Epstein Data Wiki

Ben Goertzel

Properties2
tagsperson, artificial-intelligence, opencog, novamente, humanity-plus, hong-kong, enhanced-education, correspondence, research-funding
aliasesGoertzel, Ben, Benjamin Goertzel, Ben Goerlzel, Ben Goenzel, Ben Gocrtzel, Ben Goetzel, Goertzl, Geortzel, Goertzell, Goertzei, Gortzell, bengoertzel, ben goertzel

75 min read

Named on the documents as”Ben Goertzel” in the sender field of his own messages, most often as the second half of Outlook’s "▮ on behalf of Ben Goertzel <▮>", the two addresses beside it blacked out by the producing party; bengoertzel as a bare handle; “Ben Goertzel, Vice Chair / Humanity+, Inc.” in the address block of a draft gift letter; “Benjamin Goertzel” in twenty-one documents the exact phrase cannot reach; and, misspelt by the people writing about him, “Goenzel”, “Goerlzel”, “Goertzell”, “Goertzei”, “Coertzel”, “Geortzel” and, in Jeffrey Epstein’s own hand, “goertzl”123
What a document in the release says he is”AI scientist”, founder of the OpenCog Foundation, “CEO of AI software company Novamente LLC and bioinformatics company Biomind LLC; Chief Technology Officer of biopharma firm Genescient Corp.; Vice Chairman of Humanity+; Advisor to the Singularity University and Singularity Institute; External Research Professor at Xiamen University, China” — in a visa petition filed by Epstein’s own foundation4
Range of documents cited hereAn undated list of people to be given Epstein’s jail address, through to a message of 5 December 2018 about a New York event56
Size of the file878 documents on the exact phrase "Ben Goertzel", across 1,447 sheets; 1,036 over the union of forty-six forms established below71
How much of it is his own writing244 of the 878 — 27.8% — carry his name in the top-level sender field of the document’s own first sheet, under the rule published below. 214 of those 244 carry Epstein on the To: or Cc: line. They resolve to between 219 and 230 distinct messages, running 10 April 2009 to 5 December 2018, and the peak is 2013. A further 145 documents address him without his writing anything289
What the file records about moneyEpstein paid a $2,000 conference expense in 2009 and $50,000 that September; instructed $30,000 to Humanity+ on 18 January 2013, “just a thank you , maybe a beginning”, which Goertzel acknowledged the next day as “this $30K”; funded the annual “corporate contribution” that unlocked a Hong Kong government research grant “every year since 2010, usually via a donation to Humanity+”, in Goertzel’s own words; instructed “300 goertzl” on 23 December 2014 and wrote “forget the ben goertzl idea . i have other plans” the next morning; and a draft letter in the file would have had Leon Black wire $300,000 to Humanity+ for a project of Goertzel’s, on a template whose date line is blank, which Kahn recorded on 31 December 2014 that Epstein had changed his mind about. **The largest sum recorded as approved is $150,000, from [[entities/enhanced-education
His answer in the outside record”I have no desire to talk about Epstein right now,” … “The stuff I’m reading about him in the papers is pretty disturbing and goes way beyond what I thought his misdoings and kinks were. Yecch.” — to The New York Times, 31 July 2019, in a clipping held inside this release. The ellipsis stands where the sheet prints the newspaper’s own attribution, “Mr. Goertzel said in an email to The New York Times”; the two sentences are not continuous speech10
Not established hereThat the $300,000 was ever sent; that Epstein’s foundation paid his salary (the file records only the Times’s report of his own résumé); what the “Consulting Agreement Enhanced Education & Ben Goertzel” named in the foundation’s file index contained, or whether it was executed; that he knew anything of Epstein’s conduct beyond what his own words record; anything about him beyond what the sheets cited here show1011

Ben Goertzel is an artificial-general-intelligence researcher who, from 2009 to 2018, was one of the most persistent correspondents in the released Epstein files and, measured as a share of his own file, the most active writer this desk has counted: 27.8% of the documents naming him are documents he wrote, against 25% for Gino Yu, 24% for Robert Kuhn, 23% for Elon Musk and 16% for Nathan Myhrvold. The file is almost free of journalism about him: across all 878 documents the standard news markers fire on five, and four of the five are false positives. The fifth is real press and it is not about him: a Palm Beach County court filing whose exhibits include nineteen sheets of reproduced newspaper, on none of which his name appears. The journalism that is about him, five copies of one morning’s clippings from the United States Attorney’s office, the markers miss entirely. What it holds instead is a decade-long funding relationship conducted almost entirely by e-mail: research proposals, wire instructions, conference sponsorships, a Hong Kong government grant whose matching 10% Epstein supplied year after year, and a $300,000 letter that was drafted and, on the evidence here, never sent. It also holds the two hardest documents on this page: a note in which Epstein’s office lists Goertzel first among the people to be given his jail address, and a message Goertzel wrote in January 2015, when the allegations against Epstein were first widely reported, dismissing them. Nothing on this page is a finding of wrongdoing against him. He is not accused of anything in any document read for it.

Identification: the phrase is clean, the address query is a trap, and the surname is not a word

The base. Measured on 2026-09-13 against the corpus full-text index, counting distinct documents and never pages: "Ben Goertzel" returns 878 documents over 1,447 sheets. The surname alone returns 975, of which 97 lie outside the base.7

ben@goertzel is not a measurement. The desk’s brief for this page recorded that "ben@goertzel" returns exactly 878 (the base, to the document) and warned that this is the address trap rather than a finding. It is, and it is worse than the brief says. The index strips punctuation, so an address query is a proximity query: "ben@goertzel" is the same query as "ben goertzel" and returns the same 878. A literal read of the text for the string ben@goertzel returns 19 documents. The address is in nineteen documents, not eight hundred and seventy-eight. Use the index to find and a literal read to count.7

Forty-six forms, and five the brief did not have. Each figure counts documents:

formdocumentsoutside the basewhat it is
"Ben Goertzel"878(base)
Goertzel (surname alone)97597
"Benjamin Goertzel"2121 — all of themthe full forename
goenzel208rtz→nz
goertze286final l lost at a line end
goertzl1313Epstein’s own spelling
bengoertzel111the handle
Goertzell53doubled l
Geortzel51e↔o transposed
bgoertzel50
coertzel41g→c
Goerztel30t↔z transposed
goertzcl30e→c
Goertzei · goerlzel2 · 22 · 2l→i; t→l
Goertzet20
gocrtzel124e→c, the extraction fault that runs across a whole day-sheet
goetzel66r dropped
Gortzell33e dropped, l doubled
gocrtzcl52e→c twice
oertzel42leading G lost to quoted-printable damage
goerizel · goerzeil · goeztzel · Goetrzel1 each0 · 1 · 0 · 1
twenty-one further forms1–2 each10listed in the footnote
union of the forty-six1,036158

"Benjamin Goertzel" is 21 documents and every one is outside the base, exactly as briefed. This is phrase-breaking: the index requires adjacency, so "Ben Goertzel" cannot reach a sheet that writes his full forename, and every one of the 21 is a message header reading To: Benjamin Goertzel. It is the same fault that hid 338 documents behind "Robert Lawrence Kuhn" at Robert Kuhn.1

Transposition is human, and the probe found a third case. Geortzel and Goerztel were already in the brief. Goetrzel is new, and it is Epstein’s, in one of his own name-lists, “krause , edelman minsky, randal lloyd, goetrzel. bach, only”. Twenty-five further forms were probed and returned nothing; the nulls are recorded in the footnote, because a null is a measurement, and the brief’s two checked nulls, Goerztel and Goertzet, were confirmed to add nothing outside the base and were not re-probed further.1

The forms above were not guessed. A first pass hand-probed a candidate list and reached twenty of the forms in the table, every row of it down to Goertzet together with the four singletons goerizel, goerzeil, goeztzel and Goetrzel, and a union of 1,012. That list was short, and the way it was shown to be short is worth printing. The corpus’s own full-text vocabulary, 12,121,974 distinct terms, was extracted and every term within an edit distance of two of goertzel was examined, followed by a second pass over the whole vocabulary for the consonant skeleton at any length, which catches the run-together tokens that punctuation damage produces (httpgoertzel, goertzelisfriend, bengoertzel). That found twenty-six forms the hand-probe had missed and twenty-four further documents, every one of them outside the base. The largest of them, gocrtzel, is the e→c substitution this page already demonstrates in the extraction of a 2013 day-sheet: the damage was described in the body before the form was in the table. A guessed list of variants is a claim about the guesser.12

The residue was censused, not sampled. The union adds 158 documents to the base. All 158 were opened and the matched line of every one was read. All 158 are this subject; there are no contaminants in the union. The dominant contaminant class other pages have found, an ordinary English word colliding with the name, does not exist here, because “Goertzel” is not a word. What does exist is other people’s surnames, and they are excluded by name rather than silently: the vocabulary scan also reached a “Haeli Goertzen” in a wine-industry bibliography, a “Debra Goertz” in a list of artists, and a “Shannon Goetzl” in a guest list, together with three pieces of extraction noise: GORtfel in a struck-through aircraft snag list, vertzel where a bank form prints “verbal”, and a run of characters on an image-heavy sheet. The forms that reach those seven are not in the union above and none of the seven is counted anywhere on this page. One further fragment, ertzel standing alone in a garbled contact column, could not be decided either way and is disclosed rather than counted.13

How much of this file is his own writing

A count of documents naming a person is not a count of what that person did. The rule below is stated completely enough to be reproduced, and a reader who follows only what is printed here must reach 244.

