As early as 2006, JPMorgan executives were aware of Jeffrey Epstein’s payments to his young victims, and bank officials later joked that he was a “sugar daddy” to girls, according to a new complaint from the U.S. Virgin Islands government.
On Wednesday, the attorney general for the U.S. Virgin Islands filed an amended and unredacted lawsuit against JPMorgan, highlighting internal memos about the late sex-trafficker’s pursuit of teens and one compliance official’s declaration that Epstein “should go.”
In 2011, one senior JPMorgan official argued there was “lots of smoke” and “lots of questions” when it came to the pervy financier, the complaint alleges.
ADVERTISEMENT
The amended complaint is the latest salvo in a legal battle between the bank and the Caribbean territory, as well as a victim of Epstein known as Jane Doe 1. Over the years, according to the suit, JPMorgan brass shared emails and memos about Epstein facing criminal investigations or civil lawsuits related to his underage sex ring.
Such memos, the filing adds, focused on news articles about a law enforcement investigation into “whether a modeling agency run by a friend . . . fed his appetite for underage foreign girls” and mentioned that “Epstein was known to fly young women from Eastern Europe to Palm Beach where they’d massage him, among other services.”
These new accusations come on the heels of JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon giving an interview to CNN, in which he claimed the financial giant has “some of the best lawyers in the world” and compliance experts who previously worked for enforcement divisions of the Department of Justice and Securities and Exchange Commission.
Dimon—who will soon be grilled under oath as part of the litigation with Doe and the U.S. Virgin Islands—claimed JPMorgan officials “review all of these things and make decisions at the time based on what they know, as best as they know.”
When CNN anchor Poppy Harlow asked whether JPMorgan should have taken action in 2008 after Epstein pleaded guilty to soliciting a minor in Florida, Dimon responded, “Hindsight is a fabulous gift.”
Yet, according to the amended complaint, JPMorgan knew about Epstein’s proclivities for years and even referenced the young women and girls in his orbit.
According to the lawsuit, one JPMorgan document alluded to the bank account of an “assistant or young lady he brought over from Prague (or some place like that).” The complaint alleges this young woman was Jane Doe 1, who sued JPMorgan in November, claiming the bank reaped millions off Epstein’s trafficking scheme.
The internal memo allegedly chronicled Doe’s bank charges “for lingerie and other sexually explicit material” in New York, Palm Beach, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Another JPMorgan document “describes media reports referring to the fact that Epstein purchased her at age 14,” the complaint states.
“She remained a customer of JP Morgan,” the lawsuit alleges, “and Epstein paid her more than $600,000, from his accounts at JP Morgan, including more than $165,000 after Epstein’s plea.”
The complaint also shares Epstein’s other payouts to his alleged enablers.
One recruiter who was granted immunity via Epstein’s shady non-prosecution agreement in Florida allegedly received $728,000 from the financier’s JPMorgan accounts and “virtually all of it” was provided after his 2008 conviction.
Between 1999 and 2002, the filing adds, Epstein transferred more than $23 million to his ex-girlfriend and convicted accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell.
The complaint says that JPMorgan noted in internal documents that Epstein was “alleged to be involved in the human trafficking of young girls and law enforcement is also allegedly investigating his involvement in this activity.”
JPMorgan officials also allegedly noted that Epstein was “an alleged personal associate” of Jes Staley, who was then the head of JPMorgan’s private bank. (As part of her lawsuit, Jane Doe has accused Staley of sexual assault, an accusation he denies.)
The amended complaint underscores numerous other instances in which JPMorgan raised questions about Epstein and whether he should remain a client.
In 2008, Mary Erdoes, CEO of the bank’s Asset & Wealth Management division, received an email asking if Epstein was at an event with a girl referred to as “Miley Cyrus,” according to the lawsuit. In another 2010 email exchange, Erdoes and Staley allegedly discussed a federal investigation into Epstein for child sex-trafficking.
Erdoes, in a recent deposition, “admitted” that JPMorgan “was aware by 2006 that Epstein was accused of paying cash to have underage girls and young women brought to his home,” the complaint says. But during her testimony, Erdoes said that JPMorgan only axed Epstein as a client in 2013 after she learned his withdrawals were “actual cash.”
It’s unclear why the bank waited seven years to dump Epstein.
As early as 2006, the filing alleges, a JPMorgan Rapid Response Team determined that the shadowy money manager “routinely” made cash withdrawals of $40,000 to $80,000 several times a month—transactions that totaled over $750,000 a year.
And JPMorgan senior executives—including Staley, Erdoes, Steven Cutler, and Catherine Keating—“met in various groupings in July and October 2008, January 2011, August 2011, and July 2013” to discuss concerns about Epstein, the complaint states.
The bank’s anti-money laundering division asked to “exit this relationship” with Epstein, the memo allegedly said, adding that it could “have a potential serious impact.”
Other internal emails questioned the identities of Epstein’s clients and shared an article exploring whether the convicted sex offender was running a Ponzi scheme, the complaint says.
At one point in 2011, JPMorgan officials discussed that Epstein sponsored private bank accounts and credit cards for a pair of 18-year-old women who “appear to be part of his inner entourage,” according to the lawsuit.
“One [woman] is mentioned in many of the recaps of the escapades as a willing participant and assistant when hosting visitors,” a bank memo allegedly stated.
“She has received about 450,000 since opening from Epstein . . . . Both can be put in Palm Beach during 2004, by way of debit charges, which was when most allegations were from . . . . He did pay other girls, many models no huge amounts. Sugar Daddy!”
In a compliance memo, JPMorgan officials also pointed out a “concerning” article about a Department of Justice probe into whether Epstein brought underage girls to America via the modeling agency MC2, which was owned by French model scout Jean-Luc Brunel. (Brunel, a longtime friend of Epstein and his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, killed himself in a Paris jail last February while awaiting trial on rape charges.)
The author of the memo claimed the modeling agency was “legit” and that “it would be hard for us to tell” if “girls were exploited via their contract or arrangement,” the complaint alleges, adding that Epstein secured a line of credit for MC2.
JPMorgan’s internal documents made note of Epstein’s charitable foundation, too, which the bank said donated funds to Palm Beach police and transferred funds to models, and culinary and massage schools and universities “on behalf of models/aspiring actresses.”
“His business accounts Fiduciary we saw no client activity. I know his biggest client, Wexner parted ways when he was convicted,” one internal memo read. “His [Due Diligence Reports] say he manages a few private clients money but never says who. I would like to know if in fact he is managing anyone’s money at this point or is it all his money.”
A JPMorgan memorandum detailed “numerous articles” about law enforcement investigations into Epstein’s molestation of underage girls, as well as a dozen out of court settlements stemming from lawsuits filed by his victims, the complaint says.
The amended complaint adds a claim against JPMorgan for allegedly obstructing the enforcement of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act.
Last month, JPMorgan filed a third-party complaint against Staley, arguing he should be liable should Jane Doe and the U.S. Virgin Islands prevail on their claims.
While lawyers for Staley and Doe contended that Staley should be tried separately from the litigation against JPMorgan, a federal judge denied the request.
“Though not always identified by name, Staley is a key figure in the allegations made in the plaintiff's and co-plaintiff’s complaints, as well as the sole defendant named in the third-party complaint filed by defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank,” U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff wrote in his order on Monday.
Rakoff said that Staley “and the facts relating to him will therefore be a prominent focus of the trial of the underlying case” between Doe, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and JPMorgan. “Under these circumstances,” Rakoff ruled, “it would make no sense to sever the case against Staley.”
The judge also indicated that the trial slated for October 2023 would not be rescheduled.
