[6:16:17]a matter of public speculation
[6:16:20]you
[6:16:21]Put everything in in in the estate over to a trust which is then administered outside outside probate
[6:16:28]When did you learn that you'd be a co-executor of the 1953 trust?
[6:16:33]So then that i'm trying to remember I think the 1952 trust was an amendment to an existing trust
[6:16:43]So if you're asking about the 1953 trust amendment
[6:16:47]That would have been
[6:16:49]At some point while he was in jail that I was there with him and his other attorneys
[6:16:57]um, if you're talking about the the prior
[6:17:00]Trust that that was a that the name was changed to that trust if in fact i'm remembering correctly
[6:17:06]It would have been when um that trust was drafted and I was appointed as a trustee of that trust
[6:17:14]What was the discussion around how much you would receive as a co-executor of the trust?
[6:17:20]As a co-executor there was no discussion there was simply this is what it provided
[6:17:31]So you have no understanding of how 50 million dollars was
[6:17:35]decided
[6:17:36]I think I tried to answer this question before um the trust itself that
[6:17:40]The the the estate document itself provides for a
[6:17:45]Relatively, it's not small amount but a relatively small amount
[6:17:50]$250,000 to each of the each of the executors
[6:17:55]Normally a truck an estate of this size if it were being probated say for example
[6:18:03]In new york or in florida
[6:18:06]Would as a base amount get you know 10, you know a large percentage tens of millions
[6:18:12]Of the of the large
[6:18:14]Amount of the estate and if it's more complex than it's trading and requires more time
[6:18:19]Um, there would be applications for for more money to be paid for there
[6:18:24]In this case that that wasn't the case
[6:18:27]There was one payment to be made of two hundred fifty thousand dollars to each of the executors to be made
[6:18:33]Upon completion of the probating of the will
[6:18:36]so
[6:18:38]As to the why he did what he did and who and why he gave money to whom he gave money to
[6:18:43]He never had conversations like that with us
[6:18:47]He did he always did what he did for his reasons and he never
[6:18:50]Discussed his infancy
[6:18:52]What's the current remaining value of the estate?
[6:18:57]um
[6:18:59]gosh
[6:19:02]I think the uh the accounting has at it
[6:19:04]Is it like a hundred and I don't I don't have the number but it's I think it's just north of a hundred so
[6:19:12]Are you factoring in?
[6:19:18]Funds that are still due from outstanding investments. I'm not because I don't know what that ultimately will look like
[6:19:26]so the rough math is 170 million from the
[6:19:30]investment he made with valor adventures
[6:19:32]Anybody who's ever invested in a fund like that?
[6:19:36]Can tell you that those numbers are they're not meaningful until they're actually real
[6:19:41]What does that fund come to?
[6:19:46]The funds I think are a year apart
[6:19:49]Their initial due date one of them I think two was due in 26
[6:19:55]but there is a
[6:19:57]An option for the fund manager to extend
[6:20:01]Um
[6:20:03]I think at least two years and then even then with the consent of the majority of the holders could extend it further
[6:20:09]So right now I don't have any any specific details on when those funds will ultimately be realized
[6:20:16]So the estate is currently valued just north of a hundred with the potential of 170. I appreciate that's unknown
[6:20:22]and the
[6:20:24]Fund
[6:20:25]Allocation at the wrap up of all of the outstanding claims would be 100 to karina 50 to you and 25 to come
[6:20:33]That's roughly
[6:20:36]100 to her except no because at the end of the day because
[6:20:41]Karina was the recipient of all of the properties that were ultimately sold to pay off all the claims
[6:20:48]um
[6:20:49]Some there's some kind of a make-up formula for that. They should get more than 100
[6:20:53]She'll get more than 100. So and and that's first
[6:20:57]so that makeup formula for all those properties gets done first and then
[6:21:02]The rest gets done. You all get paid in order
[6:21:05]Or do you strike a proportional balance? Um, I believe it's a proportional balance
[6:21:11]after the payment of
[6:21:13]The makeup for the for the properties. Okay. So first is property makeup and then 150 25 is
[6:21:21]Divided proportionally based off of available assets. This is my understanding and remember charge this
[6:21:26]I know but I have I have counsel that tells me what to do. Okay, just clarify. So that's are there any other
[6:21:34]Uh unknown amounts that are due other than the hundreds other than the potential of 170 from valor ventures
[6:21:42]um
[6:21:45]There are
[6:21:48]few other funds, um one of the funds is
[6:21:53]I think some or something like that sort of partnerships, um
[6:21:57]that I believe that's being sold in the
[6:22:00]I don't know after taxes what the what the number comes to but it's a tens or hundreds ten less than ten
[6:22:07]Ten or maybe it's just over tens
[6:22:09]um, but you have to pay for taxes number one and that money's
[6:22:13]um
[6:22:14]in part being used if if i'm a cash requirements of the
[6:22:18]of the um
[6:22:21]The class action settlement you said there's three outstanding claims the the third one
[6:22:26]Or so are there three overall outstanding claims? I want to say three outstanding claims
[6:22:31]You're talking about against the estate that would preclude you from wrapping it up
[6:22:35]Well, there's there's new claims that are filed almost daily. So
[6:22:40]You know, it's certainly there were new claims filed this past month
[6:22:43]In addition to this class action
[6:22:45]um
[6:22:47]I don't know so it could be a while. It could be a while. I'm
[6:22:50]You know, and the most you can get you've already got you've got paid two hundred fifty thousand dollars for the entire thing
[6:22:55]I haven't gotten paid two hundred that doesn't get paid until after the estate is probing. How are you paying for attorney's fees?
