EFTA00086230 JUDGE COTE ## UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re Application of the United States for a Disclosure Order in connection with Grand Jury Investigation USAO Ref No. 2018R01618 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York Ex Parte Sealed Application for Grand Jury Disclosure Order 19 Misc. ___ The United States of America (the “Government”), by its attorney, Geoffrey S. Berman, United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Associate United States Attorney, of counsel, respectfully moves this Court pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e)(3)(E)(i) & 6(e)(3)(F) for an order authorizing disclosure of certain grand jury matters in aid of a continuing investigation into conduct by associates of Jeffrey Epstein relating to alleged sex trafficking of minors by Jeffrey Epstein, and other offenses, and possible forfeitures or injunctive relief. This application relates specifically to a trust created by Jeffrey Epstein that would receive most (if not all) of Jeffrey Epstein’s assets, including potentially forfeitable assets, and pursuant to which substantial payments would be made over time to individual beneficiaries, including individuals who may be of interest in the ongoing investigation. By this application we request authorization to disclose the trust agreement and related documents to a trusts and estates expert we have retained to advise us in this area of law, and to attorneys in our Civil Division who would represent the Government in any litigation that may appear advisable to assert Government interests concerning these matters. 1. The Criminal Investigation. In November 2018, this Office, in conjunction with the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the New York City Police Department, commenced an investigation into conduct by Jeffrey Epstein and possible co-conspirators involving, among other things, alleged sex trafficking of minors during the period from (at least) the mid-1990s through EFTA00086231 the summer of 2019. On July 2, 2019, a federal grand jury in this district returned an indictment charging Jeffrey Epstein with sex trafficking of minors and conspiracy to commit sex trafficking of minors in United States v. Epstein, 19 Cr. 490 (RMB). On August 10, 2019, Jeffrey Epstein died by suicide while incarcerated at the Manhattan Correctional Center awaiting trial on those charges. But despite Epstein’s death this Office has continued its criminal investigation into the conduct of other individuals, including possible co-conspirators, as well as possible obstructive conduct by co-conspirators or associates of Epstein. 2. As alleged in the indictment against Epstein and in filings in that case, Epstein and others engaged in a years-long scheme to sexually abuse underage girls. In particular, Epstein enticed and recruited dozens of minor girls to engage in sex acts with him, for which he typically paid the victims hundreds of dollars in cash. He undertook this activity in several locations, including his mansion in Manhattan, New York; his estate in Palm Beach, Florida; and his private island located in the U.S. Virgin Islands. The defendant typically paid his victims hundreds of dollars in cash for each separate encounter. Epstein worked with others, including employees and associates, to facilitate this exploitation by, among other things, contacting victims and scheduling their sexual encounters with the defendant in New York and in Florida. 3. Additionally, in connection with a prior investigation of Epstein’s conduct in Florida, there were credible allegations that Epstein engaged in witness tampering, harassment, or other obstructive behaviors. Extensive allegations of obstruction and tampering by Epstein were also made in connection with civil lawsuits brought against Epstein. See Doe v. United States, 08 Civ. 80736 (S.D. Fla.), Dkt. 291-15 at 21-23, 31. More recent instances of potential obstruction surfaced following the publication, commencing November 28, 2018, of a series of articles in the Miami Herald regarding Epstein and the circumstances of his prior conviction for solicitation of a minor. 2 EFTA00086232 Records obtained by the Government show that two days later, on or about November 30, 2018, Epstein wired $100,000 from a trust account he controlled to an individual previously identified as a possible co-conspirator, and that just three days after that, on or about December 3, 2018, Epstein wired $250,000 from the same trust account to another individual previously identified as a possible co-conspirator and who was identified as one of Epstein’s employees in the Indictment. This course of action, and in particular its timing, suggests the defendant was attempting to further influence co-conspirators who might provide information against him in light of the more recently re-emerging allegations. 4. Epstein’s Will and Trust Agreements. As part of the Government’s continuing investigation, the Government obtained, via grand jury subpoena, the Will that Epstein executed on April 8, 2019, shortly before his death; and the Trust Agreement of The $1953^{1}$ Trust, also executed on April 8, 2019. The Government also obtained, via grand jury subpoena, two prior trust agreements referenced in The 1953 Trust Agreement. The Will has been publicly filed in probate proceedings that are taking place in the U.S. Virgin Islands, but the various trust documents are not public. (We have been advised that in normal circumstances, trust agreements set up in connection with estate planning are not generally made public.) 