Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 1 of 34

Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 1 of 34 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED ) STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS ) PLAINTIFF, V. JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A. DEFENDANT. ) ) ) ) Case Number: I:22-cv-10904 JSR ACTION FOR DAMAGES JURY TRIAL DEMANDED FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR A JURY TRIAL Plaintiff Government of the United States Virgin Islands ("Government") files this Complaint against JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. ("JP Morgan") for violations of Trafficking Victims Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1591 to 1595, the Virgin Islands Criminally Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 14 V.I.C. §§ 600 to 614, and the Virgin Islands Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, 12A V.I.C. §§ 301 to 336, and in support thereof alleges as follows: PARTIES I. The Attorney General of the United States Virgin Islands (hereinafter "Virgin Islands") brings this parens patriae action on behalf of the Plaintiff, Government of the Virgin Islands, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1595(d) and 3 V.I.C. § 114 and her statutory authority to enforce the laws of the Virgin Islands and protect public safety. 2. The Attorney General, pursuant to her authority to represent the Government of the United States Virgin Islands, also acts on behalf of, and with the lawfully delegated authority of, the Virgin Islands Department of Licensing and Consumer Affairs under 12 V.I.C. § 327 in regard to Count Four of the Government's Complaint alleging violations of the Virgin Islands Consumer EFTA00161836 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 2 of 34 Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act. 3. This action stems from an enforcement action the Government filed against the Estate of Jeffrey E. Epstein, the Co-Executors of the Estate, and various entities relating to Jeffrey Epstein ("Epstein"), under the Virgin Islands' Criminally Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("CICO Act"), see Government of the U.S. Virgin Islands v. Indyke et at, Case No. ST-20- CV-14 (Super. Ct. V.I. Jan. 15, 2020). The Attorney General brings this action, after presenting her findings to JP Morgan in September 2022, in her ongoing effort to protect public safety and to hold accountable those who facilitated or participated in, directly or indirectly, the trafficking enterprise Epstein helmed. The investigation revealed that JP Morgan knowingly, negligently, and unlawfully provided and pulled the levers through which recruiters and victims were paid and was indispensable to the operation and concealment of the Epstein trafficking enterprise. Financial institutions can connect—or choke—human trafficking networks, and enforcement actions filed and injunctive relief obtained by attorneys general are essential to ensure that enterprises like Epstein's cannot flourish in the future. 4. Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. is an American multinational investment bank and financial services company headquartered in New York City and incorporated in Delaware. 5. At all relevant times, JP Morgan engaged in business in the Virgin Islands, including, but not limited to, the acts and practices described herein. 6. As described below, based on documents reviewed and interviews conducted by the Government, JP Morgan knowingly facilitated, sustained, and concealed the human trafficking network operated by Jeffrey Epstein from his home and base in the Virgin Islands, and financially benefitted from this participation, directly or indirectly, by failing to comply with federal banking 2 EFTA00161837 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 3 of 34 regulations, JP Morgan facilitated and concealed wire and cash transactions that raised suspicion of—and were in fact part of—a criminal enterprise whose currency was the sexual servitude of dozens of women and girls in and beyond the Virgin Islands. Human trafficking was the principal business of the accounts Epstein maintained at JP Morgan. 7. Upon information and belief, JP Morgan turned a blind eye to evidence of human trafficking over more than a decade because of Epstein's own financial footprint, and because of the deals and clients that Epstein brought and promised to bring to the bank. These decisions were advocated and approved at the senior levels of JP Morgan, including by the former chief executive of its asset management division and investment bank, whose inappropriate relationship with Epstein should have been evident to the bank. Indeed, it was only after Epstein's death that JP Morgan belatedly complied with federal banking regulations regarding Epstein's accounts. JURISDICTION, VENUE, AND RELATED CASE 8. This action is brought pursuant to and based on federal and Virgin Islands statutes, including the federal Trafficking Victims Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1591 to 1595 ("TVPA"), and the federal Bank Secrecy Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 5311 to 5336 and its implementing regulations ("BSA"). 9. This Court has federal question subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 because the Government's TVPA and BSA-based causes of action arise under federal law. 10. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the Government's Virgin Islands law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a) because these claims are so related to those arising under or based on federal law as to form part of the same case or controversy under Article III of the United States Constitution. 3 EFTA00161838 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 4 of 34 II. This Court is an "appropriate district court of the United States" in which for the Government to obtain appropriate relief under 18 U.S.C. § 1595(d) and venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(6)(2) because Defendant maintains its principal place of business within this judicial district, so that this Court may exercise general personal jurisdiction over Defendant, and because many of the alleged acts and omissions of Defendant giving rise to the Government's claims took place within this judicial district, so that this Court may exercise specific personal jurisdiction over Defendant. 12. Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 1.6(a), the undersigned believe that this action is related to Doe I v. JP Morgan Chase & Co., No. 1:22-cv-10019 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 24, 2022), because both actions arise from a common nucleus of operative fact involving Defendant JP Morgan's alleged participation, directly or indirectly, in Epstein's sex-trafficking venture by facilitating payments to women and girls, channeling funds to Epstein to fund the operation, and concealing Epstein's criminal conduct by failing to comply with federal banking regulations. BACKGROUND I. JP Morgan's Federal and State Legal Requirements 13. JP Morgan is subject to federal laws, including the BSA and the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-56, 115 Stat. 272 ("USA PATRIOT Act"), which amended certain BSA regulations. 14. Under both the BSA and USA PATRIOT Act, JP Morgan is required to implement adequate, risk-based anti-money laundering ("AML") policies and systems to detect and prevent money laundering or other use of the institution's services to facilitate criminal activities. This includes, but is not limited to, maintaining a due diligence program, filing suspicious activity 4 EFTA00161839 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 5 of 34 reports ("SARs") when the financial institutions detect suspicious behavior and currency transaction reports ("CTRs") for currency transactions or series of currency transactions that exceed $10,000 in a 24-hour period, preventing structuring or assistance with structuring of transactions undertaken for the purpose of evading federal reporting requirements, and maintaining systems to prevent money laundering. 15. The FDIC and the other federal banking regulators, including the Federal Reserve Board and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, formed an interagency organization known as Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council ("FFIEC"). 16. To provide further guidance to banks on what BSA compliance requires, FFIEC published a Bank Secrecy Act/Anti-Money Laundering Examination Manual ("BSA Manual"). The BSA Manual explains that an effective SAR program is essential: Suspicious activity reporting forms the cornerstone of the BSA reporting system. It is critical to the United States' ability to utilize financial information to combat terrorism, terrorist financing, money laundering and other financial crimes. Examiners and banks should recognize that the quality of SAR content is critical to the adequacy and effectiveness of the suspicious activity reporting system.' 17. Pursuant to the BSA Manual, "[p]roper monitoring and reporting processes are essential to ensuring that the bank has an adequate and effective BSA compliance program. Appropriate policies, procedures, and processes should be in place to monitor and identify unusual activity."' When a bank detects suspicious activity, it is required to report that information within 30 days to the U.S. Department of the Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network ("FinCEN"). The reporting requirement ensures that the government is able to monitor and act FFIEC Bank Secrecy Act/Anti-Money Laundering Examination Manual, Suspicious Activity Reporting at 1 (2014) https://bsaaml.ffiec.gov/docs/manual/06_AssessingComplianceWithBSARegulatoryRequirement s/04.pdf. 2 Id. at 2. 5 EFTA00161840 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 6 of 34 when alerted to potential illegal conduct. 18. Appendix F of the BSA Manual includes examples of suspicious transactions that may indicate money laundering, terrorist financing, or fraud, including: a. Funds transfer activity is unexplained, repetitive, or shows unusual patterns; b. The currency transaction patterns of a business show a sudden change inconsistent with normal activities; c. Unusual transfers of funds occur among related accounts or among accounts that involve the same or related principals; d. Currency is deposited or withdrawn in amounts just below identification or reporting thresholds; e. Regarding nonprofit or charitable organizations, financial transactions occur for which there appears to be no logical economic purpose or in which there appears to be no link between the stated activity of the organization and the other parties in the transaction; f. Funds are sent or received via international transfers from or to higher-risk locations. 19. In addition, the CICO Act, 14 V.I.C. § 600, incorporates violations of Virgin Islands Law and federal felonies, which includes the BSA's criminal-liability provisions. II. Jeffrey Epstein's Criminal Conduct 20. Jeffrey Epstein was a resident of the Virgin Islands. 21. In 2008, Epstein pled guilty to one count of solicitation of prostitution with a minor in Palm Beach, Florida. As a result of that conviction, Epstein was forced to register as a sex offender in the Virgin Islands. 6 EFTA00161841 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 7 of 34 22. Epstein was a Tier 1 offender under Virgin Islands law based upon his Florida conviction of procuring a minor for prostitution. 23. On January 15, 2020, the Government filed a lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein's estate and related individuals and entities for violation of the CICO Act, 14 V.I.C. §§ 600 to 614, and civil conspiracy, which the Government recently settled. As laid out in the Government's Second Amended Complaint, ST-20-CV-14, ("SAC") (attached as Exhibit 1), Epstein created a network of companies and individuals who participated in, directly or indirectly, and conspired with him in a pattern of criminal activity related to the sex trafficking, forced labor, sexual assault, child abuse, and sexual servitude of these young women and children. SAC 43-75. Epstein and his associates trafficked underage girls to the Virgin Islands, held them captive, and sexually abused them, causing them grave physical, mental, and emotional injury. Id. 24. To accomplish this criminal activity, Epstein formed an association in fact with both companies and non-profit organizations that he owned and operated, as well as individuals, who were willing to participate in, directly or indirectly, facilitate, and conceal Epstein's criminal activity in exchange for Epstein's bestowal of financial and other benefits, including sexual services and forced labor from victims. Id. at 157-195. 25. In October 2012, the Southern Trust Company—one of the companies Epstein owned—applied for economic benefits from the Virgin Islands Economic Development Commission ("EDC") so the company could provide "cutting edge consulting services" in the area of "biomedical and financial informatics." Id. 157-158. Southern Trust Company received a 10- year package of economic incentives running from February 1, 2013 until January 31, 2023 that included a 90% exemption from income taxes and 100% exemptions from gross receipts, excise, and withholding taxes in the Virgin Islands. Id. 1 159. 7 EFTA00161842 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 8 of 34 26. Southern Trust, in fact, appeared to perform no informatics or data-mining services during this period. Instead, Southern Trust funded the Epstein Enterprise (defined below), acting as a conduit for payment to foreign women, credit cards, airplanes and other instrumentalities. Id. ill 167-173. 27. This illicit association of Epstein, businesses, and his associates constitutes what is referred to herein as the "Epstein Enterprise." Specifically included in the Epstein Enterprise were the following companies and non-profit organizations, all of which had accounts with JP Morgan: 2013 Butterfly Trust, Coatue Enterprises, LLC, C.O.U.Q. Foundation, Enhanced Education, Financial Trust Company, Inc., HBRK Associates, Inc., Hyperion Air, Inc, JEGE, Inc., JEGE, LLC, NES, LLC, Plan D, LLC, Southern Financial, LLC, and Southern Trust Company. 28. Epstein used his wealth and power to create the Epstein Enterprise, which engaged in a pattern of criminal activity by repeatedly procuring and subjecting underage girls and young women to unlawful sexual conduct, sex trafficking, and forced labor. 29. Many of these women, particularly after Epstein's conviction in 2008, were trafficked from Eastern Europe. As the Government explained in its Second Amended Complaint, these women were recruited and, in several instances, required to many other Epstein victims in order to maintain their immigration status and their availability to Epstein. Id. II 62- 63, 78, 86. 30. As also alleged in the Second Amended Complaint, recruiters and victims were paid in cash or through entities set up by Epstein and/or his associates. Id. ¶ 100. Many of these companies were shell companies, that existed merely to transfer money to other accounts, or to shelter Epstein's assets from judgment. Id. II 116. 31. Epstein's lawyer, Darren K. Indyke, and accountant, Richard Kahn, now the Co- Executors of Epstein's Estate, authorized or directed many of the transactions in JP Morgan accounts 8 EFTA00161843 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 9 of 34 held by Epstein or related entities. Id.118-10, 76-117. 32. Epstein and the Epstein Enterprise continued trafficking and sexually abusing young women and female children until Epstein was arrested by federal law enforcement authorities on July 6, 2019 on federal charges for the sex trafficking of minors. 33. Epstein was found dead on August 10, 2019 while in custody in a federal detention center in New York on charges for sex-trafficking crimes. Id. 91 7. ALLEGATIONS I. Jeffrey Epstein Was an Extremely High-Risk Customer 34. Jeffrey Epstein's reputation as a sex trafficker and abuser of women and girls was well-known and well-publicized for more than a decade before his death. 35. Between 2005 and 2013, there were numerous press reports that Epstein sexually abused women and girls. 36. In March 2005, there were press reports that Epstein paid a 14-year old girl in Palm Beach, Florida for a "massage" and then molested her. Following these allegations, multiple underage girls, many of them high school students, told police that Epstein also hired them to give sexual massages. 37. Throughout 2006—when Epstein was arrested in Palm Beach, Florida for solicitation of a minor—there was extensive press regarding the nature and extent of Epstein's sexual offenses, including the existence of dozens of victims. 38. In 2008, Epstein pled guilty to sexual offenses in Palm Beach, Florida, including solicitating a minor for prostitution. Epstein was sentenced to 18 months in jail and was required to register as a sex offender. 39. In 2009, the non-prosecution agreement between Epstein and the United States 9 EFTA00161844 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 10 of 34 became public. It revealed allegations that Epstein may have used interstate commerce to induce minors to engage in prostitution, engaged in illicit sexual conduct with minors, and trafficked minors. 40. In 2010, press reports noted allegations that Epstein was involved with Eastern European women in particular and that a modeling agency he helped fund brought "young girls . . . often from Eastern Europe" to the United States on Epstein's private jets? II. JP Morgan Knew Epstein Was a Felon, Registered Sex Offender, and Alleged Child Trafficker 41. JP Morgan did business with Jeffrey Epstein from as early as 1998 to 2013. In that time, JP Morgan serviced approximately fifty-five Epstein-related accounts collectively worth hundreds of millions of dollars. 42. 3 Conchita Samoff, Jeffrey Epstein Pedophile Billionaire and His Sex Den, The Daily Beast (July 22, 2010), https://www.thedailybeast.com/jeffrey-epstein-pedophile-billionaire-and-his-sex-den. 10 EFTA00161845 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 11 of 34 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. II EFTA00161846 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 12 of 34 49. a. b. 50. 5I. I2 EFTA00161847 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 13 of 34 III. Head of JP Morgan's Private Bank Had Close Personal Relationship With Epstein 52. Former senior executive, Jes Staley ("Staley"), developed a close relationship with Epstein when Staley was the head of JP Morgan's Private Bank, which is a segment of JP Morgan's business dedicated to extremely wealthy clients with at least $10 million in assets. 53. Between 2008 and 2012, Staley exchanged approximately 1,200 emails with Epstein from his JP Morgan email account. These communications show a close personal relationship and "profound" friendship between the two men and even suggest that Staley may have been involved in Epstein's sex-trafficking operation. They also reveal that Staley corresponded with Epstein while Epstein was incarcerated and visited Epstein's Virgin Islands residence on multiple occasions. 54. 55. 56. 13 EFTA00161848 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 14 of 34 57. 58. 59. I4 EFTA00161849 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 15 of 34 60. 61. 62. None of the emails between Epstein and Staley were flagged in connection with risk reviews of Epstein's accounts. Moreover, JP Morgan allowed Staley to remain a decision- maker on Epstein's accounts. JP Morgan even tasked Staley to discuss the human trafficking allegations with Epstein. 63. In July 2013—several months after Staley left JP Morgan to join another financial institution—JP Morgan's Compliance Officer terminated JP Morgan's relationship with Epstein. 64. At the time of Epstein's death in 2019, Staley was the Chief Executive Officer of Barclays; however, Staley stepped down from that position in November 2021 after British 15 EFTA00161850 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 16 of 34 financial regulators concluded an investigation into Staley's characterization of his relationship with Epstein. IV. JP Morgan Ignored Obvious Red Flags Relating to Epstein's Accounts 65. Despite JP Morgan's claims that it would closely monitor Epstein's accounts, JP Morgan ignored numerous red flags related to Epstein's accounts and failed to comply with federal banking regulations. 66. Between 2003 and 2013, Epstein and/or his associates used Epstein's accounts to make numerous payments to individual women and related companies. Among the recipients of these payments were numerous women with Eastern European surnames who were publicly and internally identified as Epstein recruiters and/or victims. For example, Epstein paid more than $600,0000 to Jane Doe 1, a woman who—according to news reports contained in JP Morgan's due diligence reports-Epstein purchased at the age of 14. Like other women who received payments from Epstein, Jane Doe I listed Epstein's apartments on 66th Street in New York City as her address, which should have been a red flag to JP Morgan. 67. Epstein and/or his associates also made significant cash withdrawals and 95 foreign remittances with no known payee. For example, Hyperion Air, Inc.—the Epstein-controlled company that owned Epstein's private jet—issued over $547,000 in checks payable to cash purportedly for "fuel expenses when traveling to foreign countries." Additionally, between January 2012 and June 2013, Hyperion converted more than $120,000 into foreign currency. Many of these cash withdrawals either exceeded the $10,000 reporting threshold or were seemingly structured to avoid triggering the reporting requirement. This is particularly significant since it is well known that Epstein paid his victims in cash. SAC 1 100. 68. In addition, Epstein and/or his representatives appeared to be misusing JP Morgan 16 EFTA00161851 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 17 of 34 accounts for Epstein's purported charitable organizations, including the C.O.U.Q. Foundation and Enhanced Education. Epstein made payments from these accounts with no clear nexus to the organization's charitable purpose. For example, Epstein and/or his representative used the C.O.U.Q. Foundation account to pay $29,464.66 to three young women, including two known victims, and over $20,000 to a company called Phoenix Realty Home Inc. Similarly, Epstein and/or his representative used the Enhanced Education fund to pay $124,232 to Leslie Wexner and $15,000 to and . a firm owned by Epstein's reportedly prior girlfriend. 69. Each of these red flags was serious; together, they suggest a pattern of potentially illegal conduct that should have prompted action by JP Morgan. 70. V. Epstein Brought Additional High Net Worth Clients to JP Morgan 71. In addition to his own holdings with JP Morgan, Epstein helped, or promised to help, Staley recruit ultrawealthy clients to JP Morgan. A few examples are laid out below. 72. In 2004, Epstein introduced Staley to Glenn Dubin, the owner of Highbridge Capital Management—one of the country's largest hedge funds. This laid the groundwork for JP 17 EFTA00161852 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 18 of 34 Morgan's acquisition of Highbridge—a move that helped catapult Staley's career. 73. In 2011, Epstein and Staley had extensive discussions regarding the creation of a "very HIGH profile" donor advised fund ("DAF"), which is an investment account established to support charitable organizations, headed by the Epstein pitched the DAF as an "exclusive club" with a minimum $100 million donation where JP Morgan would act as the fiduciary. VI. JP Morgan's Reveals Systematic Failures 74. 75. 76. 18 EFTA00161853 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 19 of 34 77. JP Morgan also seemingly did no due diligence on the nature of the various business entities for which it held accounts for Epstein, which appear to have no legitimate business purpose and, upon information and belief, were part of Epstein's criminal enterprise in the Virgin Islands. 