| Name as printed | ”David Geffen” in the body of the messages; “david geffen”, lower case, on the sender line of the one message written by him, read as ink on the paper1 |
| Sign-off used | ”dg”1 |
| How he enters the files | As a man other people ask Epstein to reach. The earliest such request read for this page is “Do you know David Geffen?”, 24 June 20112 |
| Messages written by him in the files read for this page | One: a reply of 5 March 2013 declining an invitation, forwarded to Epstein by a third party1 |
| Messages between him and Epstein read for this page | None. Every item cited here was written by, or forwarded by, somebody else13 |
| Vessel named against him | Rising Sun, in two documents which give its length as 418 feet and as 460 feet; a third speaks of “David’s 500’ boat” without naming it456 |
| Named on Epstein’s own lists | Two e-mails of 28 October 2012 and 20 April 2013, each sent from his own address and each showing no recipient in the released text78 |
| Span of the documents cited on this page | 4 August 2009 to 3 August 201469 |
A man other people asked Epstein to reach. Across the files read for this page David Geffen is almost never writing and almost never written to: he is the person being sought. Epstein is asked whether he knows Geffen, answers that he is “getting to geffen”, and between June 2011 and August 2013 works a succession of intermediaries towards him on behalf of other people. One message in the whole set was written by Geffen himself, and it declines an invitation.
What this page covers, and what it does not
This page makes no allegation and records none. It does not allege conduct of any kind by its subject or by anyone named on it. It does not cover, reproduce, characterise or count any complainant’s or survivor’s account, and it cites no document for anything it records about a complainant or a survivor.
Several of the messages quoted here sit on sheets that also carry, elsewhere, one correspondent’s characterisations of named third parties. Those passages are outside what this page is for, they are not reproduced, not described and not alluded to, and this page takes from each such sheet only the words it quotes.
Where the producing party has covered words on a sheet cited here, this page writes around the covering. It does not supply the covered words from context, does not characterise them, does not reason about whom or what they belong to, and does not treat the released text’s rendering of a covered passage as the passage.
No family relation is asserted anywhere in this page’s own voice. One relation appears, in three quotations, in cited documents’ own words, about a person those documents do not name and this page does not name; each quotation is given as its document gives it, because this page does not alter quotations. Where a message refers to a person by a forename alone and no cited document gives more, this page does not supply more.
The name in the released files, and why a count of it misleads
A search of the released files on 24 October 2026 returns the phrase “David Geffen” on 660 sheets across 537 documents, and the bare surname on 813 sheets across 677 documents, against 1,425,556 documents and 2,925,025 sheets in the release.10
Much of that is not this man’s correspondence. The phrase “Geffen School of Medicine”, which is an institution’s name rather than a person writing, is on its own returned by 508 sheets across 396 documents in the same invocation, and “David Geffen Hall” by nine documents.10 Set the institutional phrases aside and the figure collapses: 138 documents print “David Geffen” and print neither of them, and 272 print the bare surname and print neither.10 So about three documents in four of those that print the full name print an institutional phrase too, and a raw count of this name is largely a count of a name on a building. Any ranking built on it is ranking a donor’s wall. The documents this page is built from were reached by reading, not by counting.
2011: the request, and the promise
The earliest request read for this page is from Boris Nikolic. On 24 June 2011 he wrote to Epstein, in a message whose header carries a zone, ending a short list of asks:
Do you know anyone at http://www.lemelson.org
Do you know David Geffen?
The same message declines something Epstein had offered in an earlier message quoted below it: “Thanks for the offer. Already booked a hotel.” The offer, as the quoted message prints it, is “dinner sun mon? do you want an apt for the week? save some nmoney”. The quoted message names no city, and this page does not supply one.2
On 17 July 2011 Nikolic said why. The message is headed “Jes” and makes two requests. The first asks Epstein for an introduction, and the document gives its own reason for it: “Can you please ask Jes to send an intro email to his brother and me?” The second follows:
Also there is another issue (do not mention this) — I need to get David Geffen to a dinner with Bill. Will invite you and les as well — but need to get to Geffen first.
The line break above is the sheet’s own. The document does not say who “Bill” or “les” are, and this page does not expand either.11
Two days after that, on 19 July 2011, Epstein replied to Nikolic:
i am getting to geffen,,, your jon is to tell dick to be extra nice to jes„ they have traded calls.
