EXHIBIT 309¶
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK¶
GOVERNMENT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS,¶
Plaintiff,¶
v. No. 22-cv-10904-JSR¶
JP CHASE BANK, N.A.,¶
Defendant.¶
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.,¶
Third-Party Plaintiff,¶
v.¶
JAMES EDWARD STALEY, Third-Party Defendant.¶
THE ORAL DEPOSITION OF JOHN P. DE JONGH, JR. was taken on the 30th day of May, 2023 at the Law Offices of JOEL HOLT, 2132 Company Street, Christiansted, St. Croix U.S. Virgin Islands, between the hours of 9:02 a.m. and 4:46 p.m. pursuant to Notice and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.¶
Reported by:¶
DESIREE D. Registered Merit Reporter Reporting Services P.O. Box 307501 St. Virgin Islands (340) 777-6466¶
1 2 Q. What is your professional background, starting from now and then moving backwards.¶
3 A. Starting from now?¶
4 Q. Yeah.¶
5 6 7 A. Yes. When I left office in 2015, I reestablished a consulting firm I had called Chilmark Advisory, LLC.¶
8 THE REPORTER: Chilmark?¶
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 THE WITNESS: Chilmark Advisory, LLC, C-H-I-L-M-A-R-K, LLC. We used to go to vacation in Martha's Vineyard and I liked Chilmark General Stores. I named my company after that. I've been doing that for the last, well, since January, February of 2015.¶
16 17 18 Prior to that I was governor of the Virgin Islands from January 1, 2007 to January 5th, 2015.¶
19 20 21 22 23 24 Prior to that, I was unemployed. I ran for governor in 2002. I lost. That's when I established the first version of Chilmark with a friend of mine out of St. Lucia. So I did consulting work in the Caribbean from 2003 until about 2006, up until when I won.¶
operating officer of the Companies, which was a local real estate company that we expanded into insurance.¶
I did that until I ran for governor in 2002. Prior to that, I was employed with Public Financial Management out of Philadelphia. But when I came back to St. was after the hurricane of 1995, which was Hurricane Marilyn.¶
And once I did that they recruited me back. What I found attractive about that, quite frankly, is that not only did I have the job in something that was new, but I got within the company. I got a board seat, and they also agreed to pay for my kids' tuition, 50 percent of my kids' tuition at school. So that was attractive.¶
And then prior to working -- before I worked with Public Financial Management, I was commissioner -- I worked for the governor of the Virgin Islands then, Alexander Farrelly, as executive assistant. And before that I was Chase Manhattan Bank. I was commissioner of finance, and then I worked at Chase Manhattan Bank.¶
1 their consumer financing in the USVI, BVI and¶
2 St.¶
3 4 Q. Focusing on the Chilmark work, you said you worked with a friend. Who is that friend?¶
5 6 A. His name is -- was Desmond Skeete, S-K-E-E-T-E.¶
7 8 Q. And who else do you work with in the Chilmark, the current version Chilmark?¶
9 A. When you say work with, what do you mean?¶
10 11 Q. Are there any associates with you in that consulting company?¶
12 A. No, sir.¶
13 Q. It's just a sole operation?¶
14 A. Correct.¶
15 16 Q. So the only person who has been associated with Chilmark was in the early iteration?¶
17 A. That is correct.¶
18 Q. What is your wife's name?¶
19 A. Cecile Rene de Jongh.¶
20 Q. And when did you meet?¶
21 22 23 A. Now you're testing my knowledge. We met we met at Chase Manhattan Bank. We met around 1984, '85. '84.¶
24 Q. When did you get married?¶
1 A. No.¶
2 MS. BOGGS: Objection to form.¶
3 MR. TEAGUE: Objection, form.¶
4 THE WITNESS: No, I did not.¶
5 6 7 Q. (By Mr. O'Laughlin:) Were you ever concerned about the fact that you may have been getting campaign contributions from Epstein?¶
8 MS. BOGGS: Objection, form.¶
9 10 THE WITNESS: Was I concerned? My campaigns were in -- no, I was not.¶
11 12 13 14 2006, 2010, 2002 -- no. And any campaign contributions that were done would have been within the legal limit that's acceptable.¶
15 16 Q. (By Mr. O'Laughlin:) What is the legal limit?¶
17 A. $1,000 per election cycle.¶
18 19 20 Q. Did you ever become aware of USVI or other politicians returning contributions they received from Epstein?¶
21 A. Yes.¶
22 Q. Which instances are you aware of?¶
