IN THE UNITED ST ATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK GOVE-5.4 RNM-7 ENT OF THE UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS Plaintiff JPMORGAN CHASE BANK N.A Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff Case No JSR JPMORGAN CHASE BANK N.A Third-Party Plaintiff JAMES EDWARD STALEY Third-Party Defendant JPMORGAN CHASE BANK A 2S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION TO THE GOVERNMEN OF THE UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS MOTION FOR PA RT IAL ARY JUDGMENT Case Document Filed Page of U?vO?OP?F3O G?M?tI?OO?G0 W?ii?W8x??I7 g6 EeD T?J Lf Kf??w k?հ F?R A EN NE_ _Ey sCyH C?H C?H C?I QIC9 4O L0L?L?L L?Sjz 6F I I 6K Jn EDb 2O I1 9Cv ngq 31Fs_g d6 TZ 5_ jz qr A..AA?A..AA g6 X?a M?N q?M 10Cy J?tZ m?E9q6t ORA?豕ar A i A i A i A I 1z I q?M CTX qY CTX qr a nd blWF uq??Ԑgg?8 9A A I 0b qr h:?WB p?c O?H lOK8 A Og I M?q qr un i W!k CTX yN?hY W?Qsyzo KMu?m M??N q?M CTX Y10Cy شl a GF3IW O?ljcప H?X?D?S G5 G5 CTX qr q0T3 o3z I_ 3j i jh3 A 0b l??9Lڱ?lVy 1x vff?516SP?ml V?rL?k?Nfq??yasZ??l OiwvO4h/??F zWH9j شl Ƨw??ơ ByMY?YA_ eݷ?y?j Na?x?wV g6 AA..AA,/AB..AA A..AA..A B..AA..B g6 jz AA..AA gq 1:K6Bg AA 31Fs_g qq 1M bWd aHA?A AB..AA qy R0 1SJq?xXkI?h?A/.AA./A a?F A?A A?V?E XP R_ A ABB3B OR1BA OA3 B?B Rg I?I I UV N?M?N 10Cy DK7 0GHFHEH It K7I H:Ct J8L l6L uA I Ӷ??t t:Z M?LM DGn??sCY KMqP;G 8I q?x HA8?j hqSEEn OtŐX?OX dBN CTX I O!Y rY b?UU 0Z g6 4D J4W 2P O3 P:c 0v sz B5 A4 CF4 B5 L_ E5 a qCX 10Cy rq Fa?3U M3 J?c _9??NºdPtq??V e?U wf Mw xO?T A I dc rM?N rqM??q 10Cy rq v현?y T?H I ac qr rM 10Cy rq 3V M3 2?Zs 5g t4 RU T0 t?(c AZ kP d6 ac qr UO ED Eej Ko?5OJ Vg lg _Y 6x P6p6 C1 I5d rM qr 10Cy a d6 a a Nqr qqr E1S lg z??g 10Cy qr E1S C?t z?i 6BT v0y5z6 PE CTX ED 9q A A 4A E0 A4 DE a qr?q rq qrCX HhL Kg lg d?a d6U a M3 flW y??S m/y t0 I F/Z V/j 1a qC KS u?v vZ O5 a qr rCX qC 0V I I dc rM?M rM 10Cy n??m?n k?o?h I A I w?!ac qr MCX 10Cy ITy qr M3 Ґ??1rA5R h?H?T3P K?z X?K I v"x i X5 EO5 5a r?q CX 9r Cy rq rqC M3 ş?:c p/p0 5H V)V 6T Y2 G5 qrM?r?qr?r9 q?10Cy rCX qr l1 X?l 3K fm?Q Z2f CX CX gT L??T 2E Cy 3P EM3 J4T L?h??M q?ᡚ?Y r??O?rJt CTX i P!e i I CTX rC YY I 1e 2j CTX X0T1i k3v Jh/e0h1 H(K W/Q0 CTX j?!k 5B r2 P0 0Q X(P0s s(s p0 Pp CTX qq dR B/J Va A y!k N?M??N rC f?Nla3 Yz N?q qr NEeD K?i N?M?qr EeD k??O N?qM v?j I CTX U3 U3 U3 U3 S6 E"L I I I5K7C:I 9O U3 Cn qrr qr q??r?q 9qr CTX G5 qr CX rC l0 WS zN pf1 ODV8L?m jC1DxV CTX CTX A qr 10Cy rYY Ң??P?V CTX C"C rqM?rq?q?qr qr CTX YY Jb?C.y CTX CTX GG4 A A G5 C.C M??r 10Cy rq YY C?J?yO c/XE?lgF GM??H p?ݡG Dp9Oh CTX CTX CJ4 I J6 CJ4 CK qrrM?q qq 9/CX?o CX qYqr rC dd?Z c6S ttcx A CTX CTX 10Cy rq rqYY X?qiX:4 3J Db ZH uD-8 1g?BH I vS 7Oo7u E?K?O J6 UJP U0 UT??ʴ UT UT UT O(p U(u UF1 iZ qr?r CX CX Yr zKW:E A K5M P-M UW VW L1J KJ56 N/Q SQ rC 6J ߵl ߵl 5TZ w8ĥDG oj?K _4 N)?Y Hp pRqc?W26 vz?WBrz?ZB??3X H4 CTX A CTX X4 U5 P8 5D qr qr 10Cy qr YY Mo?ANp D01jJ 9F bzEV 4O 8V CTX O!o CTX KK AA qr A C5 qr rYY 1A?CC V9 a c?F CTX A G5 qr EeD?M CTX 9?rY 10Cy rq qY ȠX1 a f??B CTX 9F I CTX 6D N?qr rrqq qC O?J RmA??b"0 M?.F q?D B?G CTX CTX F4 d6P A F4 qr rYY 4G AV8 CTX UY UL0 U0 U0 U0 UF UF UFAGA UA UA UAL UL UL UL UL UL UL U7 U7 U7 U7 U7 U7 U7 2EH GTU U/U OUoU UV G1 CTX TUV 1G 7A UA UAL X7 U7 U7 U77XL UL UL ULLYX KTX 8Y GJ A UMAT UD 7M GVW GF10 MWA LL MPM M?M 4M XY qr qr qr NEeD 10Cy qYY E2 GH l1 Pd h3V g?KIq V5kL O65S d_xKKU vV 5H p1 Z6 CTX U0 U1 CTX U0 U1 A0 1D qr qr 10Cy YY K??Kl 1B AMwv 1K F1 KV yW Gd T?H CTX CTX I CK M?qr K?SK?PQZ I IRZX 8YCX 10Cy qr CX kv zg S5kB??a iG wA CTX U2 6Y CTX U2 6Y I K,,j j,s 6Y P!p qr 10Cy qr YY G?O 9K mSd X0 9r?yal 1d bY0 XNf??qN D?J CTX P!Z b!o C,C qrM 10Cy qr8 I fX2 9R lO KV CTX Oo CTX A qr r?qr rq YY Lsy7H4 C,6E IL CTX U3 CTX J,O3_3xx qrM?r q?CX Y9/C 9CX CTX Y10Cy CX CX CX YC YY FV uTl bEWa ȓjJ-8 Gc G??Q9E 9Wq CTX CTX Up i I A 9_ qr qr YY D.X 7s F??Y bc3_c iH CTX CTX A qr 10Cy YY EMq 7H AY mK9Z BY A2 P6L N7 CTX CTX a I I i qr rC CTX CTX 7O I FMM qr qr i I I3 CTX Z6 I L(K4 P:u Z6P CTX y8 i TABLE CONTENTS-4.1 PRELIMINARY STATEMENT ARGUMENT I DISPUTED ISSUES OF MATERIAL FA CTS PRECLUDE SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON USVI 2S a CLAIM A JPMC Did Not Know Of Or Recklessly Dis4.5 ard An Epstein 2s Sex5.3 Trafficking Venture JPMC Did Not 223Participate In A ny Epstein Sex-Trafficking Venture JPMC Did Not Benefit From A Sex-Trafficking Venture II USVI IS NOT ENTITL-4.7 ED TO MMARY UDGME-5 IN ITS FAVOR ON IT-5 OBSTRUCTION CLAIM USVI CANNOT JUSTIFY INJUCTIVE RELIEF IV JPMC 2S FIRMATIVE DEFE-4.9 ES APPL-4.9 TO VI AND NNOT BE RESOLVED ON SUM-6 ARY JUDGMENT A USVI Officials Took Epstein 2s Cash Epstein5 Cash Bought Influence And Access To USVI DOJ Epstein 2s Cash Bought Waivers And Special eatment Epstein 2s Cash Bought Million In Government Subsidies For His Businesses Epstein 2s Cash Bought Visas And Other Benefits Epstein 2s Cash Bought Immunity CONCLUSI-7.1 ON Case Document Filed Page of ii TABLE AUTHORI-6.3 Page Federal Cases4.7 Adickes Kress Co U.S United States Afyare App 2x 6th Cir Agence Fr Presse Morel Supp 2d S.D.N.Y Alfred Snapp Son Inc P.R ex rel Barez U.S Anora Oasia Pro Mgmt Grp Ltd WL S.D.N.Y Aug Aquino by Convergent stribs of Tex LLC Alexander Cap LP B.R S.D.N.Y Boyle United Sta5.5 es U.S Compass Aerospace Corp Alinabal Holdings orp WL S.D.N.Y May Doe Red Roof Inns Inc F.4th 11th Cir Does Reddit Inc F.4th 9th Cir English ttanzi WL E.D.N.Y Aug Geiss Weinstein Co Holdings LLC Supp 3d S.D.N.Y United States ex rel Grubea Rosicki Rosicki Assocs P6 Supp 3d S.D.N.Y United States Hansen Ct Case Document Filed Page of i Jasco Tools Inc Dana Corp F.3d 2d Cir Lawson Rubin WL E.D.N.Y Apr Nagelberg Meli WL S.D.N.Y June Nicosia azon.com Inc F.3d 2d Cir Noble Weinstein Supp 3d S.D.N.Y S.J Choice Hotels Int 2l Inc Supp 3d E.D.N.Y Twitter Taamneh Ct Utica Mut Ins Co Fireman 2s Fund Ins Co Supp 3d N.D.N.Y Waran Christie 2s Inc Supp 3d S.D.N.Y Wight BankAmerica Corp F.3d 2d Cir Woodhull reedom Found United States 4th D.C Cir Zurich Am Life Ins Co Nagel Supp 3d S.D.N.Y State Cases Christopher Douglaston Club N.Y.S.2d App Div Juiditta thleh5.5 Ste4.3 Corp N.Y.S.2d App Div Montalvo Episcopal alth Servs Inc N.Y.S.3d App Div Software Design Application Lt Hoefer Arnett Inc Cal Rptr 2d Ct App Case Document Filed Page of iv Federal Statutes U.S.C U.S.C a U.S.C U.S.C U.S.C U.S.C U.S.C Regulations C.F.R Case Document Filed Page of PRELIMINARY STAT-3.6 EMENT-3.6 USVI makes no serious effort to meet the summ ary judgment standard Rule is designed for resolving pure legal issues about which there are no reasonable disagreements as to fact USVI-7.5 disregards the rule 2s standa rds and purpose with a list of highly editorialized and mischaracterized 223facts which do nothing more than provide reasons why summary judgment cannot enter on USVI 2s claims As a plaintiff ith the burden of proof USVI carries the well established burden to prove that there is not one disputed fact as to whether JPMC violated the See Adickes S.H Kress Co U.S And USVI must shoulder that burden5.4 with all MC 2s idence beli eved and ll justif3.7 iable inferences drawn in JPMC 2s favor Zurich Am Life Ins Co Nagel Supp 3d S.D.N.Y Aquino by Convergent Distribs of Tex LLC Alexander Cap LP B.R S.D.N.Y 223The court is barred at summary judgm ent from weighing onflicting evidence making credibility findings or attemp ting to ete5 rmin6.2 the uth USVI comes nowhere close to meeting that bur den As JPMC explains below and in response to USVI 2s 223SUMF USVI 2s summary judgment papers are rife with disputed characterizations of cherry-pic ked evidence stripped of cont ext and laden with counsel 2s argumentation Its filing is a pr oposed findings of fact not a mo tion for summary judgment and it should be denied in its enti rety for that reason alone Moreover USVI 2s motion does no thing to ad6 dress th6 glari ng deficiency in its case namely6.2 tha5 it lacks5.4 stan6.2 ding to seek6.2 any rm relief beyond prospective injunctive relief highlighted by JPMC 2s own motion for summary judgm ent And as to injunctive relief USVI not posited a single fact establ ishing that USVI or its re sidents are at any risk of ture injury from JPMC 2s banking services especially ith respect to a TVPA violation Case Document Filed Page of Finally as JPMC explains at lengt in the4.3 nal ction5.5 this brief,5.5 it is VI that ena4.3 led5.5 Epstein not JPMC The USVI Attorney General ho iled5.5 this4.7 lawsuit tes4.7 tif3.5 ied der th For years that sa me government bent its laws and favor to Epstein 2s wishes ncluding granting him million in tax bene fits 227and