Jeffrey Epstein's Shrouded Business Network Emerging in New Lawsuits Against His Estate
The new details come after sources told the New York Law Journal last week that Epstein, before he died, had tried to set up a fund to help cover the legal costs of certain employees and other associates who might be contacted by law enforcement.
August 20, 2019 at 12:55 PM
5 minute read
A series of new lawsuits from Jeffrey Epstein’s accusers, filed overnight against the disgraced financier’s estate, laid out fresh allegations of abuse, and shed new light on how Epstein used his network of businesses to operate an alleged child-sex trafficking ring that landed him under federal indictment before his death earlier this month.
According to the filings, Epstein and those close to him used a network of eight companies to operate an “enterprise” that yielded vast power, wealth and resources to threaten and cajole the women and young girls he brought into his orbit.
The companies, which were registered in New York, Delaware and the U.S. Virgin Islands, for years enabled Epstein to procure commercial sex acts and expand the circle of young victims upon whom he allegedly preyed, according to the lawsuits.
One company acted as a front for further sexual abuse while Epstein participated in a work-release program after pleading guilty to two state prostitution charges in Palm Beach County, Florida, the lawsuits said.
Another, formed in New York following Epstein’s 2008 conviction in Florida, designated employees to recruit victims and keep them in line, the suits claimed.
“Epstein, his associates and related companies, including corporate defendants, through acts of fraud and coercion, caused plaintiff to engage in commercial sex acts for many years,” attorney J. Stanley Pottinger wrote on behalf of one of the plaintiffs, identified in the filing by the pseudonym Katlyn Doe.
The new details came in the three latest suits to target Epstein’s estate following his death Aug. 10 while awaiting trial on federal conspiracy and sex trafficking charges. Epstein’s death, which was ruled a suicide by hanging, ended the federal criminal case against him, but an investigation into his associates and other affairs remains ongoing.
A number of Epstein’s former employees have retained criminal defense attorneys.
Sources told the New York Law Journal last week that, before he died, Epstein had tried to set up a fund to help cover the legal costs of certain employees and other associates, who might be contacted by law enforcement in an ongoing criminal investigation into the alleged ring and Epstein’s affairs.
The suits claim that Epstein’s pattern of engaging women and girls for massages that turned sexual spanned “many years before” and “many years after” the 2002 to 2005 timeframe outlined in the government’s indictment. They allege that Epstein forcibly used a sex toy on one of the victims and confiscated the passport of another so that she could not leave his Caribbean island.
In the case of Katlyn Doe, one filing claimed Epstein had long promised to help treat the alleged victim’s eating disorder, and held out funding for surgeries as a way to allegedly manipulate the woman, who was 17 when she met Epstein.
|Business Links
In addition to new allegations of sexual abuse, the lawsuits also detailed how Epstein used his shrouded network of businesses to find new victims and avoid detection by law enforcement.
According to the filings, Epstein continued to solicit sexual encounters while employed by the Florida Science Foundation Inc. during his participation in a work-release program in Florida. State records list the company’s headquarters in West Palm Beach, and Darren Indyke, Epstein’s longtime corporate attorney, as its director.
Indyke, who is also a joint representative of Epstein’s estate, has hired criminal defense counsel in New York, as a federal criminal investigation remains ongoing.
According to the lawsuit, Epstein engaged in paid sexual encounters while working out of his office at Florida Science, and leveraged his other businesses and associates to lure Katlyn Doe there in the hope of gaining legitimate employment with the company.
One of Epstein’s New York firms, HBRK Associates Inc., employed “numerous individuals whose primary, if not exclusive, objective” was to aid Epstein in his sex trafficking endeavor, the suits said.
According to the filings, employees of HBRK included recruiters and schedulers, who were responsible for maintaining appointments with young girls, some of whom were kept “on call.” Other employees, meanwhile, were allegedly responsible for providing gifts, money and services to alleged victims who met Epstein’s sexual demands.
The filings also alleged that NES, a limited-liability company, was tasked with maintaining Epstein’s daily massage schedule, while JEGE Inc., a Delaware corporation, owned at least one of Epstein’s planes, which was allegedly used to fly women and girls across state lines.
“Under Epstein’s control were numerous companies with many employees and obvious resources, each of whom worked for the Epstein enterprise,” Pottinger wrote. “While the individuals were employees of various Epstein-related companies, including defendant corporations, it was clear through explicit words and appearances that all such employees acted at Epstein’s direction and for his protection.”
The newest filings bring to at least five the number of lawsuits filed against Epstein’s estate following his death.
Geoffrey Berman, the Manhattan U.S. attorney, has said that Epstein’s death presented “yet another hurdle” to obtaining justice for the victims, but he confirmed that his office was continuing its probe of people linked to the financier.
U.S. Attorney General William Barr said last week that the criminal case would proceed against anyone who might have enabled Epstein’s behavior, and warned that any co-conspirators would be in the DOJ’s crosshairs.
“Let me assure you that this case will continue on against anyone who was complicit with Epstein,” he said in remarks last week. “Any co-conspirators should not rest easy. The victims deserve justice, and we will ensure they get it.”
Related story:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAttorneys 'On the Move': Structured Finance Attorney Joins Hunton Andrews Kurth; Foley Adds IP Partner
4 minute readNY Civil Liberties Legal Director Stepping Down After Lengthy Tenure
Former Top Aide to NYC Mayor Is Charged With Bribery Conspiracy
Trending Stories
- 1The Tech Built by Law Firms in 2024
- 2Distressed M&A: Mass Torts, Bankruptcy and Furthering the Search for Consensus: Another Purdue Decision
- 3For Safer Traffic Stops, Replace Paper Documents With ‘Contactless’ Tech
- 4As Second Trump Administration Approaches, Businesses Brace for Sweeping Changes to Immigration Policy
- 5General Warrants and ESI
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250