Epstein Data Wiki

Edmond de Rothschild (Suisse) S.A.

Properties2
tagsentity, switzerland, banking, southern-trust-company, epstein-finances
aliasesEdmond de Rothschild (Suisse), Edmond de Rothschild Suisse SA, EDRS, Edmond de Rothschild (Suisse) SA

16 min read

TypeSwiss bank. It names itself “Edmond de Rothschild (Suisse) S.A.” in the two letter agreements it addressed to Southern Trust Company, and the notice block for it in both gives an address in “Suisse”1234
Short form used in the instruments”EDRS”1
Chief Executive Officer named in the October 2015 signature blocksEmmanuel Fievet56
Chief Financial Officer named in the same blocksCynthia Tobiano56
CounterpartySouthern Trust Company, Inc., a Virgin Islands corporation, addressed through Darren K. Indyke, Vice President13
Fee stated”EDRS shall pay STC $10,000,000” in each of two letter agreements, dated October 5 and October 23, 201531
Expensesreasonable out-of-pocket expenses, travel excluded, “capped at $100,000”1
Governing law and forumthe laws of the United States Virgin Islands; proceedings “only in the superior court or a federal court in the United States Virgin Islands”2
Execution, as the copies were releasedthe October 5 copy is signed for the bank by Fievet and Tobiano; the October 23 copy carries no signature at all; the line for Southern Trust is blank on both65

Edmond de Rothschild (Suisse) S.A. is a Swiss bank whose chief executive and chief financial officer signed a letter agreement dated October 5, 2015 undertaking to pay $10,000,000 to Southern Trust Company, Inc., the U.S. Virgin Islands company owned by Jeffrey Epstein. On every copy of that instrument read here, the line for Southern Trust’s own signature is blank.365 The released files hold two versions of that instrument, dated eighteen days apart. Each is a “Letter of Agreement” from the bank to Darren K. Indyke as Vice President of Southern Trust; each recites that Southern Trust “has been working with” the bank “on a variety of strategic business matters”; each fixes the fee at $10,000,000; and neither says what the work was.31 The definition is left open on the face of the document: paragraph 1 provides that Southern Trust “shall continue to work with EDRS as further specified and agreed to between STC and EDRS from time to time.”1

What follows is what these documents record. An agreement records what its parties agreed, not what was done; nothing on this page is a finding of wrongdoing.

Two letter agreements, October 2015

October 5, 2015

The earlier version is dated October 5, 2015. Its recital reads: “Southern Trust Company, Inc., a Virgin Islands corporation (“STC”), has been working with Edmond de Rothschild (Suisse) S.A. (“EDRS”) on a variety of strategic business matters.” Its purpose clause, in this version, says the agreement sets out the terms “upon which STC will continue to work with EDR on the EDR Matters”, using the shorter form, which the later version does not.3

Paragraph 2 provides: “In consideration for the Work, EDRS shall pay STC $10,000,000. Payment shall be made by EDRS to STC by not later than November 15, 2015.” The bank also undertook to reimburse reasonable out-of-pocket expenses, travel excluded, capped at $100,000.3

The same October 5 agreement appears in the release twice, once as a flatbed scan and once as a photograph of the paper under a separate production stamp; the two carry the same text and the same signatures.67

October 23, 2015

The later version is dated October 23, 2015 and is addressed to the same person at the same company. Its recital is identical. Its purpose clause is not: it reads “upon which STC will continue to work with EDRS on the EDRS Matters,” correcting the short form used eighteen days earlier.1

Paragraph 2 is identical in amount and different in date: “In consideration for the Work, EDRS shall pay STC $10,000,000. Payment shall be made by EDRS to STC by not later than November 30, 2015.” The $100,000 expense cap is unchanged.1

The phrase “EDRS Matters”, the term the October 23 version uses for whatever the parties were doing, was searched across the full-text index of the release as an exact phrase and returns this document and no other.8

What “the Work” is defined as

Paragraph 1, headed The Work, is one sentence: “STC shall continue to work with EDRS as further specified and agreed to between STC and EDRS from time to time while this Agreement remains in effect (the “Work”).”1 The definition is by reference to future agreement between the parties. The instrument that fixes the fee at $10,000,000 does not describe the service, name a deliverable, set a term, or attach a schedule. This page does not characterise what the work was; the open definition is what the document says.

