Epstein’s Lawyers Say They “Didn’t Know” — But Follow the Money

The release of the depositions of both Jeffrey Epstein's accountant, Richard Khan, and his

lawyer, Darren Indike, is leading to more questions about the Justice Department's handling

of the Epstein case.

Here's what they told the House Oversight Committee.

I've been talking about the investigation and prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein that were

conducted in Florida.

As you know, Mr. Epstein was subsequently investigated and executed in the Southern District

of New York.

Were you ever contacted by the Department of Justice or the FBI in connection with

that investigation?

No.

Were you ever contacted by the Department of Justice or the FBI in connection with the

investigation or prosecution of Gilaean Maxwell in the Southern District of New York?

I was not personally contacted.

Have you ever been formally questioned by any government authority in connection with

Mr. Epstein?

I've never been questioned by any government authority.

Absolutely.

Wild, neither Khan or Indike have an accused of wrongdoing, but they are two men who worked

with the deceased sex offender for years.

It's hard to believe the DOJ would not have interest in talking to either of them.

As NBC News points out, their testimony directly undercuts the government's review of the

case, which, quote, the Justice Department and the FBI called Exhaustive in an unsigned

joint memo in July, announcing that the government would not disclose additional materials on

the disgraced financier.

I want to bring in our senior legal reporter, Lisa Rubin, and Tara Palmeri is with us.

She writes the red letter on Substack and has hosted two podcast series on the Epstein

case.

It is good to see you both.

That is really startling.

To me, explain to me how it is even possible, the DOJ that SDNY would not have reached out

to them.

I have no idea why SDNY would not have reached out to them.

I can explain why they might not have reached out prior to Epstein's death.

For two reasons.

One, both of them were still in his employ, and to the extent that you don't want to tip

off the subject of an investigation, you don't want to get to the people closest to him who

are likely to be loyal to him and help, perhaps, with the subversion of evidence.

That was something that was accused with respect to Jeffrey Epstein in the earlier Florida

investigation that they destroyed things that were at the Palm Beach House that they disposed

of computer equipment and other evidence.

If you thought that was likely to happen again, you might not ask Derren Endiger, Rich

Khan to come in.

But the other reason is something that Michael Feinberg touched on with you yesterday, which

is Derren Endiger as a lawyer, is not typically the kind of person you bring in to talk to.

Usually when the FBI wants to talk to someone like that, they have to establish that there

is, like, sort of a higher threshold for talking to someone who behaves as a lawyer.

That having been said, why they didn't talk to either of them after Epstein was found

dead is stunning to me.

They had lots of information that they could have provided that would have been helpful

in the prosecution of Galein Maxwell.

And, of course, some of their answers yesterday, Alicia, I believe, inculpate them.

And why they weren't investigated with respect to potential crimes they may have committed,

or at least were potentially aiding and abetting, which sound do you think you know?

I am thinking about a number of things, but in particular, I'm thinking about immigration-related

crimes.

So, there are a number of pieces of sound where each of them were asked about instances

in which they helped Epstein victims arrange for documents that would be helpful in immigration

-related proceedings.

In Mr. Khan's case, he was asked, for example, about a letter that he wrote on behalf

of two known Epstein victims, one an American citizen, the other a foreign-born person, where

he attested to the strength of their relationship and their passion for each other.

He admitted on, in his congressional testimony, that that was an embellished letter I'd like

to go further than that.

One of the people in that relationship was Jeffrey Epstein's known girlfriend and his girlfriend

at the time of his death.

She is the largest beneficiary of his will.

How a person who principally serves as his accountant and who knew each of these women,

he said he knew both of them, I'm not naming them for their own safety and privacy, but

he said he knew both of them.

Why he didn't know one of them was Jeffrey Epstein's girlfriend.

At the time he was asked to write this letter, it's kind of baffling to me.

Right.

Okay.

I want to stick on that point, Tara.

Here is another moment from Darren Indyke's deposition.

Let's listen and then we'll talk about it on the other side.

Mr. Indyke, with the benefit of hindsight, were there things you witnessed or observed

about Mr. Epstein that could have suggested he was trafficking and sexually abusing young

women and girls?

Let me add what period of time during the entirety of your relationship?

No.

I had no knowledge of any allegations before 2006 and after 2006 when he ultimately went

to jail and was back, my understanding was that he was underage people, sex within the

age people.

I understand it was limited to Florida and when I was in New York, which is where I spent

my time, I never saw any underage people.

I never saw any sexual activity.

He was, by all accounts, a very smart man.

I couldn't imagine he would do anything to put himself back in that position again.

So no.

There's nothing that I saw that would lead me to believe that he was engaging in miscalculation.

Tara, based on the extensive reporting you have done on this case, does that seem plausible

to you?

No, it's not plausible at all.

It's incredibly, it's baffling, frankly, to think that.

I mean, he was literally withdrawing cash at $7,500 each.