78. In January 2013—the year JP Morgan terminated Epstein's accounts—the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency ("OCC") entered into a consent order with JP Morgan regarding deficiencies in the bank's overall program for BSA/AML compliance. The OCC found— consistent with the Government's findings here—that JP Morgan failed to develop adequate due diligence on customers and failed to comply with federal banking regulations. In fact, the OCC noted that JP Morgan "failed to identify significant volumes of suspicious activity".4 79. After JP Morgan terminated Epstein's accounts, Epstein moved his accounts to 4 NYSDFS Consent Order at 2-4 (Jan. 14, 2013), https://www.occ.treas.govinews- issuances/news-releases/2013/nr-occ-2013-8a.pdf. 19 EFTA00161854 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 20 of 34 Deutsche Bank from 2013 to 2018. 80. The New York State Department of Financial Services ("NYSDFS") investigated Deutsche Bank for failures to monitor Epstein's accounts. On July 6, 2020, the NYSDFS and Deutsche Bank entered into a Consent Order with a $150 million penalty, which stated, in relevant parts: a. "The Bank's fundamental failure was that, although the Bank properly classified Mr. Epstein as high-risk, the Bank failed to scrutinize the activity in the accounts for the kinds of activity that were obviously implicated by Mr. Epstein's past. The Bank was well aware not only that Mr. Epstein had pled guilty and served prison time for engaging in sex with a minor but also that there were public allegations that his conduct was facilitated by several named co-conspirators. Despite this knowledge, the Bank did little or nothing to inquire into or block numerous payments to named co- conspirators, and to or on behalf of numerous young women, or to inquire how Mr. Epstein was using, on average, more than $200,000 per year in cash." b. "Whether or to what extent those payments or that cash was used by Mr. Epstein to cover up old crimes, to facilitate new ones, or for some other purpose are questions that must be left to the criminal authorities, but the fact that they were suspicious should have been obvious to Bank personnel at various levels. The Bank's failure to recognize this risk constitutes a major compliance failure." c. "These errors are unacceptable in the context of a major international bank 20 EFTA00161855 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 21 of 34 and inexcusable in the context of the heightened scrutiny that should have occurred in the monitoring of a high-risk customer." 81. The NYSDFS also found fault with Deutsche Bank's failure to obtain answers regarding Epstein's use of his accounts to pay women with Eastern European surnames: "In a May 2018 email, a compliance officer submitted an inquiry . . . about payments to the accounts of women with Eastern European surnames at a Russian bank, and asking for an explanation of the purpose of the wire transactions and Epstein's relationship with the counterparties."5 82. JP Morgan's failures to appropriately monitor Epstein's accounts and comply with federal banking regulations are even more egregious than Deutsche Bank's failures because JP Morgan failed to demonstrate even basic due diligence and continued its relationship with Epstein for over a decade, despite the glaring indications of criminal activity. 83. 84. VII. JP Morgan Fraudulently Concealed Its Continuing Violations 85. JP Morgan's continuous illegal conduct has caused repeated and continuous injury. 86. JP Morgan knew—including at the highest level of the bank—that Epstein was an extremely high-risk client. Between 2005 and 2013, there were myriad reports that Epstein sexually abused women and girls. In 2008, Epstein pled guilty to sexual offenses and registered as 5 Id. at 15. 21 EFTA00161856 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 22 of 34 a sex offender. Despite JP Morgan's acknowledgement that it needed to closely monitor Epstein, JP Morgan ignored numerous red flags and failed to comply with federal banking regulations until years later after JP Morgan was no longer benefiting from Epstein's business. 87. JP Morgan also engaged in a course of conduct aimed at fraudulently concealing its illegal conduct, including by failing to timely comply with federal banking regulations in order to profit from Epstein's wealth and connections. 88. A key purpose of federal banking regulations is to give law enforcement real-time information so that it can act to detect violations of the law and protect public safety. 89. The Government of the Virgin Islands did not know, and could not have known, that Epstein used JP Morgan to facilitate his trafficking enterprise or that JP Morgan turned a blind eye to unusual cash transactions and wires and failed to carry out or follow up on basic due diligence and to timely comply with federal banking regulations, as required by the law. 90. Over more than a decade, JP Morgan clearly knew it was not complying with federal regulations in regard to Epstein-related accounts as evidenced by its too-little too-late efforts after Epstein was arrested on federal sex trafficking charges and shortly after his death, when JP Morgan belatedly complied with federal law. 91. The continued illegal conduct by JP Morgan has caused repeated and continuous injury. JP Morgan's illegal conduct was not completed nor were all damages incurred until the wrongdoing ceased in August 2019 when JP Morgan began belatedly complying with federal banking regulations in regard to Epstein-related accounts. 22 EFTA00161857 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 23 of 34 CAUSES OF ACTION COUNT ONE Participating in a Sex-Trafficking Venture Violation of Trafficking Victims Protection Act 18 U.S.C. §§ 1591(a)(2), 1595(d) (Parens Patriae) 92. The Government restates and realleges paragraphs 1 to 91 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 93. The Government brings this Count as parens patriae on behalf of the residents and visitors of the United States Virgin Islands and pursuant to the Attorney General's express statutory authority. 94. JP Morgan knowingly and intentionally participated in Epstein's sex-trafficking venture that was in and affecting interstate and foreign commerce, together and with others, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1591(a)(2) by facilitating payments to women and girls, channeling funds to Epstein to fund the operation, and concealing Epstein's criminal conduct by failing to comply with federal banking law. 95. JP Morgan knowingly and intentionally benefitted financially from and received value for its participation in the sex-trafficking venture in which Epstein and his co-conspirators, with JP Morgan's knowledge or reckless disregard of the fact, would use means of force, threats of force, fraud, coercion, and a combination of such means to sexually abuse young women and underage girls, including by causing them to engage in commercial sex acts, in the Virgin Islands and elsewhere. 96. Among the financial benefits that JP Morgan received for participating in and facilitating Epstein's sex-trafficking venture was the deposit of funds that Epstein—a Virgin Islands resident—and Epstein-controlled entities located in the Virgin Islands made to JP Morgan. JP Morgan profited from the use of these deposits. Epstein and Epstein-controlled entities located 23 EFTA00161858 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 24 of 34 in the Virgin Islands deposited these funds in exchange for JP Morgan's facilitation of and participation in Epstein's sex-trafficking venture. 97. Also, among the financial benefits that JP Morgan received for participating in and facilitating Epstein's sex-trafficking venture were referrals of business opportunities from Epstein and his co-conspirators. JP Morgan profited from, or expected to profit from, these referred business opportunities. Epstein referred business entities and business opportunities to JP Morgan in exchange for its facilitation of and participation in Epstein's sex-trafficking venture. 98. JP Morgan financially profited from the deposits made by Epstein and Epstein- controlled entities located in the Virgin Islands and from the business opportunities referred to JP Morgan by Epstein and his co-conspirators in exchange for its known facilitation of and implicit participation in Epstein's sex trafficking venture. 99. JP Morgan knew and recklessly disregarded and concealed the fact that it was Epstein's pattern and practice to use the channels and instrumentalities of interstate and foreign commerce to recruit, entice, harbor, transport, provide, obtain, and maintain young women and underage girls for purposes of causing them to engage in commercial sex acts in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1591(a)(1). 100. JP Morgan and its employees had actual knowledge that they were facilitating Epstein's sexual abuse and sex-trafficking conspiracy to recruit, entice, harbor, transport, provide, obtain, and maintain young women and underage girls to engage in commercial sex acts through the means of force, threats of force, fraud, abuse of process, and coercion. 101. Despite this knowledge, JP Morgan intentionally paid for, concealed, facilitated, and participated in Epstein's and his co-conspirators' violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1591(a), which JP Morgan knew and was in reckless disregard of the fact that Epstein and his co-conspirators would 24 EFTA00161859 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 25 of 34 use its bank accounts and financial transactions to coerce, defraud, and force young women and underage girls to engage in commercial sex acts. 102. JP Morgan, through its employees and agents and their role in facilitating the financial aspect of Epstein's enterprise, actively facilitated or participated in the sex-trafficking conspiracy in which Epstein and his co-conspirators led young women and underage girls in the Virgin Islands and elsewhere to believe that they would be rewarded if they cooperated with Epstein and his co-conspirators and acquiesced to their demands. 103. JP Morgan committed this affirmative conduct knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that Epstein would use cash transactions and financial support provided by JP Morgan as a means to defraud, force, and coerce commercial sex acts from young women and underage girls. 104. In addition to having actual knowledge that it was participating in and facilitating the Epstein sex-trafficking venture, JP Morgan also knew that it was participating in and facilitating a venture that was engaged in coercive sex trafficking in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1591(a)(1). 105. In exchange for facilitating and covering up Epstein's commercial sex trafficking, JP Morgan's employees received financial benefits and career advancement from JP Morgan. 106. Facilitating and covering up Epstein's sex trafficking venture was a means for JP Morgan employees to obtain economic success and promotion within JP Morgan. 107. JP Morgan's knowing and intentional conduct has caused serious harm to the Virgin Islands and its residents, including without limitation financial harm, by facilitating the commission of sexual abuse against young women and underage girls, including their engagement in commercial sex acts, in the Virgin Islands. 25 EFTA00161860 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 26 of 34 108. JP Morgan's tortious conduct in violating the TVPA was outrageous and intentional because it was in deliberate furtherance of a widespread and dangerous criminal sex-trafficking venture operated in and from the Virgin Islands. JP Morgan's tortious conduct also evidenced a high degree of moral turpitude and demonstrated such wanton disregard for the safety of young women and underage girls in the Virgin Islands and elsewhere as to imply a deliberate indifference to its legal obligations. 