it did so for money in return VI does no seek justice for any victim It seeks an escape from having to try its cas4.8 and the accountability5.6 that trial will bring The Court should not tertain gambit.5.3 The motion should be denied ARGUME-3.6 After narrating twenty-six pages of its view of contested facts USVI asks for summary judgment only as to its demands for civil penalties decl aratory relief and injunctive relief As to the first categor JPMC 2s motion for summary judgm ent kt already explains why USVI has no authority to seek 223civil pena lties 223disgorgement and 223damages that USVI 223defers until trial In short USVI ha no authority5.4 227and is not here proceeding act as an forcement agency like the SDFS whose statutorily-authorized fines against Deutsche Bank USVI repeatedly cites It is a civil plaintiff seeki ng a civil remedy nothing more Nor does the record permit summary judgment on USVI 2s re maining demands As to declaratory relief the record is hotly di sputed5.8 as5 to whether USVI can s5 atisfy any of elemen5.8 ts5 of its a Claim ee Part I nd no reaso6.1 able ror ould credit its obstruction claim see Part II Disputed facts also preclude entry of an injunc tion demand that fails for independent reason that USVI has marshalled no facts at it or its resident are at future risk5.3 of harm from anyone let al one a future violation of the TVPA by C2 see Part I Finally the Court should disregard USVI 2s cramped reading of the caselaw governing JPMC 2s affirmative defenses and the strong factual bases in the record 227indeed USVI complicity has only own more apparent it iled the4.6 motion to s5 rik5.8 this ourt rec4.6 ently Case Document Filed Page of denied See Part IV USVI should not be heard to claim it was merely exercising its governing discre4.6 tion respe4.6 cting5.8 Epstein onstitu5.8 tion5.8 al rights whe4.6 its fic4.6 were acilitating s5 crimes Here too the record is disputed a nd summary judgment inappr opriate I DISPUT-3.9 ED ISSUES-4.7 OF MATE-3.9 RIAL-3.9 FACTS-4.7 PRECL-3.9 UDE SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON USVI 2S a CLAIM)-6.4 To obtain summary judgment USVI must prov 227with all inferences awn in JPMC 2s favor 227that there is no dispute of material fact as to whether Epstein led a sex-trafficking venture9.6 as defined by the TVPA and that MC kne of or recklessly disr egarded an Epstein sex trafficking venture participat ed in that venture and bene fitted from that pa rticipation U.S.C a USVI comes nowhe re clo6.4 to tis5.6 fy ing that burden A JPMC Did Not Know Of Or Reckle ssly Disregard An Epstein 2s Sex Trafficking Venture As a threshold matter USVI carries the burden of demonstrating that Jeffrey Epstein led a sex-trafficking venture as de fined by the TVPA And as parens patriae it must prove a sex trafficking venture that 223threatened adversely affected 223interes ts of the residents of USVI U.S.C After positing the conclusion that 223Epstein wa engaged in sex-trafficking and nothing else USVI asks for su mmary judgment on this element But a sex-trafficking venture under the TVPA requires more than just sex-tra3.7 fficking by an individual Rather the TVPA defines 223venture to be 223any group of two or more individuals associated in fact the same way that RICO defines an 223enterprise U.S.C U.S.C In that context-6.8 the Supreme Court has explained at an 223enterprise enco5.7 asses a up of person5.7 associated together for a common purpose of en gaging in a course of conduct Boyle United States Throughout this memorandum 223CSMF refe rs to JPMC 2s Counterstatement of Additiona4.7 Facts iled erewith SVI SUMF re rs to VI 2s sta4.9 ent of und6.1 isputed fac4.9 filed in support of its moti on for summary judgment Case Document Filed Page of U.S By ignoring its burden to prove a PA-defin ed sex-trafficking venture USVI has iled5.8 to mee4.6 inc4.6 udin5.8 by ailing to prove the scope and contours and timeline of the alleged venture its 223common purpose who th victims of Epstein5.7 sex-trafficking venture were as distinguished from the victims of Epst ein 2s individual conduct and any nexus to USVI or any way in which the specific stein sex-traffick5.7 i ng venture affected ter3.2 sts of USVI3.2 residents the very least these fact questions are insusceptib le to summary judgment As to JPMC 2s alleged liab6 ility the4.8 first tego ry of disputed material facts pertains to whether MC acted with 223actual nowledge or eck5.5 less disregard Epstein5.5 crimes scienter is only appropriate fo resolution at summary judgment in the most extraordinary case See Nagelberg Meli WL at S.D.N.Y June the question of whether someone 223had scienter the knowledge of what was going on is a 221que stion for the jury because 223juries are rticularly sk illful in determining5.3 such5.3 matt ers of interes4.4 motive and like Wa6 ra6 Christie4.8 2s Inc Supp 3d S.D.N.Y same see also e.g Compass Aerospace Corp Alinabal Holdings orp WL at S.D.N.Y May USVI trie4.8 to make th6 em em so6 by citin abuse by Epstein told outside this litigation USVI SUMF But USVI ha made5.5 attemp6.7 show it the right or ability to tell their stories at tr ial or on this motion See Fed Evid Fed Civ Addition)5.8 ally even miss5 USVI demons4.9 tra4.5 es eith5.7 how ese experience4.5 satis4.9 fy the legal elemen5.7 ts of USVI 2s TVPA cl aim nor how USVI rather than es5 women is5 entitled to money for any damages they sus4.8 ain5.6 For instance me of their exp5.6 rien5.6 ces no connection whatsoever to USVI e.g USVI a Others based on the allegations recount monstrous crimes but may not meet USV I 2s burden to demonstrate a commercial element See e.g USVI SUMF U.S.C And some others are subject to genuine issues of material fact as to ether they amount to traffick ing or example USVI relies5.1 on hearsay5.9 statemen5.9 made to one of its experts in an unsworn unrecorded conversation about the individua experience of an uni ndicted co-conspirator named in Epstein 2s non-prosecution agreement e.g USVI SUMF Finall regardless of how any specific victim 2s experience aligns with the legal elements of a USVI has failed explain how all these individual stories can be used by USVI to prove a venture with a common purpose that threatened the in terests of its residents Case Document Filed Page of Rakoff finding scienter a 223genuine ly disputed factual question unsuited for deter4 mina4.8 tio6 as tte4.8 r4 of law in6 the case4.9 VI does not cite a singl case in which questions of scienter were decided on summary judgment let alone a case in the PA context The record in this cas5.3 will not per4.1 mit it to be the first USVI 2s alleg5.8 tions as to J5 P2 MC 2s scie4.6 nter can grouped five buck5.8 ets 227each disp5.8 uted each fit for resolution at summary judgment Epstein 2s Conviction JPMC disputes that Epstein5.4 guilty plea for solicitation in Florida state court gave JPMC actual knowledge of an Epstein-re lated sex trafficking venture Even if Epstein had been convicted of a violation of the TVPA and he of course was not it still)-6.6 would not satisfy USVI 2s burden As the Cour3.6 itself gnize there is a di fference between calized ate-law se crimes and the TVPA which equir4.6 addition6.6 emen6.6 ts including an interstate nexus MTD Order 223MTD Order Dkt And if anything the most salient fact to come out of Epstein 2s plea for purposes of JPMC 2s knowledge is that the federal government elected not to charge Epstein for violating the TVPA and thus provided JPMC7 no reason to believe Epstein was in fact doing so let alone doi ng so after serving the sentence deemed appropriate by the courts at that time CSMF The relevant inquiry5.5 is at JPMC believed.5.5 The jury will decide at ques4.6 tion They will hear evidence that JPMC7 did not consider those pa st crimes to constitute sex-trafficking under the TVPA CSMF They will ear that JPMC relied upon Staley 2s representations that Epstein had 223turned the page on his past conduct had 223paid his debt to so ciety and that JPMC 2s general counsel 223absolutely 223relied on taley 2s views regarding Epstei 2s change in conduct because Staley 223knew this client and was a 223respect ed member of operating committee CSMF They will hear aley tes4.5 imony denying5.3 knowledge of any x-tra fficking activity5.7 led5.7 by Epstein CSMF And they will hear uniform stimony from JPMC6.8 witnesses disclaiming Case Document Filed Page of knowledge of any sex trafficki ng Assessing that knowledge will depend on the fact finder 2s weighing this among other testimony and cannot be resolved now News Articles and Lawsuits USVI next turns4.8 to allega4.4 tio5.6 ns against Epstein in civil lawsuits and media reports including a Vanity Fair ofile which cite)4.5 no illegal behavior and a New York Post article at But 221mere awareness of allegations concerning a defendant 2s miscond8.2 uct is different from knowle dge of actual misconduct United States ex rel ubea Rosicki Rosicki Assocs P.C Supp 3d S.D.N.Y Rakoff alteration in the original Such eneral allegations of wrongdoing do not come close to satisfying 223the knowledge element as to a particular sex trafficking venture S.J Choice Hotels Int 2l Inc Supp 3d E.D.N.Y USVI itself argues when defen5.7 ing its complic4.5 ity in Epstein5.7 imes that 223news reports were to initiate an investigation becau5.2 se they did5.2 contain requisite crete alleg5.6 tions4.8 wrongdoing USVI SUMF and that USVI ould not 223rely on 221news reports rumor or 221innuendo to initiate investigatio5.3 into Ep ein USVI SUMF The ry will rth5.3 hear how MC understood media allegati ons to be just that 227allegations e.g CSMF The jury will also hear that JPMC did not i gno6.2 re5 the media5 eports vestig6.2 ated em E.g CSMF Take just one example In there were media reports that Epstein may have been under federal investigation fo trafficking CSMF JPMC personnel conducted a review of his account activity and too5.5 steps to determine whether there was any merit to the claim.5.3 CSMF JPMC reached ut to Epstein 2s attorney5.3 JPMC preserves its argument that VI mu st further prove that JPMC had knowledge as to the sex-trafficking a specific ctim Dkt at Case Document Filed Page of CSMF It reached out to the federa government CSMF And it reviewed Epstein 2s JPMC account transactions related to a ny alleged victims or co conspirators named in the article but JPMC found smoking guns CSMF Again these are the same new7.6 articles that USVI itself claims did not provide a 223sufficient basis to initiate an investigation USVI All inferences must be drawn in JPMC 2s favor and the inferences to be drawn from these facts are that JPMC diligently investig ated the media repo rts and found nothing concrete not that JPMC had actual knowledge of sex trafficking Financial ransactions.5.5 USVI next cites at wire payments and cash withdrawals from Epstein 2s accounts including payments from Epst ein to his own lawyers as proof of actual knowledge of a sex trafficking vent ure As an initial matter USVI cites no evidence that anyone at JPMC knew any Epstein-related transaction pertained to sex tr afficking And while USVI may urge a jury to infer that essential fact this Court must make the opposite inference the record shows the opposite The jury will hear for exampl that in Epstein xplained to his private banker Paul Morris and JPMC Private Bank CEO John Duffy that his large ca sh withdrawals were for air fuel expenses when Epst ein travels to foreign countries CSMF at same jury will hear that JPMC believ5.3 that Epstein was a 223sugar daddy who 223likes to spend hi money on ladies but that this fact alone did not 223imply unlawful fi nancial support in exchange for sexual favors let alone sex trafficking CSMF The ry will further hear that Epstein 2s cash use habits were consisten5.7 with5.7 high net-worth customers at JPMC 2s private bank 227that these cust omers 223use cash regularly and so the fact that Epstein 223took out cash with the kind of assets that he had in his accounts was not in and of itself 223unusual CSMF see also CSMF Nor was it indicative of someone operating a sex trafficking venture See CSMF6.1 see Software Design Case Document Filed Page of Application Ltd Hoefer Arnett Inc Cal Rptr 2d Ct App 223Account activ6.1 ity whe4.9 her in larg6.1 sums or ll whethe4.9 fr equent or infrequent is the nature of the beast far from being suspic4.5 iou5.7 it is exp5.7 ed rou5.7 tine4.5 behavior.5.8 And the will ar how USVI mispresents the record for example by claimi ng at JPMC opened an account for without her 223birthdate confirmed or a Passport or Driver 2s License Number when JPMC in fact had all that information from her credit card app4.5 lication CSMF In short the record regarding MC 2s knowledge based on Epstein 2s transactions is disputed making summa5.1 ry dgment inap6.3 propria5.1 Internal MC Deliber4.7 ations USVI next cite4.8 at in)6 rnal JPMC delibe4.8 ations as to the ght time to it Eps5 ein as a client revealing the view of so me JPMC employees that Epstein should have been exited earlier Internal libe4.7 tions about whether and when to exit Epstein are hardly undisputed eviden7.4 ce proving JPMC 2s actual knowledge of sex trafficking To the contrary the jury that will hear ev idence will unders5 tand that sev5.8 eral JPMC employees concern5.8 s5 were 223based6 on reputatio6 nal risk asso6 ciated with banking with Jeffrey Epstein 227and not because of a belief that Epstein 223was engaging in continued illegal activ ity after his plea CSMF deed the jury will hear that JPMC executiv5.2 es would ha ve sisted5.6 on exiting Epstein5.6 from the bank if they had believed he was enga ged in ongoing criminal ac tivity CSMF A concern for reputational ri sk is not akin to actual knowledge of ongoing sex trafficking and summary judgment clearly cannot en ter to the contrary Jes Staley Finally VI argues at that JPMC had 223personal knowledge of sex trafficking through Jes aley That fails for two independent reasons First Staley squarely disputes having this knowledge CSMF If Staley himself did not have the relevant knowledge there is nothi ng to impute to JPMC Th is is a classic question Case Document Filed Page of of credibility for the jury to resolve That alone is eason to deny summary judgment See e.g Compass Aerospace Corp WL at Second even assuming Staley ha knowledge of Epstein 2s onduct imputation of that-7.3 knowledge to JPMC as a matter of law is impossible on th is record Under th so-called 223adverse interest exception of agency law 223managemen5.5 miscondu5.8 ct will not be imput ed to corporatio6.4 if cer3.9 acted entire4.7 ly in own inte4.7 rests a nd adversely to the interest of the corporation ght BankAmerica Corp 3d 2d Cir53 The record here is replete with evidence that Staley abandoned the interests of JP MC and pursued exclusively personal ends For7.8 example Staley and Eps4.4 ein regu5.2 larly exchanged5.2 em ils5.1 abou5.9 entir3.9 ely sonal matter3.9 inc4.7 uding5.9 their interes4.8 in women See e.g CSMF In these emails Staley and Epstein repeatedly refer to each5.7 other as CSMF Epstein help5.3 ed ith Staley 2s graduate school admissions CSMF Staley also took personal trips to Epstein 2s USVI residence at Epstein 2s invitation CSMF There is even evidence that Staley CSMF conduct that per se derives from 223wholly personal tives,6.3 see Montalvo Episcopal alth Servs Inc N.Y.S.3d App Div Moreover courts have found th at the adverse interest excep tion applies when an employer atte5.1 mpts to hide mis5.5 con6.3 duct fro6.3 his employ6.3 See Christopher Douglaston Club N.Y.S.2d App Div Juiditta Bethlehem eel Corp S.2d App And the fact that Staley regularly forwarded confidential information to Epstein e.g CSMF while simultaneously withholding material information from JPMC regarding Epstein p6 o6 v1 ides p6 enty6 for a ju6 ror to conclude th at Staley w8 as doing exactly that.6.4 deed is is Case Document Filed Page of the very basis of JPMC 2s pending ithless erva4.8 n1 and6 brea4.8 h1 of fiduciary duty claims against Staley All told a reasonable juror coul either credit Staley 2s te stimony not If not the juror could find that Staley was acting solely to furthe personal inte5 rests That mak6.2 es summa5.1 judgment improper twice over JPMC Did Not 223Participate In An Epstein Sex-Trafficking Ventu6.3 re Nor does VI 2s mo6 tio6 come4.8 clo6 to showin that an undisputed record proves that-7.5 JPMC 223participated in any Epstein sex-trafficking venture Th TVPA defines tic4.7 ipation in a venture as 223knowingly assisti ng supporting or faci litating a violati on of a U.S.C In other words there must be 223participation in the se trafficking act itself through 223specific conduct that furthered the sex trafficking venture oble Wein6.1 stein Supp 3d S.D.N.Y see also Geiss Weinstein Holdings LLC Supp 3d S.D.N.Y 223The participa tion giving rise to the benefit must be participa4.8 tion6 in a sex-4 tra4.8 f4 fick6 ing venture not participation in othe ctiv6 itie4.8 engaged in6 by the sex6 traffickers4.9 that do fu rther the sex-trafficking aspect their nture