Fresh documents from the estate of late pedophile Jeffrey Epstein reveal how the convicted sex trafficker carried on doing business with high-powered Wall Street firms and banks until well after his crimes came to light.
The Epstein estate has reportedly handed a list of more than 20 banks—including behemoths like Wells Fargo, TD Bank, and FirstBank Puerto Rico—to Congress.
The House Oversight Committee now expects to subpoena those lenders as part of their wider review of the case, The Wall Street Journal reports.
JPMorgan Chase told the newspaper it didn’t close the pedophile’s accounts until 2013, roughly eight years after he was first accused of sexually abusing minors. Deutsche Bank said it did not cut him off until 2018, just one year before he died in police custody while awaiting trial on charges related to one of the most notorious sex trafficking conspiracies in U.S. history.
Meanwhile, Blockchain Capital, one of the earliest venture investors in the cryptocurrency sector, is understood to have purchased stakes in private companies from Epstein through at least three of its funds in 2018.
The tranche of documents apparently reveals several previously unreported transfers to known associates of Epstein. These include former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, who received just over $1,000 in travel reimbursement for a series of meetings with Epstein between 2013 and 2016.
Also on the list are Joi Ito, the former MIT Lab director who received $2.5 million in investments from Epstein between 2014 and 2015, and Norwegian diplomat Terje Rod-Larsen, who received $250,000 for unspecified purposes in 2015.
The files reportedly also serve to confirm several previously reported, high-value transfers between Epstein and other influential business figures, among them billionaires Peter Thiel and Leon Black, as well as members of the Rothschild banking family.
I don’t disagree with anything that you said, but where is the line? For banks being liable for criminal activity, I believe they would need to be facilitating payment of the “criminal activity” in your example of dispensaries. But the owner of the dispensary likely still has a personal bank account.
With Epstein, it’s highly unlikely that his billions in assets were all used to facilitate his awful sex crimes.
My question isn’t about enabling atrocities, but more about where the line should be drawn to prevent largely innocent people from harm. Obviously, fuck Epstein and his enablers.
Where do you think his assets came from? Sex trafficking was his business, and most likely he was just the middle man for people like Wexler and Maxwell. Before he became involved with them he was living in a small 2 bedroom apartment.
It’s scummy enough so many people knew who he was and what he was doing before he was ever busted yet continued to do business with him, but the world is a scummy place sometimes.
Jeffrey Epstein files: Tracing the legal cases that led to sex-trafficking charges
Where does the line get drawn?
Morally, I would say 2005. As far as legal liability, I would say potentially as early as 2006 but definitely by 2007.
I will say, though, in terms of legal liability for the banks, (definitely not moral liability, bc again they all fucking knew) the deal he was given by Acosta back then definitely enabled this.
It’s not even clear why they suddenly closed his accounts in 2013, but it seems likely this would be around the time you couldn’t realistically keep pleading ignorance to the general public without it hurting you financially. In other words, moral liability became the only potential liability they cared about bc the legal system failed.
Ok.