109. By virtue of these knowing and intentional violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1591(a)(2), JP Morgan is liable to the Government for all appropriate relief under 18 U.S.C. § 1595(d), including damages suffered by the Government and/or Epstein's victims, punitive damages, restitution, appropriate injunctive relief, fines, reasonable attorneys' fees, and all such other relief as the Court deems appropriate. COUNT TWO Criminal Activity—Participating, Directly or Indirectly, in a Sex-Trafficking Venture Violation of Trafficking Victims Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1591(a)(2), actionable under Virgin Islands Criminally Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 14 V.I.C. §§ 604(e) and 605(a) 110. The Government restates and realleges paragraphs 1 to 109 of this Complaint as if funny set forth herein. III. The Virgin Islands Legislature enacted the CICO Act with the purpose to "curtail criminal activity and lessen its economic and political power in the Territory of the Virgin Islands by establishing new penal prohibitions and providing to law enforcement and the victims of criminal activity new civil sanctions and remedies." 14 V.I.C. § 601. 112. At all times material herein, JP Morgan was a "person" identified in 14 V.I.C. § 604(1). 26 EFTA00161861 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 27 of 34 113. At all times material herein, Epstein and his co-conspirators were engaged in an illicit sex-trafficking "enterprise" as defined in 14 V.I.C. § 604(h). 114. At all times material herein, JP Morgan supported and/or was associated with the Epstein sex-trafficking enterprise by providing banking and payment-processing services to Epstein, who resided in the Virgin Islands, and Epstein-controlled entities that were located and/or incorporated in the Virgin Islands. 115. In providing banking and payment-processing services to Epstein and Epstein- controlled entities in return for profits realized both from Epstein's and Epstein-controlled entities' accounts and from receiving referrals by Epstein of other high-value banking clients, JP Morgan knowingly, intentionally, and willfully benefitted financially and by receiving things of value from its participation, directly or indirectly, in Epstein's sex-trafficking venture and enterprise, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1591(a)(2). 116. JP Morgan's knowing, intentional, and willful receipt of financial benefits and things of value from its facilitation and participation in Epstein's sex-trafficking venture and enterprise through the financial infrastructure it provided and concealed constitutes a felony under 18 U.S.C. § 1591(b) and "criminal activity" as defined in 14 V.I.C. § 604(e). 117. By knowingly, intentionally, and willfully receiving financial benefits and things of value from its participation, directly or indirectly, via financing in Epstein's sex-trafficking venture and enterprise, JP Morgan enabled Epstein to have ready and reliable access to and use of resources with which to recruit, entice, harbor, transport, provide, obtain, and maintain young women and underage girls for purposes of causing them to engage in commercial sex acts in the Virgin Islands and elsewhere. JP Morgan thereby unlawfully conducted and/or participated in, 27 EFTA00161862 Case 1 22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 28 of 34 directly or indirectly, the affairs of the Epstein sex-trafficking enterprise through a pattern of illegal activity in violation of 14 V.I.C. § 605(a). 118. JP Morgan's illegal activity has caused serious harm to the Virgin Islands and its residents, including without limitation financial harm, by facilitating the commission of sexual abuse against young women and underage girls, including their facilitation and participation, directly or indirectly, in commercial sex acts, in the Virgin Islands. 119. By virtue of this pattern of illegal activity in furtherance of the Epstein sex- trafficking enterprise, JP Morgan is liable to the Government for all appropriate civil remedies under 14 V.I.C. § 607, including treble damages suffered by the Government and/or Epstein's victims, civil penalties, restitution and/or disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, appropriate injunctive relief, attorneys' fees and costs, and all such other relief as the Court deems appropriate. COUNT THREE Criminal Activity—Willfully Failing To Comply With Federal Banking Law, Violation of Bank Secrecy Act, 31 U.S.C. § 5322(a), as it incorporates actionable under Virgin Islands Criminally Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 14 V.I.C. §§ 604(e) and 605(a) 120. The Government restates and realleges paragraphs 1 to 119 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 121. The Virgin Islands Legislature enacted the CICO Act with the purpose to "curtail criminal activity and lessen its economic and political power in the Territory of the Virgin Islands by establishing new penal prohibitions and providing to law enforcement and the victims of criminal activity new civil sanctions and remedies." 14 V.I.C. § 601. 122. At all times material herein, JP Morgan was a "person" as defined in 14 V.I.C. § 604(1). 28 EFTA00161863 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 29 of 34 123. At all times material herein, Epstein and his co-conspirators were engaged in an illicit sex-trafficking "enterprise" as defined in 14 V.I.C. § 604(h). 124. At all times material herein, JP Morgan was employed by and/or associated with the Epstein sex-trafficking enterprise by providing banking and payment-processing services to Epstein, who resided in the Virgin Islands, and Epstein-controlled entities that were located and/or incorporated in the Virgin Islands. 125. In providing banking and payment-processing services to Epstein and Epstein- controlled entities, JP Morgan knowingly, intentionally, and willfully failed to comply with federal banking regulations in violation of 31 U.S.C. § 5322(a), . From accounts maintained and served at JP Morgan, Epstein and Epstein-controlled entities received payments of large dollar amounts for no apparent business or other lawful purpose and made repeated cash payments, sometimes in amounts and patterns designed to evade federal reporting requirements, to young women and/or underage girls who were sexually abused and coerced into engaging in commercial sexual acts in the Virgin Islands and elsewhere. 126. JP Morgan's knowing, intentional, and willful failure to comply with federal banking regulations constitutes a felony under 31 U.S.C. § 5322(a) and "criminal activity" as defined in 14 V.I.C. § 604(e). 29 EFTA00161864 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 30 of 34 127. By knowingly, intentionally, and willfully failing to comply with federal banking regulations, JP Morgan enabled Epstein to have ready and reliable access to and use of resources with which to recruit, entice, harbor, transport, provide, obtain, and maintain young women and underage girls for purposes of causing them to engage in commercial sex acts in the Virgin Islands and elsewhere. JP Morgan thereby unlawfully conducted and/or participated in, directly or indirectly, the affairs of the Epstein sex-trafficking enterprise through a pattern of illegal activity in violation of 14 V.I.C. § 605(a). 128. JP Morgan's illegal activity has caused serious harm to the Virgin Islands and its residents, including without limitation financial harm, by facilitating the commission of sexual abuse against young women and underage girls, including their engagement in commercial sex acts, in the Virgin Islands. 129. By virtue of this pattern of illegal activity in furtherance of the Epstein sex- trafficking enterprise, JP Morgan is liable to the Government for all appropriate civil remedies under 14 V.I.C. § 607, including treble damages suffered by the Government and/or Epstein's victims, civil penalties, restitution and/or disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, appropriate injunctive relief, attorneys' fees and costs, and all such other relief as the Court deems appropriate. COUNT FOUR Unfair Methods of Competition Violation of Virgin Islands Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, 12A V.I.C. § 304 130. The Government restates and realleges paragraphs 1 to 129 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 131. Section 304 of Title 12A of the Virgin Islands Code provides that "[i]t is unlawful for any person to engage in unfair methods of competition . . . in the conduct of any trade or commerce." 30 EFTA00161865 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 31 of 34 132. JP Morgan is a "person" as defined in 12A V.I.C. § 303(h). 133. JP Morgan's provision of banking services and payment processing for Epstein and Epstein-controlled entities constitutes "ifirade or commerce" as defined in 12 V.I.C. § 303(k). 134. In return for knowingly and intentionally participating in, directly or indirectly. facilitating, and concealing by failing to comply with federal banking regulations regarding Epstein-related accounts, JP Morgan both profited from the use of the funds in their accounts and received referrals of other high-value business opportunities from Epstein and his co-conspirators. 135. By receiving referrals of high-value business opportunities from Epstein and his co-conspirators in return for participating in, directly or indirectly, facilitating, and concealing by failing to comply with federal banking regulations regarding Epstein-related accounts, JP Morgan unlawfully and unjustly enriched itself at the expense of other banks that complied with their legal obligations. This conduct constitutes an unfair method of competition in violation of 12A V.I.C. § 304. 136. By virtue of its knowing, intentional, and repeated acts constituting unfair competition, JP Morgan is liable to the Government for all appropriate civil remedies under 12A V.I.C. §§ 328 and 332, including damages, civil penalties awarded on a per-violation basis pursuant to 12A V.I.C. § 328(6), appropriate injunctive relief, attorneys' fees and costs, and all such other relief as the Court deems appropriate. REQUEST FOR RELIEF The Government respectfully requests that the Court enter judgment in its favor, and against JP Morgan, as follows: 31 EFTA00161866 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 32 of 34 A. That the Court award the Government compensatory, consequential, general, and nominal damages, as suffered by the Government and/or Epstein's victims, and punitive damages, all against JP Morgan in amounts to be awarded at trial; B. That the Court award the Government punitive and exemplary damages against JP Morgan in an amount to be determined at trial; C. That the Court order JP Morgan to pay appropriate fines to the Government pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1591(b) in amounts to be determined at trial; D. That the Court order JP Morgan to provide restitution of all ill-gotten gains to the Government pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1593 and 14 V.I.C. § 607(a)(6) and pursuant to 14 V.I.C. § 608(c)(4) to protect the rights of victims and innocent persons in the interest of justice and consistent with the purposes of the CICO Act, in amounts to be determined at trial; E. That the Court award the Government treble damages against JP Morgan pursuant to 14 V.I.C. § 607(c) in an amount to be determined at trial; F. That the Court order JP Morgan to pay appropriate civil penalties to the Government pursuant to 14 V.I.C. § 607(e) and 12A V.I.C. § 328(b) and pursuant to 14 V.I.C. § 608(c)(4) to protect the rights of victims and innocent persons in the interest of justice and consistent with the purposes of the CICO Act, in amounts to be determined at trial; G. That the Court enter an injunction pursuant to 14 V.I.C. § 607(a)(2) and 12A V.I.C. § 328(a)(2) to prevent further illegal conduct and any concealment of illegal conduct; 32 EFTA00161867 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 33 of 34 H. That the Court order JP Morgan to provide disgorgement of all ill-gotten gains to the Government pursuant to 14 V.I.C. § 607(a)(6) and pursuant to 14 V.I.C. § 608(c)(4) to protect the rights of victims and innocent persons in the interest of justice and consistent with the purposes of the CICO Act, in amounts to be determined at trial; I. That the Court award the Government attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1595, 14 V.I.C. § 607(c), and 12A V.I.C. § 332 in amounts to be determined after trial; and J. That the Court award the Government and order JP Morgan to provide all such other relief as the Court deems appropriate. JURY DEMAND The Government demands a jury trial on all issues so triable. Dated: January 10, 2023 CAROL THOMAS-JACOBS, ESQ. ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL Is! David I. Ackerman DAVID I. ACKERMAN (NYS Bar #4110839) Motley Rice LLC 401 9th Street NW, Suite 630 Washington, DC 20004 Tel: (202) 849-4962 [email protected] CAROL THOMAS-JACOBS (NYS Bar #2941300) Admitted Pro Hac Vice Acting Attorney General of the United States Virgin Islands Virgin Islands Department of Justice 34-38 Kronprindsens Gade St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands 00802 Tel.: (340) 774-5666 ext. 10101 [email protected] 33 EFTA00161868 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16 Filed 01/10/23 Page 34 of 34 LINDA SINGER (NYS Bar #2473403) Admitted Pro Hac Vice Motley Rice LLC 401 9th Street NW, Suite 630 Washington, DC 20004 Tel: (202) 232-5504 lsingerernotleyrice.com PAIGE BOGGS Admitted Pro Hac Vice Motley Rice LLC 401 9th Street NW, Suite 630 Washington, DC 20004 Tel: (202) 386-9629 [email protected] 34 EFTA00161869 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 1 of 77 Exhibit 1 to Government's Amended Complaint against JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. EFTA00161870 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 2 of 77 FILED Novertber 30, 2022 12:02 PH ST-2 02 0-CV-000 / 4 TAMARA CHARLES CLERK OF WE COURT IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN ******************************** GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS, PLAINTIFF, V. DARREN K. INDYKE, in his individual capacity and in his capacity as the EXECUTOR FOR THE ESTATE OF JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN and ADMINISTRATOR OF THE 1953 TRUST; RICHARD D. KAHN, in his individual capacity and in his capacity as the EXECUTOR FOR THE ESTATE OF JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN, and ADMINISTRATOR OF THE 1953 TRUST; ESTATE OF JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN; THE 1953 TRUST; PLAN D, LLC; GREAT ST. JIM, LLC; NAUTILUS, INC.; HYPERION AIR, LLC; POPLAR, Inc.; SOUTHERN TRUST COMPANY, INC.; CYPRESS, INC.; MAPLE, INC.; LAUREL, INC.; AND JOHN AND JANE DOES, DEFENDANTS. Case No.: ST-20-CV-14 ACTION FOR DAMAGES JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT COMES NOW, the Government of the United States Virgin Islands ("Government") and files this Second Amended Complaint containing information that has become known through further investigation and third-party discovery and in support thereof, would show unto the Court as follows: JURISDICTION AND PARTIES I. The Attorney General of the United States Virgin Islands (herein after "Virgin Islands") brings this action on behalf of the Plaintiff, Government of the Virgin Islands, pursuant EFTA00161871 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 3 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 2 of 76 to 3 V.I.C. § 114 and 14 V.I.C. §607 and her statutory authority to enforce the laws of the Virgin Islands, and advocate for the public interest, safety, health and well-being of persons in the Virgin Islands. 2. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this civil matter pursuant to 4 V.I.C. § 76 and 14 V.I.C. § 607. 3. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the parties pursuant to 5 V.I.C. § 4903. 4. The Virgin Islands is an unincorporated territory of the United States. It consists of St. Thomas, St. Croix, St. John, and Water Island, and more than 40 surrounding islands and Cays, some of which are privately owned. Among these privately owned islands are Little St. James and Great St. James. 5. Jeffrey E. Epstein ("Epstein") was a resident of the Virgin Islands and he maintained a residence on Little St. James, which he acquired in 1998 and in 2016 he also purchased Great St. James. 6. Epstein registered as a sex offender in the Virgin Islands in 2010. He was a Tier 1 offender under Virgin Islands law based upon his Florida conviction of procuring a minor for prostitution. As a Tier 1 offender, Epstein was required to register annually with the Virgin Islands Department of Justice ("VIDOJ") and give advance notice of his travel to and from the Virgin Islands. Epstein was also subject to random address verification by VIDOJ. 7. Epstein was found dead on August 10, 2019 while in custody in New York for sex crimes. 8. Defendant Darren K. Indyke ("Defendant Indyke") is co-executor of the Estate of Jeffrey E. Epstein and Administrator of The 1953 Trust and was and/or is a participant in the activity of the "Epstein Enterprise," as set forth below. EFTA00161872 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 4 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 3 of 76 9. Defendant Richard D. Kahn ("Defendant Kahn") is co-executor of The Estate of Jeffrey E. Epstein and Administrator of The 1953 Trust and was and/or is a participant in the activity of the "Epstein Enterprise," as set forth below. 10. Defendants Indyke and Kahn, in addition to administering the Estate under the laws of the Virgin Islands, engaged in conduct in the Virgin Islands through their participation in businesses, financial transactions, and accounts registered, held, and operating in the Virgin Islands, and by filing documents with the Government of the Virgin Islands. II. Defendant, the Estate of Jeffrey E. Epstein ("Estate"), created upon Epstein's death, is domiciled in the Virgin Islands. On August 15, 2019, Defendants Indyke and Kahn filed a Petition for Probate and Letters Testamentary which included Epstein's last will and testament with the Probate Division of the Superior Court of the Virgin Islands. 12. The Petition reported the value of the real and personal property in The Estate located in the Virgin Islands at $577,672,654.00 dollars. 13. According to the Petition, the assets in the Virgin Islands thus far included: a. $56.5 million in cash; b. $127 million in fixed income and equity investments; c. $195 million in hedge fund and private equity investments; and d. $18.5 million in planes, boats, and automobiles. The Estate did not originally value his fine arts, antiques, and other valuables. 14. The Estate also included shares of various corporate entities which hold residences and real property used by Epstein, namely: a. Brownstone in New York City valued at $56 million; b. Ranch in New Mexico valued at $72 million; EFTA00161873 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 5 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 4 of 76 c. Gated home in Palm Beach, Florida, valued at $12 million; d. Seven units in an apartment building in Paris, valued at $8 million; and e. Great St. James and Little St. James, collectively valued at $86 million. 15. At the time of this Second Amended Complaint filing, the Estate's most recent accounting, filed February 1, 2021, valued its total assets at $240,782,955.84, which is almost 60% lower than the Estate's starting valuation less than 18 months earlier when Defendants Indyke and Kahn began their Co-Executorship of the Estate. 16. The Estate is responsible to pay penalties and damages for the acts committed by Epstein and the Epstein Enterprise described below. 17. Defendant The 1953 Trust ("The Trust") was created by Epstein, who "amended and restated" its terms only two days before his suicide. That same day, Epstein revised his Last Will and Testament, transferring all of his "property, real and personal, wherever situated" to The Trust. The Trust also contains Epstein's financial assets and is also responsible to pay damages for the acts committed by Epstein and the Epstein Enterprise described below. Defendants Indyke and Kahn, filed a Certificate of Trust in the Superior Court of the Virgin Islands for The Trust on August 26, 2019. 18. Epstein maintained a deliberately complex web of Virgin Islands corporations, limited liability companies, foundations, and other entities, not all of which are yet known to the Government of the Virgin Islands, through which he carried out and concealed his criminal conduct. 19. Epstein regularly created new entities in the territory and transferred properties and funds between them in order to preserve and shield Epstein's assets and to facilitate and conceal the unlawful acts described in this Complaint. EFTA00161874 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 6 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 5 of 76 20. These entities held properties, including Little St. James and Great St. James, at which Epstein trafficked and sexually abused women and underage girls. Epstein owned and arranged for private planes, helicopters, boat and automobiles to transport victims to, from, and within the Virgin Islands, and provided money to pay these young women and underage girls. 21. Epstein sat at the hub of this web, serving as president, member, manager, or director of each of the entities and, upon information and belief, directing their activities. 22. Defendant, Nautilus, Inc., is a corporation established and organized under the laws of the Virgin Islands. It was incorporated on November 22, 2011. 23. According to records of the Virgin Islands Recorder of Deeds, Nautilus, Inc. owns Little St. James, a/k/a Parcel Number 109803010100, a parcel of 3.1 million square feet valued at $3.2 million, with buildings and improvements valued at $4 million. 24. Epstein was president and director of Nautilus, Inc., which corporate filings describe as "holding property for personal use." Defendants Indyke and Kahn are the secretary and treasurer of Nautilus, Inc., respectively. The Estate values Epstein's holdings of Nautilus, Inc., which holds title to Little St. James at $63.9 million. 25. A deed recorded with the Virgin Islands Recorder of Deeds on December 30, 2011 reflects that the property was transferred from a Delaware entity, L.S.J., LLC, to Nautilus, Inc. for "TEN DOLLARS ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration." The quitclaim deed lists Jeffrey Epstein as the sole member of L.S.J., LLC, which it acquired Little Saint James via a warranty deed dated April 27, 1998. 26. As described below, Epstein engaged in a pattern and practice of trafficking and sexually abusing young women and female children on this private, secluded island of Little St. James where Epstein and his associates could avoid detection of their illegal activity from Virgin EFTA00161875 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 7 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 6 of 76 Islands and federal law enforcement and prevent these young women and underage girls from leaving freely and escaping the abuse. 27. Thus, Nautilus, Inc. participated in carrying out, facilitating and concealing Epstein's crimes, hence Little St. James became an instrumentality of those crimes. 28. Defendant, Great St. Jim, LLC, is a limited liability company established and organized under the laws of the Virgin Islands. Great St. Jim, LLC was organized on October 26, 2015. Great St. Jim, LLC, according to records of the Virgin Islands Recorder of Deeds, owns at least three properties that make up Great St. James acquired on January 28, 2016: Parcel Number 109801010100, consisting of 3.5 million square feet and valued at $17.5 million; Parcel Number 109801010200, consisting of 450,000 square feet of land, valued at $2.8 million; and Parcel Number 109801010300, 1.2 million square feet of land, valued at $2.7 million. According to a warranty deed filed with the Virgin Islands Recorder of Deeds, Epstein, through Great St. Jim, LLC, acquired the last two parcels for $5 million each. 29. Epstein is listed as manager and a member of Great St. Jim, LLC and the nature of its business is described as "holding assets." Upon information and belief, Epstein purchased these Great St. James properties—the island with closest proximity to Little St. James—to further shield his conduct on Little St. James from view, prevent his detection by law enforcement or the public, and allow him to continue and conceal his criminal enterprise. Epstein's significant investment in the purchase of Great St. James demonstrates his intent to expand his illegal operation in the Virgin Islands for years to come. Thus, Great St. Jim, LLC participated in carrying out, concealing, facilitating and continuing Epstein's crimes, and Great St. James became an instrumentality of those crimes. EFTA00161876 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 8 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 7 of 76 30. Defendant. Poplar. Inc.. is a corporation established and organized under the laws of the Virgin Islands. Poplar, Inc. was incorporated on November 22, 2011. Epstein was president and director of Poplar, Inc., and its purpose was described in corporate filings as "holding property for personal use." Defendants Indyke and Kahn are secretary and treasurer of Poplar, Inc., respectively. 