23 24 A. Some local politicians, I believe, returned some contributions.¶
1 A. No.¶
2 Q. How do you know he had ownership interest?¶
3 A. I was told that by Andrew Farkas.¶
4 Q. When were you told that?¶
5 A. In 2007.¶
6 7 Q. Is the governor's office involved in granting EDA benefits?¶
8 9 A. It's involved -- it affirms the decision of the EDA board that grants the benefits, yes.¶
10 Q. And what is the process surrounding that?¶
11 12 A. The process surrounding the governor's involvement?¶
13 Q. Yeah.¶
14 15 16 17 18 19 A. The beneficiary will submit the application to the Economic Development Authority, which is then reviewed by their staff. They will go through the process, according to their rules and regulations as to whether it fits under the requirements.¶
20 21 22 It will then be presented by the staff to the board of the EDA, either with a recommendation to approve or disapprove.¶
23 24 The board will then make its determination as to which way they're going.¶
1¶
2¶
3¶
4¶
5¶
6¶
7¶
8¶
9¶
10¶
11¶
12¶
13¶
14¶
15¶
16¶
17¶
18¶
19¶
20¶
21¶
22¶
23¶
24¶
25¶
governor's office and sent to legal counsel. Legal counsel does its review of it, and then at that point, it will come to the governor for signature. That was at least the process that we followed.¶
Q. And so focusing on the portion that involves the governor's office, what exactly does that review entail?¶
MR. TEAGUE: Objection, asked and answered. You can answer it.¶
THE WITNESS: It involves their basically reviewing the decision that the board made to make sure they complied with the Economic Development Authority rules and regulations.¶
Q. (By Mr. O'Laughlin:) And -- so they take the regulations from the EDA and they look at the application and they compare the two?¶
A. The regulations are codified, our rules and regs. They would then look at the application, review the application, and then make a recommendation.¶
Q. And the -- what is the thing they're evaluating for? Just compliance with the EDA regs?¶
A. And to see how the board approved it, right. And the type of business activity that would 1 be within the Virgin Islands.¶
2 3 Q. And so they're evaluating the underlying business activity of the beneficiary?¶
4 5 6 7 8 A. As to whether they complied to the sourcing rules of income, the number of individuals that are employed in the V.I., making sure they fit the rules and regulation, making sure that they were comfortable.¶
9 10 Q. And is there an analysis of the underlying business of the beneficiary?¶
11 MS. BOGGS: Objection, form.¶
12 13 THE WITNESS: I'm going to presume that there is.¶
14 15 Q. (By Mr. O'Laughlin:) By the governor's office?¶
16 17 A. In terms of jobs, I think. In terms of jobs, business activity, yes.¶
18 Q. What does that investigation look like?¶
19 MS. BOGGS: Objection.¶
20 Mischaracterization. Form.¶
21 22 THE WITNESS: Just an analysis by the board.¶
23 MR. TEAGUE: Objection.¶
24 Foundation as well. You can answer.¶
1 2 to what extent. They may call the EDA to find out more on the activity.¶
3 4 They'll look at the rules and regulations.¶
5 6 Q. (By Mr. O'Laughlin:) And is a recommendation made to you personally?¶
7 8 A. It's made to me, yes. Was made to me, yes.¶
9 Q. And then you review it?¶
10 11 12 13 A. I review the cover memorandum, usually, of what was provided to me by my legal counsel. I may get a little bit more into the activities and understand the type of business it is.¶
14 15 Q. What do you do to get a little more into the underlying business?¶
16 17 18 19 A. Just look if -- the overview would provide the business, the type of activity. I may or may not look at the application just to understand if it was an unusual business.¶
20 21 Q. Would you ever reach out to the person who is applying to ask them questions?¶
22 A. No.¶
23 24 Q. Would you look at the financial projections that they submitted?¶
1¶
2¶
3¶
4¶
5¶
6¶
7¶
8¶
9¶
10¶
11¶
12¶
13¶
14¶
15¶
16¶
17¶
18¶
19¶
20¶
21¶
22¶
23¶
24¶
25¶
Q. Would you do any kind of diligence on the business itself to see that they were doing what they claimed to be doing?¶
MS. BOGGS: Objection, form.¶
MR. TEAGUE: Same objection.¶
Foundation as well. You can answer.¶