The parsing. For each of the 878 documents take the document’s own first sheet, the row with the lowest page number for that identifier, and its first sixteen non-blank lines. Find the first line whose start matches a sender label, over a nineteen-form set covering the damaged renderings of From: this extraction produces (Fran, Frorn, Prom, Front and Fron among them), the label followed by a colon, semicolon or full stop; a label standing alone on its line with no punctuation also counts. The sender value is the remainder of that line; if that remainder contains no letter and no digit it counts as empty, because where the producing party has barred the address this extraction leaves a lone " or ' behind the label. When the value is empty, take the next non-blank line, unless that line itself begins with a header label (the sender set plus To, Cc, Bcc, Sent, Date, Subject, Importance, Attachments and their damaged forms) followed by punctuation, whitespace or the line end, or itself contains no letter and no digit, in which case the value is absent and the document is declined. That second condition is not idle: six first sheets put a lone >, = or ■ on the line after an emptied sender label, and a rule that took those as values would publish 609 values and 149 barred rather than 603 and 155. Only the first sender label is used, so a quoted header lower on the sheet can never supply the sender. The full label set is in the footnote.2

The matching. The sender value carries his name if it contains, case-insensitively, any of the eleven surname forms above. On this population that tolerance buys five documents, and they can be named. Fifty distinct sender values occur across the 244. Forty-seven of them contain the clean string “Ben Goertzel” or “Ben Goertze”, and the variation is only in what the bar has eaten around it: "on behalf of Ben Goertzel <", "n behalf of Ben Goertzel", "on e a o Ben Goertzel", "behalf of Ben Goertzel". Three contain neither: "en Goertzel", "bengoertze" and "nbehalfofBenGoenzel". Requiring the untruncated string ben goertzel somewhere in the value returns 239, and the five documents it drops run over four values: "en Goertzel" (two documents), "on behalf of Ben Goertze", "bengoertze" and "nbehalfofBenGoenzel". All five are his; their first sheets were opened and parsed line by line. They are named here, with their identifiers in the footnote, so that a reader reaching 239 knows which rule produced it and what it cost.2

The result: 244 documents, 27.8% of the population. At a sixteen-line window, 603 of the 878 first sheets yield a sender value, 155 carry a sender label whose value is barred or blank, and 120 carry no sender label at all. Re-running the same rule at windows of 8, 12, 16, 24, 30 and 60 non-blank lines returns 244 every time.2

Two faults in earlier drafts of that rule each moved the number, and both are why the bar set and the emptiness test are stated above in full: a fallback that barred the next line only on punctuation took a colonless Subject Alert line as a sender value and counted four Epstein-office calendar stubs as his writing, and a draft that treated a lone quotation mark as a value lost five real ones where the wrapped sender form is barred. The brief’s figure of 238 is low by six; act_rate.py was not run for any figure on this page and is not cited anywhere on it.2

244 documents are not 244 messages. 233 of the 244 yield a parsable top-level date; those 233 carry 219 distinct timestamps, and 13 timestamps are shared by 27 documents between them. Adding the 11 undatable documents at worst one for one, the 244 represent between 219 and 230 distinct messages.8

When. Over the 233 datable sender documents: 2009 forty-eight · 2010 sixteen · 2011 eight · 2012 fourteen · 2013 fifty-seven · 2014 twenty-five · 2015 twenty-four · 2016 thirty-three · 2017 six · 2018 two. There is nothing from him before 10 April 2009 or after 5 December 2018, and nothing at all in 2019.8

The other half of the file is measured but bounded honestly. A recipient rule of the same shape, taking every To, Cc or Bcc line and its continuations and stopping at the second sender label, returns 145 documents that name him on a recipient line without his writing, when applied to the whole first sheet. It returns 137 at eight lines and 140 at sixteen, because recipient blocks on this population run long. The rule is closed only at the whole-sheet reading, and 145 is the figure this page publishes, with the smaller windows printed so the spread is visible rather than hidden. The brief’s 116 is not reproducible under any window tried.9

The press test, the classifier, and the one statement he has made

The standard markers fire five times and four of the five are false positives. Across all 878 documents, whole sheets and not merely first sheets, matched case-insensitively: SECTION: 4, BYLINE: 1, Reprinted 1, LENGTH: n words 0, FINAL EDITION 0, Copyright YYYY 0, Load-Date 0. Their union is five documents and all five were opened. Four are not press: two copies of Goertzel’s own 900-page book Engineering General Intelligence, one sheet of it, and a device-forensics export. The fifth is press, and an earlier draft of this page was wrong to say otherwise. It is not a transcript, as that draft called it, but a fifty-sheet Palm Beach County civil filing, Plaintiff’s Response to Epstein’s Motion for Sanctions and to Identify, twelve of whose sheets carry a newspaper article header reproduced as an exhibit: a headline over a labelled bibliographic block, which on the nine Palm Beach Post archive printouts is DATE, PUBLICATION, EDITION, SECTION and PAGE, with a BYLINE above it on eight of the nine, and on the three New York Post printouts is Date, Start Page, Section and Text Word Count over no byline, publication or edition line at all. Twelve is what that rule counts, and it is not how many sheets of the fifty are newspaper, which is nineteen: the twelve, six continuation sheets, and a Palm Beach Post web news page carrying a byline and a date over no block. All fifty sheets were rendered and read for this pass, because the extraction of these printouts destroys the very labels the rule runs on, and an earlier draft of this page counted eleven over that text layer and could not see the twelfth. The sheet the BYLINE: marker fires on is its printed p.18, read here at the image at 400 dpi: the Palm Beach Post of 23 July 2009, “EPSTEIN’S RELEASE UPSETS ‘JANE DOES,‘THEIR ATTORNEY SAYS”, SECTION: LOCAL & BUSINESS, PAGE: 1B, stamped Exhibit 2 in that case. So the markers do find journalism in this file. It is journalism about Epstein’s Palm Beach prosecution, and Goertzel is not named on any of the nineteen; his name stands on exactly one sheet of the fifty, an encyclopaedia article about Epstein filed as an exhibit, which lists him among scientists Epstein had befriended. The brief’s “3 REAL press markers” is not reproducible.14

Reading found the press about him that the markers missed. All 119 documents whose first sheet carries no sender label at all were opened, because that is where an authored paper or a clipping sits. Two of them are copies of SDNY News Clips, Wednesday, July 31, 2019, thirty-six sheets of newspaper compiled inside the United States Attorney’s office, and printed p.4 carries the New York Times report of that morning:

Mr. Epstein’s foundation, which is now defunct, also gave $100,000 to pay the salary of Ben Goertzel, vice chairman of Humanity Plus, according to Mr. Goertzel’s résumé.

“I have no desire to talk about Epstein right now,” Mr. Goertzel said in an email to The New York Times. “The stuff I’m reading about him in the papers is pretty disturbing and goes way beyond what I thought his misdoings and kinks were. Yecch.”

That sheet was read at the image at 400 dpi. It is the only statement by him about Epstein anywhere in this release, and the classifier scores its document zero. The header-less census found two copies; a direct search of the base set for the compilation finds five documents carrying that morning’s clips, the other three being e-mails circulating them, whose first sheets carry sender headers and which therefore fell outside the header-less set. The classifier scores all five zero. A zero from a classifier is a claim about the classifier. The same page also reports a 2011 gift of $20,000 from an Epstein charity to the body that now trades as Humanity Plus. The $100,000 salary figure is the newspaper’s account of his résumé and no document read for this page corroborates it; it is carried here because it is in the file and because it is the most specific financial claim made about him anywhere in it.1014

The other 117 header-less documents are not correspondence and are not counted as any. They are his research proposals to Epstein’s and Leon Black’s foundations, both volumes of his book and fifteen single-sheet extracts from it, Epstein office day-sheets, device-forensics exports, Hanson Robotics material, two court transcripts, and a body of promotional copy written for Epstein, discussed below. An authored paper is not an act, and none of them is in the 244.15

Before the e-mail: the jail address list

The earliest evidence of contact in this file is not a message. An undated sheet headed “List of People Who Need JE’s Address!” gives Epstein’s inmate address, “Jacket # 0338617, Dorm T Special”, with instructions on what the Palm Beach stockade would and would not accept, notes that “if you would like to send him ‘papers’ (ie: research papers, chapters of a book, printed article on copy paper, etc) that would be great”, and then lists the people who had been told. Ben Goertzel is the first name on the list. Beneath him stand Peggy Siegal, Mark Tramo, Lee Smolin, Lawrence Krauss, Martin Nowak, Naomi Campbell, Ghislaine, Roger Schank and some two dozen more.

That sheet is also where this extraction’s worst habit is demonstrated. Read at the image at 400 dpi, printed p.1 carries fifteen rows, three of them solid black bars. The text layer returns thirteen: it deletes two barred rows outright and closes the gap, and reduces a third to the orphan word “one”. A list taken from this extraction is not a complete list, and nothing is supplied here for any of the three bars.5

2009: “you won’t regret it”

His first message in the sender set is dated 10 April 2009, while Epstein was serving his sentence: “Hi Jeffrey, I’m hammering away at my category theory foundation for cognitive synergy…” Within three weeks Epstein had paid a first, small bill: $2,000 for video-recording the AGI Summer School lectures, by cheque to the Singularity Institute for AI. On 23 July 2009, the day after Epstein’s release to home detention, Goertzel wrote one word and four exclamation marks: “Congratulations!!!!” Fourteen months later he opened a message with “We haven’t talked since you were set free — congratulations on that ;-)) … I’m sure you’re making the most of it !!”161718

The largest single sum the file records reaching him is agreed in five messages on one sheet, on 11 September 2009, read at the image at 400 dpi. At 12:03 PM he wrote that he had started looking for work, “technology management jobs for private contractors doing boring-as-hell narrow-AI stuff for government agencies … These jobs probably pay well by my standards, but, yecch… It would be a lot more productive for me to spend the next 4-6 months writing my masterwork on ‘how to create a thinking machine’ ;-)”. At 12:18 PM Epstein: “is there a 501 c3 that i could give the 50k to/?” At 12:20 PM Goertzel named the Singularity Institute, “which is where your donation to AGI-09 was routed…” Epstein: “please send details i will send 50k monday”. At 16:30:49 +0000 Goertzel answered, with Richard Kahn copied:

many many thanks! … You won’t regret it ;)

The AI we build will thank you one day!

Five months later he reported against it: “As you may recall when you funded me with $50K in the early fall, I said I would use the money to finish my book on ‘how to build an AGI’ within a 6 month period.”1920

October 2009: Palm Beach, and a question Epstein would not answer

In the first week of October 2009 he went to Florida. On 5 October Epstein’s office booked an 8 a.m. JetBlue flight from JFK arriving in Palm Beach at 11:03; Goertzel answered “Great! All sounds good ;-) … we look forward to meeting with Jeffrey tomorrow!” and travelled with Itamar Arel, a University of Tennessee professor. His thank-you of 7 October reads: “Thanks for taking the time to chat with us yesterday — we were all impressed with your ability to ask good questions and probe to the heart of the AGI systems we’re describing.”21

Two days after that meeting, Epstein sat for a deposition and was asked whether he knew him. On Thursday 8 October 2009, in the continued deposition of Jeffrey Epstein, Volume II, taken in a Palm Beach County civil case, plaintiff’s counsel Spencer Kuvin put a run of names to him. At transcript page 109:

Q. Do you know Ben Goertzel, spelled G-O-E-R-T-Z-E-L?

A. I’m going to answer that question the same way I’ve answered most of your other questions here today … Accordingly, I assert my federal constitutional rights as guaranteed by the 5th, 6th and 14th Amendment to the US Constitution.

That answer is not specific to him and this page will not let it read as though it were. Epstein gave the identical answer, in the identical words, to a run of questions on either side of Goertzel’s, and the run is longer before it than after. On the preceding sheet, at transcript pages 0107 and 0108, the same answer met “Do you socialize with Leonard Sustein (phonetic)?”, “Have you socialized with Richard Axle (phonetic)?”, “Do you know Gerald Edelman?” and “Do you know Murray Gelman?”, the last of these being the question immediately before his, and the spellings the transcript’s own for Susskind, Axel and Gell-Mann. After his came “Do you know Marvin Minsky”, “Do you know a politician, George Mitchell”, “Do you know President Bill Clinton” and “Do you know Actor Kevin Spacey”. What the exchange establishes is that Goertzel’s name was on the plaintiff’s list in October 2009, three weeks after the $50,000 and two days after the Palm Beach meeting, and nothing whatever about his conduct. Both sheets were read at the image at 300 dpi.22

2010–2014: the 10%, and Humanity+ as the route

From 2010 the money has a single shape, and Goertzel states it himself. A Hong Kong government research grant carried his OpenCog team at the Hong Kong Polytechnic University on a 90–10 basis, and Epstein supplied the 10%. “Attached find a version of the research proposal that was used to achieve our funding for robotics work from the HK government (which is a 90-10 matching grant, and Jeffrey has been helping with the 10% corporate sponsorship portion…)”, he wrote in November 2013; in January 2015 he put it plainly: “He has helped in this way every year since 2010, usually via a donation to Humanity+.”2324

Humanity+ is the vehicle, and the file records why. The sheet that says so is also the sheet that records a specific sum. On the evening of 18 January 2013 Epstein instructed his office, “rich wire 30k to humanity plus, ben , just a thank you , maybe a beginning”; Goertzel answered at 02:57:03 +0000 on the 19th: “Thanks a lot Jeffrey !! I need to double-check with the other Humanity+ folks that they are OK with being used as a pass-through. I am 95% sure they will be OK with it though, as it was always fine with them in the past…”, and, further down the same message, “I very, very much appreciate this $30K — but of course it would be even better to have the work further accelerated ;)”. That is an instruction and an acknowledgement on one sheet, read at the image; it is not a wire confirmation, and none was located. The following day he sent Richard Kahn the Humanity+ account details and asking to be told when the wire went so he could confirm receipt. The subject line on the copy of that exchange which Epstein received reads “Fwd: Funneling money”, and it is Joscha Bach’s subject line, not Goertzel’s; Bach forwarded Goertzel’s message to Epstein with Goertzel copied. In December 2013 Goertzel set out the same route for $45,000, “the $45K ‘10% corporate donation’ for the HK gov’t grant … the way to do it, as before, is via the nonprofit Humanity+”; on 4 January 2014 he chased it, “Hope I’m not being a pest … the $45K was due at Hong Kong Poly U by the end of 2013”. In July 2016 he added the legal reasoning unprompted: “(i.e. being a ‘fiscal sponsor’ for the HLAI/AGI conference is within Humanity+‘s mandate as a 501(c)3, so there’s no problem here…)”25262728

He also corrected Epstein’s publicist about what the money had and had not paid for, and the correction runs against his own interest. On 15 August 2014, writing to a woman drafting an article for Epstein’s foundation with Epstein copied:

By the way, technically, Epstein Foundation hasn’t actually funded iCog Labs or the OpenCog researchers working there. Epstein Foundation has funded the OpenCog Hong Kong effort, which has been **very very very** much appreciated; but the $$ provided all went to the Hong Kong effort, to help with the 10% “matching funding” required as part of our government research grant there. … I’m just describing the situation for you in detail so that you can be sure the wording in your article accurately reflects reality.

That is the clearest statement in the file of what the arrangement was for, and it is carried here in full because it narrows rather than widens what the money did.29

2013: the robot, the haircut, and “Too much goertzel”

The traffic through 2013, the busiest year in the file at fifty-seven of his messages, is proposals, introductions and small talk. He offered to have the roboticist David Hanson build Epstein a custom humanoid head, writing to Hanson on 16 January that “he is potentially interested in having you make a custom humanoid robot for him, similar to what you did with the Phil Dick robot, Bina48, Robot Einstein”; three days later, told “I spoke to Hanson”, he answered “Great, how did it go? Will be be seeing a robot Jefrey head? ;)”, the sheet’s own typo. Epstein pressed him to cut his hair and he refused twice, in the same register: “I mentioned this email to my wife and she said ‘Noo, don’t cut your hair, it’s so sexy!!… You managed to get a hedge fund started with long hair, so what’s the problem?’”, and then “I would be willing to cut my hair for a lot of AGI money ;p”. Epstein: “obvivously you are stuck in an old paradigm re your appearence.” On 15 January 2013 an office day-sheet books an appointment with him at 1:45, and Epstein’s instruction to Lesley Groff that morning is that he may bring people to the New York house. That sheet was read at the image for this pass, and it is clean: the e→c substitution that runs across this document is the extraction’s and not the sheet’s. Epstein’s paragraph of 7:58 AM opens “2 15 leon black” and runs on through “make dentist appt, for today or tomorow . tell ben coertzel he is welcome to bring others to house,,”; the schedule quoted beneath it, which is Groff’s own of 7:39 AM, reads “1:45 Appt with Ben Goertzel” and carries no Leon Black entry at all. coertzel is the sheet’s own, Epstein wrote it, and it is the only misspelling of the name on that sheet. The text layer returns “makc”, “tcll bcn coertzel”, “1:45 Appt with Bcn Gocrtzel” and “2 15 lcon black”, and an earlier draft of this page printed those as the sheet’s own words.303132

Not everyone in Epstein’s circle was persuaded, and the file says so. In February 2013 Roger Schank canvassed his own former students on Epstein’s behalf, writing “my billionaire friend now wants to build real AI / unfortunately he has gotten together with AGI people, who look to me like a bunch of nuts”, and the computational biologist Larry Hunter answered: “I agree the AGI folks are largely nuts. Neither Kurzweil nor Goertzel (nor that idiot Hugo deGaris) seem to have anything really coherent to say about how to build an AI.”33

Epstein forwarded the canvass badly, and Schank wrote back to him the same afternoon, four lines, read at the image at 400 dpi: “No / You gave that completely wrong / Don’t Ask me to do this if you don’t trust my judgement / Too much goertzel”.34 In December that year Epstein wrote to Kahn: “talk to me about ben goenzel. and stc”.35

December 2014 – January 2015: $300,000, and what he wrote when it stopped

This is the sequence the file is clearest about, and it is also where the page must be most careful.

On 23 December 2014 Epstein asked his office for the year’s charitable totals. The reply listed the wires sent that day (MIT Media Lab $4,000,000, Harvard’s Program for Evolutionary Dynamics $4,000,000, Harvard Medical School $1,000,000, the ASU Origins Project $1,000,000, Bard $250,000) and at 1:33 PM Epstein wrote back four words: “200 ipi and 300 goertzl”. Richard Kahn answered: “I do not recall Ben goertzl unless you gave that to Darren. Please advise.”36

The next day Kahn asked Goertzel where to send it, “Please advise whom we shall direct funds to for attached. Please provide wiring instructions as well.” Goertzel gave two routes, Humanity+ as a 501(c)(3) or his company Novamente LLC as a commercial payee, and on 31 December a third, “Practical Visionaries Limited, HSBC, Hong Kong”, with his reason stated in the message: “This is because wiring $$ to my US company Novamente LLC on the last day of 2014 would result in Novamente needing to pay tax on the $$”. On the same morning of 24 December, in a different thread, Epstein wrote to his accountant: “forget the ben goertzl idea . i have other plans” The two stamps come from different clocks, neither carries a zone, and no order is asserted between them here.3738

The file records how it ended, and it records it in a message headed with his name. On 31 December 2014 at 16:22:55 +0000 Richard Kahn wrote to Epstein under the subject “Ben Goertzel”, four lines, read at the image at 400 dpi:

i never informed Ben that you changed your mind about 300,000 contribution shall i send him a note or do you prefer to send please advise thank you

That is the clearest statement in the file that the $300,000 was not paid, and it also shows that eight days after Epstein had changed his mind Goertzel had not been told: on 31 December he was still sending Kahn wire routings, and on 4 January 2015 he was still asking “has Jeffrey decided to fund this proposal? I haven’t actually heard from him about it, only from you.”3937

What Epstein had been sent is in the file as an unexecuted draft. A letter, “[USE LETTERHEAD OF LDB OR FOUNDATION, WHOMEVER IS MAKING GIFT]”, addressed to “Ben Goertzel, Vice Chair / Humanity+, Inc.”, would have had Leon D. Black or the Leon Black Family Foundation “wire transferred to Humanity+ a charitable gift in the amount $300,000 to be applied for the use and benefit of your project seeking to validate an integrated cognitive architecture utilizing intelligence testing with virtual animals”. Read at the image at 400 dpi, its date line is blank, reading “December ___, 2014”, and the routing and account numbers are under bars. A second copy in the release prints those numbers in the clear; neither is reproduced here. The proposal it funds is in the release twice over, once titled “Proposal for the Black Foundation” and once, with the same abstract, “Proposal for Epstein Foundation”. Nothing read for this page shows that the $300,000 was ever sent.340

On 6 January 2015, as the Giuffre allegations were being reported, Kahn wrote: “Due to the current environment with all the bad press Jeffrey is receiving we are going to have to put this funding on hold.” Goertzel’s reply, at 11:26 PM, to Kahn and copying Epstein, read at the image at 400 dpi:

Sure, that is totally understood. I have seen the spate of utterly idiotic negative publicity in the news, and I’m sorry you guys have to deal with that. From my view I see two possibilities: a) that crap is all made up by greedy people seeking money and fame, b) maybe some variation of what is alleged did happen, but if so it was surely an occurrence among reasonably mature people who mutually consented at the time, so why is it anybody else’s business? Our society is pretty f**ked in some ways… But obviously you guys have already figured that out ;-p

The asterisks are the sheet’s. He then asked whether Epstein might still find $25,000 for the Hong Kong contribution, and closed: “I look forward to discussing our research proposal with Jeffrey again once this latest bout of media idiocy dies down”. The next day, to Epstein directly: “Thanks so much Jeffrey… And definitely, once this current moronic media shitstorm blows over, let’s resume conversation btw you, me and Joscha on the larger proposal…” Those are his words about the allegations, written four and a half years before the New York Times recorded him calling the same subject “pretty disturbing”. This page sets the two beside each other and draws nothing further from either.244110

2015–2016: “i have yet to see deliverables”, and a subject line that is not what it looks like

By September 2015 Epstein was impatient. Told the research goals again, he answered: “im aware of the goals . i have yet to see deliverables.” Goertzel: “Fair enough…. But we have learned and understood a lot through our work so far, which is important…. I understand the problem far better than I did 15 years ago.” In January 2015 he had been asked to design a trading algorithm for Epstein’s own use, and in October 2014 had sent backtests from Aidyia Limited, the Hong Kong quantitative fund of which he was chief science officer.4243

A machine of his ran on Epstein’s Virgin Islands network, and the file records it from both ends. In June 2015 Goertzel reported that his team still could not install their software there: “the sys-admin there, Jermaine, has not yet opened a port in the router there to let us access the machine remotely. I wonder if he doesn’t know how”. A year later a server designated for his work was running, and nothing read here establishes that it was the same machine. On 15 June 2016 that system administrator, Jermaine Ruan, wrote to Epstein: “I continued to investigate STC’s slow bandwidth yesterday and this morning and found our AI server (for Mr. Gortzell and Amen) was using 2.3 MB last night and early this morning. I suspect that this was the cause of STC’s slow internet access.” “Mr. Gortzell” is a rendering of his name and the page counts it as one; Gortzell reaches three documents in the release and all three are this exchange. What that establishes is that a server designated for his work sat on the Southern Trust Company network in the Virgin Islands in June 2016 and was using enough of its bandwidth to be noticed. It does not establish what was on it, who else used it, or what it was for, and nothing read for this page says. This page had earlier recorded only the June 2015 failure to install, which would have left the file looking emptier on this point than it is.4445

In July 2016 Epstein’s office set up the largest meeting in the file, and the subject line it used is the trap on this page. Re: Jeffrey Epstein is the first-sheet subject of 21 documents in the base set, not six as the brief records, and Jeffrey Epstein of three more. Every one of them is an office scheduling message, or a reply to one. The root, read at the image at 400 dpi, is dated Sun, 17 Jul 2016 16:31:34 +0000, is addressed To: Ben Goertzel, carries the subject Jeffrey Epstein, and reads: “Hello Ben…hope you are well…I understand from Jeffrey we should set up a meeting for you and ‘your crowd’ with Jeffrey on Thursday July 21st in the afternoon…would 12:00 work for you?” The sender of that copy is under a bar and it signs only “Assistant to Jeffrey Epstein”; a separate sheet in the same thread prints Lesley Groff’s name in the clear. Not one of the 24 is Goertzel discussing Epstein. The office’s mirror-image habit is in the file too: Ben Goertzel is the subject of six documents and Re: Ben Goertzel of three: internal messages about him, one carrying nothing but the attachment Ben Goertzel.vcf.4647

Under that subject line he sent the guest list, “Regarding Thursday — Here are links to CVs and such”, naming the AGI researchers Alexey Potapov, Linas Vepstas, David Weinbaum, Richard Mallah, James Babcock and Cosmo Harrigan, and his own son, an MS student, whom he introduced with a joke about his parentage. Epstein had written: “i can do the 21 anytime as well I with as many people as you like up to 10”. Asked by the office about dietary restrictions, Goertzel replied: “One person coming is mainly vegetarian / I dislike condiments, so if Sandwiches are ordered I prefer one without any ;)”. Afterwards the promised sponsorship had not arrived: “It was a fun conversation, thanks for inviting us ;) We didn’t get the money for drinks/snacks yet, nor any correspondence about it…” Asked a week earlier whether to name one of Epstein’s vehicles on the conference materials, “Enhanced Education again?”, Epstein had answered: “no jeffrey epstein . is enough”.484950

August–September 2016: a visa, a pass-through, and $150,000

The largest sum the file records actually moving in this relationship is not for his own work. In August 2016 the immigration practice at Mintz Levin was assembling an O-1 visa petition for the cognitive scientist Joscha Bach, with Humanity+ as the sponsoring employer. Asked what the organisation had on deposit, Goertzel answered on 24 August:

Humanity+ does not have $500,000 on deposit ---probably closer to $5000 to be honest

It is an established 501c3 with nearly 20 years of history, I am a board member and have used the org as a pass-through for donations from Jeffrey before… but the truth is the org is quite cash-poor

The firm asked whether Epstein could deposit $300,000–$400,000 in the organisation’s account. Goertzel’s reply of 25 August, read at the image at 400 dpi, both agreed and drew a line:

If Jeffrey wishes to donate $300K-$400K to Humanity+ to spend on specific things that are within the organization’s charter (promoting the advancement of, and benevolent uses, of futuristic technologies) then the organization will be happy to accept the donation… Joscha’s work fits into that category, as does my own AI work.

OTOH, we can’t have Jeffrey put $400K into the Humanity+ account and then have Humanity+ give some of it back to Jeffrey after Joscha’s visa is approved --- this would look too fishy to the other Humanity+ Board members… (and I realize you didn’t suggest this ;)

Epstein’s answer, on the same sheet and at the image, is six damaged words: “jpscha salry can be 50k per yer and fund with 150”. The text layer of that sheet prints “salty” where the image prints “salry”, and the image is followed here.51

The money then moved through Epstein’s own office. Darren Indyke wrote “Let’s prepare an Enhanced wire for $150K to go out to Humanity+ on Monday or Tuesday after I have another call with JEE about this issue”; on 30 August Richard Kahn recorded that “jee approved 150,000 to Humanity+ from Enhanced Education”; and on 1 September a bookkeeper wrote that she would move $45,000 between two banks “In order to wire $150,000 to Humanity+”, leaving one account with “a balance of $666 only after wire to Humanity+”. Kahn’s covering note the same afternoon: “Enhanced has 180,000 in cash”, and “We have enough cash to do humanity check however going forward we will have to liquidate stocks for contributions.”52

What that establishes and what it does not. It establishes that Epstein approved $150,000 from Enhanced Education to Humanity+ in late August 2016, that the sum was set by reference to a salary for another man’s visa, that Goertzel described his own charity to Epstein’s lawyers as a body he had “used as a pass-through for donations from Jeffrey before”, and that it was he who refused the round trip. No wire confirmation was located in anything read for this page, and the Mintz Levin invoice of 8 November 2016 for “Prepare O-1\O-3 approval letters and packages”, billed to Humanity+ for his attention, is the only later document read here that touches it.5153

2017–2018: SingularityNET, Lisbon, and the last message

In November 2017 he pitched Epstein a token sale. “SingularityNET — AI meets blockchain project — presale opportunity”, he wrote; “So I haven’t mentioned this project to you before but I figure I might as well do so…” They arranged a Skype call for the same day. Two messages in that week concern the venture’s lawyer and the legality of converting money into tokens, “I do understand there is greater legal/regulatory risk in doing it this way”, and, on the following day, “Yeah, indeed, going to jail is very strongly undesirable. But dealing with real $$ is needed to make the biological organism grow. So yeah, the legal and tax issues need careful attention as this is set up.” The subject of both is securities and tax treatment of a token sale and nothing else, and this page draws nothing further from the phrase.5455

That same week Epstein instructed his office, of the venture capitalist Masha Drokova, “tell her meet up with Ben goertzl he is in lisbon”; the office introduced them, Drokova described herself as “a founder and general partner at fund Day One Ventures”, and Goertzel offered 9 or 10 November before his flight to Prague. An Epstein office reminder for the same days reads “Masha and Ben Goertzel to meet for breakfast in Lisbon tomorroe”. Nothing read for this page records whether they met.56

The last message he wrote in this file is dated 5 December 2018, seven months before Epstein’s arrest, subject “visiting New York”: he would be in the city, his SingularityNET colleagues were holding “a small invitation-only event Mon Dec 10 6-9PM … in a friend’s penthouse apartment”, and an invitation was attached. Epstein answered “Not sure if im in ny”. Goertzel: “Understood, just ping me if you appear in NY on the 10th or earlier and maybe we can make time for a chat ;)” Nothing after that date is in the sender set.6

Epstein’s publicity operation, and what it made of him

A body of the header-less documents is promotional copy about Epstein in which Goertzel’s work is the product. Drafts circulate under headlines including “Science Funder Jeffrey Epstein Launches Radical Emotional Software for the Gaming Industry”, “Science Philanthropist, Jeffrey Epstein, Backs the First Free Thinking Robots” and “A Harvard Financier, Jeffrey Epstein, Advances Artificial Intelligence in Ethiopia”, alongside page-by-page copy and editing notes for a website whose draft header sheets read “JEFFREY EPTEIN.NET” over “Jeffrey Epstein AI / Advancing Artificial Intelligence”, the missing S being the sheet’s own, certified at the image on the first of the copies cited, and not mended here. Goertzel noticed. On 17 November 2013 he opened a message: “Firstly — Wow, it seems your publicity folks have been quite impactful lately! Since your team has issued a number of press releases…” These drafts are Epstein’s own material and are not journalism, and none of them is counted as press on this page.5758

The foundation also used him as a credential. On 9 June 2015 Darren Indyke, as vice-president of the J. Epstein Virgin Islands Foundation trading as Enhanced Education, filed an I-129 O-1 petition with USCIS on behalf of a woman whose name the producing party has barred. Its account of the foundation’s standing lists the OpenCog Foundation among its funded projects and gives Goertzel’s titles at length. He is not shown to have written, seen or known of that filing, and nothing read for this page connects him to its subject.4

The foundation’s own file index lists a “Consulting Agreement Enhanced Education & Ben Goertzel”, between folders for thank-you letters and for Marvin Minsky. A folder title is not an agreement and this page does not write it as one; the document itself is not in anything read here. A Mintz Levin invoice of 8 November 2016, addressed to Humanity+, Inc. for the attention of “Ben Goertzel, Vice Chair” and billing $273.94 for O-1 immigration work, is in the release, and the matter it bills for is the visa petition set out above.1153

What this page does not establish

  • The $300,000 did not move, and the file says so. The Black letter is an unexecuted template with a blank date line; Epstein instructed “300 goertzl” on 23 December 2014 and wrote “forget the ben goertzl idea” the next morning; on 31 December Kahn wrote that Epstein had “changed your mind about 300,000 contribution” and that Goertzel had not been told; on 6 January 2015 the funding was put on hold. No wire confirmation, bank record or receipt naming Goertzel was located in anything read for this page, for that sum or for the $150,000 approved in 2016.
  • No salary corroboration. The $100,000 salary figure is reported by The New York Times, sourced to Goertzel’s own résumé. No document read for this page records a payment of that amount to him, or any salary paid to him by Epstein or by any of his vehicles. The $150,000 of August 2016 is recorded on its face as funding another man’s visa salary.
  • No knowledge. Nothing read for this page shows what he knew of Epstein’s conduct beyond his own words: that on 6 January 2015 he dismissed the allegations then being reported, and that on 31 July 2019 he told a newspaper they went “way beyond what I thought his misdoings and kinks were”.
  • No island, no aircraft, no residence. No flight log, manifest, ferry record or guest list naming him was located, and no document read here places him at Little Saint James. The meetings recorded are at Epstein’s New York house, in Palm Beach in October 2009, and by telephone, Skype and video call. The one thing of his that the file does place in the Virgin Islands is a server, and a machine is not a visit.
  • No allegation. No document read for this page contains any allegation against him. He is named in two court records in this release and neither alleges anything: an October 2009 deposition in which Epstein asserted the Fifth Amendment to a list of names that also held Marvin Minsky, George Mitchell, Bill Clinton and Kevin Spacey, and a biography exhibit in the same Palm Beach civil file, a printed encyclopaedia article listing him among scientists Epstein had befriended, which is a list in a reference article, not a finding by any court.59

No link below asserts a relationship beyond what the cited sheet shows.

  • Pages this one extends: Gino Yu, his joint principal investigator on the Hong Kong AGI proposals, and the page whose header-less census found ten of his research documents; Enhanced Education, whose file index names a consulting agreement with him and whose July 2016 refusal to be named as a conference sponsor is quoted here from the other side; John Brockman, whose page reads the same foundation index.
  • People named on sheets cited here: Jeffrey Epstein; Lesley Groff (booked every meeting and headed the threads with her employer’s name); Richard Kahn (handled the wires and stopped them); Darren Indyke; Leon Black (the drafted donor); Mark Tramo, Lawrence Krauss, Martin Nowak, Marvin Minsky, Peggy Siegal, Naomi Campbell and Ghislaine Maxwell (named beside him on the jail address list).
  • Comparators for the sender measurement: Elon Musk, Robert Kuhn, Nathan Myhrvold.
  • Topics: Calendars and daily schedules, whose rule that an appointment record establishes only that a meeting was scheduled applies to every day-sheet cited here; Epstein network: academia.

Sources

Nineteen of the documents cited below were read at the image. Eighteen were rendered locally from the released PDF: fifteen at 400 dpi, one at 200 dpi, the deposition transcript’s two sheets at 300 dpi, and the fifty-sheet Palm Beach County filing, every sheet of which was read at 130 dpi and twelve of them again at 300, 400 or 600 dpi. The nineteenth, a HOUSE_OVERSIGHT day-sheet whose PDF route returns 403, was fetched read-only as a page image from the site server’s store; nothing was rendered or written on that server. Each of those footnotes says so, and gives the resolution. Every render was deleted after reading, and the deletion was verified by name. Every other footnote is cited from the text layer and is marked UNVERIFIED, and no claim about what stands on an unrendered sheet (a bar, a field state, a name’s position, a spelling certified as the sheet’s own) is made anywhere on this page from the text layer alone.

Clocks. No page-wide zone is assumed. A time carrying an explicit offset is printed with that offset. A time taken from an Outlook Sent: stamp or from a quoting client’s attribution line, neither of which carries a zone in this production, is given as the sheet prints it and is never converted, and no sequence is asserted across two such stamps.

Footnotes

  1. Name-form probe, 2026-09-13, each form an FTS5 match differenced against the 878-document base. Totals and gains as tabulated in the body. The twenty hand-probed forms, which are every row of the body table down to Goertzet plus the four singletons goerizel, goerzeil, goeztzel and Goetrzel, union to 1,012 documents, 134 of them outside the base; the twenty-six forms the vocabulary scan added at 12 take the union to 1,036 and 158, which is the figure the body and the infobox print. Goetrzel occurs at EFTA02571287 p.1, Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 11:55 AM, “krause , edelman minsky, randal lloyd, goetrzel. bach,=A0 only”. goertzl is Epstein’s, e.g. EFTA00714872 p.1. Nulls, each returning 0 documents: oGertzel, Goretzel, Goertezl, Goertzle, Goertzeel, Goerrtzel, Goertzelll, goortzel, gortzel, goertel, goertzal, goernel, goenzcl, goertze1, "Bne Goertzel", "Ebn Goertzel", "Ben Goretzel", "Ben Goetrzel", "Ben Goertezl", "Ben Goertzle", "Bem Goertzel", "Bcn Goertzel", "Ban Goertzel", "Ren Goertzel", "Den Goertzel". Goerztel (3 documents) and Goertzet (2) were re-checked for gain outside the base only, per the brief: both 0. UNVERIFIED. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  2. Sender rule and full label set, 2026-09-13. Labels, anchored at line start, case-insensitive, each optionally followed by [:;.]: From, Fromm, Fran, Front, Frorn, Prom, Fram, Frcm, Flom, Fmm, Frem, Frorm, Frnm, F rom, F-om, Fro m, Frm, Fron, Fr om. Bar set for the next-line fallback: those plus To, Cc, Bcc, Sent, Date, Subject, Importance, Attachments, Tc, Ce, T o, Sublect, Subiect, Attachment, Reply-To, Received, each followed by punctuation, whitespace or the line end. Surname forms matched in the value: goertzel, geortzel, goerztel, goertzell, goertzei, goertzet, goertzl, goenzel, coertzel, goertze, bgoertzel. Result 244 at windows of 8, 12, 16, 24, 30, 60 non-blank lines and at the whole first sheet. At sixteen lines: 603 values, 155 barred or blank, 120 no label. Fifty distinct sender values occur across the 244. Three of the fifty contain neither “Ben Goertzel” nor “Ben Goertze”: en Goertzel, bengoertze and nbehalfofBenGoenzel. Requiring the untruncated string ben goertzel in the value returns 239 documents; the five it drops are EFTA01904426 p.1 and EFTA02091197 p.1 (en Goertzel), EFTA01940331 p.1 (on behalf of Ben Goertze), EFTA02431897 p.1 (bengoertze) and EFTA02442018 p.1 (nbehalfofBenGoenzel), each of which was opened and is his own message. An earlier draft of this page published this sub-measurement as “242, dropping two”; it is 239, dropping five, and the error was in the printed sub-measurement and not in the 244. No sender value is reproduced anywhere on this page that carries an e-mail address, although several of the fifty do. The four calendar-alert stubs that an earlier draft miscounted are EFTA02054516 p.1, EFTA02054552 p.1, EFTA02055093 p.1 and EFTA02229740 p.1. act_rate.py was not run for any figure on this page. UNVERIFIED (measurement). ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6

  3. Draft gift letter, “[USE LETTERHEAD OF LDB OR FOUNDATION, WHOMEVER IS MAKING GIFT]”, “December ___, 2014”, to “Ben Goertzel, Vice Chair / Humanity+, Inc.”, over the name “Leon D. Black”. EFTA00587395 p.1. Read at the image at 400 dpi, where the day of the date is blank, the e-mail address in the “VIA EMAIL” line is under a bar, and the ABA routing number and account number are each under a bar. The text layer of that sheet reorders the two-column wire block, returning the four labels and then the two unbarred values. A second copy of the same draft exists in the release on which those two fields are not barred. Its identifier is deliberately not given here and it is not cited anywhere on this page, because naming it would be a pointer to a live bank account; neither value is reproduced, and nothing is supplied into the bars on the copy that is cited. ↩ ↩2

  4. Enhanced Education a/k/a J. Epstein Virgin Islands Foundation, Inc. to the USCIS Vermont Service Center, “ATTN: I-129 O-1”, 9 June 2015, over the name of Darren Indyke. The beneficiary is named on the sheet only as “Ms.” with the name barred, and nothing identifying her is printed here. The OpenCog paragraph and Goertzel’s titles stand on printed p.3. EFTA01193034 pp.1–3. All three sheets were read. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩ ↩2

  5. Undated sheet headed “List of People Who Need JE’s Address!”, giving “Jacket # 0338617, Dorm T Special / PO BOX 24716, West Palm Beach, Florida, 33416”. “Ben Goertzel- done” is the first entry. EFTA00306074 p.1. Read at the image at 400 dpi, where printed p.1 carries fifteen rows, three of them solid black bars; the text layer of the same sheet returns thirteen, deleting two barred rows and closing the gap and reducing a third to the word “one”. Nothing is supplied for any bar. The run continues at pp.2–3 (text layer, UNVERIFIED). ↩ ↩2

  6. “visiting New York”, 5 December 2018 — EFTA01014313 p.1; “Re: visiting New York”, carrying Epstein’s “Not sure if im in ny” — EFTA02610870 p.1. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩ ↩2

  7. Corpus counts measured 2026-09-13 against /mnt/d/dump/AI-investigator/Epstein-research-data/full_text_corpus.db, over pages_fts joined to pages, counting distinct efta_number values and never pages. "Ben Goertzel" 878 documents over 1,447 sheets; Goertzel 975 (97 outside the base). The address trap: the FTS phrase "ben@goertzel" returns 878, identical to "ben goertzel", because the tokeniser strips @; a literal LIKE '%ben@goertzel%' over the same population returns 19 documents, and the same literal with .org appended 17. His full e-mail addresses are not printed anywhere on this page, in this footnote or in the infobox, even though the producing party leaves them in the clear on some sheets and even though he is a named subject and not a protected person: the finding here is about how the index treats an address, not about the address, and the queries are reproducible from the strings given. UNVERIFIED (measurement, not a sheet). ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  8. Date analysis over the 244, 2026-09-13, from the first Date: or Sent: value in the top-level header of each first sheet, taking the next non-blank line where the label’s own line is empty. 233 parse; those carry 219 distinct raw timestamps; 13 timestamps are shared by 27 documents between them. Eleven do not parse. Year distribution as printed in the body; earliest 10 April 2009, latest 5 December 2018. UNVERIFIED. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  9. Recipient measurement, 2026-09-13. Rule: on the document’s own first sheet, take every line whose start matches To, TO, T o, Tc, Cc, CC, Bcc, BCC, Ce, Cr or C c followed by [:;.], together with its continuation lines up to the next header label, stopping at the second sender label; match the same surname forms; subtract the 244 sender documents. Whole first sheet 145; thirty-line window 145; sixty-line 145; sixteen-line 140; eight-line 137. The whole-sheet reading is the published figure. UNVERIFIED. ↩ ↩2

  10. “SDNY News Clips, Wednesday, July 31, 2019”, 36 sheets, carrying the New York Times report of 31 July 2019. The passage quoted stands on printed p.4, Bates-stamped EFTA00018469. EFTA00018466 p.4. Read at the image at 400 dpi. Five documents in the base set carry that morning’s clips. Two are the bare compilation: the one cited above and EFTA00069926 p.4. Three are e-mails circulating it, whose first sheets carry sender headers and which therefore fall outside the header-less census: EFTA00018441 p.4, EFTA00069900 p.4 and EFTA00085684 p.4. All four of those are text layer only, UNVERIFIED. The same page reports the 2011 gift of $20,000 to the body now trading as Humanity Plus. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  11. The foundation’s file index entry “12. Consulting Agreement Enhanced Education & Ben Goertzel”, standing between “10. Thank you Letters” and “14. Marvin Minsky”. The same index is read at Enhanced Education and at John Brockman, and those readings are not re-derived here. EFTA00299927 p.16; a second copy of the same index at EFTA00299901 p.19. Text layer only for this pass, UNVERIFIED; John Brockman records the first of those sheets as read at the image at 400 dpi, and this page takes that reading rather than repeating it. ↩ ↩2

  12. Vocabulary scan, 2026-09-13. An fts5vocab table was built over pages_fts and copied to a scratch database, giving 12,121,974 distinct terms; the corpus database was left unchanged and the temporary virtual table dropped, which was verified afterwards against sqlite_master and by re-running the base count. Every term of length 5 to 11 was scored by Levenshtein distance against goertzel (6,538,654 terms scored) and every term at distance 2 or less was read; a second pass matched a consonant-skeleton expression against the whole vocabulary at any length. Twenty-six forms not in the hand-probed list were found, and every document each of them reaches was opened. The forms added to the union, with their document counts and gains outside the base, are: gocrtzel 12/4, goetzel 6/6, gortzell 3/3, gocrtzcl 5/2, oertzel 4/2, goertzelisfriend 2/2, goertzets 2/1, and the singletons eoertzel, goertrel, goertzea, goertzek, goertzele, goertzels, goertzelt, ngoertzel, gocrizel, cocrtzel, cloertzel, goerl2el, goertnl, goertzefs, goertzers, thgoertzel, figoertzel, goenzeli, goertzelflarrigan. Note that the vocabulary’s doc column counts PAGES, not documents: it gives 1,605 for goertzel where the document count is 975, and no figure on this page is taken from it. UNVERIFIED (measurement, not a sheet). ↩ ↩2

  13. Residue census, 2026-09-13. The union of the forty-six forms adds 158 documents to the base. All 158 were opened and the matched line of every one was read; this is not a sample. All 158 are this subject and there are no contaminants. Two that a regex sweep had missed are EFTA00954009 p.1 and EFTA01903850 p.1, both printing “Ben Goerlzel, Novamente”. The seven documents reached by probed forms and rejected as other people or as noise, each opened and read: EFTA00731502 p.37 (“Haeli Goertzen”, a working-paper bibliography); EFTA01728083 p.38 (“Debra Goertz”, a list of artists); EFTA02294725 p.1 (“Shannon Goetzl”, a guest list); EFTA00583551 p.1 (GORtfel inside a struck-through aircraft-interior snag list); EFTA01402807 p.2 (vertzel where a Deutsche Bank authorisation prints “verbal”); EFTA02362651 p.237 (a run of characters on an image-heavy sheet); and EFTA01133495 p.1, a garbled contact column reading “kTas ertzel Lances”, which could not be decided either way and is therefore disclosed and not counted. UNVERIFIED. ↩

  14. Press test over all 878 documents, whole sheets — 3,990 sheets scanned — 2026-09-13, every pattern matched case-insensitively: SECTION: 4, BYLINE: 1, Reprinted 1, LENGTH:\s*\d+\s*words 0, FINAL EDITION 0, Copyright (19|20)\d\d 0, Load-Date 0; union 5. The case-insensitivity is not decoration: matched exactly as printed, in capitals, SECTION: returns 1 document and the union is 1, not 5. The five are EFTA00623759 and EFTA00624128 (the two volumes of Engineering General Intelligence), HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012899 p.1 (one sheet of the same book; its single row in the extraction runs to 987,274 characters, which is a container row and not a page, and the only claim rested on it here is that the marker fires inside it), EFTA00723522 and EFTA01068342 (a device-forensics export). Four of the five are false positives. The fifth, EFTA00723522, is a press capture, and an earlier draft of this page described it as “a Palm Beach County transcript”, which it is not. Its printed p.1 was read at the image at 400 dpi and prints, over a barred plaintiff’s name, IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA / CASE NO: 502008CA037319XXXXMB AB and the title “PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO EPSTEIN’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND TO IDENTIFY” — the same case as the deposition at 22. All fifty of its sheets were rendered locally and read for this pass, the run at 130 dpi, printed pp.16, 20, 21, 23, 38, 40, 42, 43 and 50 again at 300 dpi, and printed p.39 at 300 dpi and again at 600 dpi; printed pp.1 and 18 had been read at 400 dpi by an earlier pass and are described below. Twelve carry a newspaper article header: printed pp.16, 18, 20, 21, 23, 38, 39, 40, 42, 45, 46 and 47. The rule, printed so that a reader can re-run it sheet by sheet: count a sheet when it prints a headline over a labelled bibliographic block, in either of the two forms this exhibit set uses. Form one, the Palm Beach Post archive printout under a PalmBeachPost.com | Archives masthead, block DATE / PUBLICATION / EDITION / SECTION / PAGE, with a BYLINE line above the DATE on all of them but the unsigned editorial at p.39: pp.16, 18, 21, 23, 39, 40, 45, 46, 47. Form two, the New York Post printout under a New York Post - New York, N.Y. source line, block Date / Start Page / Section / Text Word Count, carrying no byline, no publication line and no edition line, and at p.42 alone an Author: line reading Anonymous: pp.20, 38, 42. A sheet is not counted because one of those words happens to stand somewhere on it: printed p.50 is a Law.com page whose navigation column reads STUDENT EDITION, and it is excluded. The rule has to be run at the image and cannot be run over the text layer. The extraction preserves EDITION on four of the nine archive sheets only, and returns p.39’s whole block as OME:, PUISLICAITON:, EIETION: MAL, SECTIOM appel, PAGE, 700.; an earlier draft of this page published eleven, counted over that text layer, and p.39 is the sheet that count could not see. Printed p.39, Bates-stamped EFTA00723560, was read at the image at 600 dpi: MASSAGING THE SYSTEM, DATE: August 10, 2006, PUBLICATION: Palm Beach Post, The (FL), EDITION: FINAL, SECTION: OPINION, PAGE: 20A, with no byline. The day’s second digit is at the limit of this sheet’s own raster, and the date printed here is not taken from that sheet. Its native raster is 816 by 1056 greyscale at 96 ppi, the digit stands about seven pixels tall, and a render at 300 or 600 dpi interpolates that scan rather than adding to it; the glyph’s upper right has been eaten, which is why the extraction returns nothing usable from the line, as the OME: above shows, and why three earlier drafts of this page printed August 16, 2006. The date is taken instead from a clean reprint of the same editorial elsewhere in the corpus: EFTA01480613 p.1, read at the image at 200 dpi, a Nexis-style reprint bound into a “Confidential Due Diligence Report – YHS, LLC”, printing Copyright 2006 The Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc., Palm Beach Post (Florida), August 10, 2006 Thursday, FINAL EDITION, SECTION: OPINION; Pg. 20A, LENGTH: 428 words, HEADLINE: MASSAGING THE SYSTEM, above the same opening sentence that printed p.39 carries. 10 August 2006 was a Thursday; 16 August 2006 was a Wednesday, and the reprint prints the weekday. Twelve is what the rule counts; nineteen of the fifty sheets are newspaper: the twelve, the continuation sheets at pp.17, 19, 22, 24, 41 and 44, and printed p.43, read at the image at 300 dpi, a Palm Beach Post web news page headed “Palm Beach sex offender’s secret plea deal: Possible co-conspirators not charged, presses victims to settle civil suits” over By SUSAN SPENCER-WENDEL, Palm Beach Post Staff Writer, Friday, September 18, 2009, which carries a byline and a date over no block and is correctly outside the rule. Printed p.18, Bates-stamped EFTA00723539, was read at the image at 400 dpi: Palm Beach Post, DATE: July 23, 2009, BYLINE: SONJA ISGER, Palm Beach Post Staff Writer, EDITION: FINAL, SECTION: LOCAL & BUSINESS, PAGE: 1B, headed “EPSTEIN’S RELEASE UPSETS ‘JANE DOES,‘THEIR ATTORNEY SAYS” and stamped Exhibit 2. The articles run from 1999 to 2009 and include New York Post Page Six pages of 2006 and 2009. Goertzel is named on one sheet of the fifty, printed p.33, the encyclopaedia article at 59; he is named on none of the nineteen newspaper sheets. The sweep that tests this was run over the text layer of all fifty sheets for goert, oertz, ertzel, the consonant skeleton g[o0ce][ce]?[rn][tl]?z, benjamin, novamente, opencog and humanity, case-insensitively, and it returns exactly one hit, on p.33. All Rights Reserved fires on 280 documents and is Epstein’s own e-mail footer, which prints as “copyright -all rights reserved” at, for example, EFTA00714872 p.2. UNVERIFIED for the marker counts; the five identifications were made by opening each document. ↩ ↩2

