Prosecution Memorandum

Privileged and Confidential — Attorney Work Product Do Not Disseminate Outside of the SDNY USAO

This memorandum seeks authorization to charge JEFFREY EPSTEIN with one count of sex trafficking of children and one count of conspiracy to commit sex trafficking of children. These charges arise from a years-long scheme to recruit and entice minor girls into engaging in commercial sex acts, specifically sexualized massages and related sexual activity in exchange for money, in locations including Manhattan and Palm Beach, Florida. The proposed indictment is attached hereto, and this memorandum is submitted to provide additional factual background and relevant legal analysis.

1. Overview

The Scheme

For a period of years, from at least 2002 through approximately 2005, Epstein engaged in a pattern of enticing minor girls to engage in paid sex acts.’ This conduct was in part revealed through a previous federal investigation into Epstein by the U.S. Attorney’s Office and FBI in the Southern District of Florida (“SDFL”), which resulted in a 2007 non-prosecution agreement,2 and was further investigated and revealed thorough our investigation, which began in late 2018. As detailed below, the SDNY is not bound by the SDFL non-prosecution agreement; moreover, while our investigation and charges cover some conduct and victims initially identified by the SDFL investigation, our charges also include conduct and victims who were not interviewed during that prior investigation, including individuals who were victimized solely in New York.

Based on our review of interview reports from the historical case file and from victim interviews in media, we have reason to believe that Epstein’s conduct traces back at least to the 1990s. However, because the victims we have interviewed were not abused during that time we have not focused on that pen

² Epstein’s conduct became the subject of an investigation by the Palm Beach Police Department, and then the FBI, in approximately 2005, after the parents of a victim reported to law enforcement that Epstein had abused their daughter. Those investigations spanned approximately two years and included, among other things, interviews with approximately 35 victims; a search warrant executed on Epstein’s Florida residence; and detailed analysis of various phone and flight records. As detailed below, the terms of the 2007 non-prosecution agreement required Epstein to plead guilty in Florida state court to soliciting prostitution, which he did in 2008. He was sentenced to 18 months in jail, was permitted to serve his sentence in a facility where he was released during the day to work, and was released from his sentence after serving approximately 13 months.

In both Florida and New York, the scheme operated in a nearly identical fashion: Epstein essentially operated a pyramid scheme of sexual exploitation, victimizing minor girls who were brought to his homes to give Epstein erotic “massages,” in exchange for hundreds of dollars, and then paying those individuals to recruit additional minor victims. Once the victims were alone with Epstein, the “massages” became increasingly sexual. The identified victims ranged from approximately 14 to 17 years old when their abuse began, with the majority having been approximately 15 or 16 when they were recruited to perform sex acts with Epstein. Epstein’s conduct included masturbating in front of victims; fondling their breasts; placing a vibrator on their genitals; and/or directly touching their genitals. Some victims also continued to engage in such acts with Epstein after they were no longer minors. Victims and recruiters in New York and Florida generally were paid $300 and $200 per visit, respectively. The victims were typically paid by Epstein or his employees in cash, in hundred dollar bills.

After their first visit to Epstein’s residences, victims in New York and Florida usually were contacted via telephone by individuals who worked for Epstein to arrange additional massages. In New York, one of those individuals was Leslie Groff, one of Epstein’s assistants; in Florida, the primary contact for the girls was who was Epstein’s employee and often accompanied him on travel, including to ew or everal victims reported that when they arrived at the Florida residence for massage appointments, was present at the house and escorted them to the massage room to meet Epstein.

In order to maintain a steady stream of underage girls to perform sexual acts, Epstein also directed others, including some of his victims, to recruit other minor girls to engage in sexualized massages. Some victims brought just one or two friends, while others become prolific recruiters, bringing Epstein dozens of other girls. Epstein and his employees, including typically paid the recruiters hundreds of dollars for each girl they brought to Epstein’s resi ences.