He needed cash.

What do you need cash for if not for trafficking?

He's paying off all of these settlements for what?

What are you paying settlements for?

He claims he didn't know what the settlements were about.

He says that wealthy people, they pay settlements all the time to deal with lawsuits.

It's shocking to me that he would say that.

I think he needs to be called back in, too, to answer questions about Jane Doe 4, one

of the Epstein survivors who alleged that she was assaulted with Epstein and President

Trump.

And during the hearings, he said that he paid a settlement to this Jane Doe 4, and then

he retracted it.

So he needs to be brought back in to answer further questions under oath.

I think this entire hearing needs to be redone, frankly.

All right.

I have more questions about that.

And no one is going anywhere.

We're going to sneak in a quick break and then we're going to be right back.

I'm not satisfied until the survivors are satisfied.

That's my benchmark.

And obviously, you know, in my floor speech here in the House of Representatives, I said

men need to be perp walked and handcuffs to the jail.

And until we see that here in this country, we've seen some of that in other countries.

But until we see that here in this country, we don't have a system of justice that's

working.

Representative Thomas Massey, on the Epstein files, we are back with Lisa.

And with Tara, let's talk about the money and the money trail here, specifically something

we heard from Khan about $3 million.

He received in loans from Jeffrey Epstein.

Take a listen.

It would be clear you are still paying off those loans.

When Epstein died, I was continuing to pay interest on those loans.

And that's when advice of counsel says, don't say what it said.

It stopped.

It stopped.

Thank you.

Payment stopped.

And based on what the trust provisions had in them.

Put that in context for me.

Well, there's no doubt that working for Jeffrey Epstein was more lucrative than it seemed

on its face, based on the salary that both of these guys earned.

As Rich Khan admitted in his deposition and Derenindic admitted his, both of them got

sizeable, multi-million dollar loans from him and stopped repaying on those loans after

Epstein died.

That means that for some period of time, minus the little amount of interest that they

paid, they've gotten multi-million dollar, basically, awards where they've not had to

pay taxes on that.

But in addition to that, Alicia, he made distributions to both of these men from trusts

that he had.

And both of them testified to that as well, again, and then multiples of millions of dollars.

So you will hear from con and index lawyers, oh, they only made $250,000 a year, oh,

they're not being compensated for their time as co-execitors of the estate.

That is true, but the financial picture in totality is far more complex.

Working for Jeffrey Epstein was ultimately lucrative and as beneficiaries of his will.

Next to that girlfriend we were talking about, the next two people in line are Derenindic

and Rich Khan.

They expect to see any money they say based on demands on the estate.

They say new claims are being filed every day.

But if anybody sees money after that girlfriend, who's it going to be?

The two of them.

Tara, how's all of this landing with survivors?

I mean, it's horrific and it's disgusting.

These people represented Jeffrey Epstein for decades.

And like Jen said so many of the other people that worked for Jeffrey Epstein, they were

really well paid.

I went to their homes, the Butler, the pilot.

They are long retired now and you see where they live and they live in mansions in Southern

Florida.

And these are the type of positions that don't usually lead to this sort of retirement.

There was a, I think that these people knew who they were working for and for that they

could charge a premium.

I mean, he was, he was bequeathed with these two lawyers, $12 and $10 million from the

estate.

It's, that is not normal for executors of the states.

So I think they knew exactly what they were doing to pretend that they didn't know what

the settlements were for, the fact that he advised some of these girls to not speak to

the feds according to a survivor and to come to them if they needed a lawyer.

And this is something that I heard from Jane Doe one of the Crime Victims Rights

Act case.

Courtney Wilde, she said that when the FBI was trying to reach her, that she believed

they were coming for her because Jeffrey Epstein told her when she was 16 years old, but

she was the one who created a crime of prostitution and that he was willing to give her a lawyer.

So she went to his lawyers and she went to his lawyer.

She said she felt like a prostitute, essentially what he made this 16 year old feel like.

And that, that was the game.

That was the manipulation and that, and these men were a part of it against, with children

involved.

It's just so startling when you put it in those terms, Lisa Rubin, Tariffel and Mary.

Thank you both so much for joining us and talking us through this.

There is much more on the Epstein files on this week's episode of the...

Hi, I'm Tamson Fidel, journalist and author of How to Menopause and host of the Tamson

Show, a weekly podcast with your roadmap to midlife and beyond.

We covered all.

From dating to divorce, aging to ADHD, sleep to sex, brain health to body fat, and even

how Mary menopause can affect your relationships and trust me, it can.

Each week I sit down with doctors, experts and leaders in longevity for unfiltered conversations,

packed with advice on everything, from hormones to happiness, and of course, how to stay sane

during what can be, well, let's face it, a pretty chaotic chapter of life.

Think of us as your midlife survival guide, new episodes released every Wednesday.

Listen now on Apple, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts.