Epstein Data Wiki

UBS Financial Services Inc., Private Wealth Management

Properties2
tagsentity, bank, ubs, banking, ghislaine-maxwell, terramar
aliasesUBS Private Wealth Management, UBS Financial Services Inc.

30 min read

TypeBank. Staff correspondence in this production is subscribed “UBS Financial Services Inc.”1 (and, in 2014, “UBS Financial Services, Inc.”2) above the line “Private Wealth Management”3
Relationship at issueBanking and wealth management services to Ghislaine Maxwell and, in the bank’s own words, “your related entities”3
Office on the August 2019 letters299 Park Avenue, New York, given as “299 Park, 26th Fl” in the signature block of the August 2019 letters45; the February 2014 correspondence gives 299 Park Avenue, 25th Floor2
Earliest correspondence read here17 February 2014 at the head of an eleven-sheet run, subject “Re: MAXWELL: Wealth Management for Ghislaine Maxwell”, whose quoted headers run back to 19 December 201326
Decision recorded1 August 2019: the bank writes that it “can no longer continue providing banking and wealth management services” and asks that assets be transferred to another institution within 30 days3
Last exchange read here13 August 2019, the bank asking the client to account for expected incoming funds and asking whether she has been able to open accounts elsewhere5
Production stampUBSTERRAMAR, on every sheet of the bank correspondence cited here352
Produced to the defenceAn index row reading “UBS Subpoena Return, 12-15-2020” in a Government discovery letter of December 16, 2020 in United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)7

UBS Financial Services Inc., Private Wealth Management is the bank that held the accounts of Ghislaine Maxwell and of entities associated with her, and that ended that relationship by an e-mail of 1 August 2019 addressed “Ms. Maxwell,”.3 The accounts themselves, the monthly statements, the advisers who ran them and the March 2019 letter of authorisation are the subject of the Angara Trust and Montpelier Trust page, whose account narrative runs to a distribution of 1 July 2019 and stops there. This page begins where that one stops: it is about the relationship rather than the balances, and specifically about how it was opened, how it was closed, and what the bank later gave to the Government.

Nothing on this page is a finding of wrongdoing, and no document cited here alleges any. A bank ending a client relationship is a commercial decision, and the documents read for this page record that decision without stating a reason for it. Account numbers, routing and identity numbers, residential addresses, telephone and fax numbers, dates of birth and e-mail addresses on the sheets cited here are not reproduced.

February 2014: opening the relationship

The earliest sheet of the bank correspondence read for this page is dated 17 February 2014 and carries the subject line “Re: MAXWELL: Wealth Management for Ghislaine Maxwell”. That sheet is the first of an eleven-sheet run, and all eleven were read at the image for this page. Beneath the top message, sheet 1 alone carries three message headers dated Friday 14 February 2014, and the quoted headers continue down the run: the lowest message on the run to carry that subject line is dated Wednesday 15 January 2014, and beneath it the same run carries an exchange under a different subject line, running back to Thursday 19 December 2013.26

In the second of the three messages of 14 February on sheet 1, Camille A. Garcia, CFP, a Senior Wealth Strategy Associate at UBS Financial Services, Inc., Private Wealth Management, wrote: “As discussed, attached is a summary of the entities. Highlighted are the open items that we need to answer/resolve in order to move forward.” The message above hers reads “116 East 65th Street Articles of Organization attached”, and the top message of the thread answers: “The Excel spreadsheet has been updated with a couple of items remaining from missing information in my files. Are there any other docs I can provide?” The attachments named on the sheet are “116 East 65th Street LLC Articles of Formation[1].pdf” and “UBS DOCS.xls”. The sheet is stamped UBSTERRAMAR00000113, which is near the beginning of that production’s own numbering.2

Two forenames on that first sheet are covered by bars, one where a message opens and one above a sign-off, and the sender of every message header on it is withheld. No name is supplied here for any of them.