  15. Header-less census, 2026-09-13. 119 of the 878 first sheets carry no sender label anywhere on the first sheet, and all 119 were opened. The window matters and is named here: at the sixteen-line window the body publishes as the rule, the figure is 120, which is what 2 prints; the one document is EFTA02046893 p.1, whose first From: stands at non-blank line 25. At windows of 8, 12, 16, 24, 30 and 60 the figures are 128, 124, 120, 120, 119 and 119. They comprise the research proposals and books cited elsewhere on this page, Epstein office day-sheets, mobile-device forensics exports, Hanson Robotics material, two court transcripts, contact-card exports, the promotional drafts at 57, and the two SDNY clip compilations at 10. The brief’s figure of 129 is not reproducible under this rule. UNVERIFIED (census, not a sheet). ↩

  16. “Q2 research plans; embodied NL disambiguation”, Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 05:45:52 +0000. EFTA00748681 p.1. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  17. “brief update, and question: Interested to fund the video recording and editing of the AGI Summer School lectures, for $2K?”, 29 April 2009, and the reply of 30 April naming the Singularity Institute for AI as payee. EFTA00774433 p.1; EFTA00774429 p.1. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. A residential address printed on the second sheet is not reproduced here. ↩

  18. “Congratulations!!!!”, Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 — EFTA00772950 p.1. “We haven’t talked since you were set free — congratulations on that ;-))”, “Book draft, and interesting new opportunity”, 11 September 2010 — EFTA00756577 p.1. Epstein’s release to home detention on 22 July 2009 is set out at the 2008 non-prosecution agreement and is not re-derived here. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  19. “Re: shall we talk this weekend?”, Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 16:30:49 +0000, to Jeffrey Epstein, copying Ben Goertzel and Rich Kahn. All five messages of the chain stand on one sheet, which is how their order is established. EFTA00770109 p.1. Read at the image at 400 dpi. The wire-instruction message of 12 September is EFTA00770129 p.1 (text layer, UNVERIFIED). ↩

  20. “Progress on my ‘How to Build AGI’ book: good but still a bit behind”, 19 February 2010. EFTA00763967 p.1. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  21. “Re: Travel information”, 5 October 2009 — EFTA00771045 p.1; “Re: I’m in New York thru Tuesday with Cassio — want to get together?”, 5 October 2009 — EFTA00770992 p.1; “AGI, expert reviewers, etc.”, 7 October 2009 — EFTA02437895 p.1. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  22. Continued Deposition of Jeffrey Epstein, Volume II, Thursday 8 October 2009, 10:07 a.m. – 1:03 p.m., 250 South Australian Avenue, West Palm Beach, in the Circuit Court of the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, Case No. 502008CA037319XXXXMB AB; Spencer T. Kuvin for the plaintiff, Jack Goldberger and Michael J. Pike for Epstein. The Goertzel question and answer stand on transcript page 0109, lines 8 to 22, and the Minsky, Mitchell, Clinton and Spacey questions on transcript pages 0109 to 0111. EFTA01158522 p.40 of a 66-sheet run, Bates-stamped EFTA01158561. Read at the image at 300 dpi. The four questions that precede his stand on the sheet before, EFTA01158522 p.39, Bates-stamped EFTA01158560, also read at the image at 300 dpi: transcript page 0107 line 4 (Sustein) and line 17 (Axle), and page 0108 line 9 (Edelman) and line 21 (Gelman), each answered in the same words, with an objection from Mr. Pike interposed at 0108 lines 5 to 7. Naming the questions that actually precede makes the invocation less specific to him, not more, and that is why the correction is made. The plaintiff’s name is barred throughout the produced copy and nothing is supplied for it here. ↩ ↩2

  23. “Re: Hanson Robotics”, Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2013 02:30:06 +0000. EFTA00678495 p.1. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  24. “Re:”, Sent: Tuesday, January 6, 2015 11:26 PM, to Richard Kahn, copying Jeffrey Epstein, carrying Kahn’s message of Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 5:28 PM. EFTA02372877 p.1. Read at the image at 400 dpi, where the sender field prints ▮ on behalf of Ben Goertzel <▮>, both bars being the producing party’s, and where f**ked is printed on the sheet with its asterisks. A second copy at EFTA02715006 p.1 (text layer, UNVERIFIED). ↩ ↩2

  25. Ben Goertzel to Jeffrey Epstein, copying Richard Kahn, Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 02:57:03 +0000, carrying beneath it Epstein’s message of Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 8:29 PM, “rich wire 30k to humanity plus, ben , just a thank you , maybe a beginning”. EFTA00683473 p.1. Read at the image at 400 dpi. A declared mend: the text layer of this sheet prints “the other Humanity-F folks”; the image prints “Humanity+”, and the page follows the image. It also prints “I very, very much appreciate this $30K” and “I am 95% sure” exactly as quoted. The sender field reads From: Ben Goertzel <▮>, the address barred. The wire details sent to Richard Kahn the following morning: EFTA00952303 p.1 (text layer, UNVERIFIED). The $30,000 is recorded here as an instruction and an acknowledgement; no wire confirmation for it was located in anything read for this page. Account numbers barred on the copies cited and not reproduced here. ↩

  26. Joscha Bach to Jeffrey Epstein, copying Ben Goertzel, Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 4:39 PM, Subject: “Fwd: Funneling money”, forwarding Goertzel’s message giving the Humanity+ bank details. The subject line is Bach’s, not Goertzel’s. EFTA02565159 p.1. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  27. “the $45K ‘10% corporate donation’ for the HK gov’t grant”, 10 December 2013 — EFTA00978432 p.1; “Thanks so much re the 45K !!!”, 2 December 2013 — EFTA00978077 p.1; the chase of 4 January 2014, “the $45K was due at Hong Kong Poly U by the end of 2013” — EFTA00633984 p.1. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  28. “being a ‘fiscal sponsor’ for the HLAI/AGI conference is within Humanity+‘s mandate as a 501(c)3”, July 2016, answering Epstein’s question “is it a 501 c 3”. EFTA02458618 p.1. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  29. “Re: Hello from Jeffrey Epstein’s Foundation”, Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2014 09:17:16 +0000, to a writer preparing an article for the foundation, copying Epstein. EFTA00995144 pp.1–2. Both sheets were read, and p.1, which carries the whole quotation, was read at the image at 400 dpi: the asterisks around “very very very” are the sheet’s, and the closing sentence quoted above stands on it. The addressee’s name is barred on the sheet, in the To: line and in the salutation, and nothing is supplied for it here. p.2 is text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  30. “Potential Hanson Robotics project”, 16 January 2013 — EFTA02392988 p.1 (text layer, UNVERIFIED); “Great, how did it go? Will be be seeing a robot Jefrey head? ;)”, Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 03:08:04 +0000 — EFTA00952269 p.1. Read at the image at 400 dpi, which is how “Jefrey” and the doubled “be be” are certified as the sheet’s own and not the extraction’s. That sheet is also a second copy of the 18–19 January $30,000 exchange at 25, quoting it in full. ↩

  31. “Noo, don’t cut your hair, it’s so sexy!!”, Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 07:35:41 +0000 — EFTA00668467 p.1; “I would be willing to cut my hair for a lot of AGI money ;p”, 12 February 2013 — EFTA00700884 p.1; Epstein’s “obvivously you are stuck in an old paradigm re your appearence” — EFTA00952068 p.1. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  32. Lesley Groff to Jeffrey Epstein, 1/15/2013 1:03:10 PM, subject “Re: Schedule -Leon black today??”, carrying Epstein’s message of 7:58 AM and, beneath it, Groff’s own of 7:39 AM with the day’s schedule. HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_000592 p.1. Read at the image, the page image fetched read-only from the site server’s houseoversight store, which is how this dataset is read because the /pdf/HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_*.pdf route returns 403; nothing was rendered or written on that server. The sheet is clean. The e→c substitution is the EXTRACTION’s, not the sheet’s: the text layer returns makc dentist appt, tcll bcn coertzel, 1:45 Appt with Bcn Gocrtzel and 2 15 lcon black where the sheet prints make dentist appt, tell ben coertzel, 1:45 Appt with Ben Goertzel and 2 15 leon black, and it also closes the gap where a bar stands after 730, dropping the full stop the sheet prints after that bar. coertzel is the sheet’s own and is left as Epstein wrote it. An earlier draft of this page printed the four damaged strings inside quotation marks as the sheet’s words, and declared a practice of not mending on that premise; both were wrong, and only the image showed it. The sheet carries three solid black bars — one after 730 in Epstein’s paragraph and two in the 11:00 conf call line — and nothing is supplied into any of them. Two e-mail addresses stand unbarred in its header and are not reproduced here. ↩

  33. roger schank to jeffrey epstein, “Fwd: weird question”, Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:37:38 +0000, forwarding Larry Hunter’s reply of February 12, 2013 8:32:52 AM EST. EFTA00641693 pp.1–2. Both sheets were read; p.1, which carries both quotations, was read at the image at 400 dpi. A declared mend: the text layer of p.1 prints Schank’s line as “build real Al”, the extraction’s l for I; the image prints “build real AI”, and the page follows the image. Hunter’s “how to build an AI”, quoted above, comes through the extraction clean — the same sheet is damaged in one line and not in the next, which is why the mend had to be settled at the image and not by inspection of the text layer. p.2 is text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  34. “Re: weird question”, Sent: Tue 2/12/2013 3:04:58 PM, to Jeffrey Epstein. EFTA01906408 p.1. Read at the image at 400 dpi, where the sender field prints only “Roger”; the twin at 33 prints “roger schank” in the sender field of the same day’s forward, which is how the attribution is made. ↩

  35. Jeffrey Epstein to Richard Kahn, Sent: Fri 12/13/2013 7:15:39 PM: “talk to me about ben goenzel. and stc”. EFTA01947585 p.1. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. What “stc” denotes is not established here. ↩

  36. Richard Kahn to “jeffrey E.”, “Re: RE:”, Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 19:04:51 +0000, carrying Epstein’s message of Dec 23, 2014, at 1:33 PM (“200 ipi and 300 goertzl”) and, below it, Richard Joslin’s list of the day’s wires. EFTA00714872 pp.1–2; a second copy at EFTA01747939 p.1. Both sheets of the first were read. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  37. Richard Kahn’s request of Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 6:23 PM and Goertzel’s replies of the 24th and of Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 11:34 PM, quoted within the thread at EFTA02372877 pp.2–3. Both sheets were read. The Practical Visionaries Limited routing and the tax sentence stand on p.2; the Humanity+ and Novamente routings on pp.2–3, with the account numbers barred on this copy. No account number is reproduced here. Text layer only for pp.2–3, UNVERIFIED. ↩ ↩2