The SDNY investigation has focused principally on conduct occurring in New York or with connections to New York, although, as detailed herein, through our review of information gathered through the prior investigation we have also developed considerable familiarity with and plan to charge—conduct that occurred in Florida.

Epstein Background

Epstein has had significant connections to New York City for many years. According to press reporting over the past approximately 20 years, he owns what is reportedly the largest private residence in Manhattan, on East 71st street, and his professional career was initially centered in New York. He was raised in Coney Island, and he taught calculus and physics at the Dalton School after dropping out of Cooper Union. From Dalton, he was hired at Bear Stems, where he worked from approximately 1976 to 1981 before reportedly starting his own wealth management business. The source of his reportedly-vast wealth is opaque; most concretely, he has worked closely with multi-billionaire Leslie Wexner, founder of the Limited chain of women’s clothing stores, who also either gave or sold Epstein the Manhattan mansion. In the 1990s and 2000s, Epstein apparently managed money, engaged in various philanthropy, and was briefly more publicly known for providing use of his aircraft to—and accompanying—Bill Clinton, Kevin Spacey, and Chris Tucker for a philanthropic trip to Africa. Since the Florida investigations, he has maintained a lower profile, residing primarily on his private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands.

II. Victim Interviews and Corroborating Evidence

New York and Victim-I

Epstein spent significant time in Manhattan during the relevant period. As described by at least one individual who was victimized in—and, as discussed further below, recruited other minor victims in—New York City (“Victim-1”), Epstein victimized at least dozens of girls in New York, in addition to the dozens of girls he victimized in Florida.

In particular, we have met with Victim-1, who has been cooperative with the investigation and is represented by counsel. In several proffers, Victim-1 has described how she was recruited to engage in sexual contact with Epstein in approximately 2002, at the age of approximately 14. While at a New York City club, Victim-1 met another teenager who described having worked for a rich man, giving topless massages—and recruiting other girls to do the same and invited Victim-1 to make money this way. At the time, Victim-1 was living by herself and supporting herself financially, having moved away from a difficult home life. As further detailed below, Victim-1 ultimately visited Epstein’s Manhattan mansion to engage in sexual massages and other sex acts at least dozens of times between approximately 2002 and 2005.

During her visits to the mansion, Victim-1 performed erotic massages on Epstein, including being partially or fully nude while she massaged him. Most or all of the massages performed by Victim-1 would end with Epstein masturbating and ejaculating; during some of the massages, Epstein touched the genitals of Victim-1 with his hand or with a vibrator or sex toy. He also commonly asked Victim-1 to pinch or twist his nipples. Epstein ordinarily paid Victim-1 $300 in cash after a massage was completed. All of these interactions with Epstein occurred while Victim-1 was a minor, including times when Epstein touched her genitals.

After Victim-I’s initial meetings with Epstein, he asked her, in sum and substance, to recruit other girls for the same activity. Over approximately two years, Victim-1 estimates that she brought dozens of girls to Epstein to provide massages, starting with girls she knew from her community and eventually strangers whom Victim-1 met at bars, clubs, or other locations. Victim-1 would describe to the girls what was expected, i.e., that they would provide erotic massages to Epstein, while nude, and that Epstein might touch them or ask them to touch him. Victim-1 would schedule appointments for the girls by phone with Epstein’s assistant, “Leslie.” Based on the investigation, we have identified “Leslie” as Leslie Groff.

Each time Victim-1 brought a girl to Epstein, Victim-1 was paid $300, and the other girl also would receive $300, always in cash. Victim-1 states that Epstein knew that she was under the age of 18, and that he knew other girls she brought were under 18. In particular, Victim-1 recalls Epstein having asked her how old she was and her truthfully telling Epstein that she was 14 years old. After Victim-1 brought a girl to Epstein, he would sometimes either tell Victim-1 to bring the girl again, if he liked her, or tell Victim-1 not to bring the girl again. Victim-1 noticed that the girls Epstein liked were generally younger and more petite. Epstein would tell Victim-1: “you know what I like,” which she took to mean underage, petite girls. Epstein would occasionally indicate his displeasure with Victim-1 for bringing a particular girl, including expressing to Victim-1 that he did not like dark-skinned girls. Later on, as Victim-1 grew older and knew fewer young girls to bring, she brought older girls, which Epstein expressed displeasure about. Victim-1 recalls at least one occasion when she saw a girl show Epstein an ID to prove she was under 18.

