Former JPMorgan executive Jes Staley and a Jeffrey Epstein victim who accused Staley of sexual assault are fighting The New York Times’ efforts to unseal portions of the woman’s testimony, which was taken as part of a bombshell lawsuit against the bank.
In November 2022, Jane Doe sued JPMorgan for allegedly aiding and profiting off the wealthy sex offender’s trafficking scheme, and the government of the U.S. Virgin Islands filed a similar complaint soon after. The litigation revealed that JPMorgan ignored red flags about Epstein’s accounts and uncovered more details of Staley and Epstein’s creepily close friendship.
JPMorgan agreed to settle Doe’s class-action suit for $290 million last June and the USVI’s claims for $75 million in September.
ADVERTISEMENT
But, with new litigation surrounding Epstein and his enablers, legal tangles over the trafficker’s network are not slowing down.
Times lawyer David McCraw wrote to Manhattan federal judge Jed S. Rakoff on Feb. 27, asking to unseal excerpts from Doe’s deposition that were filed to the court docket as exhibits.
“Unsealing of the excerpts would provide additional insight into not merely Mr. Epstein’s abuse of women, but also the powerful people and institutions around him who may have been aware of his activities but failed to intervene,” McCraw wrote in a letter to the judge.
“In particular, because Jane Doe 1 was under Mr. Epstein’s control from 2006 to 2013—a longer period than many other victims of his abuse—her testimony is likely to provide a uniquely comprehensive insight into his operation.”
The court previously designated Doe’s testimony, taken in March 2023, as confidential as part of a protective order in the case.
McCraw added that some Epstein victims received “carve-outs” from previous settlements with the trafficker’s estate that allowed them to sue “other powerful men who were complicit in their abuse.”
“Unsealing of these excerpts of Jane Doe 1’s testimony may contribute to understanding of such provisions and whether all members of the class have been treated equitably,” McCraw noted.
Attorneys for Doe, Staley, and the USVI wrote Rakoff last week to oppose the release of the deposition excerpts.
Sigrid McCawley, a lawyer for Doe and multiple other Epstein victims, said the passages “include substantial details about Jane Doe 1’s family and a horrific rape she endured.”
These excerpts also include Doe testifying to “the ways in which Epstein’s request that she recruit other victims deeply affected her psychologically” and “the manipulation Epstein employed to try to force her to do so,” McCawley wrote.
McCawley argued that redacting Doe’s name “is not sufficient to protect her identity or privacy interests” and that the publication of the testimony “could reveal her identity to the public and to those who harmed her who she fears might retaliate against her.”
According to the lawyer, the excerpts don’t touch on “powerful figures” in Epstein’s world but instead discuss Doe’s “horrific rape by another, already publicly identified individual who has been sued in public lawsuits for his role in Epstein’s operation.”
She added that the excerpts “have nothing to do with such ‘other powerful men’ who may have been carved out of releases, other than the man who raped her and has already been publicly identified.”
The identity of the man is not disclosed in the letter. But the Times has previously reported that one Epstein victim’s settlement included a carve-out provision allowing her to pursue claims against Staley and billionaire Leon Black, who has battled his own sex-abuse lawsuits in connection to the sex-trafficker. (Black has denied the accusations against him.)
Meanwhile, Staley’s attorney Stephen Wohlgemuth stated that Doe’s deposition testimony delves into her “allegation of assault against” his client, who “has consistently and repeatedly denied those false allegations.”
The deposition, Wohlgemuth wrote, was taken before Staley became a defendant in the cases and the bank honcho didn’t have an opportunity to cross-examine his accuser. (Days after Doe’s testimony, JPMorgan filed a third-party complaint against Staley that argued he should be liable for Doe’s claims.)
“Mr. Staley’s interest in keeping Doe’s false and untested testimony confidential is immense,” Wohlgemuth added in his letter.
“To be sure, Mr. Staley recognizes that there is some public interest in understanding Epstein’s criminal activities. But even if that interest outweighed Mr. Staley’s privacy concerns (it does not), the unverified, untested testimony of Jane Doe in the exhibits at issue is hardly a unique font of information on this subject.”
On Tuesday, McCraw filed a reply to the oppositions, saying they failed “to demonstrate why targeted redactions of identifying information, rather than wholesale sealing, would not strike the appropriate balance between privacy and the public’s right of access.”
Doe’s “account will provide greater insight into the Epstein crimes than what has been previously disclosed in the accounts involving others,” McCraw said. “As Ms. Doe’s own description of the excerpts underscores, her testimony was detailed and broad-ranging, and significant to the questions before the Court.”
“She, tragically, was a victim of Mr. Epstein’s for longer than many other women, giving her extended observation of his insidious sex trafficking operation.”
McCraw argued that “[d]etails that are identifying can and should be redacted, with input from Ms. Doe’s counsel, but the remainder of the excerpt should be released.”
As for Staley’s argument, McCraw said the executive “is not an innocent third party who somehow finds himself caught up in a civil case in which he has no real interest in the outcome” but “was impleaded as a defendant.”
“Secrecy, not transparency, is the morbidity we need to guard against, and that explains why judicial documents—including those here—are presumptively open and the press free to broadly report on what goes on in courts,” McCraw wrote.
The JPMorgan litigation brought to light Epstein’s alleged role in bringing high-profile clients to the bank, including Google co-founder Sergey Brin.
Epstein was a client of JPMorgan from 1998 to 2013. Even after the investment bank cut ties with him, it transferred more than $1 million to women and girls in his orbit, the USVI alleged.
Legal filings also revealed that Epstein had connected Staley with Britain’s Prince Andrew, Microsoft billionaire Bill Gates, and Israel’s prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Staley used his JPMorgan email account to communicate with Epstein, who sent him “photos of young women in seductive poses,” the USVI’s complaint said.
When Epstein was on home detention in Florida for soliciting a minor, Staley wrote the perverted financier a message that suggested he was enjoying his hospitality.
“So when all hell breaks lo[o]se, and the world is crumbling, I will come here, and be at peace,” Staley wrote in November 2009. “Presently, I’m in the hot tub with a glass of white wine. This is an amazing place. Truly amazing. Next time, we’re here together.
“I owe you much. And I deeply appreciate our friendship. I have few so profound.”
