Epstein Paid $350,000 to Possible Witnesses Against Him, Prosecutors Say


Epstein Paid $350,000 to Possible Witnesses Against Him, Prosecutors Say

Jeffrey Epstein, the financier facing sex-trafficking charges in New York, tried to influence possible witnesses against him, prosecutors said on Friday, wiring $350,000 to two people who might testify against him at trial.

Mr. Epstein sent the money to the potential witnesses in late November and early December, 2018, shortly after the Miami Herald began publishing an investigative report about a secret deal he had reached with the authorities in Florida to avoid federal prosecution, prosecutors said.

The United States attorney’s office in Manhattan made the new allegations in a court filing asking that Mr. Epstein be denied bail while he awaits trial, saying the payments were evidence that he might try to influence witnesses if he were not detained.

The prosecutors have not charged Mr. Epstein in connection with the new allegations, and a spokesman for the United States attorney’s office declined to comment on that possibility.

Mr. Epstein’s lawyers maintain their client has lived a law-abiding life for the past 14 years, since he pleaded guilty to state prostitution charges in Florida and served 13 months in jail. He has plead not guilty to the new federal indictment in Manhattan.

Prosecutors said Mr. Epstein had paid significant amounts of money to influence individuals who were close to him and “who might be witnesses against him at a trial,” the government’s filing said.

Two days after the Herald published its expose, Mr. Epstein wired $100,000 to a person who had been named as a possible co-conspirator in his deal with Florida prosecutors a decade ago.

Three days later, Mr. Epstein sent $250,000 to a person who not only had been named as a co-conspirator in the Florida agreement, but was also identified in the New York indictment as an employee who helped Mr. Epstein in his sex-trafficking scheme.

The payments and their timing, the prosecutors wrote, “suggests the defendant was attempting to further influence co-conspirators who might provide information against him in light of the recently emerging allegations.”


Source link