After all as Supreme urt recen5.5 tly confirmed lpab5.7 ility of some rt is necessary to justify punishmen5.4 of a secondary actor lest mostly passive actors lik banks become liable for all of their customers crimes by virtue of carryi ng out routine transactions Twitter4.6 Inc Taamneh Ct see Woodhull Freedom7.3 Found United States 4th D.C Cir equating 223participation in a venture with the crimin al-law concept of aiding-and abetting United States Hansen Ct cabining criminal-law concept of 223aiding-and-abetting to the rovision of assistance to a wrongdoe with the intent to further an offense 2s commission Case Document Filed Page of USVI 2s motion advances three theo5.5 ries as to how JPMC purportedly 223participated in Epstein5.4 crimes First USVI points to JP MC 2s processing of cash withdrawals and wire transactions out of Epstein 2s acc ounts and a million standby lett er of credit 223SBLC provided to Epstein to backstop a loan to a modeling agen cy MC2 Second USVI ar gues that MC helped Epstein tructure his cash wit hdrawals to avoid scrutiny Fi nally USVI claims that JPM4.7 But as with scienter each USVI 2s arguments rests on disputed5.2 questi ons4.3 of material fact both whether JPM4.3 engaged in any of the conduct USVI claims and whether any action establishes that JPMC 223knowingly assisted suppor ted or facilitated any 223sex trafficking act Noble Supp 3d at Transaction6.3 SBLC USVI argues that JPMC participated in an Epstein sex-tr3.8 aff3.8 ing5.8 venture by 223handling payments from Epstein to various individuals 223allowing5.2 Epstein to use his own accounts to transfer mo ney or withdraw his own funds in cash As a th reshold matter a bank does not 223knowingly assist su pport or facilitate a sex traffi cking act merely by passively process4.3 ng the routine transact ions its sto5.5 ers ee Twitter Ct at so Geiss Supp 3d at involvement in 223hush pa yments to cover up se trafficking was not 223participation under a Noble Supp 3d at no participation in a sex trafficking venture where defendant alleg5.9 edly acilita4.7 ted5.9 erpetr ato6.2 travel by rtu6.2 of job responsibilities Regardless,5.9 far from the4.7 bei ng no factu5.9 al disp5.9 ute as to Epstein5.9 trans5.1 action5.9 the jury5.9 will hea4.7 at cash trans5.1 action5.9 ref3.9 enced by US VI were routine matter3.5 that not stand from typ5.6 cal transactions of a althy Private Bank client See regard to Epstein5.5 cash withdrawals CSMF Case Document Filed Page of CSMF 223But at the end of the day withdrawal cash is a withdrawal of cash And so especially5.7 all dollars,5.7 wealthy le withd5.7 cash They do a lot of di ffe4.5 ren5.7 ings CSMF wasn 2t concerned about pstein 2s use of cash Large client use cash in different ways They are different than you know th an the average person on Main Street It wasn 2t wasn 2t outsized in relation to what clients of Mr Epstei 2s net worth or asset base do And it wasn 2t unusual as it related to what was expected in that acc ount and he was pretty consistent in the use of that MF have seen very large amounts of cash be taken out of the bank by Private-6.3 Bank clients over my time at the bank USVI can point to no evidence that JPMC had any contemporaneous knowledge that a given transaction was at all relate to a sex-trafficking venture Epstein provided what was then considered a plaus4.7 ble explana tion for his cash withdrawals See CSMF testifying tha9.2 Epstein 2s cash withdrawals were for jet fuel and nobody at JPMC su spected cash was used for sex trafficking CSMF took Mr Epstein at word And then following that his activity for fuel ame4.7 of the Hy perion account and that made sense CSMF Duffy email to Bonnie Perry per3.5 rming annu5.5 al KYC review of Epste4.3 i writing5.8 did ask stein5.8 to w8 thdraw this cash from his aviation account for these payments Clearly he is doing this CSMF it 223seemed reasonable 223Epstein wa s5 using large4.6 cash withd5.8 awals to pay5.5 for fuel exp5.5 nses when he traveled5.5 to foreign countries CSMF Epstein5.6 2s accountan5.6 testifying that CSMF Nor did his payments to adult o1 men give rise to suspicion of crimes CSMF describin6.2 Epstein as a 223sugar daddy CSMF explaining understa nding of 223sugar daddy as 223somebody that Case Document Filed Page of likes to spend his money on ladies2.1 but does not 223imply financia support in exchange for sexual favors CSMF explaining that filing a And neither the pr ovision of legal services to which a criminal defendan6 constitu6 tio6 nally entitle4.8 d1 nor the 223handling payments for such leg6 al services5.2 amounts to 223knowing assistance support or fa cilitation of a sex tr afficking venture See Lawson Rubin WL at E.D.N.Y Apr As to the 223standby letter of credit to the mode ling agency MC2 again the jury will hear that Epstein5.7 actual invo5.7 lvemen5.7 in MC2 2s busine ss was dis5 puted even within the s5 ame ticles on which USVI relies CSMF noting owner of MC2 223denied receiving any payment from Epstein ee pres4 ident J4 ffrey Fuller confirme Brunel was a partne the comp5.3 but denied ny working rela4.5 tionsh5.7 with eithe4.5 Ep stein or Marie.6 And the jury will hear th)6 the SBLC 227which represented Epstein 2s fully6.4 cure guarantee not MC 2s of a separate loan obligation owed by MC2 to a different financial institution 227was never even drawn on CSMF Moreover after the media reports alleging Epstein was under fede ral investigation for trafficking connected to MC2 see CSMF JPMC 2s anti-m oney laundering operations investigated the modeling agency but could not find any evidence of misconduct CSMF appears to be a legit modeling ag ency If girls were expolited sic via their contract or arrangement it would be hard for us to tell CSMF 223What do we have today with regard to possible linkages betw7.5 een the JPM accounts and ba activity You noted below that he has ties to the modeling agency but that real ly tells us little And regardle ss light the4.6 incre4.6 ase derogato5.4 ry information JPMC ltimately ecided not to ren5.4 the SBLC in March CSMF Case Document Filed Page of Nor can USVI obtain any relief 227let alone summary judgment a theory that JPMC mere4.8 ly faile4.8 d1 to d6 ete4.8 ct o6 stop6 Epstein 2s lleg6 ed ex-tr4 af4 fick6 in6 ventu6 ee Choice4.7 Hotels Supp 3d at failure to adequate ly detect signs of sex trafficki ng not sufficient to state claim see also es Reddit Inc F.4th 9th Cir a not rget ose tha4.9 ely ur a blind eye to the source of their reven5.7 ue clean5.7 ed up cert denied WL U.S May United Sta5.7 es Afyar4.9 App 2x 6th Cir same Banks ar required to report suspicious ac tiv5.7 ity5.7 they are not obligated to investigate underlying crimes 223investigation is th responsibility of law enforcement FFIEC Bank Secrecy Act/Anti-Money Lau ndering Examination Manual Susp icious Activity Reports Overview at Feb And while what Epstein may have hosen to do with his money is abhorrent that does not mean that JP MC somehow 223participated in that conduct Twitter Ct at 221Culpabi lity of some sort is necessary to jus tify punishment of a secondary actor lest mostly passi ve actors like banks become liab le for all of their customers crimes by virtue of carrying out routine transactions see also Reddit F.4th at 223Mere association with sex traffickers is insuff icient absent some knowin9.6 221participation in the form of assistance supp ort or facilitation Afyare App 2x at a requires 223that a fen5.1 dant actually participate and mmit so rt act th6 at furthers5.2 the4.8 sex6 tra4.8 fickin6 g6 aspect of the venture At botto5.5 the jury5.5 will hear cons4.7 tent te stimon5.3 that JPMC empl oyees did not know or have any reason to believe that Epstein 2s JP MC accounts were being used by Epstein for any unlawful purpose ee CSMF 223Absolutely not never heard th at CSMF had no reason to believe that Mr Epstein 227and at no point in time did I believe Mr Epstein was committing criminal acts thr ough JPMorgan such as sex traf ficking CSMF 223The Case Document Filed Page of Case Document Filed Page of co ce rn was cas ay ts a at im cas payme nt were a ed airp a sage An eve at ti was at so thin at I was co nn ec tin in mind wit a yt hin do wit any of a ll egatio at ay or ay ot ave do a I was awa of any go in thin gs hat pste in was do in a th two thin gs eve th ey ever came min to co nn ect th CSM Aga in utlin es at find ig ht It does estab li a link etwee Morgan an th ope rati by Eps in of a sex rnffick in in ro th ank i ts face in op ini reco is cl ea rl at min im um disp ut ed an hu