[6:23:01]Associated with all this so the attorney's fees are paid from the estate because this is all
[6:23:06]No
[6:23:10]Well, I think you're saying it i'm are you are you getting paid hourly for services you're talking about my attorney's fee
[6:23:17]Oh, i'm not getting paid
[6:23:19]from the estate
[6:23:23]For seven years, this has taken up
[6:23:25]Well thousands of hours of your life exactly and you have not gotten paid a dollar
[6:23:30]Not from the estate. No, I pay you know, I I had a legal practice that i'm trying to to work up
[6:23:35]I have real estate a real estate business that i'm trying to take it off the ground
[6:23:42]um
[6:23:43]Now can we consult on one of it's an earlier question
[6:23:46]I just want to make sure we get the record straight on on the value of the estate
[6:23:49]Can we consult for a minute let's turn back we can go off the record
[6:23:57]We'll go back on the record. Thank you. Can. Mr. Indyk just clarify on something that um the congress
[6:24:02]So when you had asked before about the 172 rough rough value of those those two funds of velar
[6:24:10]um, I wanted to make sure that
[6:24:12]It was clear that the the hundred the the hundred something valuation of the estate from the last accounting
[6:24:19]Includes some valuation of the law or so the so the 172 is not on top of that
[6:24:25]There was a portion of that 172 which is not included in the hundred
[6:24:29]But I don't know what the exact number is but but but it is
[6:24:33]It is not the full 172
[6:24:37]Does that make sense? Could you ballpark it?
[6:24:42]I really don't want to be in it. It's in the accounting though. That's not the account of the usbi
[6:24:47]Sorry, I don't want to be an actor. I appreciate you clarifying
[6:24:51]um
[6:24:53]Mr. Indyk, I want to run through
[6:24:56]some entities
[6:24:58]That you may have had a role in first. What is the southern trust?
[6:25:05]The southern trust or southern is that other trust company of southern trust company inc
[6:25:11]Is a current entity. That's a that's owned by the estate
[6:25:17]And it was
[6:25:19]The main operating business of epstein before he died
[6:25:23]Main operating business. What was its general purpose? Um, it was
[6:25:30]Ultimately going to be providing financial and medical information informatics
[6:25:36]Um, it was also doing consulting services
[6:25:40]So
[6:25:43]Else beside
[6:25:44]You were affiliated with this entity. I would presume right as an administrative role
[6:25:49]I was secretary, I believe secretary and the vice president who else was involved
[6:25:54]um
[6:25:58]I'm trying to remember at the time but right now
[6:26:00]Um con is a treasurer
[6:26:04]um, I think I think i'm president now
[6:26:08]um
[6:26:09]But at the time i'm trying I don't remember I don't remember who
[6:26:13]Who had a titular role, um, but the office had
[6:26:18]You know multiple employees in the in the u.s for generalists who were the beneficiaries of the trust
[6:26:25]It's not a trust. It's a company. Excuse me
[6:26:28]What is the butterfly seems the sole was the sole stockholder or sole? I think it's a stockholder. Yeah, sole stockholder of that
[6:26:35]What is the butterfly trust?
[6:26:37]um
[6:26:40]Are you familiar with the concept of the grat?
[6:26:42]The grantor retained annuity trust
[6:26:45]Can you briefly elaborate for the record again?