THE WITNESS: I presume that by the time it came to me after the analysis done by EDA staff and the board and my legal counsel, that that was less of an issue.¶
THE REPORTER: I'm sorry, that was --¶
THE WITNESS: Less of an issue.¶
Q. (By Mr. O'Laughlin:) So what is specifically the thing that you are reviewing for?¶
A. The legal opinion, making sure it is consistent with the rules and regulations, looking at the business activity, looking at the economic development, diversification that was taking place in the territory.¶
Q. What do you mean by looking at the business activity?¶
A. If it was unusual. One year, we had someone that applied that wanted to do manufacturing. 1¶
2¶
3¶
4¶
5¶
6¶
7¶
8¶
9¶
10¶
11¶
12¶
13¶
14¶
15¶
16¶
17¶
18¶
19¶
20¶
21¶
22¶
23¶
24¶
25¶
We don't have very many manufacturers in the Virgin Islands, so I just looked at the application to make sure I understood.¶
Some were looking at foreign destinations to sell their products. I wanted to see, you know, what percentage of their business activity they were looking at. Was it -- did they consider the U.S. foreign or where are they selling? So I would look at things like that.¶
Q. What would you do if the business -- the underlying business activity did strike you as unusual?¶
A. I would, then, more than likely not call the individual. I'd probably call my attorney and ask him to look into it.¶
Q. And they would go and report back to you?¶
A. Correct.¶
Q. Did you review Financial Trust's application?¶
A. Yes.¶
Q. Did you review Southern Trust's application?¶
A. No.¶
Q. unusual? Okay. Did you find any of their activity¶
1 2 Q. So the initial amount, the actual cost of improvements was 181,000?¶
3 4 5 A. No. That was the value that the government said I owed after the depreciated value over eight years.¶
6 7 8 Q. Okay. And then the ultimate amount paid was 381,000. So they added 200,000 on to their assessment of the value?¶
9 A. That's correct.¶
10 11 Q. Okay. And of the 381,000, Epstein financed 200,000?¶
12 A. He gave us a loan for 200,000.¶
13 Q. What were the terms of the loan?¶
14 15 16 17 A. That we had to pay it back -- we asked him if we could have two years to pay it back. He said, no, a year. So we paid it back early, mid '16, 2016, and that was it.¶
18 Q. Was there interest accrued on the loan?¶
19 20 A. Yes, I don't recall the amount, but there was interest on the loan.¶
21 Q. Do you recall what the rate was?¶
22 A. I do not.¶
23 Q. How was the rate determined?¶
24 25 A. I don't know. I don't know how they negotiated the rate.¶
1 2 Q. Did you ask the First Lady to relay this information to Epstein?¶
3 A. I must of.¶
4 5 6 Q. Were you involved in any discussions of a $50 million loan to the USVI government involving Epstein?¶
7 8 A. When you say "discussions," please -- what do you mean by discussions?¶
9 10 Q. What do you understand the word "discussions" to mean?¶
11 A. Discussions, but with whom?¶
12 Q. Anyone.¶
13 A. I wasn't in any discussions, no.¶
14 15 Q. Did you have do you have any knowledge of any $50 million loan to the USVI government?¶
16 17 A. I was asked some questions, of which I responded to those questions, yes.¶
18 Q. What were the questions you were asked?¶
19 20 21 22 A. Just if the government wanted to borrow, could they. Was there a revenue stream? Could it be collateralized? But there was no discussions. There were just some questions.¶
23 Q. Why were those questions coming to you?¶
24 MS. BOGGS: Objection,¶
1 2 THE WITNESS: I'm presuming just based on my knowledge of government.¶
3 4 Q. (By Mr. O'Laughlin:) But this was after you were out of office, correct?¶
5 A. I believe so.¶
6 Q. Okay. Who was asking the questions?¶
7 8 A. I'm not sure if it came from Cecile. I think it may have come from Cecile.¶
9 Q. Okay. On behalf of Epstein?¶
10 A. I presume so.¶
11 12 Q. Okay. Do you know the approximate date of these questions being asked to you?¶
13 A. No, I don't.¶
14 MR. O'LAUGHLIN: Let's enter tab¶
15 64.¶
16 17 (Deposition Exhibit No. 50 was marked for identification.)¶
18 19 20 21 22 Q. (By Mr. O'Laughlin:) Exhibit 50. This is an email chain that starts February 5, 2017, and Epstein writes to the First Lady, "The government needs 40 to 50 million for year. What does John think would be the most viable collateral"?¶
23 Do you see that?¶
24 A. I do.¶