umm a dgme nt i in approp iate Stru turing USV I ex cl aims at at JP MC st rn ct ur ed Eps in cas wit drawa to rovide cove fo pste in in edib a un doc um nt ed fu el exp a atio But thi mi ssta es eco in severa ways As descr ib ed above ste in fu ex lanatio for is cas wit ra wals was in fact be li eved by multip le JP MC mp loyees and ultim ately supported by ate nt a un de oat SVI cites to ev i de ce in th reco to co ra ry Mo eover SVIs tru ct urin a ll egatio is base a co versatio th at a Pr ivate Bank exec uti ve ad wi th ste in rega in at ur hi cas wit drawa Bu ere i thin in appropr i a a ut in to un de stand th nat ur and rpose li nt ti 267ansac ti See CSMF a rati a in co siste fo mu of Eps in tim as a clie of Pr ivate a nk CSMF not in at cas ti ansactio and payme nt to indi vid a al os a of ic were en co bined pr ese nt ed less an ti sac ti betwee brn a a nd and of ti sactio betwee Sep be and Januaiy Indeed that is exactly what is supposed to ha ppen and did happen at various points while Epstein was a client of the Private Bank CSMF explaining need to speak to Epstein abo5.8 cash usage for jet el id documenting April conversation between Duffy and Epstein o6 discuss Epstein6 2s cu6 rre nt busine4.5 ss activities4.9 a nd his related account activity with JPMC as part of annual KYC re view CSMF March email from Perry to Duffy analyzing Epstein cash ac tivity noting cash was coming from account for Hyperion Air Inc which held Epst ein 2s private plane and all ot her acco5.3 unt activity 223appeared to be legitimate4.6 ly lated to fees associat to an airc4.5 raft CSMF That JP MC executives,5.6 includ5.6 ing Mary Erdoes came to question that explanation at a later point in time MF in no way supports the inference that JPMC its5.7 emp6.5 oyee5.3 truc5.3 tured6.5 Epste5.3 ash withd6.5 als avo6.5 scru6.5 tiny.6.5 At the5.4 very6.5 least,6.5 tha5.4 an inference a reasonable juror would be free to ject and which must be drawn in JPMC 2s favor in resolving USVI 2s motion for summary judgment Case Document Filed Page of CSMF CSMF CSMF In short Epstein was treated no differently See CSMF CSMF CSMF See CSMF These facts alone suffice to deny USVI 2s motion Case Document Filed Page of First as USVI concedes a SAR must be filed only after a bank 223detects any known or suspected deral criminal violatio5.6 and 223believe tha4.5 it was used to facilitate a crimina4.5 transaction C.F.R Whether a given transaction or se ries of transactions such Epstein5.7 cash withdraw7.9 als meets at standard an inherently subjec tive judgment FFIEC Bank Secrecy Act/Anti-Money Lau ndering Examination Manual Susp icious Activity Reports Overview at Feb and depends on th 223totality of facts and the circumstances surrounding both the client and th activity MF MF CSMF See CSMF Case Document Filed Page of By th at time in light of Epstein 2s withdrawal of an 223outsized amount of cash CSMF compliance personnel were sk eptical of Epstein 2s je fuel explanation for his cash withdrawals CSMF and regulatory environmen and overall risk tolerance within the Private Bank had changed CSMF see so CSMF ema4.5 il Duffy to Erdoes on talking points for Epstein exit including 223the reg6.4 lato6.4 ry stan6.4 dards the5.3 banking ind5.9 stry con5.9 tin5.9 ue to evo5.9 with a low tole4.7 ran5.9 ce for3.9 cash activ5.9 ity whe4.7 combin5.9 with your personal history CSMF CSMF CSMF SARs-5.7 must ile4.7 within days rom the date4.7 of initia5 de5 te5 ction acts tha5 may6.2 c5 onstitu6.2 te a basis for filing a SAR FFIEC Bank Secrecy Act/Anti-Money Laundering Examination Manual Suspicious Activity Reports Overview at Feb Case Document Filed Page of CSMF CSMF CSMF CSMF A request refers to a request to share information between financia institutions-5.6 for the purpose of detecting poten tia4.7 lly suspiciou5.9 activity5.9 rsuant to Section of the USA PATRIOT Act Case Document Filed Page of CSMF CSMF CSMF CSMF CSMF In USVI seeks mma4.7 ry judg5.9 ment tha4.7 MC active4.5 ticip5.7 ated in sex trafficking venture by omit ting JPMC 2s actual conduct 227whi ch included scrutinizing and reviewing Epstein 2s accounts and ev entually exiting Epstein as a lient A reasonable juror could obviously conclude that JPMC was not 223assisting supporting or facilitating any Epstein sex trafficking venture by reporting hi transaction activity to the federal government repeatedly through the approximately CTRs-6.4 filed cash tran5.8 sactio5.8 ns involv5.8 Epstein5.1 accounts between and See CSMF A reasonable juror could also conclude that MC was not 223assisting supporting or facilitating any Epstein sex-trafficking ventur by repeatedly holding meetings to evaluate Epstein 2s status as a client of the Bank see CSMF and investigating evidence of Case Document Filed Page of potentially unlawful activity ti ed to his JPMC accounts or of a potenti al ongoing federal investigation into his conduct C7 MF And a reasonable juror could readily conclude that MC was not 223assisting,6.5 supporting or facilita ting any Epstein sex trafficking venture by exiting Epstein as a client in August CSMF Given that everyone involved has sworn under oath that they would never bank a sex tr afficker that they asked the right questions when alle gations arose that they did the right work and that they did not-7 know about Epstein 2s trafficking co nduct a reasonable ju ror could easily conc lude that JPMC did not participate in a sex trafficking venture JPMC Did Not Benefit From A Sex-Trafficking Venture Lastly USVI does not show an undisputed record that JPMC 223benefited from a sex traf3.7 ficking enture At trial USVI must demon5.7 stra4.5 a usal lation5.7 ship betwe4.5 en JPMC 2s alleg5.6 223affirmative con5.6 duct furthe ring the sex-trafficking venture a nd its receipt of a benefit Geiss Weinstein Co Holdings LLC Supp 3d S.D.N In other words JPMC must have received benefits in return its support or facilita tion of a particular sex trafficking venture and JPMC must have known this was the case See id at Doe Red Roof Inns Inc th th Cir Geiss Supp 3d at while The Weinstein Compan5.3 223undoubtedly benefited because Harvey Weinstein 2s 223movies influence generated revenue plaintiffs failed to alleg6.1 Wein6.1 stein prov6.1 ed those ben6.1 efits because the company facilitated his sexual misconduct Elsewhere in its brief USVI argues that JP MC continued to 223benefit from Epstein as a source of referrals following his ex it from the bank But VI doe not even atte mpt to identify any facts4.5 at show that JPMC 223participated5.5 any traffick ing venture following Epstein 2s exit ile4.5 selec4.5 JPM4.9 employee4.5 met with stein following his it is was4.9 in Epste4.5 capacity as an advisor to existing ivate Bank lients at the express reque st of those clients concerning accounts over which Epstein had no control ma nagement or discretion See CSMF Case Document Filed Page of At the motion to dismis stage the ourt noted it was not yet 223convinced that JPMC must rece4.8 ive ben6 efits ex6 h1 ange for its fu6 rthe4.8 ra nce of Epstein 2s sex-trafficking venture MTD Order JPMC maintains at this is prop5.6 er leg5.4 stan5.4 dard But ecause there are genu5.4 ine disputes5.4 of mate5 ria5 fac5 reg6.2 arding6.2 the ve5 ry existence of any benef its 227and whether any such benefits were connected in any way to Epstei 2s sex-trafficking vent ure 227entry of summary judgment is improper under any pos sible causation standard USVI prima4.5 rily ints to three sup5.7 posed benefits JPMC received from Epstein 2s sex trafficking venture fees ea rned from Epstein 2s accounts economic benefits derived from JPMC 2s acquisition of ghbridge Capital which Ep stein purportedly facilita ted and referrals)-5.5 Epstein provided to other sources of business None suffices First as already explained mere banking fees are insu5.7 icient to tab5.7 ish a bene4.5 fit from sex trafficking and no jury could conclude otherw ise USVI must prove that JPMC benefited from partic4.6 ipation in a sex trafficking venture i.e that there is a causal connection between the 223fees and Epstein 2s specific sex-traffickin activity U.S.C emphasis added Otherwise USVI woul-6.9 simply be asking the Court to hold TVPA liable for the provision of routin5.9 commercial serv5.9 ices to a sex tra4.5 cke4.5 That is the law See Anora Oasia Pro Mgmt Grp Ltd WL at S.D.N.Y Aug finding lack of benefit in TVPA labor-trafficking case where defendant was not alleged to have 223received any benefits othe8.7 than rou6.3 tin6.3 paymen6.3 leg6.3 al serv6.3 ices Not only