5. Epstein’s Will directs that, after certain payments of fees and distributions, all property be provided to the Trustees of The 1953 Trust. Property whose disposition is covered by the Trust includes Epstein’s New York City residence which was identified as subject to criminal forfeiture in the Epstein indictment and which may continue to be subject to civil or criminal forfeiture. 1 "1953" may be a reference to the year of Epstein's birth. 3 EFTA00086233 Other potentially forfeitable property, including Epstein’s other residences, is also purportedly covered by the Trust. 6. Potential Proceedings Concerning Epstein’s Will and The 1953 Trust. To assist the Government in evaluating its need or ability to become involved in trust and estate proceedings, our Office has retained Yale Law School Professor , a noted expert in the field of trusts and estates, to advise us concerning, among other things, any interests the Government may have in the Epstein probate proceedings in the U.S. Virgin Islands, and any actions it might take, including potential injunctive relief the Government might seek to, for example, preserve its interests in potentially forfeitable property, or to void appropriate provisions of The 1953 Trust Agreement as contrary to public policy. If it appears necessary and appropriate to initiate proceedings in probate or another court to vindicate the Government’s interests in this area, we anticipate that the litigation would be handled by the attorneys in our Civil Division. 7. By this application, the Government requests authorization to disclose the Epstein Will, The 1953 Trust Agreement, and related trust documents, to Professor and to the Civil Division attorneys assigned to this matter $ ^{2} $ so that they may provide informed advice and consideration regarding judicial proceedings that may be appropriate for the Government to initiate relating to the dispositions Jeffrey Epstein made relating to his property. 8. Standard for Disclosure. The Supreme Court has interpreted Rule 6(3)(e)(E)(i) “to require a strong showing of particularized need for grand jury materials before any disclosure will be permitted.” United States v. Sells Engineering, Inc., 463 U.S. 418, 443 (1983). Although this $ ^{2} $ The Civil Division attorneys assigned to this matter are 4 EFTA00086234 standard applies to requests for disclosure to government attorneys, the Supreme Court has “made it clear that the concerns that underlie the policy of grand jury secrecy are implicated to a much lesser extent when the disclosure merely involves Government attorneys.” *United States v. John Doe, Inc. I*, 481 U.S. 102, 112 (1987). Thus, a district court might reasonably consider that disclosure to Justice Department attorneys poses less risk of further leakage or improper use than would disclosure to private parties or the general public. Similarly, we are informed that it is the usual policy of the Justice Department not to seek civil use of grand jury materials until the criminal aspect of the matter is closed. And “under the particularized need standard, the district court may weigh the public interest, if any, served by disclosure to a governmental body . . ..” On the other hand, for example, in weighing the need for disclosure, the court could take into account any alternative discovery tools available by statute or regulation to the agency seeking disclosure. United States v. Sells Engineering, Inc., 463 U.S. at 445 (citations omitted) (quoting United States v. Abbott, 460 U.S. 557, 567 n.15 (1983)) Here, the requested disclosure is for a narrow scope of materials, to limited individuals, for the narrow purpose of identifying proceedings the Government may need to initiate in order to avoid interference with its ongoing criminal investigation, potential forfeiture interests, and related matters. Indeed, one of the major purposes of this disclosure is to identify and address any issues that might affect the continuing criminal grand jury investigation into Epstein-related conduct. 9. Authorization Requested. The Government accordingly requests that the Court enter an Order, in the form attached, authorizing the Government to disclose to Professor and to the Civil Division attorneys (and their successors, if any) the Epstein Will; The 1953 Trust Agreement; and earlier related trust agreements, for the purpose of obtaining advice and consideration of proceedings that may be appropriate for the Government to initiate to protect its interests in the ongoing criminal investigation; potential forfeiture matters; and asserting public policy considerations that may be raised by The 1953 Trust Agreement. 5 EFTA00086235 10. Sealing. Because this relates to grand jury matters and concerns documents that are not otherwise already public, the Government respectfully requests that the Court order this Application be filed under seal pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 6(e)(6); and that the Court's Order also be filed under seal, except that the Government may disclose the Order to persons to whom the information at issue herein is disclosed. 11. Prior Requests. No prior request for the relief sought herein has been made. WHEREFORE, I respectfully request that the Court issue a Disclosure Order in the form submitted herewith. Dated: New York, New York December 19, 2019 By: GEOFFREY S. BERMAN United States Attorney Southern District of New York Associate United States Attorney Southern District of New York 6 EFTA00086236