Further down the run, a message of 14 February whose sender is covered by a bar asks: “Just checking in to see if you need something from me today in order to expedite this transition from JPMorgan? Ghislaine is leaving for over a month next week so she really needs to get this moved over / paperwork signed before her departure.”8 On the run’s ninth sheet, under the subject line “Re:”, Maxwell wrote on 19 December 2013: ”… Scott, good to e meet you. Scott, I am in the UK and at my office now for the next few hours if you have time.”6

July 2019: the weeks before the letter

The account correspondence continues in its ordinary form into the last week of July 2019. On 26 July 2019 Elyanna Rivas, a client service associate at UBS Financial Services Inc., Private Wealth Management, wrote to the client: “Confirming we see a $308,105.00 wire from your account at Barclays coming through in our system. We will confirm once the funds have been posted to your main UBS account”, and later the same day, “Confirming the $308,105.00 wire has been deposited into your main UBS account.”9 On the same day she confirmed an outgoing wire: “As discussed, the $150,000.00 wire to the Cohen and Gresser LLP Attorney Escrow Account at JP Morgan is completed”, answering an instruction quoted beneath it that reads “Please wire $150,000 to JP morgan chase” with the routing and account values covered by bars, “For further credit to Cohen and Gresser LLP attorney escrow account”.1 The quoted header of that instruction carries a copy line of eight further names, among them Randy Campbell, whose name is on the letter of 1 August.1

Later in the same run, eighteen production numbers after that second sheet, comes a single sheet headed “BANK WIRE TRANSFER INSTRUCTIONS”, for the Coltaf Trust Account of the Denver law firm Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, P.C. at Wells Fargo Bank West, NA, 1700 Broadway, Denver. The routing, SWIFT and account values on that sheet are covered by bars and none is reproduced here. Its stamp is UBSTERRAMAR00004491.10

The next number in the production, UBSTERRAMAR00004492, is the termination letter.3 That is the production’s own ordering, and it is reported here as nothing more than that. No document read for this page says that any one of these items caused any other, and no causal relation between them is asserted here.

1 August 2019: the bank ends the relationship

On 1 August 2019 a letter was sent to Maxwell under the subject “Accounts at UBS”. It opens “Ms. Maxwell,” and reads:

I have tried reaching you by phone, but have been unable to connect. As I believe you are aware, UBS has made a decision that we can no longer continue providing banking and wealth management services to you and your related entities. As a result, we kindly ask that you initiate the transfer of your assets to another financial institution within 30 days. In addition, we will no longer be able to accept deposits into your accounts or the related entities without prior approval from UBS.

The next paragraph, which qualifies the thirty days, reads: “Please feel free to contact me at the number below to provide transfer instructions for your assets or if you don’t believe you can transfer your accounts within 30 days. Alternatively, the firm to which you plan to transfer your accounts can generally initiate the transfer of your assets upon request. We thank you in advance for your attention to this matter.”3

The letter closes “Best”, above a signature block printed in type, without a signature rule and without a manuscript mark, reading “Randy Campbell / Executive Director / Private Wealth Management”.3 The letter’s own From: header is covered by a bar on both copies of the sheet that the release holds, so the attribution to Campbell is taken from that printed signature block in the body and not from the header.34

A reply of the next day, 2 August 2019, from an address displayed as “G Max”, under the subject “[External] Re: Accounts at UBS”, reads: “Randy, I am in receipt of the bellow and am in the process of finding a new home and will advise / Thank you”. A reply above it, sent the same day, reads: “Thank you. Let me know if there is anything we can do to assist or if you have any questions.” On the second copy of the sheet a further message sits above all of these and reads, in full, “Will do”.34

The bank states a decision in that letter. It does not state a reason for it, and none is supplied here. What prompted the decision, and when inside UBS it was taken, are questions the sheets read for this page do not answer.

The two copies

The release holds the same message twice, one production number apart, at UBSTERRAMAR00004492 and UBSTERRAMAR00004493.34 Each fact taken from that message on this page is cited to the sheet that carries it, and no sheet is cited for anything it does not carry. The second copy runs to two sheets rather than one, the second of them the tail of the bank’s standard e-mail disclaimer.11

One message on the pair is timed two different ways. The reply of 2 August is carried on one sheet as a top-of-message Sent field and on the other as an inline stamp, and the two do not read alike. Neither field carries a time zone, and on the same sheet a top-of-message Sent field stands earlier in the thread than a quoted header it must post-date, so the two kinds of field are not on one clock. The two other messages the sheets share are timed identically on both. No clock time from either sheet is printed on this page; the dates are used and the times are not.34

13 August 2019: the exit is negotiated

Twelve days after the letter, on 13 August 2019, Campbell wrote again, under a different subject, “UBS Accounts”, opening “Hi Ghislaine”. The message begins with a request the client had made:

I received your request to deposit some funds into the TerraMar account for bill payment. We also understand that you are having difficulties finding a new institution to handle the TerraMar account and would like to be able to maintain your UBS account until it winds down in the near future.