did JPMC not receive fees4.5 with any causal relationship to sex-traffi cking the record actually suggests the opposite Once allegations of Epstein5.6 sex-trafficking5.6 emerg5.6 MC placed5.6 restrictions on his account to limit the scope of its business with Epstein CSMF Once he was convicted JPMC design ated Epstein as a high Case Document Filed Page of risk client at warranted5.7 suppl emental ilig6.1 ence.6.1 CSMF A ban6.5 limiting6.5 rvices5.7 criminal is not undisputed evidence of benefiti ng from criminal activity It is the opposite Second USVI claims at that 223Epstein fa cilitated Morgan 2s acquisition of hedge fund Highbridge a 223game-changing acquis4.8 ition JPMorgan But USVI fails to explain6.4 why any nefit to JPMC from th at acquisition constitutes a bene fit from sex trafficking And regard6.4 less,6.4 it is disp uted question whether Epstein had mean6 ingf4 ul invo6 lve4.8 ent in th6 at transaction JPMC Executiv10.1 Officer Jamie Dimon testified that he didn 2t recall 223any involvement by Epstein in the tran saction at all CSMF And if anything Epstein was an agent for the party across the ta ble Highbridge pstein received a consulting fee from Highbridge founder Glenn Dubin for and acquisition advice ee CSMF yet re ceived nothing from JPMC,5.8 see CSMF Third USVI argues at that Epstein onnected JPMorgan with the orld 2s dignitaries and wealthiest peopl bringing in 223signi ficant revenues to the Bank nce again any benefit from these conn ections are not benefits from sex trafficking And many of these purported introductions never occurr ed USVI claims at that Epstein connected JPMC to a long list of wealthy individuals a nd dignitaries including the Sultan of Dubai Prince Andrew Ehud Barak etc to JPMC But the only evidence that shows that Epstein referred business from any of these individuals is the conclusory an self-serving testim ony of Jes Staley See e.g USVI SUMF-4.5 USVI claims at that these 223restrictions were ignored but ffers no support for that claim All USVI cites is an email indica ting that Epstein remained an 223investment professional/active trader w/GI million NW USVI SUMF Ex at But7.9 nothing abo5.9 tha4.7 is consistent ith JPMC im position5.6 the4.4 cited str3.6 ctions Epstein5.6 account USVI repeatedly relies on the size of Epst ein 2s account 227which is neither relevant accurate Whether his accounts re large smal there is still no re cord evid5.9 ce of JPMC7.9 benefiting from a sex traffick5.5 ing ven5.5 ure USVI also agg5.5 rates relative ze Epstein assets vis the bank 2s portfoli Regardless of relevance this again is a question of fact Case Document Filed Page of Even Staley 2s testimo ny is inconsistent In the very same deposition Staley testified that Epstein was not 223making a referral to the bank through any introduction CSMF In fact several of th ese individuals 227including Barak S6 ultan Ahme8.6 Bin Sulayem Robert ee Burch I Prince Andr ew and David Gergen 227are not and have never been JPMC private bank clients And contrary to Staley 2s testim ony Epstein also had nothing to do with MC 2s relationship with Leon Black CEO of Apollo Gl obal Management Black was already a 223client of the private bank CSMF Given his own role in this litigation suffice it to say tha5.1 ry could6.3 co clude that Staley is a credib le witness to cts ing the ultimate issue of JPMC 2s liability Summary judgment is thus improper II USVI IS NOT ENTIT-4.1 LED TO SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN ITS FAVOR ON OBSTRUCTION CLAIM It is JPMC not USVI that is entitled to summary judgment on USVI 2s obstruction claim As JPMC explains in its own mo tion no reasonable juror could find that JPMC knew of an effor4 to en6 force the TVPA and inten)6 tion6 ally obs5.3 truc4.9 ted atte4.9 mpt4.1 ed to obstruc4.9 tha4.9 enforc4.6 emen5.8 effo5.8 M5 Order quo5.8 tin5.8 F.3d 6th Cir USVI 2s motion only underscores it absence of proof fo either element USVI 2s motion cites no supporting facts in the mountain of discovery it has received to support the claim that JPMC knew of a federal TVPA investigation afte5.2 the5.2 feder4.4 al non prosecution agreement was executed and unsealed It points at and only to tabloid articles in and and media allegations in none of which proves the existence of As JPMC explained in its own motion for summa ry judgment USVI cannot base its obstruction claim on conduct that too5.7 place befo5.7 re was added to the TVPA in December Prior to December the TVPA did not provide for eith5.8 er ci il or criminal liability for 223obstruction and holding JPMC liable for obstruction for conduct predating the enactment of would result in an impermi ssible retroactive application of the statute Dkt at Case Document Filed Page of anything reasonable juror coul conclude such evidence cons titutes proof of JPMC 2s actual knowledge of a TVPA investigation It further points at to a subpoena the nited States Attorney 2s Office4.2 for the Southern5.4 District Florida4.5 issu5.7 ed to Bea4.5 Stearns4.9 in August regarding transactions out of Epstein 2s accounts4.5 in the amounts of either or But that subpoena was served prior to JPMC 2s acquisition of Bear Stearns and by the time JPMC acquired that firm that same prosecutor 2s offi ce had entered a non-prosecution agreement with more,5.5 the und5.5 isputed evid5.5 ence4.3 shows tha4.3 dera4.3 law force4.3 did not view these transactions as and when as ked by B7 ear Stearns AML group whether the4.5 ass4.9 sta4.5 United States4.9 Attorn ey handling the case 223answered that question in the negative CSMF All of which says not hing of the fact that JPMC never received a subpoena from the federal government and actively tried to determine whet her there a federal TVPA investigation only to have the inquiry either deni ed or ignored ee Dkt Put simply USVI 2s motion confirms the record is barren of any proof of the first essential ele4 ent its4.4 obstruction claim and summary judg ment must enter for MC Similar3.6 USVI 2s tion con5.6 ms at it has no proof that MC 223intentionally obstructed the federal TVPA inve stigation it did not know existed The entirety5.6 of USVI theory on this point is an alleged failure to re port Epstein to the federal government theory thoroughly refuted for the same reasons that does not constitute USVI misleadingly5.8 claims5 members law8 enfor3.8 ceme4.6 id possessed information that would have been 223extremely useful in prosecuting Epstein USVI-6.9 SUF What USVI omits how7.8 ever is that th special agent who made that statement was4.6 referring to a journal kept by Ep stein 2s former employee about his tiv5.7 ities who ied to sell its content to law enforcement See JPMC Resp USVI SUMF at USVI cites no evidence from any law enforcement urce that informatio5.8 in JPMC 2s possession was at all material to investigatio5.6 ag ainst Epstein Case Document Filed Page of Case Document Filed Page of parti cipation in a sex rnffic kin ve ntur As JPM has ah-eady explained at th it did in fac rep o1i Eps ein to the federal gover nm nt numerou occasio and ia numerou ve hicle a nd the federal gove rnm nt did ot hin i those rep is or he ot her extensive evi nce it a eady had prosecu Ep ste in Dk at Th ritic a int is th at even ifUSVI i co1Tect that yet another CTR wo ul ave sp mTed a federal in vestigatio th is proof-none at JPMC intentionall wit hh el that CTR for th purp oses of thwai i ing the DOJ Even acco rdin greatest weight possible to SVls ai 267guments and ass umin i ut bas i that frequen repo1 i in by JPMC wo uld ave ed the DOJ to indict Epstein soo ner SVls claim till fail The que stio is th tru ti was JP MCs goa and there i no evidence to th at effect JPMCs actual repo1iing to the gove rnment is to the co ntr ummai jud men sho uld here fo enter in JPMCs favor I USVI CANNOT JUSTIFY INJUNCTIVE RELIEF JPMCs ti for ummai judgment a eady explains that as a atter law SVI ca nn bt a in th vai ious catego rie of ne aiy relief it de man ds USVI otio papers sepai ely ow i ca nn cai1y its bur de fo injun ti ve relief ei ther-n at tr 267ial and ce rt a inl at umma1 jud ment In a sing se nt ce at that li es any se ri in ention to ee he requirements for pe1manent injun ti ve relief SVI asks thi Co ito enjoin JPM ga fr pai i icipating in tr 267affick in ve ure in the fu ure a nd obs tru cting effo1 is to sto ve ure in CSM I violation of the TVPA Obvi ously JPMC has no intention of doing either And as explained throughout this brief genuine disputes of material fact preclude a nding of liability at this time-5.1 