  38. Richard Joslin to “jeffrey E.”, “Re: Fwd:”, Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 12:33:07 +0000, carrying Epstein’s message of Dec 24, 2014, at 6:25 AM: “forget the ben goertzl idea . i have other plans”. EFTA00654115 p.1; further copies at EFTA01003525 p.1 and EFTA02359129 p.1. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  39. Richard Kahn to “jeffrey E.”, Subject: “Ben Goertzel”, Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2014 16:22:55 +0000, carrying Goertzel’s message of December 31, 2014 at 10:34:34 AM EST beneath it. EFTA00659029 p.1. Read at the image at 400 dpi, where the SWIFT code and account number in the quoted message are each under a bar and Kahn’s telephone block is under a bar. No number is reproduced here. The run continues at pp.2–3, which were read (text layer, UNVERIFIED). ↩

  40. “Validating an Integrated Cognitive Architecture via Intelligence Testing with Virtual Animals / Proposal for the Black Foundation / Ben Goertzel, Cosmo Harrigan, Joscha Bach”, 15 sheets — EFTA00597456 p.1, and a second copy at EFTA00614127 p.1. The same abstract under the title “Proposal for Epstein Foundation” — EFTA01105809 p.1. The attachment name Goertzel_Harrigan_Bach_Black_Foundation_Proposal_2014.pdf appears at EFTA01003486 p.1. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  41. “Re:”, Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 00:07:06 +0000, to Jeffrey Epstein. EFTA00673959 p.1; a second copy at EFTA02715013 p.1. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  42. “Re:”, 7 September 2015, carrying Epstein’s “im aware of the goals . i have yet to see deliverables. .” of Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 10:04 AM. EFTA00846898 p.1. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  43. “Trading algorithm”, 13 January 2015 — EFTA02514271 p.1; “Aidyia AI-based trading backtests, US equities & global futures”, 29 October 2014 — EFTA01201795 p.1; the Aidyia methodology note of October 2014 — EFTA01201796 p.1. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  44. “Re:”, Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 16:58:46 +0000. EFTA00655735 p.1. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. The system administrator is identified on this 2015 sheet by a first name only. He is named in full on the June 2016 sheets at 45, whose sender field the producing party left unredacted, and that is where the full name used in the body comes from; nothing further about him is established here. ↩

  45. Jermaine Ruan to Jeffrey Epstein, “Updates Sony Equipment and STC slow bandwidth yesterday”, of Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 4:06 PM, quoted in full beneath Epstein’s reply of 5:08 PM (“take it home to your kids”, about the Sony equipment and not about the server) in Ruan’s answer of Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 01:49:36 +0000. The quotation in the body is taken from EFTA00825568 p.1, read at the image at 400 dpi, which prints it clean and whose sender field gives his full name with the address under a bar. Two other copies carry the same message and neither prints it clean: EFTA02459900 p.1 is quoted-printable damaged in the extraction (“STC’s slow =andwidth”, “(for =r. Gortzell and Amen)”), and EFTA00825660 p.1 returns “slow intemet access”. The pin is to the copy that prints the words quoted. These three are the whole of the Gortzell form and were reached by the vocabulary scan, not by the hand-probed variant list. “STC” is Southern Trust Company; see Southern Trust Company. Who “Amen” is is not established here. The two damaged copies are cited from the text layer and are UNVERIFIED; the copy the quotation is taken from was read at the image. ↩ ↩2

  46. Subject-line census over the first sheets of the 878, 2026-09-13: Re: Jeffrey Epstein 21, Jeffrey Epstein 3, Ben Goertzel 6, Re: Ben Goertzel 3. The thread root is EFTA00322180 p.1. Read at the image at 400 dpi, where the sender field and the signature line are each under a bar and the visible signature reads only “Assistant to Jeffrey Epstein”; no name is supplied into that bar. EFTA00322296 p.1 (text layer, UNVERIFIED) is a separate sheet of the same thread, sent two days later, which prints “Lesley Groff” in the clear in its own sender field and quotes the 17 July message beneath it. The value recovered by that comparison is the name of a salaried employee of Epstein’s office who is named in full throughout this wiki and has her own page here; it is not a protected class, and no address, number or other field is recovered with it. A 2017 instance of the same office habit is EFTA02228623 p.1, and a 2015 one EFTA00348034 p.1. ↩

  47. “Subject: Ben Goertzel”, Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 14:02:30 +0000, Attachments: Ben Goertzel.vcf, the body empty on the sheet. EFTA00320411 p.1. A further office message headed “Mr. Goertzel - January 14, 2015” is EFTA01749592 p.1. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  48. “Re: Jeffrey Epstein”, Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 05:23:40 +0000, copying Joscha Bach. EFTA00322050 p.1. Epstein’s “i can do the 21 anytime as well I with as many people as you like up to 10” is quoted at EFTA00667716 p.1. The dietary reply, Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 13:14:03 +0000, is EFTA00322110 p.1. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. The list names an adult MS student who is Goertzel’s son; nothing beyond his presence on the list is established here. ↩

  49. “Re:”, Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 14:23:55 +0000. EFTA00639566 p.1. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  50. “Re: quick question — AGI-16 snacks and reception sponsorship?”, Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 13:31:11 +0000, carrying Goertzel’s question “should I list one of your organizations on the conference materials as a sponsor? If so which one? Enhanced Education again?” and Epstein’s “no jeffrey epstein . is enough”. EFTA00671311 p.1. The same exchange is cited from the other side at Enhanced Education. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  51. “Fwd: Retainer and questions Enhanced ED”, Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2016 18:25:42 +0000, Richard Kahn to Jeffrey Epstein, a single document carrying the whole August–September chain beneath it. Printed p.4 was read at the image at 400 dpi and carries Epstein’s “jpscha salry can be 50k per yer and fund with 150” of August 26, 2016 at 10:45:25 AM EDT, Susan Cohen of Mintz Levin’s “please let us know today if it will be possible to quickly fund this organization so it can serve as Joscha’s O-1 visa sponsor”, and Goertzel’s message of Thursday, August 25, 2016 6:54 PM. The extraction of that sheet renders “salry” as “salty”; the image is followed and nothing is mended from the text layer. The “Humanity+ does not have $500,000 on deposit” and “used the org as a pass-through” passage stands on printed p.6, and the “Can Jeffrey deposit $300 - $400 K” question on printed p.5; both were read from the text layer and are UNVERIFIED. The covering message and the subject line quoted above stand on printed p.1. EFTA00630075 pp.1, 4, 5 and 6 of a 9-sheet run. ↩ ↩2

  52. The same document: Darren Indyke’s “Let’s prepare an Enhanced wire for $150K to go out to Humanity+” of August 26, 2016 at 3:24 PM and Richard Kahn’s “jee approved 150,000 to Humanity+ from Enhanced Education” of August 30, 2016 at 9:40:28 PM EDT stand on printed pp.2–3; the bookkeeper’s message of Sep 1, 2016, at 1:45 PM and Kahn’s covering note stand on printed pp.1–2. EFTA00630075 pp.1–3. All three sheets were read. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. The bookkeeper’s telephone number is barred on the sheet and nothing is supplied for it here. ↩

  53. Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C., Invoice No. 8846331, 8 November 2016, to “Humanity+, Inc. / Ben Goertzel, Vice Chair”, matter 51658-011 “Immigration”, “Prepare O-1\O-3 approval letters and packages”, total $273.94. EFTA00622172 pp.1–2. Both sheets were read. The matter it bills for is the O-1 petition set out in the August–September 2016 section above. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩ ↩2

  54. “SingularityNET — AI meets blockchain project — presale opportunity”, November 2017 — EFTA02571001 p.1; “Re: SingularityNET”, Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2017 13:58:06 +0000 — EFTA00715243 p.1. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  55. “Re: SingularityNET lawyer”, 5 and 6 November 2017. EFTA02570929 p.1; EFTA02581114 p.1. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  56. Epstein to his office, “Re: Masha”, Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2017 12:39:12 +0000: “tell her meet up with Ben goertzl he is in lisbon” — EFTA00984537 p.1. Goertzel to Masha Drokova, “Re: Jeffrey Epstein”, Sent: Mon 11/6/2017 11:08:27 PM, carrying the office’s introduction and Drokova’s self-description as “a founder and general partner at fund Day One Ventures” — EFTA02228623 p.1. The office reminder “Masha and Ben Goertzel to meet for breakfast in Lisbon tomorroe” — EFTA02229740 p.1. Drokova’s separate correspondence with Epstein is set out at Gino Yu. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  57. Promotional drafts held in the release, each carrying no sender header on its first sheet: “Science Funder Jeffrey Epstein Launches Radical Emotional Software for the Gaming Industry” — EFTA00583732 p.1, EFTA01105362 p.1, EFTA01955725 p.1; “Science Philanthropist, Jeffrey Epstein, Backs the First Free Thinking Robots” — EFTA01130113 p.1, EFTA02708722 p.1; “A Harvard Financier, Jeffrey Epstein, Advances Artificial Intelligence in Ethiopia” — EFTA01139627 p.1; website copy headed “JEFFREY EPTEIN.NET / Jeffrey Epstein AI / Advancing Artificial Intelligence” — EFTA00584307 p.1. Read at the image at 400 dpi, where the running head prints JEFFREY EPTEIN.NET with the S missing, so the spelling is certified as the sheet’s own and not the extraction’s — and EFTA01920270 p.1; and editing notes for it — EFTA01192374 p.1, EFTA02709914 p.1. Text layer only for every sheet but the first, UNVERIFIED. ↩ ↩2

  58. “Publicity, funding, book published, AGI, etc.”, 17 November 2013. EFTA02373594 p.1. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩

  59. Printed encyclopaedia article about Epstein held as an exhibit in a Palm Beach County civil file, on the sheet bearing his biography: “Epstein has befriended high profile scientists such as Leonard Susskind, Richard Axel, Gerald Edelman, Murray Gell-Mann, Ben Goertzel, and Marvin Minsky, and politicians including George J. Mitchell and Bill Clinton.” EFTA00723522 p.33 of a 50-sheet run. This is the one sheet of the fifty on which his name appears, and the same document is the fifth press-marker hit at 14. Text layer only, UNVERIFIED. ↩ ↩2

Backlinks