31. A certificate of incumbency provided to the Department of Planning and Natural Resources ("DPNR") also lists Epstein as president of Poplar, Inc. and expressly authorizes the incorporators to conduct "transactions related to permitting matters submitted on behalf of Great St. Jim, LLC." 32. Poplar, Inc. is listed as the signatory for the 2017 Annual Report for Great St. Jim, LLC, and the signature appears to be Epstein's. The Petition for Probate and Letters Testamentary filed by The Estate lists Poplar, Inc. as holding title to Great St. James. Thus, Poplar, Inc. participated in carrying out, concealing, facilitating and continuing Epstein's crimes. 33. Defendant, Plan D, LLC is a limited liability company established and organized under the laws of the Virgin Islands. In its original Articles of Organization, filed October 19, 2012, and Annual Report filings, Epstein's pilot, Larry Visoski, was listed as Plan D, LLC's sole manager/member. However, the July 31, 2019 Annual Report revealed Epstein as the principal behind Plan D, LLC. 34. Upon information and belief, Plan D, LLC owns one or more of the airplanes and helicopters that Epstein used to transport young women and children to and from the Virgin Islands to carry out the criminal pattern of activity described below. Among the airplanes owned by Plan D, LLC is a Gulfstream with N-number N212JE. Flight logs and travel notices indicate EFTA00161877 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 9 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 8 of 76 that Epstein used this plane to traffic and transport and young women and underage girls to the Virgin Islands. 35. Defendant, Hyperion Air, LLC is a limited liability company established and organized under the laws of the Virgin Islands on October 19, 2012. Jeffrey Epstein is a manager/member of Hyperion Air, LLC, along with his pilot, Larry Visoski. The purpose of Hyperion Air, LLC is listed in its Annual Report as "holding assets." 36. Hyperion Air, LLC is the registered owner of a Bell helicopter with N-number N331JE and a Keystone helicopter with N-number N722JE. Upon information and belief, Epstein used these helicopters to transport young women and underage girls between St. Thomas and Little St. James. 37. Defendant Southern Trust Company, Inc. was originally incorporated in the Virgin Islands on November 18, 2011 as Financial Informatics, Inc., but changed its name to Southern Trust Company in September 2012. Southern Trust Company is a tenant at American Yacht Harbor in Red Hook, St. Thomas, and Epstein is a "passive investor" in IGY-AYH, d/b/a American Yacht Harbor. By the end of 2013, according to its corporate filings, Southern Trust Company has assets of $198.5 million; four years later, its assets reached $391.3 million. From 2011 until at least 2018, Jeffrey Epstein was the President/Director of Southern Trust Company, and Defendants Kahn and Indyke were Treasurer/Director and Secretary/Director, respectively. Epstein was the sole owner of Southern Trust Company. 38. Defendant Cypress, Inc. is a Virgin Islands corporation that was formed and first licensed in or about November 2011. As of December 31, 2018, Epstein was listed as President/Director and Defendants and Co-Executors Indyke and Kahn were listed, respectively, as Vice President/Secretary/Director and Treasurer/Director of Cypress, Inc. Cypress, Inc. owns EFTA00161878 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 10 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 9 of 76 the property 49 Zorro Ranch Road in Stanley, New Mexico, which was transferred to it in or about December 2011, shortly after it was incorporated. 39. Defendant Maple, Inc. is a Virgin Islands corporation that was formed and first licensed in or about November 2011. As of December 31, 2018, Epstein was listed as President/Director and Defendants and Co-Executors Indyke and Kahn were listed, respectively, as Vice President/Secretary/Director and Treasurer/Director of Maple, Inc. Maple, Inc. owns the property 9 East 71st Street in New York, New York, which was transferred to it on or about December 23, 2011, shortly after it was incorporated. 40. Defendant Laurel, Inc. is a Virgin Islands corporation that was formed and first licensed in or about November 2011. As of December 31, 2018, Epstein was listed as President/ Director and Defendants and Co-Executors Indyke and Kahn were listed, respectively, as Vice President/Secretary/Director and Treasurer/Director of Laurel, Inc. Laurel, Inc. owns the property 358 Brillo Way in Palm Beach, Florida, which was transferred to it in or about December 2011, shortly after it was formed. 41. John and Jane Does represent individuals and entities whose identities or involvement with Epstein are currently unknown. The Government of the Virgin Islands will amend the Complaint to add these individuals and entities when discovered. 42. The Attorney General brings this action to seek all remedies available to the Government of the Virgin Islands in enforcing its laws and protecting the public interest and public safety. These claims are distinct from, and are not intended to supplant, the claims of victims who were unconscionably harmed by Jeffrey Epstein and his associates. EFTA00161879 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 11 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 10 of 76 FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS A. The Conduct of the "Epstein Enterprise" in the Virgin Islands 43. Epstein and his associates, including Defendants, identified and recruited female victims, including children, and transported them to the Virgin Islands where they were abused and injured. Epstein, through and in association with Defendants, trafficked, raped, sexually assaulted and held captive underage girls and young women at his properties in the Virgin Islands. 44. Epstein created a network of companies and individuals who participated in and conspired with him in a pattern of criminal activity related to the sex trafficking, forced labor, sexual assault, child abuse, and sexual servitude of these young women and children. Epstein and his associates trafficked underage girls to the Virgin Islands, held them captive, and sexually abused them, causing them grave physical, mental, and emotional injury. 45. To accomplish his illegal ends, Epstein formed an association in fact with multiple Defendants and others (both companies and individuals) who were willing to participate in, facilitate, and conceal Epstein's criminal activity in exchange for Epstein's bestowal of financial and other benefits, including sexual services and forced labor from victims. 46. This illicit association of Epstein, Defendants, and his associates constitute what is referred to herein as the "Epstein Enterprise." Epstein's associates in the Epstein Enterprise, including, but not limited to, those named as Defendants knowingly facilitated, participated in, and concealed Epstein's illegal conduct. 47. Epstein used his wealth and power to create the Epstein Enterprise which engaged in a pattern of criminal activity in the Virgin Islands by repeatedly procuring and EFTA00161880 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 12 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 11 of 76 subjecting underage girls and young women to unlawful sexual conduct, sex trafficking, and forced labor. 48. The Epstein Enterprise engaged in a pattern of criminal activity in the Virgin Islands (and elsewhere) with the criminal purpose and goal of placing a steady supply of vulnerable female children and young women into sexual servitude in service of Epstein's desires, and those of his associates. The Epstein Enterprise maintained and made available young women and underage girls for the purpose of engaging them in forced labor and sexual activities and used coercion and deception to procure, abuse, and harbor its victims. 49. Flight logs and other sources establish that between 2001 and 2019 the Epstein Enterprise transported underage girls and young women to the Virgin Islands, who were then taken via helicopter or private vessel to Little St. James where they were then deceptively subjected to sexual servitude, forced to engage in sexual acts and coerced into commercial sexual activity and forced labor. 50. In furtherance of its criminal activities, the Epstein Enterprise used its aircrafts to transport the young women and underage girls to the Virgin Islands for purposes of sexual abuse and exploitation. 51. The Epstein Enterprise facilitated and participated in the sexual molestation and exploitation of numerous girls between the age of 12 and 17 years old. 52. On the pretext of providing modeling opportunities, careers and contracts, associates of the Epstein Enterprise, funded by the Epstein Enterprise, lured and recruited young women and underage girls to travel to locations including the Virgin Islands where, upon information and belief, based on the pattern and practice of the Epstein Enterprise, they were sexually abused and exploited. EFTA00161881 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 13 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 12 of 76 53. Associates in the Epstein Enterprise recruited both victims and abusers into the Epstein Enterprise, participated in sexual acts of rape and abuse of minors and witnessed Epstein and others engage in sexual acts with children. 54. As recent as 2018, air traffic controllers and other airport personnel reported seeing Epstein leave his plane with young girls some of whom appeared to be between the age of 11 and 18 years. 55. Upon information and belief, based on Epstein's pattern of trafficking and sexually abusing young girls, the Epstein Enterprise trafficked and abused these girls, and others, in the Virgin Islands through 2018. 56. When sued in civil court for committing sex trafficking and sex crimes, Epstein never denied engaging in sexual acts with underage females and procuring underage females for prostitution, but instead consistently invoked his Fifth Amendment privilege against self- incrimination. 57. Upon information and belief, the Epstein Enterprise kept a computerized list of underage girls who were in or proximate to the Virgin Islands, and able to be transported to Epstein's residence at Little St. James in the Virgin Islands. 58. The Epstein Enterprise engaged in a pattern of criminal conduct by trafficking children and young women and placing them in sexual servitude and forced labor in the Virgin Islands. The Epstein Enterprise repeatedly violated 14 V.I.C. §§ 133 to 138, which prohibit trafficking and sexual abuse. The Epstein Enterprise also repeatedly violated laws against child abuse and neglect, including 14 V.I.C. § 505, which defines the crime of child abuse as knowingly or recklessly causing "a child to suffer physical, mental, or emotional injury," or causing a child to be placed in a situation where such injury is foreseeable, and 14 V.I.C. § 506, which applies, as EFTA00161882 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 14 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 13 of 76 here, where the child suffers serious physical, mental, or emotional injury as a result of that abuse. The harm to Epstein's victims was both fully foreseeable and deeply damaging. 59. The Epstein Enterprise knowingly recruited, transported, transferred, harbored, received, procured, obtained, isolated, maintained, and enticed young women and girls to engage in forced labor (such as providing massages) and, ultimately, sexual servitude at his little St. James residence. 