Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-02635027DOJ Data Set 11Other

EFTA02635027

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 11
Reference
efta-02635027
Pages
4
Persons
0
Integrity

Summary

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
From: Darren Indyke Sent: Friday, March 15, 2019 4:34 PM To: Jeffrey Epstein Cc: Darren Indyke Subject: Re: Privileged and Confidential To =larify regarding Decision Item 3. Do I exclude the Christmas =onus check stub and and last payment check stub which references the =oan repayment? DARREN K. INDYKE s••: The information =ontained in this communication is confidential, may =e attorney-client privileged, and is intended =nly for the use of the addressee. It is the property of Darren K. Indyke. Unauthorized use, disclosure or =opying of this communication or any part =hereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you =ave received this communication in error, =lease notify us immediately by return e-mail, and destroy =his communication and all copies =hereof, including all attachments. Copyright =f Darren K. Indyke - © 2019 Darren K. Indyke — All =ights reserved. On Mar 15, 2019, at 12:25 PM, J <[email protected]> wrote: all ok On Fri, Mar =5, 2019 at 12:04 PM Darren Indyke wrote: 1. Regarding the questionnaire to be =eturned to VI Department of Labor with respect to Kyle Steward. I =now you approved the form, but I didn't like the large number =f contractors stated on the document. Recall the document stated =hat there are 17 contractors and 21 employees in the same "class =80 as Kyle. I questioned Daphne further about it and learned =hat she included all workers paid as contractors and not just =andscaper contractors. So, I revised it to change the number of =ontractors in Kyle's class from 17 to 4 and the number of =mployees from 21 to 6, which relates to the class of landscape =ontractors and landscape employees rather than all contractors and =mployees. 2. Also, Chris Kroblin and I =idn't like the reference to non-payment of taxes that Daphne =nd Jeanne originally provided in the questionnaire as one of the =easons to treat Kyle as a contractor. We changed the explanation =s to why Kyle is a contractor to read as follows: EFTA_R1_01860456 EFTA02635027 "Mr. Steward was =ontracted to provide services as a temporary landscaper for the Island =fter the Hurricanes. His role was to perform needed landscape =rojects until the Island was restored back to normal. Accordingly =e was not brought on as a permanent employee. Rather he was =ontracted solely for the post-hurricane restoration =rojects" 3. The questionnaire also includes =he following instructions: "Attach copies =/span>of =/span>any =ritten agreements, billing statements, applications, or contracts =etween the firm and the worker. If the agreement was oral, please =educe it to writing and attach. If any State or Federal Agency has ruled on the same job class as this worker or another =/span>of =/span>the =ame job class, attach a copy of the ruling. =These documents will not be returned.)" a Daphne proposed to include: all =heck stubs for checks issued to Kyle which generally indicate number of =ays worked and the daily rate. Excluding the =eparate check stub relating to the Christmas Bonus (discussed in 3b =elow), there are 44 check stubs relating to payments to Kyle Steward =ating back to October 2017. I think the =heck stubs would be requested anyway and would provide them. =hris Kroblin agrees and thinks we should provide the check =tubs. b With regard to check stubs, there =re two additional separate issues: There is a check =tub which is separate and states that it is a "Christmas =onus" as per JE. I suppose that providing Kyle a =hristmas Bonus could make it seem like Kyle is being treated as an =mployee. Not sure if you want to include the stub or delete it. =nbsp; c. Second check stub issue. It =s my understanding that Kyle's pay was $240 less than it =ormally is during one period. Apparently, Stephanie loaned him =240 to cover the shortfall out of petty cash. He had not paid the =oan back, so, when he was let go, there was a deduction from his pay in =he amount of that loan (silly). The check stub makes a reference =o the deduction for the loan repayment. Does the loan of =240 make it seem more like he is being treated as an employee? =nbsp; d. Daphne also included invoices =ssued with respect to each payment made to Kyle, but the invoices reflect billing at an hourly rate, rather than the daily rate reflected =n the check stubs, and the invoices were prepared by the office rather =han Kyle. I think that the fact that we prepared the invoices =ould come out during the process =e.g., if asked about invoices, Kyle would likely say he =ever prepared or gave us any invoices). Also, that the invoices =how payment at an hourly rate, which is different than the daily rate =n the check stubs, creates confusion and might cause =dditional scrutiny. I think that our preparing the invoices =ould reflect negatively and would work against us, so I have excluded =he invoices. e. Daphne also included the =ndemnity agreement that we make all contractors, vendors and suppliers =ign and which states that the person signing the agreement is a =ontractor, vendor or supplier. Under this agreement the person =ho signs it indemnifies Nautilus, Inc., Great St. Jim, LLC, LSJE, LLC =nd you for any personal injury claims arising out of the engagement as = contractor. It includes an assumption of the risk with respect =o dangerous conditions and activities on the properties, a release and = waiver of claims. I think it could cut both ways because it =ooks like we make people waive certain rights to work for us. On =he other hand, as Chris Kroblin indicated, the people who do this are =ot rocket scientists and are simply looking at the universe of =actors they have been told makes someone a contractor or =mployee. The document clearly states the mutual understanding =hat Kyle is a contractor, is responsible for his own evaluation of the =onditions on the property and for his own conduct, requires him to =aintain his own insurance and provides additional support for treatment =f Kyle as a contractor. Also, because we want to 2 EFTA_R1_01860457 EFTA02635028 provide some =ocuments in response to the specific request on the questionnaire, on =alance, Chris Kroblin would include the indemnity. I =gree and would include it as well. f. Daphne also included a =ermination letter, which would ordinarily be ok, but also includes a =tatement that $240 was deducted from final pay to repay a loan =tephanie gave Kyle. I think the kind of loan we are talking about =ere might make it appear that Kyle was treated like an employee, even =hough paid as a contractor, And it is highlighted in the letter, =o even if we include the "loan repayment" check =tub, I don't think we need to highlight it in the termination =etter, so I am excluding the termination letter as well. Chris =roblin agrees. Decisions for you: 1. Are you ok with my changes to the =uestionnaire as reflected in points 1 and 2 above? 2. Are you ok with just providing =he check stubs and the indemnity agreement, and nothing else, in =esponse to the direction on the questionnaire? 3. With regard to check stubs, do =ou have any direction on whether or not to exclude the "Christmas =onus" check stub and the "loan repayment" check =tub? Please advise. Thanks. DARREN K. INDYKE ••••••••••• The information =ontained in this communication is confidential, may =e attorney-client privileged, and is intended =nly for the use of the addressee. It is the property of Darren K. Indyke. Unauthorized use, disclosure or =opying of this communication or any part =hereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you =ave received this communication in error, =lease notify us immediately by return e-mail, and destroy =his 3 EFTA_R1_01860458 EFTA02635029 communication and all copies =hereof, including all attachments. Copyright =f Darren K. Indyke - © 2019 Darren K. Indyke — All =ights reserved. please note The information contained in this =ommunication is confidential, may be attorney-client =rivileged, may constitute inside information, and is =ntended only for the use of the addressee. It is the =roperty of JEE Unauthorized use, disclosure =r copying of this communication or any part thereof is =trictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have =eceived this communication in error, please notify us =mmediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to [email protected], and destroy this =ommunication and all copies thereof, including all =ttachments. copyright -all rights reserved 4 EFTA_R1_01860459 EFTA02635030

Technical Artifacts (8)

View in Artifacts Browser

Email addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.

Phone2635027
Phone2635028
Phone2635029
Phone2635030
Wire Refreference
Wire Refreferences
Wire Refreflected

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.