precluding entry of any final reme But USVI requ5.6 est for3.6 injun5.6 tiv5.6 lie4.4 ffe4.4 rs additional,5.6 independent flaws First 223although past injuries may provide a sis for standing to seek money damages they do not confer standing to seek injunctive relief unless the pl ain5.5 iff can demons4.7 trate at is like4.7 to harmed ain in the ture in a similar way Nicosia Amazon.com Inc F.3d 2d Cir But nowhere scattered in USVI 2s 223undisputed fa cts or forty pages of ief3.9 ng will the Cou5.9 find any act stab5.9 lish5.9 ng tha4.2 VI or its res4.6 dents4.6 are4.2 at any sk future injury from JPMC 2s banking serv2.6 ices especially with respect to a TVPA olation In Snapp Puerto Rico lik5.7 the sovereigns in every successfu5.7 parens patriae case ted in tha4.8 opinion ght enjo5.6 ongoing immin5.6 ent rm posed5.6 by the defend5.6 ants they5.6 sued See Alfred5.5 Snapp Son Inc P.R ex rel Barez U.S But here USVI 2s allegations and evidence concern long past behavior US VI has not introduced evidence of any current sex-trafficking ac tivity in its territory let alone a sex-trafficking venture through which JPMC is knowingly benefitting via the provi sion of banking services The focus of this lawsuit is stead on JPMC 2s relatio5.9 nship with a client at MC exited over a decad6.4 ago who is now deceased in a reg5.7 lato5.7 ry environment and AML progra4.2 vastly different than at in ace4.8 today In short there is nothi ng for the Court to enjoin Second as explained below USVI-6.7 is a civil plaintiff with 223unclean hands proceeding pursuant to the TVPA 2s 223civil remedy It is acco rding5.5 subject to MC 2s equitable defenses which would foreclose any possibl relief kt collecting cases There remain fact Case Document Filed Page of questions regarding the nature and scope of USVI 2s own wrongdoi ng and thus whether USVI recourse to this Court 2s equ itab5.8 risdiction at all See infra IV JPMC 2S AFFIRMATI-6.7 DEFE-3.9 NSES TO USVI AND CANNOT BE RESOLVE-3.7 ON ARY JUDGMENT-3.7 USVI 2s req6 u1 est fo6 su6 mma4.8 ry judg6 ment on JP MC 2s affirmative defenses a misguided5.2 atte4.9 mpt to e-litig6.1 ate motion strike ment tha4.9 ose defense4.9 are unavailable aga4.9 nst the government as a matter of law Compare Dkt at 223JPMorgan 2s equitable defenses are not cognizable as a matter of law with Dkt at same The Court has already rejected that legal argument Dkt What remains is the factual question of wh ether USVI officials were comp5.9 licit in Eps5.1 ein 2s im es Answering this question requi res cre5.2 ibility ete5.2 rmin6.4 ation6.4 weighing of competing testimony an drawing inferences about th motive underlying the actions-5.6 of government officials Such determinations are the exclusive province of the factfinder and preclud5.8 mmary judgment The record shows that Epstein gave payments advice and other benefits to the highest USVI government officials In ex change he received influenc over the very law6.7 that were-6.7 supposed to constrain him waivers of sex offender monitoring requi rements million dolla4.9 rs in bsidies to allegedly am comp6.1 ie he used for sex traffick ing6.2 acilita5 tion visas licenses and other forms of government assistance that enabled his criminal conduct and immunity from inves tigation and scrutiny A USVI Officials Took Epstein 2s Cash USVI 2s summary judgment motion ignores th foundational element of its quid-pro-quo arrangement with Epstein 227the hundr eds of thousands of dollars in payments Epstein made to USVI government entities and officials over two decades See Dkt at CSMF detailing payments These included paying in school tuition for Governor de Jongh 2s Case Document Filed Page of Case Document Filed Page of hildr CSM I and fo ll ow in th ove rn an es fo bezz lin li fun ds CSMF i Ep ste in ay ts it i ian we adv i se an dir ected by SVI ir st ady see CS MF i,i an bo ght Eps in oya ty an access a USVI li i i a CSMF i Th ese ayme nt prov i de bac dro JP MC efe ses by estab li hin at ey ffi i a ithin th SVI gove rnm nt ad a co pe llin ot i ve to i ve him ec i a ea tm an fac ili tate is rim es was pay in Whe th th ese payme ts we eg i im a pa li of a i ll ic it qui ro exc han ge is a di sputed fact qu es ti at pr clu des Uil aiy ju dg See English Lattanzi at A in Uil aiy ud gme nt co ve i cla im ase fac tu a di sp tes th ir ran sfe we egi tim ate sa aiy payme ts sto ey SVIs fa ilur to a ddr ess i te llin See Agence Fr resse Morel 2d in uII1m aiy ud gme pl a in iff ll i facts at ar dir ect co ra1 it os iti Epstein Cash Bought Influence And Acces To USVI DOJ Eve afte ste in deat Cec il Jo USV I a so i gno es th man wa n-m aiy be fi ts Cec il de Jon gh CS MF i nn et Map USV Gove rn fr to so ps co un se ow to in ease SVIs in ess in vest nt an dea i USV st rn ct ur a fisca imb a a ce CS MF i asked ps in to pr ead th wo a USVI was pu hin fo bu in ess in ves tm nt an eq este ste in input i ss uin riti ca ll ee ed nd to fm a ce USV rati CSMF i ate asked Ep ste in fo lp i co min up i a way fo ED fi i a ies to a tr iate i in co a USVI rog ram attrac ti ve an in awyers rafte propose eg i at i fo ove rn CSM In as ow th i govt was espe rat fo cas CSMF i Eps in wo rk ed ith bot a i tt in an fo 1m USVI ove rn a pl an to get ir cas th rough exte ndin th a milli oa co ll atera li zed by USVI i lan ds CS MF I Evidence also reveals why Epstein paid USVI officials For example the First Lady suggested that Epstein 2s business associat es CMSF and expla4.6 ned tha4.6 CSMF Celestino White is the same USVI Sena tor that the First Lady suggested stein put 223some sort of month5.8 retain5.7 er because it would 223get Epstein his loyalty and access.5.7 CSMF He is also same USVI senato5.5 who CSMF Email correspondence show that as early as Epstei worked through the USVI First Lady and overnor to reach the Attorney General CSMF The reason why has beco5.6 me clear In USVI he could guard guards In the USVI First Lady solicited Epstein 2s input on USV I 2s pending sex offender monito5.7 ring legislation and shared aft languag5.7 from DOJ4.6 with Epstein writing5.4 223This is suggested language will it work4.1 for you CSMF emphasis added Epstein responded with directions on how to loosen the restrictions The First Lady responded that she did not 223want to email back and rth5.3 and that 223this need5.3 be settled Thursday ecause Governor John de Jongh es away a week AG Vincent Frazer needs to sub5.7 mit June CSMF Epstein and his lawyers continued to stay in touch with USVI DOJ a nd various senators in order to influence the text of the bill CSMF Here too the witnesses and documents When confronted with these emails USVI witnesses gave conflicting accounts again requir3.4 ng edibility5.4 terminations.5.4 The Gove4.2 nor id emailed the4.6 re quest Atto6.2 rney General and5.4 told5.4 the4.2 Fir3.4 st Lady to peak direc4.2 ly to the Atto5.9 rney Gener3.9 the F7 ady tes5.1 ified5.9 that she never spoke to the Atto rney General but that the Gover nor did and relayed to her how Epstein sho5.4 uld proceed5.4 and the Attorney General claimed CSMF Case Document Filed Page of Case Document Filed Page of prese con fl ict in acco un ts of what appe ed at nl a ur can esolve Wh i le USVI atte pts to min i mize the im propriety of Epste in in fl ce ove sex offende leg i at i USVI witness est i fied a CSMF1273 in a Bou ht ai er A nd pecial Tr atment It did stop the When Epste in prefe ed language i ot make i in aw First Lady wrote ps in to reassure hi that alt i ad in cl ded eve ything wa ted all was lost and we wi ll fig ur somet hin by coming i a game plan to ge aro un these stacles CSMF ass ur ed i that We i ll eed to work through en USVI Senato Ca rl Dowe and USV I Senato Ce es ino White to ge th i accomplis ed In meantime we wi ll wo with en USV I Atto rn ey General in cent Fraze to i ve i sc et i fo status fo yo thats east he can do CSMF Afte passage of egisla ion USVI Atto rn ey Ge eral in ce Fraze promp tl prov i ded a waiver of day ior ice equ ir eme to the USVI DO for Epstein en trave ll ing out of the ir in I slands CSMF When Epste in atto rn eys compla in ed that th i accommodatio was sti ll oo resti i ct i ve Atto rn ey Ge eral Frazer loosened it fm i er offe rin at Epstein be a ll owed notify the USVI OJ of his in te io ti 267avel out of the USVI twe ty four hours prior to his depaii ur CSM USVI ecycles its prio ai men that the Atto rn ey Ge era ant in a u-avel wa i ver Epstein is a i sc et i a1y actio that canno suppo1i an affinnative defe se Th i misses the po in JPMC is not second ess in et er