Corroboration of Victim-1

Corroboration of Victim-I’s account exists through contemporaneous records, as well as through other victims we have already approached. We also expect to develop additional corroboration through interviews of victims we plan as well as likely through additional victims we expect to approach immediately after the investigation is overt, i.e., after charging.

In our review of the evidence from the initial investigation, we have identified a written phone message that was obtained from a trash pull from Epstein’s Florida residence. The message is from a 646 area code, and the person listed is Victim-I’s first name, Victim-1 does not recognize the phone number, and has told us she cycled throug manydifferent phones when she was a teenager, but contemporaneous phone records of an associate of Victim-1 reflect tolls with the 646 number, which strongly suggests the 646 number was being used by Victim-1.

With respect to corroborating witnesses, two individuals who were introduced to Epstein by Victim-1 and were paid by Epstein to perform erotic massages (“Individual-1” and “Individual-2,” respectively) were interviewed in connection with the prior Florida investigations. In those interviews, Individual-1 stated that when she was approximately 18, she met Victim-1 (known to her only by first name) through a mutual friend. Victim-1 told Individual-1 she knew a man named Jeffrey who would pay girls $300 for massages. Victim-1 made an appointment for Individual-1 to go to Epstein’s house, which she did. After Individual-1 was brought to Epstein’s massage room, he asked her to strip down to her underwear and massage him; Individual-1 agreed only to strip down to a shirt and underwear. Individual-1 massaged Epstein’s back for approximately 20 minutes before Epstein got off the table, handed her $300, and told her he did not want her to massage him again, because she reminded him of his niece, and that he wanted her to bring him other girls instead. Individual-1 recalls that later she and Victim-1 brought Individual-2 to Epstein’s house to perform a massage. Individual-1 recalled bringing Individual-2 approximately two additional times, and recalled receiving calls from “Leslie” regarding scheduling. Individual-2 generally confirmed this account, telling FBI agents that during massages with Epstein she removed her clothes and he masturbated in front of her. She said Epstein attempted to use a vibrator on her, but she refused. Individual-2 confirmed that Victim-1 (known to her only by first name) and Individual-1 had recruited her to give massages to Epstein.

The case agents in our investigation have approached Individual-1 and Individual-2, both of whom preferred not to speak to law enforcement at this time and emphasized that they believed they were 18 years old during the relevant time period. However, while they would not be considered statutory victims given their age at the time, if called to testify they could corroborate that Victim-1 worked as a recruiter for Epstein as a minor. To our knowledge, Victim-1 has not spoken to Individual-1 or Individual-2 in the many years since they each interacted with Epstein.

Victim-I also has described Epstein’s Upper East Side residence in great detail, including describing the artwork in the massage room, a stuffed dog in the living room, and a library that she compared to the one in “Beauty and the Beast.” It would be extraordinarily unlikely that Victim-1 could describe these aspects of the residence in such detail if she had not spent significant time there. Finally, the account from Victim-1 is nearly identical to that of another victim who became a recruiter for Epstein in Florida (“Victim-2”), with whom Victim-1 has had no contact or communications. Victim-2 is further described below.

Epstein asked Victim-2 to bring other girls for massages, which she did. Initially, Epstein simply asked her to “bring a friend” and told her he would pay her to bring other girls. Later, after a few experiences of Victim-2 bringing victims who balked at the sexual nature of the massages, Epstein told her not to bring girls unless they knew what to expect. Victim-2 understood this to mean she should warn girls to expect they would need to take off their clothes, and that Epstein would touch them and masturbate. She then conveyed as much in recruiting victims.

Victim-2 estimates she recruited approximately 20 to 30 girls for Epstein, all of whom were approximately 15 to 20 years old. Victim-2 believes that most of the girls she brought were minors. This continued for approximately two to three years. Although Epstein did not expressly tell Victim-2 to bring minors, the girls she knew—and thus the girls she could recruit—were all minors at the time. Epstein would occasionally indicate to Victim-2 which girls he liked and which girls he disliked, and she noticed he preferred the younger minors she brought, and that he preferred petite blonde girls. Victim-2 usually coordinated these appointments with Victim-2 specifically recalls that would occasionally call Victim-2 and say that she was in New York, that Epstein would be arriving in Florida soon, and that she wanted to know if Victim-2 could “work” when he arrived.

When Victim-2 first met Epstein, she told him she was 18 because her friend had told her to lie about her age. In truth, she was approximately 14 or 15 at the time, and was wearing braces, and recalls that it would have been obvious that she was very young. Initially, Victim-2 similarly told other girls she brought to Epstein to say they were older because her friend had given her that instruction. Over time, however, based on her observations of the girls that Epstein seemed to prefer—and the sheer number of minors she brought to the house without issue—Victim-2 came to believe that Epstein wanted younger girls, and did not care if the girls told him their true ages. For this reason, Victim-2 stopped telling the girls she recruited to lie about their ages. She stated that the girls she recruited looked very young, and she believes it would have been obvious to anyone that they were underage.

When the Florida investigations became public, after Victim-2 had stopped visiting Epstein, she recalls having a phone conversation with in which stated, in sum and substance, that Victim-2 would be taken care of if she didn’t say anything.

Corroboration of Victim-2

The full name and phone number of Victim-2 appear on message pads recovered from Epstein’s house during a search conducted as part of the prior investigations. The messages appear to refer to scheduling appointments and recruiting other girls, e.g.: “She has a female friend for you, please call back as soon as possible.” These messages strongly corroborate that Victim-2 worked as a recruiter for Epstein. Additionally, the message pads appear to include messages with names of individuals Victim-2 has identified as other victims, and who were interviewed during the previous investigation (and who confirmed at the time that they were victimized in a matter consistent with the pattern of conduct victims have described in our investigation). Although we have not yet been able to interview those victims, we intend to approach them after charging.

Contemporaneous phone records also reflect numerous phone calls between Victim-2 and corroborating Victim-2’s account that was her primary contact for scheduling massagesor Epstein.

Proposed ( haraes, Elements of the Offenses. and Venue

A draft indictment is attached as an exhibit. We propose to charge Epstein with one count of sex trafficking, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1591 and 2, and one count of conspiracy to commit the same, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371. The first count covers Epstein’s abuse of victims in New York. The second count covers all three victims along with dozens of others in both New York and Florida. By having a freestanding New York count, the indictment will make clear that this case goes beyond the Florida investigation, and that New York is a significant stakeholder in the equities of this case. It also provides a freestanding count we believe will be immune to arguments that the NPA bars prosecution. At the same time, we think it is important to charge a conspiracy count that covers all of the conduct, so that Epstein can be held accountable for the harm he caused to all of his victims.

Count One,5 18 U.S.C. §§ 1591 (Sex Trafficking of Children) and 2

Charged period: 2002 to 2005

V. I .eflal Context

Separate from anticipated defenses, which are addressed further below, we expect there are two legal issues that might be raised in connection with a prosecution of Epstein in SDNY.

A. The Florida Non-Prosecution Agreement

Prior to opening our investigation, we examined the question whether Epstein’s prior non-prosecution agreement with the SDFL would bar prosecution against Epstein or his co-conspirators in the SDNY, including for conduct that occurred in part in SDFL. For the reasons set forth below, we believe that it would not. In particular, we believe that the Agreement—which was signed only by representatives of SDFL and spoke, in relevant part, only to binding that Office—would not preclude another federal district from bringing properly-venued charges based on the same conduct.

Background

Following the SDFL and state investigations into Epstein’s conduct from approximately 2005 through 2007, Epstein entered into a non-prosecution agreement (the “NPA,” a copy of which is attached) with the SDFL in September 2007. II As discussed further below, the terms of the NPA required, among other things, that Epstein plead guilty to state charges of soliciting prostitution from a single victim. In exchange, the SDFL agreed not to prosecute Epstein for “any offenses that arose” from the SDFL investigation, including trafficking and enticement offenses. The NPA further purported to commit the SDFL to not bringing c es a ainst “an potential co-co noirators n of Epstein. including but not limited to Lesley Groff, or none of whom were signatories to e NPA. Groff are believ to ve wo or Epstein to schedule massages, and and are believed to have recruited Epstein’s victims. As noted, only Epsteinhimself an t SDFL were parties to the NPA.

Substance and Language of the NPA

The language of the NPA overwhelmingly refers to the SDFL, and the core terms and text of the agreement appear to be limited to the SDFL. The prefatory language states: “THEREFORE, on the authority of R. Alexander Acosta, United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, prosecution in this District for these ofJenses13 shall be deferred in favor of

II On February 21, 2019, following litigation initiated in 2008 by certain of the Victims, a court in the Southern District of Florida found that the SDFL violated the Crime Victims’ Rights Act in connection with its entrance into, and notification regarding. the NPA. A decision on the appropriate remedy currently is pending.

¹² As discussed above,1. and Groff worked for Epstein and scheduled appointments for victims. nu also wo as an assistant to Epstein during the relevant period, but appears to have had minimal contact with victims. lived with Epstein during the relevant period and appears to have had some kind of sexua re ationship with him.

¹³ All emphases relating to the NPA are added unless otherwise specified.

We are aware of two substantial and historical sets of materials (in addition to materials we have obtained as part of our current investigation) that will require discovery and disclosure processes: files maintained by the Department of Justice FOIA office, and files maintained by the FBI in Florida in connection with the initial investigations. In addition, we are in the process of obtaining the physical evidence obtained in connection with the Florida investigation so we can log and store it in evidence in New York. The evidence currently remains in FBI custody in Florida.

Separate from those two sources of materials, although we believe that the FBI file contains all materials from the initial state investigation, to the extent that is not correct, we may need to obtain certain materials from local police. We have held off on contacting local police but will do so once the investigation is overt. Additionally, while unlikely, at an appropriate time we will need to ascertain whether SDFL has any materials separate and in addition to the FBI case files, and, if so, to obtain copies of any such materials.

We also expect to need to determine what protections should cover discovery materials, potentially including the need for significant redactions, including of victim identifying information.

VIII. Forfeiture / Restitution

We expect to seek both forfeiture and restitution in this case.

Restitution is mandatory under the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 (the “TVPA”), and includes “the full amount of the victim’s losses” including “any costs incurred by the victim for—(A) medical services relating to physical, psychiatric, or psychological care; (B) physical and occupational therapy or rehabilitation; (C) neePqRaty transportation, temporary housing, and child care expenses: (D) lost income; (E) attorney’s fees, as well as other costs incurred: and (F) any other losses suffered by the victim as a proximate result of the offense.” 18 U.S.C. § 1593(bX3) (incorporating by reference 18 U.S.C. § 2259(bX3)). The statutory language is circumscribed by a requirement of a causal connection between the offense of conviction and victim’s harm, but “mathematical precision” is not required.

Forfeiture is also specifically provided for under the TVPA. 18 U.S.C. § 1594 provides, in relevant part: “The court, in imposing sentence on any person convicted of [an involuntary servitude offense, including 18 U.S.C. § 1591] shall order . . . that such person’s interest in any property, real or personal, that was used or intended to be used to commit or to facilitate the commission of such violation.” 18 U.S.C. • 159• 1 . This includes residential