It goes on: “I will do my best to assist, but would like to manage expectations. I think it will be a challenge to get our compliance area comfortable taking in new funds. That being said, I have a few questions that might be useful in helping us come up with a resolution.” The questions that follow ask where a $10,000 inbound wire from the United Kingdom originates and whether it comes from a TerraMar account or a different entity; whether it is the final wire; how many bills, over what period, and of what type she is looking to pay; and what “a few small checks from ‘Network for Good’” represent. The last of them reads: “Finally, have you had any luck opening accounts in your personal name and do you have a timeline on moving your personal assets?” The message ends “Please feel free to give me a call if you prefer to discuss in person.”5

Two things sit on the face of that sheet. Twelve days into the thirty the 1 August message allowed, the client was asking the bank to take money in rather than to move it out; and the bank’s own account of what she had told it is that she was having difficulty finding another institution.

What the bank gave the Government

On 13 November 2019 the New York Field Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation completed an FD-1057 Electronic Communication titled “(U) Analysis of UBS Credit Card Financial Production Re Ghislaine Maxwell”. Its synopsis states: “This information was obtained via federal grand jury subpoena.” The document carries the federal grand jury caption of Rule 6(e) and the standard FD-1057 child victim and child witness caption. The contact, approving and drafting fields are covered by bars; nobody withheld on that sheet is named, described or given a role here.12

The communication states that “The analysis period of the credit card is from February 2014 through September 2019”, and prints schedules of “uses of funds greater than $500 by year”, grouped by year and by a description column carrying names such as Twitter Advertising, MailChimp, Cloudflare, Amazon Web Services, GoDaddy, Facebook, T-Mobile, PayPal and Amtrak. The year lines and the grand total read:13141516

yearcountamount ($)
201413424,034
201512715,977
2016357,702
20173712,771
20184220,724
2019248,880
Grand Total39990,088

Those six year lines sum exactly to the printed grand total in both columns, which is evidence that those figures were read correctly from the image and is not evidence that any individual description row is assigned to the right year.16

The enclosure carries the analyst’s own worksheets. An “Account Summary” sheet enters the bank as UBS, the account name as Ghislaine Maxwell, the account number as “VARIOUS” and the analysed period as 2/23/14 to 9/26/19, and totals 72 additions of $92,962.46 against 598 disbursements of $95,013.65, for an ending balance of ($2,051.19).1718 The communication’s schedules and the worksheet totals are not the same measure. The communication says it schedules “uses of funds greater than $500 by year”, and its grand total is smaller in both columns than the worksheet’s own.1318

Two features of those worksheets are worth recording. The account summary enters the account opened date as the spreadsheet error value “#REF!”, where the detail sheet of the same workbook enters “February 2014”.1719 And the detail sheets themselves are numbered “Page1 of 23”, “Page2 of 23” and “Page3 of 23”; three sheets of that run of twenty-three are in this document as released and the remaining twenty are not.192021 On each of the three, three columns at the left of the table are covered by a single solid bar running the height of the sheet; the columns that print carry a month and a year for each row, so a row on those sheets can be placed in a month but not on a day, and no account reference is legible; none is reproduced here.19

The communication closes: “FoA [name withheld] will continue to work consult with the Case Agent to determine which financial productions should be obtained and analyzed”, the wording as printed.16

Three later documents place further UBS material in the Government’s hands, and each is a separate document from the others.

On 18 June 2020 a forensic accountant of the FBI New York Field Office, whose name is covered by a bar in a signature block that prints the role and the office beneath it, wrote under the subject “Maxwell SARS”: “Per your request attached, are the SARs filed on Maxwell. Additionally, I have attached spreadsheets for UBS and JPMC which were attached to the SARs.” The reply above it, whose sender is also withheld, asks: “Are you able to send us the UBS schedule of accounts/entities today, so that we can get the follow-up subpoena we discussed out today?” That sheet carries an explicit Date: header of 18 June 2020 with a +0000 offset. The sheet does not say who filed the reports it mentions.22

On 10 August 2020 a weekly activity report, whose From and To lines are covered by bars, listed under “This Week’s Anticipated Activities” the heading “Epstein (31E-NY-3027571) (C20)” and beneath it the single item “Document review & analysis (waiting for additional UBS production)”. That sheet also carries an explicit Date: header with a +0000 offset.23