waive ld ave bee gran ed as an ob ect i ve matter Epsteins lawye ad proposed or the bi ll CSMF Rather it is pointing to record evidence suggestin that the waivers were part of an improper quid pro-quo exchange involving DOJ and USVI politicia ns with close ties to Epstein Former Attorneys General Thomas-Jacobs and George bot tes5.1 ified5.9 tha4.7 MF And Attorney Genera Frazer himself CSMF A jury is entitled to hear this evidence and draw in ferences regarding the connection between Epstein 2s sp ec5 ia5 eatment a5 nd his payments to USVI officials Epstein5.4 ides furth5.6 evidenc4.4 benefited fro5.6 improper political influence USVI witnesses testified that CSMF Under that regime pstein should have been CSMF Yet he wa CSMF No witness within the USVI government was able to CSMF The best evidence of how the classification ca me about is CSMF Yet the USVI witness-5.3 who CSMF This5.1 con5.9 lic4.7 tween5.9 the docu6 n1 tary and tes5.2 timon6 al o1 rd a qu6 in6 tessen6 tia4.8 f4 ct dispute.6 S6 ee Utica6 Mu6 Ins.6 Co Fireman 2s Fund Ins Supp 3d N.D N.Y denying plaintiff summary dgment on efendan5.7 2s efense ased5.7 in part on fact that deposition5.7 tes4.9 imony was4.9 223contradicted by several documents Case Document Filed Page of Case Document Filed Page of An a inin bt as th a dis pu ted fac un de rl in MCs a ffinn ative defe ses i re ove by fo ne USVI At rn ey Ge era De ni se Geo ges test im at CSM eo ge testi fi ed th at CSMF To epeat th SVI At rn ey Ge ra fil ed hi law i tes i fi ed un de oat th at Th a alo uf fices to ecl ud umm aiy ju dg Ep tein Ca Bought Million In Government Sub idie For Hi Bu ine ss SVIs co mp la in a ll eges a Ep ste in two USVI ased co mp a ies we fr nt for hi sex rnffick in terpr i se Seco A Co Dk For twe ty yeai SVI ub idized th operatio ese two co pa ni es and ur ed th ey ep ir eratio in SVI by grant in th a by exte i pste in betwee and red ti in in co taxes CS MF th befo and after hi co ict i SVI offic i als too swo rn esti rega in ste in eratio a th vote allow him a hi co pa ni es to avo i ay in taxes CSMF Th ese ax breaks a un ted to mi ll i in di ec be efi ste in CSM MCs expe is a alyzed tax br eaks an co cl ded a th was va lid as a in ess a bassador for sain er nm nt tity Case Document Filed Page of eco mi rati nal to ppo rt th CSMF th ir ow co un SVI ffi cia exte ded ese fi ts ece i ved CSM Ye in years do in bu in ess ith him CSM if SVI atte mp ts dis tan ce i tse lf fr th ED cla imin it act i a ot a ttribut a bl to th gove rnm In fa Cs oa i un de th ge ral pe i sio an dir ect i th ove rn I ll Th Gove rnm ow itn ess ega rdin test ifi ed a CSM An ultim ate dec i i th ot to a prove eco mm nd ed tax in ce i ves a ma de by ove rn CSMF Assess in USV ot i vat i hin ese ax a ks kn ow edge SVI fic ial ad a out ps in operat i ir in vo ve in ose ope rati a th in ce i ves we im prope rl anted as ai i a ui ro qu exc han ge quir es we i hin co mp tin ev i de ce a ob fo th jm Epstein Cash Bought Visa And Other Benefit SVI waves away at infl ue ce Fir st ady Jo cl a imin pos iti was ce ni a Bu th fa cts ow was an ac ti ve pl aye in pos i i to influ ce a il ow th at ps in So uth rn Tm st oyees al so se ved him in a in i i ual ac i i Fi ad ove see in th In a il Fo ex am a tim mpl oyee a USV I des i gnee eg ar in i ts ran ts to Ep ste in rov id ed swo rn tes tim a a po in di th ED do an kin in vest i gat i legislation and secure government benefits for Epstein CSMF listing fact7.9 demonstrating First Lady acted as a govern ment official CS MF owing how the Firs4.6 Lad5.4 used her osition5.4 to nefit Epstein5.4 USVI 2s claim the First Lady had contact with individua ls in a position to influ5.6 Epstein 2s sex offender monito ring is also disputed CSMF As USVI 2s cla4.6 at the4.6 Governor view Eps5 ein5.8 app5.8 ation5.8 for3.8 tax5.8 benef3.8 its5 rely5.8 formality CSMF USV I 2s perfunctory treatment of Ep stein 2s relationship with the First Lady ignores the many ways in which she and other government affiliated individuals activ5.4 ely facilitated Eps4.6 ein 2s crimes See e.g CSMF For example the First Lady fa cilitated gifts from Epstein to airport personnel and customs employees CSMF And there is evidence that Epstein traveled openly through USVI airports accomp5.4 ied by young women CS MF Indeed CSMF Further Epstein corresponded with First La dy de Jongh and other high-level government officials about securing visas and setting up ESL cl asses for his alleged victims in VI Specifically Ms de Jo ngh was aware that at least one of his young female associates had only a temporary business visitor visa Ms CSMF She coordinated with Epstein on how an ndividual could obtain an throu6.1 gh the University of Virgin Islands CSMF The First Lady also assisted with other immigration matters related to Epstein foreign female associates incl ing by speaking with immig5.4 ration atto5.4 rneys on Epstein 2s behalf CSMF A nd she assisted in gathering materi als to be provided in support Case Document Filed Page of of another young woman 2s visa application by coordinating with members of the USVI government for letters of support CSMF She also assisted with setting up a special session of an ESL class specifically for three young women CSMF She worked directly with the Vice5 esiden6.2 stitu6.2 tion6.2 al Advanceme5 at the ivers4.9 ity the Virgin5.7 lands on Thomas in order to do so CSMF In Cecile de Jongh wa included on an email that CSMF Ms Ann Rodriguez writes about plans for Id None this is ceremonial It is evidence active facilit ation Epstein5.5 crimes that at the very leas4.7 requires the taking and evaluation of conflicting evidence by a jury Epstein 2s ash Bought Immunity USVI concedes it nev5.6 investig5.6 ated5.6 Epstein.5.6 at ema4.5 ins sputed is USVI cla4.5 ims4.9 at it an undisputed fact that the Govern5.5 ment lack5.5 suff3.9 icient idence to investig5.9 ate Epstein ot so USVI itnesses acknowledged that hen Florida law enforcement faxed Epstein 2s registration information to USVI DOJ officials in July they included a news article CSMF Based on his article the Govern ment 2s designee acknowledged that CSMF USVI DOJ kept this article in Epstein 2s official sex offender registry file MF USVI witnesses further confirmed that CSMF6.4 And that CSMF A former Attorney General of USVI confirmed CSMF And Case Document Filed Page of Case Document Filed Page of although A torney General Geo ge claims that Epstein USVI i tness flatly contradicts hi cla i testifying at CSMF r,i What is mo a lth USVI a es i ever eceived evidence to trigge an in vestigation witnesses tes ified tha CSMFif Were this ot CSM i Th gove rn ment i tness on sex offe der mo ito rin tes ified at CSMF i,i If Epstein had bee checked weekly over a period of te years ere wo ld be ecords of approx i mately ecks Yet Epstein CSMF I CSMF i Across USVI claims Othe USVI i tnesses disp ted CSMF r,i fo ne Atto rn eys Ge era tes ified tha CSMF I CSM i Thi co nfl ict in ev i de ce creates a fact i spute At bottom JPMC 2s aff3.9 rma4.7 tive enses rn on hotly disputed questions as to whether USVI 2s preferential treatment of Epstein and the benefits it rived fro5.9 its relationsh5.9 with him can all be attributed to mere incompetence and bad judgment or whether the government 2s actions activ5.6 ely facilitated stein 2s crimes and miscond5.6 uct At this stage all ferences mus4.3 be awn in favor of JPMC See Jasco Tools Inc Dana Corp F.3d 2d Cir the court 2s role in deciding a motion for summary judgment to identify f4 actual issu6 es n6 o1 to solv6 them The disputed reco rd requires jury resolution CONCL-4.1 ION For these reasons the Court should not enter mma4.7 ry judg5.9 ment in USVI 2s favo5.9 any5.9 claim or any5.8 issue Dated August MASSEY GAIL LLP-5 Leonard A Gail Leonard A Gail pro hac vice Rachel Morse pro hac vice East Washington Street Suite Chicago IL lgail mass4.7 eygail.5.5 com rmorse masseygail.com Respectfu5.9 lly5.9 submitted,5.9 WILMER CUTLER CKERING HALE AND DORR lic4.3 ia Ellsworth Felic4.3 ia Ellsworth5.5 John Butts Andr 2Laughlin State Street Boston MA felicia.ellsworth wilmerhale.com john.butts ilmerhale.5.6 com andy.olaughlin wilmerhale.com Boyd Johnson I Robert Boone Alan Schoenfeld Christopher Bouchoux World Trade Center Greenwich Street New York NY Case Document Filed Page of boyd.johnso5.5 wilmerh5.5 ale.co5.5 robert.boon5.3 wilmerh5.3 ale.com alan.schoenfeld wilmerhale.com chris4.9 opher.5.7 bouchoux wilmerhale.5.7 com Attorneys JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A Case Document Filed Page of