The other terms

The remaining clauses are the ones a bank’s counsel would want. Paragraph 3 binds Southern Trust to hold the bank’s confidential information “in strictest confidence.”1 Paragraph 4(a) records that Southern Trust “has no authority to, nor shall STC, bind EDRS in contract or otherwise, or make any decisions or take any actions whatsoever under this Agreement on behalf of EDRS, and STC is not serving in any fiduciary capacity whatsoever, to, for or on behalf of EDRS.”9

Paragraph 5 has the bank indemnify Southern Trust against claims arising out of the work, carved out for “fraud, bad faith or willful misconduct,” and adds a sentence about scale: “EDRS agrees that the magnitude of the amounts involved in connection with any Work, in and of itself, does not elevate STC’s standard of care in any manner whatsoever.”9

Paragraph 6, headed No Investment Advice, has the bank acknowledge “that in connection with the Work, STC is not acting in any way as an “investment advisor”, as such term is defined in and interpreted in accordance with the provisions of the Investment Advisors Act of 1940, as amended” (the statute’s name is spelled with an “o” in the document), and that no part of the work constitutes advice on the value of securities, the selection of investment managers, or the allocation of assets.10

Paragraph 8 puts the agreement under the law of the United States Virgin Islands and confines proceedings to USVI courts. It also contains an entire-agreement clause: the agreement “constitutes the entire agreement of the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes any prior understandings, agreements or representations by or among the parties hereto with respect to such subject matter.” That clause appears in both versions.24

Facsimile and email values on the third sheet of the October 23 copy, and address and email values on its fourth sheet, are barred on the image and are not reproduced here.102

The signature pages, read at the image

Both versions close with the same sentence: “If STC is in agreement with the foregoing, please sign, date and return one copy of this Agreement.” Below it, the bank’s block is set up for two signatories side by side, the left block printing “Name: Emmanuel Fievet” above “Title: Chief Executive Officer” and the right block “Name: Cynthia Tobiano” above “Title: Chief Financial Officer”; and, lower on the sheet, an acceptance block for “SOUTHERN TRUST COMPANY, INC.” above “Name: Darren K. Indyke” and “Title: Vice President”. The running foot reads “[Signature Page to Letter Agreement between Edmond de Rothschild (Suisse) S.A. and Southern Trust Company, Inc]”.56

The extraction of both sheets prints “By:” with nothing after it, which does not distinguish a blank line from a redacted one. Read at the image, the two sheets differ:

  • On the October 5 copy, both of the bank’s signature lines carry handwritten ink in blue. The acceptance block for Southern Trust is dated in print, the 5th day of October, 2015, and its “By:” line is an unmarked rule: no ink, no redaction bar.67
  • On the October 23 copy, all three “By:” lines are unmarked rules. There is no ink and no redaction bar on any of them. The acceptance date, the 23rd day of October, 2015, is printed rather than written in.5

So the released copy of the later agreement was not executed by anyone, and the released copies of the earlier one were executed by the bank alone. Whether a fully executed copy of either exists elsewhere is not something these documents can answer.

What the bank’s chief financial officer sent Epstein

The bank’s chief financial officer corresponded with Epstein directly and over her own name. On September 6, 2014, thirteen months before the letter agreements, Cynthia Tobiano wrote to him beginning “Dear Mr Epstein” and saying “You will find attached (i) our organizational chart and (ii) cash flow stat=ment”, adding that “we have included both consolidated and statuto=y views for 2013” and, in the same sentence, for the first half of 2014, and offering further information. She signed “Cynthia Tobiano / CFO Edmond de Rothschild.”11

Epstein replied the same day asking for more: “Id also like to understand the cash per entity on the chart flow.” The exchange continues over several messages that day, the earlier ones quoted inside the later; the message header at the top of the sheet is not barred, and the bars on the sheet fall on values further down it and on the footer, which are not reproduced here.11

What a Rothschild principal told Epstein about signing “NPA”

On September 14, 2015, three weeks before the earlier letter agreement, a message sent from an account labelled “A. de Rothschild-2” and signed “Ariane de Rothschild” told Epstein: “For NPA, it will be signed by CeO of EdR suisse ( emmanuel Fievet) and another mber pf the exec committee, after board approval”. It replies to a message from Epstein reading “one of the documents should definintly be a power of attny in your favor”.1213

The message does not say what “NPA” is, and nothing cited on this page connects it to either letter agreement. What the message does establish is that in September 2015 a Rothschild principal described to Epstein the signing requirement stated for the instrument the message calls “NPA” (the bank’s chief executive plus one further member of its executive committee, after board approval), and that the instruments dated the following month are made out for exactly two of the bank’s officers to sign.