60. A 15-year old victim was forced into sexual acts with Epstein and others and then attempted to escape by swimming off the Little St. James Island. Epstein and others organized a search party that located her and kept her captive by, among other things, confiscating her passport. Another victim, who was first engaged in provide massages to Epstein, was then forced to perform sexual acts at Little St. James in the Virgin Islands. When she attempted to escape the "private island," Epstein and a search party found her, returned her to his house, and suggested physical restraint or harm if she failed to cooperate. 61. Another victim was flown by Epstein and his associates to New York or Palm Beach and then to the Virgin Islands dozens of times from 2004, when she was age 20, to 2017. She was repeatedly abused by Epstein and also was pressed to have sex with Epstein's business colleagues. 62. During the latter part of this period, she was forced into an arranged marriage to another victim that was facilitated by Defendant/Co-Executor Indyke to prevent the other victim from being deported. Indyke and a New York immigration lawyer retained by Epstein prepared the victim for communications with U.S. immigration officials almost immediately after the wedding. DefendanUCo-Executor Kahn provided a letter of reference for the immigration proceeding. When the victim inquired about ending the marriage and leaving Epstein's circle, EFTA00161883 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 15 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 14 of 76 Indyke repeatedly tried to talk her out of a divorce and threatened that she would lose Epstein's and his associates' protection. 63. The Epstein Enterprise forced at least three separate arranged marriages, in each case requiring American female victims to marry foreign victims to avoid their deportation. The victims were coerced into to participating in these arranged marriages, and understood that there would be consequences, including serious reputational and bodily harm, if they refused to enter a marriage or attempted to end it. In each instance, Indyke and Kahn knowingly facilitated the fraudulent and coerced marriages, performing and securing the legal and accounting work involved and enabling a fraud that would further bind Epstein's victims to him and enable Epstein to continue to control and abuse these victims sexually. 64. The Epstein Enterprise deceptively lured underage girls and women into its sex trafficking ring with money and promises of employment, career opportunities and school assistance. The Epstein Enterprise preyed on their financial and other vulnerabilities, and promised victims money, shelter, gifts, employment, tuition and other items of value. For example, participants in the Epstein Enterprise targeted young and underage females under the pretext that they would be paid substantially merely to provide massages to him and others. However, once drawn in, victims were then pressured and coerced to engage in sexual acts. 65. The Epstein Enterprise forced underage victims to recruit others to perform services and engage in sexual acts—a trafficking pyramid scheme. 66. The Epstein Enterprise paid girls for each "meeting," with additional money if they brought additional girls. Epstein reportedly required three meetings per day. EFTA00161884 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 16 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 15 of 76 67. The Epstein Enterprise used the term "work" as a code for sexual abuse, and, upon information and belief, reportedly kept computer records of the contact information for the victims. 68. Consistent with his creation and use of a complex web of entities to carry out and conceal the criminal trafficking enterprise in the Virgin Islands, the Epstein Enterprise sometimes paid young women and underage girls he exploited and trafficked through his charitable foundations. 69. Once the girls and women were recruited, participants in the Epstein Enterprise enforced their sexual servitude of victims by coercion, including but not limited to, confiscating passports, controlling and extinguishing external communications, and threatening violence. They also made fraudulent statements to family members of victims, claiming victims were being well cared for and supported financially in college and other educational opportunities. 70. One of the victims, who was flown by Epstein and his associates to the Virgin Islands dozens of times up until as late as 2017, described how Epstein exercised strict control over her and other victims' activity. The girls had to give notice if they left the main residence and were kept to a rigid set of roles and rules. Epstein brought victims to business meetings, where they were often required to massage his feet or run errands. Victims had to use Epstein- approved doctors and sign consent forms for access to their medical records. Epstein also required them to give him their email passwords. Each of these was a means of demonstrating and reinforcing his control over the women and girls. 71. During this time period through 2017, this victim observed a succession of girls and young women who were transported to Little St. James and while there were called into Epstein's office or sauna to engage in sexual acts. EFTA00161885 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 17 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 16 of 76 72. Another victim, who was brought to Little St. James more than 50 times during the years 2000 to 2002, when she was 17 to 19 years old, was required to have sexual relations with "guests" of Epstein, and was subjected to sexual abuse virtually every day, and on some days, multiple times a day by Epstein or his guests. 73. This victim, too, observed a large number of young women and girls around Epstein at Little St. James. Many of them did not speak English, which was Epstein's preference since they spoke less. 74. Epstein sent these victims out to night clubs or on shopping trips to try to identify and recruit other young women and girls, at times paying them a fee for each recruit. 75. The Epstein Enterprise transported, held, sexually abused, trafficked, and concealed women and children at his property in the Virgin Islands dozens of times over nearly two decades. B. Defendants and Co-Executors Indyke and Kahn were Instrumental to the Epstein Enterprise's Human Trafficking and Financial Fraud. 76. Defendants Kahn and Indyke organized, controlled, and directed almost every aspect of the Epstein Enterprise. They were officers in virtually every corporate entity that Epstein created to fund and conceal his activities. They were deeply involved in the financial activities of the Epstein-owned entities, including those of Defendant Southern Trust Company, which made clear that Southern Trust did not provide the services described to the Government as the basis for tax incentives that allowed Epstein to fraudulently obtain more than $80 million from the Government. 77. Defendants Indyke and Kahn also directed, approved, enabled, and justified millions of dollars in payments that fueled the Epstein Enterprise's sex trafficking, including EFTA00161886 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 18 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 17 of 76 payments to women who were forced to have sex with Epstein and/or recruited others to be victimized. Defendants Indyke and Kahn obtained large and frequent stocks of cash for Epstein which, based on public knowledge, would have funded Epstein's cash payments for "massages"—code for forced sex. 78. Defendants Indyke and Kahn participated with Epstein in coercing his sex trafficking victims, in at least three cases, to enter into arranged and forced marriages in order to obtain immigration status for the foreign women so that they could continue to be available to Epstein for his abuse — a doubly-deep assault on their will and dignity. Defendant Kahn provided a letter of reference for at least one immigration application and tax services to the spouses, and Defendant Indyke paid the immigration lawyer who applied for citizenship for the women and threatened at least one who indicated that she would seek a divorce. They used their professional skills and authority to carry out this abhorrent scheme. 79. Indyke and Kahn were, in short, the indispensable captains of Epstein's criminal enterprise, roles for which they were richly rewarded. 80. Defendants Kahn and Indyke controlled and directed the activities of the other entities and personal bank accounts of Epstein accounts after they were funded. One, and frequently both, of them were officers or directors of Butterfly Trust; of companies holding Epstein's real property (as laid out below); and of ; FT Real Estate Inc.; Gratitude America, Inc.; J. Epstein Virgin Islands Foundation, Inc.; Jeepers, Inc.; Mort, Inc.; Nautilus, Inc.; and Zorro Development Corporation: among others. 81. Along with their officer and director roles, Defendants Kahn and/or Indyke also had signatory authority over virtually all of the accounts held by the Epstein Enterprise entities, EFTA00161887 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 19 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 18 of 76 which allowed them to personally authorize and sign off on payments totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars to the Enterprise's sex-trafficking and abuse victims, including those who also acted as recruiters, and other expenses including legal fees, apartment rent, and tuition. Further, they routinely withdrew cash in various ways, including ATMs, checks, or by converting U.S. Dollars to Euros. In many instances, Kahn and/or Indyke structured these transactions in order to evade the bank's reporting requirements. 82. Defendant Kahn also oversaw the accounting and tax reporting for the other entities in the Epstein Enterprise. As discussed below the "Tree entities," Laurel, Maple, and Cypress, filed materially false and misleading financial statements by not including the properties in other states they owned or related expenses. These financial statements were submitted to the Office of Lieutenant Governor of the Virgin Islands and signed by Defendant Kahn. In addition, in 2013, Defendant Kahn also directed the outside accountant not to report the properties on their respective tax returns. 83. The J. Epstein Virgin Islands Foundation, Inc. (the "Foundation") is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt private foundation that was founded in June 2000 and registered in the Virgin Islands. 84. As of October 23, 2007, Indyke was listed as President of the Foundation. 85. Between September 2015 and June 2019, Indyke made over a period of more than three and a half years until the middle of 2019. EFTA00161888 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 20 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 19 of 76 86. In November 2017. Indyke 87. These payments were inconsistent with the charitable purpose of the Foundation and designed to serve the private benefit and criminal activities of Epstein and the Epstein Enterprise. 88. Earlier in 2017, Indyke signed a Foundation check for $160,000 to resolve a fine Epstein had incurred for construction on Great St. James Island that violated Virgin Islands environmental regulations and attempted to make the payment appear to be a charitable donation. Over two years later, the Estate had to repay this amount to the Foundation after questions were raised to Epstein's lawyer about the propriety of the Foundation payment. 89. With help from Indyke and Kahn, Epstein established and operated separate businesses through which he could pay victims and recruiters, and, upon information and belief, which he used to maintain their immigration status. 90. is a New York Limited Liability Company, the Articles of Organization of which were filed in November 2014. The Articles list who was forced and coerced to have sex with Epstein, . was manipulated, exploited, and controlled by the Epstein Enterprise. 