On 16 December 2020 the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York wrote to five named defence counsel in United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN), producing material stamped SDNY_GM_00274187 through SDNY_GM_00274302 under the July 31, 2020 protective order in the case. The letter’s index has a single row, and its summary description reads “UBS Subpoena Return, 12-15-2020”. The confidential designation cell for that row is empty.247 The signature block is redacted and this page does not identify the signers.7

What the documents cited here do not establish

No document read for this page states why UBS ended the relationship. The letter of 1 August 2019 records that a decision had been made and communicates its consequences; it gives no ground for it, and none is inferred here from its date or from anything near it in the production.3

No document read for this page connects the bank’s decision of 2019 to the analysis the FBI completed in November 2019. The two are set out above with their own dates and their own authors, and the communication of 13 November 2019 is an investigative work product that alleges nothing on the sheets read.12

Nothing read for this page establishes what happened to the accounts of the entities named in the letter as “your related entities”, or which entities the bank meant by that phrase.3 The question is live rather than academic: the Montpelier Trust statement for June 2020, published on that page, closes at $4,841,818.09 at UBS, eleven months after a thirty-day transfer demand addressed to Maxwell and her related entities. Whether that trust fell inside the phrase is not answered by any sheet read for this page, and it is left as the question the documents raise.

Nothing read for this page records a response from Ghislaine Maxwell, from Randy Campbell or from any other person named here to anything reported on this page beyond the replies quoted above, which are their own words as the sheets carry them.

The searches run

Searches of the machine-read text of the release were run in the full-text index and are reported here as searches rather than as a census, because a barred or damaged line does not answer a search. A count of this bank’s own name is a floor for a second reason, measured for this page on one 336-sheet run of its statements: a phrase query for the name returns 307 of those sheets, while the literal three letters appear in the machine text of 329, the difference being sheets where the name has been read as part of a longer token such as “SUBS” or “UBSIn”. No count of the name is printed on this page as though it were complete.

The production stamp UBSTERRAMAR returns 3,346 pages across 1,265 documents when searched as a prefix. Searched as a quoted phrase the same stamp returns nothing at all, because the tokeniser keeps the stamp and its page number together as one token; the zero is a fact about the query and not about the release.

The phrase “UBS has made a decision” returns two pages, which are the two copies of the 1 August letter. The phrase “transfer of your assets to another financial institution” returns four pages: the same two, and two sheets of a different bank’s correspondence that are not cited here. “Randy Campbell”, the form used in the signature blocks, returns three pages in three documents, all three of them cited on this page; the header form “Campbell, Randy” returns thirty-six pages in eighteen documents.

Five phrases that would carry a decision of this kind were searched against the whole release and the returns then intersected with the 1,265 documents of this production: “exit the relationship” (13 documents), “offboard” (68), “reputational risk” (309), “terminate the relationship” (10) and “de-risk” (47). Not one of those documents is in this production. “AML” returns 2,687 documents across the release and one of them is in this production. The statement above that no document read for this page gives a reason rests on the documents themselves and not on these counts; the searches are the check on whether a plain statement of one sits elsewhere in this production, and they did not return one.

Ghislaine Maxwell; Angara Trust and Montpelier Trust; The TerraMar Project; JPMorgan Chase; Deutsche Bank; Southern District of New York; Discovery materials; Offshore financial structures.