The payment Deutsche Bank recorded

Transaction charts drawn from Deutsche Bank’s document production, sent on August 13, 2019 by one of the bank’s own associate general counsel under the heading “Exhibit A: Leon Black / Rothschild Group Transactions”, record a payment dated 12/17/2015 of $10,000,000 from “Edmond de Rothschild (Suisse) SA Geneva, Switzerland” to Southern Trust Company, Inc., against the Bates cite DB-SDNY-0005122. The chart states no purpose for it. The same exhibit records a payment dated 12/21/2015 of $14,999,980 to Southern Trust from Benjamin Edmond de Rothschild; no instrument accounting for that payment is cited on this page.14 The chart as a whole, and the other payments on it, are set out on Southern Trust Company.

The dates stand as follows and are left to stand: the October 5 agreement required payment by November 15, 2015; the October 23 agreement required payment by November 30, 2015; the chart records a payment of the agreed amount on December 17, 2015. Nothing cited here states that the December payment was made under either agreement, or which of the two versions was operative, and this page does not infer it.

What these documents do not establish

  • What the work was. Both versions leave “the Work” to be “further specified and agreed to between STC and EDRS from time to time,” and neither attaches a schedule.13
  • Whether either agreement was fully executed. The released copies show the bank’s two signatures on the October version dated the 5th and no signature at all on the version dated the 23rd; Southern Trust’s line is blank on every copy read here.65
  • Which version governed. Both contain the same entire-agreement and supersession clause; the later one is unsigned as released.24
  • Any response. No statement from the bank, from Emmanuel Fievet or from Cynthia Tobiano about these agreements is recorded on this page.

Searches run for this page, and their results, are recorded in the note below.8

See also

  • Southern Trust Company, Inc.: the counterparty, and where the Deutsche Bank transaction chart is set out
  • Darren K. Indyke: the addressee and named signatory for Southern Trust
  • Deutsche Bank: the producing bank from whose document production the charts recording the December 2015 payment are drawn

Notes

Footnotes

  1. Letter agreement dated October 23, 2015 from Edmond de Rothschild (Suisse) S.A. to “Mr. Darren K. Indyke, Vice President, Southern Trust Company, Inc.,” first sheet, carrying the recital, ¶1 The Work, ¶2 Fees and Expenses and the opening of ¶3 Confidentiality. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00648735 p.1. Rendered locally and read at the image, 2026-09-09T22:53Z. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8 ↩9 ↩10 ↩11 ↩12

  2. The same agreement, fourth sheet: the notice block for the bank and ¶8 Miscellaneous. Address and email values on this sheet are barred on the image and are not reproduced here. The address lines carry no label of their own; where the image bars the address the extraction emits a nonsense string, and after the email label it closes the gap, so that a redaction reads there as an empty template field. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00648735 p.4. Read at the image, 2026-09-09T22:54Z, and the barred region re-examined at a 4x crop. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  3. Letter agreement dated October 5, 2015 from Edmond de Rothschild (Suisse) S.A. to the same addressee, first sheet: the recital, the purpose clause using “EDR” and “EDR Matters,” ¶1 and ¶2 with the November 15, 2015 payment date and the $100,000 expense cap. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01110892 p.1. Read at the image, 2026-09-09T22:57Z; the text layer of this sheet is damaged in places where the image is clear. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8

  4. The same October 5 agreement, fourth sheet: the notice block for the bank and ¶8 Miscellaneous, carrying the United States Virgin Islands governing-law and forum provisions and the entire-agreement and supersession clause. Email values on this sheet are barred on the image and are not reproduced here. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01110892 p.4. Read at the image, 2026-09-10T00:40Z. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  5. The same agreement, fifth and last sheet: the signature page. Read at the image at 200 dpi and again at a 2x crop of each block, 2026-09-09T22:55Z: all three “By:” lines are unmarked rules, carrying neither ink nor a redaction bar, and the acceptance date is printed. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00648735 p.5. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7

  6. The same October 5 agreement, fifth and last sheet: the signature page, signed in blue ink over the printed names of Emmanuel Fievet, Chief Executive Officer, and Cynthia Tobiano, Chief Financial Officer, with the Southern Trust line left as an unmarked rule. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01110892 p.5. Read at the image, 2026-09-09T22:57Z. The extraction of this sheet is damaged where the ink crosses the type (it renders the second name and the second title as broken strings, and the printed ordinal in the date as a garble), which is consistent with what the image shows and is why three short quotations from this sheet do not resolve against its text layer. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8