91. According to operating agreement, Kahn was to be the initial Manager of the company, with full and complete authority, power, and discretion to do all things necessary or convenient to manage, control, and carry out the business. Kahn also had signatory authority for bank accounts. EFTA00161889 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 21 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 20 of 76 92. One of bank accounts was funded entirely with money transferred from Epstein's personal bank accounts. 93. payroll was paid to two persons, one of whom was the listed sole owner. Kahn gave conflicting reports to bank about the second person on the company's payroll and the reasons for its payments to her. Once, he described her as an , which would justify the payments in light of purported line of business, but which appears to have been false. The other time, Kahn described this payroll recipient which would not justify payments to her, but which appears to be true. 94. LSJE, LLC is a Virgin Islands Limited Liability Company that was organized on October 27, 2011. Defendants Indyke and Kahn were authorized signatories on the company's checking account. 95. Indyke and Kahn signed company checks for combined value of almost $300,000 made out personally to young women or to, again, the immigration lawyer in New York who was involved in one or more forced marriages arranged among Epstein's victims to secure a victim's immigration status. 96. Upon information and belief, after his guilty plea in Florida for soliciting prostitution from a minor, Epstein began to focus on procuring and abusing women from Eastern Europe. These women's immigration status and language barriers made them more isolated, dependent, and vulnerable to Epstein's abuse and manipulation. 97. The Butterfly Trust is a trust created for the benefit of numerous persons who performed work for Epstein, including numerous young women with Eastern European surnames and also including Indyke and Kahn themselves. Indyke and Kahn were authorized signatories on the Trust's checking account. EFTA00161890 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 22 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 21 of 76 98. Indyke and Kahn signed trust checks for combined value of over $1,000,000 made out personally to young women, or their associated entities, who in some instances were not beneficiaries of the trust. 99. Defendants and Co-Executors Indyke and Kahn also were deeply involved with transactions made in and out of Epstein's personal accounts, for which Indyke had signatory authority, that were flagged by bank representatives and the New York Department of Financial Services as potentially suspicious. 100. Indyke also engaged in repeated transactions that seem designed to have provided Epstein with cash in small enough increments to avoid triggering financial reporting requirements. It is well known that Epstein paid girls and women in cash for sexual encounters that began as or were euphemistically described as massages, or for recruiting other girls to provide such massages. 101. On July 20, 2016, Indyke brought two checks to a branch teller window for withdrawal, one for $7,500 drawn on Epstein's personal account and one for $4,000 drawn on Indyke's business account. Indyke presented the $7,500 check for cashing and stated that he would be cashing the other check the next business day to avoid all the paperwork. On July 21, 2016, Indyke returned to cash the $4,000 check. 102. From June 2018 to February 2019, there was a series of 97 separate withdrawals of $1,000 made from this account at an ATM that is a short walk from Indyke's law office. 103. From this same account, Indyke wrote 11 checks, between April 2016 and April 2019, for the purpose of converting U.S. dollars to Euros totaling over $126,000. Some of the checks contained the notation "Euros for safe." EFTA00161891 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 23 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 22 of 76 104. Also, Indyke withdrew large amounts of cash in single transactions. For instance, on January 17, 2018, Indyke cashed a check for $100,000. Although Indyke cashed the check, Kahn arranged with the Bank representative to have the cash ready for pickup. 105. Payments from this account, for which Indyke had signatory authority, totaling over $2,500,000 were made to dozens of women with Eastern European surnames, purportedly for hotel expenses, tuition, and rent, and to, again, the immigration lawyer in New York who was involved in one or more forced marriages arranged among Epstein's victims to secure victims' immigration status. 106. For another of Epstein's personal accounts with the same bank, Indyke, from 2014 to 2016, made almost 45 separate check-cashing withdrawals at a pace of two to three per month, each for the amount of $7,500, which was the bank's limit for third-party withdrawals. 107. From this same account, between June 2014 and September 2015, Indyke wrote eight checks for the purpose of converting U.S. dollars to Euros. Each of the checks to effectuate the conversion approximated $7,500, presumably in order to evade reporting requirements, with some containing the notation "Euros for safe." 108. Payments from this account totaling over $1,000,000 were made to dozens of women with Eastern European surnames and to, again, the immigration lawyer in New York who was involved in one or more forced marriages arranged among Epstein's victims to secure a victim's immigration status. 109. Indyke made wire transfers from another of Epstein's personal accounts with a different bank totaling almost between November 2016 and July 2019 (just before Epstein's arrest) to EFTA00161892 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 24 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 23 of 76 110. From another of Epstein's personal accounts with another different bank, for which someone acting on Epstein's behalf made a total of In III. Payments from this account totaling almost 112. Upon information and belief, based on their authority for the accounts, their interactions with the relevant banks, and records indicating that they made or approved the transactions, these payments could have only been made with the knowledge and/or at the direction of Indyke and Kahn. 113. The sheer complexity of the infrastructure that Epstein set up and maintained with the participation of Kahn and Indyke suggest their unlawful purpose. Based on the Government's current knowledge, Epstein, with Kahn and Indyke, held and managed at least 140 different bank accounts for Epstein and Epstein-owned entities, many of which existed only to transfer payments to other entities and accounts. 114. Kahn and Indyke profited substantially from their relationship with Epstein. The amount of their payments is further evidence of the illicit nature of the work they performed. 115. From 2011 to 2019, Epstein and Epstein-owned entities paid over to Defendant/Co-Executor Indyke, and over to Defendant/Co-Executor Kahn. This includes on records obtained so far, Based EFTA00161893 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 25 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 24 of 76 116. Indyke and Kahn were paid through multiple entities, including HBRK Associates, Inc. (Kahn), Coatue Enterprises, LLC (Kahn), Birch Tree BR, LLC (Indyke) Harlequin Dane, LLC (Indyke) and Darren K Indyke, PLLC, which functioned as shell companies and engaged in no activities other than to coordinate the activities of Epstein's Enterprise, including the receiving and sending money to other entities they held. 117. Since they were appointed as Co-Executors of the Epstein Estate in 2019, Defendants Indyke and Kahn have approved the release of Estate funds to pay for the legal fees and costs of persons who—like the Co-Executors themselves—are alleged herein to have participated in the criminal activity of the Epstein Enterprise. C. The "Epstein Enterprise" Abused Privileges of Residency to Carry out its Criminal Scheme 118. The Epstein Enterprise in 1998 acquired Little St. James in the Virgin Islands as the perfect hideaway and haven for trafficking young women and underage girls for sexual servitude, child abuse and sexual assault. Little St. James is a secluded, private island, nearly two miles from St. Thomas with no other residents. It can be visited only by private boat or helicopter; no public or commercial transportation is available to carry persons on or off the island, and no bridge connects the island to St. Thomas. Epstein had easy access to Little St. James from the private airfield on St. Thomas, only 10 minutes away by his private helicopter, but the women and children he trafficked, abused, and held there were not able to leave without his permission and assistance, as it was too far and dangerous to swim to St. Thomas. 119. In 2016, upon information and belief, using a straw purchaser to hide Epstein's identity, the Epstein Enterprise acquired Great St. James the nearest island to Little St. James. By then, Epstein was a convicted sex offender. Upon information and belief, the Epstein Enterprise EFTA00161894 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 26 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 25 of 76 purchased the island for more than $20 million because its participants wanted to ensure that the island did not become a base from which others could view their activities or visitors. By acquiring ownership and control of Great St. James to the exclusion of others, the Epstein Enterprise created additional barriers to prevent those held involuntarily on Little St. James from escaping or obtaining help from others. 120. Great St. James and Little St. James are environmentally sensitive locations, with native coral and wildlife protected by federal and territorial law and enforcement authorities. The Department of Planning and Natural Resources ("DPNR") regulates and monitors construction in the Coastal Zone to protect, maintain and manage the precious natural resources of the Virgin Islands. Under its authority, DPNR repeatedly issued citations and assessed thousands of dollars of fines for violations of the Virgin Islands construction code and environmental protection laws on both Little St. James and Great St. James-significant penalties to the agency and to the average resident of the Virgin Islands. But because of Epstein's enormous wealth, these fines had little effect in curbing or stopping the Epstein Enterprise's unlawful conduct or conforming its activities to the law. 121. As a result of illegal construction activity of the Epstein Enterprise, the Virgin Islands has incurred, and will incur, significant expenses to remove the illegal construction or remediate its effects on natural resources in and around Little St. James and Great St. James. The extent of the potential environmental damage is unknown at this time as the illegal construction has not been removed or remediated. 122. The Epstein Enterprise continues to attempt to prevent or limit DPNR authorities from conducting random inspections on the Little St. James and Great St. James necessary to comply with Virgin Islands law. EFTA00161895 Case 1:22-cv-10904-JSR Document 16-1 Filed 01/10/23 Page 27 of 77 GVI v. Estate of Jeffrey Epstein GVI's Second Amended Complaint Page 26 of 76 123. The Epstein Enterprise's violation of the construction and environmental laws was part of a pattern of behavior in flouting the laws of the Virgin Islands and holding itself above the law. Upon information and belief, as described above, the Epstein Enterprise undertook construction at Great St. James after 2016 to continue the scheme to carry out and conceal his trafficking and sexual abuse of young women and children in the Virgin Islands. These actions are also indicative of the Epstein Enterprise's disregard for Virgin Islands' law. The Epstein Enterprise used the Virgin Islands' land, resources, people, and laws for its illicit purposes. Rather than participating lawfully in this community, the Epstein Enterprise took advantage of the secluded nature of the islands in furtherance of its crimes. 124. As a result of its deplorable and unlawful conduct, the Epstein Enterprise has subjected the Virgin Islands to public portrayals as a hiding place for human trafficking and sex crimes. D. The "Epstein Enterprise" Fraudulently Concealed its Conduct 125. The Epstein Enterprise fraudulently concea