Footnotes

  1. E-mail thread, subject “[External] Re: MAXWELL: RE: Transfer”, top message of Friday, July 26, 2019, carrying beneath it a message subscribed “Elyanna Rivas / Client Service Associate / UBS Financial Services Inc. / Private Wealth Management” and, beneath that, the client’s wiring instruction. Read at the image at 250 dpi by the writer at 2026-09-10T02:20Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00239735 p.1, the first sheet of a four-sheet run. Stamped UBSTERRAMAR00004472 and marked CONFIDENTIAL. The FED reference, the routing value and the account values in the quoted instruction are covered by bars and none is reproduced here; the office lines, telephone and fax lines in the signature block are covered by bars. The quoted header of the instruction carries a Cc line of eight names, printed surname first: Shkreli, Juliana; Ramdeen, Vijai; Walker, Christopher; Traskus, Michelle; Stackman, Scott; Casriel, Lyle; Spellman, Heather; Campbell, Randy. The sheet gives no role or employer for any of them and none is supplied here; the roles stated on this page for Randy Campbell, Elyanna Rivas and Camille A. Garcia are taken from their own printed signature blocks on the sheets cited for them. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  2. E-mail thread, subject “Re: MAXWELL: Wealth Management for Ghislaine Maxwell”, top message of Monday, February 17, 2014, carrying beneath it three message headers dated Friday, February 14, 2014. Read at the image at 250 dpi by the fix at 2026-09-10T03:07Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00235862 p.1, the first sheet of an eleven-sheet run; all eleven sheets of the run were read at the image for this page. Stamped UBSTERRAMAR00000113 and marked CONFIDENTIAL. The signature block reads “Camille A. Garcia, CFP / Sr. Wealth Strategy Associate / UBS Financial Services, Inc. / Private Wealth Management / 299 Park Avenue, 25th Floor / New York, NY 10171”, with the two lines beneath covered by bars. The sender of every message header on this sheet is covered by a bar, including the header of the message subscribed by Garcia, whose attribution is taken from that printed signature block and from the words “Thanks, Camille” above it and not from the header. Two forenames are covered by bars on the sheet, one where a message opens and one in a sign-off; no name is supplied here for any withheld participant. An entity named on this sheet is a limited liability company whose name incorporates a street address. That name is a corporate name and an attachment title, not anyone’s residence, and it is reproduced here; the same company is named on three other pages of this wiki, two of them published. Every e-mail address on the sheet is covered by a bar and none is reproduced here. The message headers on this sheet carry no time zone and no clock time from this sheet is printed on this page. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6

  3. E-mail thread, subject “RE: Accounts at UBS”, carrying three messages: the letter of Thursday, August 1, 2019 to “Ms. Maxwell,”; the reply of Friday, August 02, 2019 from an address displayed as “G Max”; and a further reply above it. Read at the image at 300 dpi by the writer at 2026-09-10T02:16Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00239754 p.1. Stamped UBSTERRAMAR00004492 and marked CONFIDENTIAL. The single sheet of this document. The August 1 message’s own From: line is covered by a bar over both the display name and the address; its Date, To and Subject fields print. The signature block below “Best” is printed type with no rule and no manuscript mark, and reads “Randy Campbell / Executive Director / Private Wealth Management”; the three lines beneath it are covered by bars and nothing from them is taken. Every e-mail address on the sheet is covered by a bar and none is reproduced here. Two renderings of the August 2 reply appear across this sheet and its twin, a top-of-message Sent field on this sheet and an inline stamp on the twin, and the two do not read alike; the two other messages these sheets share are timed identically on both. No clock time from either is printed on this page. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8 ↩9 ↩10 ↩11 ↩12 ↩13 ↩14

  4. The second copy of the same thread, one production number later, carrying in addition a further message at the top reading “Will do”. Read at the image at 300 dpi by the writer at 2026-09-10T02:16Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00239755 p.1. Stamped UBSTERRAMAR00004493 and marked CONFIDENTIAL. The signature block on this copy prints the office lines “299 Park, 26th Fl / New York, NY 10171”, which are the bank’s own business address on its own correspondence; the line below them is covered by a bar. The August 1 message’s own From: line is covered by a bar on this copy as it is on the other. Each fact on this page is cited to the sheet that carries it. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  5. E-mail of Tuesday, August 13, 2019, subject “UBS Accounts”, opening “Hi Ghislaine”, signed “Thanks / Randy” above a printed signature block reading “Randy Campbell / Executive Director / Private Wealth Management / 299 Park, 26th Fl / New York, NY 10171”. Read at the image at 300 dpi by the writer at 2026-09-10T02:16Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00239775 p.1. Stamped UBSTERRAMAR00004513 and marked CONFIDENTIAL. The single sheet of this document. The sender’s name prints in the top-of-message From field and the address beside it is covered by a bar, as is the recipient’s address; the line below the office address in the signature block is covered by a bar. No e-mail address, telephone or fax number on this sheet is reproduced here. The top-of-message Sent field carries no time zone and no clock time from this sheet is printed on this page. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  6. The same run, ninth sheet, carrying a message of Wednesday, January 15, 2014 under the subject line “Wealth Management for Ghislaine Maxwell” and, beneath it, a message of Thursday, December 19, 2013 sent from an address displayed as “G Maxwell” under the subject line “Re:” and signed “Ghislaine”. Read at the image at 250 dpi by the fix at 2026-09-10T03:07Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00235862 p.9. Stamped UBSTERRAMAR00000121 and marked CONFIDENTIAL. A contact detail on this sheet is covered by a bar and is not reproduced here. Cited for the span of the run and for the December 2013 message. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  7. The same letter, second sheet, carrying the one-row production index, the closing paragraph and the signature block. Read at the image at 300 dpi by the writer at 2026-09-10T02:19Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00073637 p.2. The index row gives a Bates start of SDNY_GM_00274187, a Bates end of SDNY_GM_00274302 and the summary description “UBS Subpoena Return, 12-15-2020”; the confidential designation cell is empty. The name above “Acting United States Attorney” and the names above “Assistant United States Attorneys” are covered by bars and this page does not identify them. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  8. The same run, third sheet, carrying the earliest of the February 14, 2014 messages and, beneath it, messages of Tuesday, February 11, 2014. Read at the image at 250 dpi by the fix at 2026-09-10T03:07Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00235862 p.3. Stamped UBSTERRAMAR00000115 and marked CONFIDENTIAL. The sender of the quoted message is covered by a bar and no name, role or employer is supplied for that sender here. A telephone number on this sheet is covered by a bar and is not reproduced here. ↩

  9. The second sheet of the same run, carrying two further messages of Friday, July 26, 2019 subscribed by the same client service associate. Read at the image at 250 dpi by the writer at 2026-09-10T02:20Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00239735 p.2. Stamped UBSTERRAMAR00004473 and marked CONFIDENTIAL. The same Cc line of eight names appears in the quoted header on this sheet. Telephone and fax lines and every e-mail address are covered by bars and none is reproduced here. ↩

  10. Single sheet headed “BANK WIRE TRANSFER INSTRUCTIONS”, naming Wells Fargo Bank West, NA, 1700 Broadway, Denver, CO, and directing money into the “Coltaf Trust Account” of “Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, P.C.”, with the closing line “Please reference the client or matter name on the transfer”. Read at the image at 300 dpi by the writer at 2026-09-10T02:18Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00239753 p.1. Stamped UBSTERRAMAR00004491 and marked CONFIDENTIAL. The single sheet of this document. The routing, SWIFT and account values are each covered by a bar on the image; none is reproduced here, and the machine reading of this sheet drops the bars and prints the labels with nothing after them, which is a fault of the extraction rather than a disclosure. The sheet carries no date and none is asserted here; its position in the sequence is taken from its production number alone. ↩

  11. The second sheet of that same two-sheet document, carrying the tail of the bank’s standard e-mail disclaimer and nothing else. Read at the image at 300 dpi by the writer at 2026-09-10T02:20Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00239755 p.2. Stamped UBSTERRAMAR00004494 and marked CONFIDENTIAL. Cited only for the fact that the document runs to two sheets; no quotation on this page is taken from it. ↩

  12. Federal Bureau of Investigation, FD-1057 Electronic Communication, first sheet, title “(U) Analysis of UBS Credit Card Financial Production Re Ghislaine Maxwell”, dated 11/13/2019. Read at the image at 200 dpi by the writer at 2026-09-10T02:18Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02728610 p.1, the first sheet of an eleven-sheet run. The running head prints “50D-NY-3027571-FA Serial 5” and the Case ID field prints “31E-NY-3027571-FA”; both forms are reported as printed and are not reconciled here. The From field reads “NEW YORK / NY-FOA1”. The Contact, Approved By and Drafted By fields are covered by bars; no name, role, gender or other attribute is supplied for any of them here. The sheet carries the federal grand jury caption under Rule 6(e)(3) and the standard child victim and child witness identity caption. Enclosure: “1. (U) UBS_G.MAXWELL_CC”. ↩ ↩2

  13. The same communication, second sheet, carrying the purpose paragraph, the analysis period and the opening of the 2014 schedule. Read at the image at 200 dpi by the writer at 2026-09-10T02:18Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02728610 p.2. Two sentences on this sheet summarise earlier serials of the investigation and are not quoted or relied on here. No identifier of any kind from this sheet is reproduced here. ↩ ↩2

  14. The same communication, third sheet, carrying the close of the 2014 schedule, the 2014 total and the opening of the 2015 schedule. Read at the image at 200 dpi by the writer at 2026-09-10T02:18Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02728610 p.3. Two description rows on this sheet and the following ones carry the names of private individuals as payees; none is reproduced here. ↩

  15. The same communication, fourth sheet, carrying the 2015, 2016 and 2017 totals and the opening of the 2018 schedule. Read at the image at 200 dpi by the writer at 2026-09-10T02:19Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02728610 p.4. ↩

  16. The same communication, fifth and last narrative sheet, carrying the 2018 and 2019 totals, the grand total line and the closing sentence. Read at the image at 200 dpi by the writer at 2026-09-10T02:19Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02728610 p.5. The closing sentence begins “FoA” followed by a bar; the words “will continue to work consult with the Case Agent” are as printed. The six year lines sum to 399 and to 90,088, which is the printed grand total in both columns. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  17. The same document, seventh sheet, an “Account Summary” worksheet marked U//FOUO and footed “Federal Bureau of Investigation”, “Page 1 of 2”. Read at the image at 200 dpi by the writer at 2026-09-10T02:19Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02728610 p.7. Its header block enters the case number, the account name “GHISLAINE MAXWELL”, the account number “VARIOUS”, the bank “UBS”, the account opened date “#REF!” and the analysed period “2/23/14 - 9/26/19”, with four “Signature Card” rows each entering 0. The payor and payee table on this sheet names private individuals among the vendors; none is reproduced here. ↩ ↩2

  18. The same worksheet, second and last sheet, carrying the close of the payor and payee table and its grand total line: 72 additions totalling $92,962.46, 598 disbursements totalling $95,013.65, and a net of ($2,051.19). Read at the image at 200 dpi by the writer at 2026-09-10T02:19Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02728610 p.8. ↩ ↩2

  19. The same document, ninth sheet, an “Account Details” worksheet marked U//FOUO and footed “Page1 of 23”. Read at the image at 200 dpi by the writer at 2026-09-10T02:19Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02728610 p.9. Its header block repeats the summary block and enters the account opened date as “February 2014”; the account totals block gives a beginning balance of $0.00, total additions of $92,962.46, total disbursements of $95,013.65 and an ending balance of ($2,051.19), and a cell reading “IN BALANCE” is set against a minimum of 2/23/2014 and a maximum of 9/26/2019. Three columns at the left of the transaction table are covered by a single solid bar running the height of the sheet; no value from behind that bar is reproduced or inferred here. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  20. The same worksheet, tenth sheet, footed “Page2 of 23”, covered by the same bar at the left of the table. Read at the image at 200 dpi by the writer at 2026-09-10T02:20Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02728610 p.10. ↩

  21. The same worksheet, eleventh and last sheet of the document, footed “Page3 of 23”, covered by the same bar at the left of the table, its last rows falling in September 2014. Read at the image at 200 dpi by the writer at 2026-09-10T02:20Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02728610 p.11. The document ends here, twenty sheets short of the run its own footer numbers. ↩

  22. E-mail, subject “RE: Maxwell SARS”, carrying an explicit header “Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 15:52:26 +0000”, and beneath it the original message of the same day. Read at the image at 300 dpi by the writer at 2026-09-10T02:19Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00151452 p.1, the single sheet of this document. The From, To and Cc lines of both messages are covered by bars, as are both salutations and both sign-offs. The signature block of the lower message prints “Forensic Accountant / FBI New York Field Office” beneath a bar covering the name, and the three lines beneath the office line are covered by bars. No name, and no attribute beyond the role and office the sheet itself prints, is supplied here. ↩

  23. Weekly activity report, carrying an explicit header “Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 10:44:05 +0000”. Read at the image at 300 dpi by the writer at 2026-09-10T02:20Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01654974 p.1, the first sheet of a two-sheet run. The From and To lines are covered by bars, as are the salutation, the whole of the “Items to report” entry and most of “Last Week’s Activities”. No name printed anywhere on this sheet is reproduced here, and no name is supplied for any withheld participant. The heading “Epstein (31E-NY-3027571) (C20)” and the single item beneath it are not covered by any bar. ↩

  24. Letter of the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, December 16, 2020, “BY ELECTRONIC MAIL”, in United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN), first sheet. Read at the image at 300 dpi by the writer at 2026-09-10T02:19Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00073637 p.1, the first sheet of a two-sheet run. Five defence counsel are named in the addressee blocks and the address beneath each block is covered by a bar; no address is taken from this sheet. The body gives the production range as “SDNY_GM_00274187 through SDNY_GM_0274302”, the second of the two printed with one digit fewer than the same number in the letter’s own index. ↩

Backlinks