  7. A photograph of the same signed October 5 agreement, released under a separate production stamp: the first and last sheets carry the same text, the same October 5 date and the same two signatures. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01120082 pp.1, 5. Read at the image, 2026-09-09T22:58Z. The two documents carry separate, non-overlapping production stamp runs, EFTA01110892–896 and EFTA01120082–086, read at the image, 2026-09-10T00:09Z. ↩ ↩2

  8. Searches run against the full-text index of the release for this page, 2026-09-09 and re-derived 2026-09-10, all as exact phrases: “EDRS Matters” returned one document, EFTA00648735. “EDRS” returned 59 pages across 50 documents; the index folds case, so that query also returns “EDRs” and “Edrs”. Eleven of the 59 are sheets of the three agreement documents. The other 48 carry a different word: 28 are “European Depositary Receipts (EDRs)” in Form ADV Part 2A brochures, 16 are an anti-money-laundering review term in bank compliance files, and 4 are a records-system service account name in a case-note log. One page from each of those three groups was rendered and read at the image, 2026-09-10T00:10Z, to confirm the reading. Within this search, the short form the instruments define appears only in the three agreement documents. “Emmanuel Fievet” returned 7 pages across 5 documents; “Fievet” alone returned 36 pages across 34 documents. “Cynthia Tobiano” returned 145 pages across 143 documents. “Benjamin Edmond de Rothschild” returned 6 pages across 6 documents. These are counts of what the index holds, not statements about what exists. ↩ ↩2

  9. The same agreement, second sheet: the close of ¶3, ¶4 Disclaimer of Representations, Warranties and Guarantees, and ¶5 Indemnification. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00648735 p.2. Read at the image, 2026-09-09T22:54Z. ↩ ↩2

  10. The same agreement, third sheet: the close of ¶5, ¶6 No Investment Advice, ¶7 Notices and the notice block for Southern Trust. Facsimile and email values on this sheet are barred on the image and are not reproduced here. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00648735 p.3. Read at the image, 2026-09-09T22:54Z. ↩ ↩2

  11. Email thread of September 6, 2014 between Cynthia Tobiano and Jeffrey Epstein, subject “Re: Informations,” read bottom-up: her message opening “Dear Mr Epstein” sits lowest and her signature block, “Cynthia Tobiano / CFO Edmond de Rothschild,” below it. The ”=” characters inside “stat=ment” and “statuto=y” are quoted-printable line-break artefacts carried onto the face of the document and are quoted as printed. The message header at the top of the sheet is not barred; the bars on this sheet fall on values further down it and on the footer, and no barred value is reproduced here. Clock times on this thread are not printed because the fields carry no zone. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02587667 p.1. Read at the image, 2026-09-09T22:58Z. ↩ ↩2

  12. Message of September 14, 2015 from an account labelled “A. de Rothschild-2” to “jeffrey E.,” signed “Ariane de Rothschild,” quoting Epstein’s message of the same day. The sender’s address is barred on this sheet and is not supplied here. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01803331 p.1. Read at the image, 2026-09-09T22:58Z. ↩

  13. A second copy of the same message in the release, whose header carries an RFC date field of “Mon, 14 Sep 2015 10:07:27 +0000.” That copy is the basis for treating the date as settled; no clock time from either copy is printed on this page. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00651980 p.1. Read at the image, 2026-09-10T00:09Z. ↩

  14. Email of August 13, 2019 transmitting transaction charts drawn from Deutsche Bank’s document production, Exhibit A, “Leon Black / Rothschild Group Transactions.” The Edmond de Rothschild (Suisse) SA row is the last on the first sheet; the Benjamin Edmond de Rothschild row is the second on the sheet that follows. The sender’s signature block sits on the ninth sheet: it gives “Director” and “Associate General Counsel” on one line, separated by a vertical rule the extraction renders as a capital I, above “Deutsche Bank AG, New York Branch” and “Litigation & Regulatory Enforcement.” Recipient address values on the first sheet, and contact values in that signature block, are barred and are not reproduced here. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00080250 pp.1–2, 9. Read at the image, 2026-09-09T23:00Z; the ninth sheet read at the image 2026-09-10T00:50Z. ↩

Backlinks