[6:26:49]then
[6:26:50]This is not my specialty. But as a generalist a grantor retained annuity trust is a trust that um
[6:26:57]You put in an asset that you believe has appreciating value
[6:27:03]Um, and you put in that value and then you take
[6:27:07]And then you take
[6:27:09]Annuities from the trust over some period of time. Sometimes it's two years. Sometimes it's three years. Sometimes it's five years
[6:27:15]but the idea that you're taking annuities out every year at a certain percentage results in the
[6:27:23]The
[6:27:24]the
[6:27:26]Gift being the gift of the trust being being zero
[6:27:30]And because you're getting it back every a percentage every every year
[6:27:35]And while it's in that trust and assuming it appreciates over the time over the term of that trust
[6:27:43]the appreciation
[6:27:47]Um, although there's a there's a there's an income tax on the appreciation
[6:27:56]The gift of that appreciation to a four-over trust
[6:28:01]Which is the butterfly trust
[6:28:03]So the the gift of of the appreciation of the property that's appreciated
[6:28:08]If I put in a hundred dollars worth of property and it turns into four hundred dollars at the end of the term of this trust
[6:28:15]somehow
[6:28:16]That appreciation
[6:28:18]That's left after you pay the annuities back
[6:28:22]Um that appreciation goes into a trust which is called a pour-over trust
[6:28:29]And that goes a state tax free
[6:28:31]State
[6:28:32]So you're getting uh, it's it's a it's a convention that as I understand it is used regularly
[6:28:39]For appreciating assets to put those in a new
[6:28:43]Trust after they've appreciated in value
[6:28:46]um, and so the butterfly trust was a pour-over trust had the appreciation in it
[6:28:52]um and
[6:28:54]Um allowed gifts to be made from the butterfly trust to be made a tax free
[6:28:59]Um, it appears that there were three distinct trusts butterfly
[6:29:06]Butterfly appears 2013 and then a caterpillar caterpillar's trust. Are you able to distinguish those three?
[6:29:13]Caterpillar trust is a is
[6:29:16]the grat that I just told you about that
[6:29:20]poured into the
[6:29:22]butterfly trust
[6:29:24]Butterfly trust 2013 was a
[6:29:27]Pour-over from another trust
[6:29:30]Who were the beneficiaries of these trusts?
[6:29:34]um
[6:29:35]I can I can't tell you all of the names
[6:29:39]today
[6:29:41]um
[6:29:42]in front
[6:29:45]I don't I can't tell you I can't list them for you. Was Karina Shuliyak a beneficiary?
[6:29:50]Um, it's possible
[6:29:52]Were you a beneficiary? Yes, and why would you be a beneficiary if you're
[6:29:58]saying that I just the same
[6:30:01]I wasn't the organizer of the trust but it's the same
[6:30:04]You'd have unfortunately the only person who would know that would be Jeffrey Epstein
[6:30:13]and
[6:30:14]I may have got ahead of myself
[6:30:16]You had mentioned that you couldn't tell the committee who these individuals were is it because you cannot
[6:30:23]Recall all of their names and it was a so like for example the butterfly trust
[6:30:29]Um the trust the pour-over trust is allowed to be amended
[6:30:33]And from time to time there were amendments to that trust
[6:30:36]Um, I just don't know what the final iteration looks like and I don't remember at this point who was initially who's not initially etc
[6:30:44]Did these trusts make payment to women identified to be victims?
[6:30:48]um
[6:30:53]I believe the trust made payments to women
[6:30:56]We don't know if
[6:30:58]I can't tell you which women which the women were
[6:31:01]But I cannot tell you that women who were later claiming to be victims weren't recipients of those payments
[6:31:07]Did you have any role in determining who would be beneficiaries of the trust? No, I had no role in determining who would be beneficiaries
[6:31:24]How much
[6:31:25]Did you receive?
[6:31:28]As from being a beneficiary
[6:31:30]Um
[6:31:38]Trying to remember
[6:31:45]Either three or four million over time
[6:31:52]Have you ever facilitated a charitable contribution from an epsi an account or entity to a leon black owned account or entity?
[6:32:03]I don't understand what that word facilitating means. Could you if you kind of
[6:32:08]Did you ever have any role?
[6:32:13]in
[6:32:15]transferring or wiring money
[6:32:20]as
[6:32:21]A charitable contribution from an epsi an account to a leon black owned account
[6:32:28]No, I don't think so no
[6:33:00]What is je ge inc there were two je ge's one was an ink one was an llc
[6:33:10]One they they each of those entities own separate aircraft
[6:33:16]They don't remember what inc owned
[6:33:21]Um, I think inc owned the boeing aircraft
[6:33:27]and I think
[6:33:30]Je ge llc owned either a g4 or a g5 aircraft
[6:33:38]Um, did you have any role in the employment of staff for the plane?
[6:33:45]um
[6:33:46]Did I have a role in the employment of staff?
[6:33:49]Maybe yes, did you draft employment agreements for staff of the plane?
[6:33:53]No, I didn't draft employment agreements for the staff the plane the planes were so there was a
[6:33:59]It was one pilot
[6:34:00]It was the chief pilot
[6:34:03]And then there were other um
[6:34:05]Some of the planes required two pilots at a time because they were so large
[6:34:09]um
[6:34:10]But they were kind of part of the staff
[6:34:13]And to the extent a second pilot was employed
[6:34:17]I wasn't the one doing the employment
[6:34:19]What is the couq foundation?
[6:34:23]uh couq foundation, I think it's a it's a
[6:34:28]Private foundation it's a corporation
[6:34:31]I don't remember if it's delaware or not, but I think it might be a delaware corporation, but it's a private foundation
[6:34:37]the the primary kind of um idea which was to do um to make grants to individual research and
[6:34:46]um and scholarship
[6:34:50]And I think it also did other charitable contributions as well
[6:34:53]Income filing or income tax filings from this foundation reflect over 200,000 scholarship payments
[6:34:58]NYU columbia and hunter college between 2001 and 2006. Do you know who these scholarships were for?
[6:35:07]I don't know as i'm sitting here today
[6:35:13]There are also reports that couq made direct payments of over three 30 000 euros to women with eastern european surnames
[6:35:22]Did you initiate these payments?
[6:35:26]Is there any way to tell me?
[6:35:29]What you're what you're talking about because it doesn't I know as i'm sitting here today
[6:35:33]I don't have a recollection of that, but if you could tell me if it's possible to tell me what payments you're talking about
[6:35:39]I'd like to answer the question
[6:35:45]during
[6:35:47]Your time working for mr. Rapsane. Do you recall any payments made to women with european?
[6:35:54]surnames
[6:35:56]Or eastern european, excuse me
[6:36:00]first of all the idea of an eastern european surname
[6:36:03]I'm not sure. I'm not exactly I I understand like the implication of it
[6:36:07]I don't I don't know for sure but putting that aside
[6:36:11]There were there were payments for
[6:36:16]Employees
[6:36:18]Made by some of the foundations, you know, if you're not it's not in front of me
[6:36:23]It is possible that this was one of them
[6:36:26]But I you know, it's hard for me to answer that question without looking at what it is that you're talking to do
[6:36:33]What is the gratitude america foundation?
[6:36:36]also a private foundation
[6:36:39]I believe gratitude america was
[6:36:41]was formed
[6:36:46]To do charitable contributions
[6:36:52]I'm trying to remember
[6:36:55]If there was anything more more specific other than charitable general charitable contributions
[6:37:04]The name would suggest more but I don't remember there actually being more than charitable contributions
[6:37:09]On november 24th of 2015 you sent a letter to bv 70 llc
[6:37:14]Thanking them for their charitable donation of 10 million to gratitude america. You signed it darren indike secretary
[6:37:21]Are you familiar with bv 70 llc?
[6:37:26]I want to say the answer is I think so. I want to say I believe that was a leon black
[6:37:31]Entity and that leon black made a contribution
[6:37:35]to gratitude america through that entity
[6:37:38]Or that entity made a contribution. I don't know if it's leon black, but I know it was associated with it
[6:37:44]And we've discussed leon black throughout our questioning today
[6:37:49]Why would
[6:37:51]This entity make a charitable contribution of 10 million dollars to gratitude america
[6:37:59]Whatever
[6:38:00]Discussions were made between leon black and geoffrey epstein as to that contribution would have been seen
[6:38:06]Jeffrey epstein and leon black and that's something that
[6:38:10]um
[6:38:11]It's not something that I was told the reason why for just that it was going to happen
[6:38:16]And then when I received it, I was told to acknowledge receipt
[6:38:25]What is the matt max foundation?
[6:38:30]I don't specifically remember
[6:38:32]Uh, it's not when when earlier it was mentioned in max foundation
[6:38:37]It did kind of go our memory of there being a foundation for peter and
[6:38:41]Maxwell
[6:38:42]Uh, I don't other than that being the case. I don't know much more about it
[6:38:47]I was my understanding was that it was a charitable foundation. Were you a trustee of the max foundation?
[6:38:54]Long time ago, but I think I was yes
[6:39:02]And what was the purpose of the max foundation? It was a charitable foundation
[6:39:09]Did mr. Epstein direct you to serve as a trustee of this foundation?
[6:39:13]I believe it was either him or maxwell that had requested me to do this
[6:39:17]This was before
[6:39:20]Any information about any allegation for me
[6:39:24]About either of them were you compensated for your services and serving as a trustee? No
[6:39:32]Not separately from whatever compensation I received from epstein
[6:39:36]Did your relationship with miss maxwell and at some point?
[6:39:44]The relationship such that it was was a kind of a professional relationship when she no longer worked with epstein kind of discontinued
[6:39:51]When was the last time?
[6:39:53]You talked or communicated with miss maxwell. I don't remember specifically but as I think I said it was a couple of years before he died
[6:40:01]What is the l or two? I'm not exactly sure
[6:40:04]What is the l s j e l l c?
[6:40:08]l s j
[6:40:10]E or else, excuse me. What is l s j e l l c?
[6:40:14]um
[6:40:17]I
[6:40:18]My understanding is that l s j e l l c was was of the
[6:40:23]Was the operating entity?
[6:40:26]Ultimately became the operating entity for little st. James the island in the u.s virgin islands run by mr
[6:40:32]Epstein did l s j e make payments to women
[6:40:36]Identified as victims
[6:40:38]I don't know. I wouldn't have done peril for l s j e l s j e
[6:40:43]Was actually called l s it was l s j e stands for little st
[6:40:47]James employed employee or employment
[6:40:50]l l c so that um, so to the extent, uh, it was making payments it was
[6:40:55]It was to my understanding was making payments to people who were employed doing work on little st. James
[6:41:28]Have you ever been contacted by any law enforcement agency concerning jeffrey epstein or galaine maxwell?
[6:41:37]Just
[6:41:38]Um tap my memory to make sure when I tell you the answer is no, I don't I don't think I would
[6:41:45]For the record
[6:41:46]Is it your testimony?
[6:41:47]Have you ever been interviewed by any law enforcement agency concerning jeffrey epstein or galaine maxwell? The answer is no
[6:41:54]I don't believe I have
[6:41:56]Have you proactively ever provided any information to any law enforcement agency concerning jeffrey epstein or galaine maxwell?
[6:42:05]Personally no, I know that over the last
[6:42:11]several months
[6:42:13]The estate has provided information to the justice department
[6:42:18]And and why do they contact the estate recently
[6:42:23]um
[6:42:25]I don't remember how long ago it was but um
[6:42:28]uh, I remember and um
[6:42:30]in the in the early days
[6:42:34]um
[6:42:35]They were contacted us for information the estate when I say outside when the estate for information
[6:42:41]The contact was through lawyers and handled by lawyers not by me
[6:42:46]We have uh
[6:42:48]We are in an hour. So one final question
[6:42:51]Are you surprised that no law enforcement body ever reached out to you to request information as it related to mr
[6:42:58]Epstein or miss maxwell even my role in in for my role as a transactional attorney for mr. Epstein. No
[6:43:06]We will go off the record
[6:43:22]I go back on the record just just one follow-up question, uh from us
[6:43:28]I think we thought we heard an exchange at the end of the previous round that suggested that
[6:43:34]The estate
[6:43:35]Has provided doj with some kind of documents or materials
[6:43:40]Somewhat recently as in within the last few months
[6:43:44]Did we hear that correctly?
[6:43:47]No, and if I did say that that's my recollection is towards the beginning of
[6:43:52]What I think was after epstein died though the doj and this may have been in connection with maxwell's investing decision
[6:44:00]Got it this what what you were describing would be all the way back through the time of miss maxwell's
[6:44:06]Or before even got but it did not as far as you can recall
[6:44:10]Post-state miss maxwell's conviction and certainly was not within the last few
[6:44:15]Months or a year, let's say I want to tell you with with a moderate degree of certainty that that's correct
[6:44:21]I i'm not a thousand percent sure as far as you can recall has doj
[6:44:28]either
[6:44:28]Seized or requested any materials from the estate within the last year
[6:44:36]Not to my not to my recollection. No, okay
[6:44:39]Do you have any indirect knowledge or any reason to be unsure about i'm watching evasive?
[6:44:44]I just I I don't think so. I just don't recall. Okay, but I didn't think so. All right, we can go off