The character before “they” is printed as a low double quotation mark in the released text and is reproduced here as it stands; the same mark appears in the same position in Epstein’s next message.12
On 1 August 2011 Epstein wrote to Jes Staley:
can you forward me your brothers contact for boris.? he wants to get to geffen„ thanks
This is the first document read for this page that attaches that introduction to Geffen. The 17 July message had asked for the same introduction and given a different reason for it, in its own words: “I do need to talk to his brother few things, including ACT UP for African epidemics.” Both stand; this page resolves neither into the other.13
January 2012: a second route
By the new year Epstein was working a different intermediary. On 7 January 2012 he wrote to Richard Merkin:
gates would like to meet with DAvid geffen . ideas?
The spacing and the capitals are the sheet’s.14 Merkin answered:
Geffen is not in town. I called Mike and he said he would have him call.
No document read for this page says who “Mike” is, and this page does not guess. Both messages carry zoned headers, so the interval between them is derivable from the documents themselves: 7 January 2012 at 23:33:01 and 11 January 2012 at 00:13:04, both stated as +0000, which is three days and about forty minutes.15
September 2012: a dinner is arranged
On 22 September 2012, in a message mostly about something else, Nikolic told Epstein that his travel had changed:
Also there is a change in my schedule — I was planning returning to NYC Sunday night red eye but now I need to stay a day longer.
Bill is having a small dinner in his home with just David Geffen and me. Thus, I will be back on Tuesday.
The document records an arrangement, not an occurrence. It is written before the dinner, in the present progressive, and no document read for this page records the dinner taking place.16 Epstein’s reply, timed two minutes later in the same zoned series, reads in full: “cool , so you gays, i mean guys finally meet”.17
Two days later Nikolic wrote again under the subject line “Pls make few calls”:
Re Geffen. Any info is welcomed and needed. Thank you
The message is ten words of body under an instruction in its subject line, and it closes “Sent from my Windows Phone”.18
One Epstein message, two documents, two readings of a name
The 22 September message quotes an earlier Epstein line beneath it, and that line survives in two documents in the release. One of them prints it ending “with LArry summers and ehud bank ,,,,,your calll”; the other prints the same line ending “with LArry summers and ehud barak ,,,,,your calll”.1617 Both readings are in the released text and this page prints both without choosing between them. Neither sheet was read at the image.
October 2012: Chicago, and what the paper carries that the text does not
On 24 October 2012 Ian Osborne reported to Epstein after a day in Chicago. This sheet was read at the image, at the paper’s own resolution of 96 pixels per inch. The first paragraph is clear:
We just finished up in Chicago. A fun and interesting day. Geffen is flying back to LA tonight but is back in NY frequently, he just bought a new place on Fifth.
The second is not. The producing party has covered two short runs of words in it, and the released text of the sheet does not show the coverings at all. It simply breaks the line where each one falls, so a reader working from the released text alone meets two unexplained gaps and no sign that anything was removed. Read at the image, with the coverings marked:
He said ▮ be glad to get together in NY or LA… he knew a bit about you, but asked what exactly you ‘did’ and said ▮ been to your island. Some funny stories about the Mid-East folks.
This page does not supply either covered run and does not reason about what either one says. In particular it does not say who, on this sheet, is reported to have been to the island: the words that would carry the subject of that clause are the words the producing party removed. The sentence that a reader would most want is the sentence with the hole in it.19
Beneath it the sheet quotes Epstein from the previous day: “i am more than happy to have geffen wed or thurs”. The quoted line carries an unzoned reply preamble dated 23 October 2012 while the sheet’s own header is zoned and dated 24 October 2012 at 01:27:17 +0000. Those are two different kinds of clock and this page derives no interval between them.19
August 2013: the Gates chain, and the obstacle it names
A two-sheet document carries a chain that ends with Nikolic forwarding it to Epstein. It is the only document read for this page in which Bill Gates is named on a sender line.
On 2 August 2013 a message sent from the account of Warren Buffett’s assistant, addressed “Bill and Melinda:” and signed “Warren”, forwarded an article:
I’m sending the attached article on David Geffen with the pages out of order — David is definitely not the most gracious guy in the world.
On 7 August Gates forwarded it onward with five lines of his own, of which these are three:
It is a shame we haven’t figured out how to get him connected with IAVI — he would enjoy being their savior.
We should try one more time somehow.
If we could catch him when he is in New York and get him to visit that would be great.
Nikolic’s reply of 11 August is the part of this chain that bears most on the rest of this page. It names an obstacle, and the obstacle is not an introduction to Geffen:
Unfortunately his assistant has been SO HARD to work with and almost impossible to pass through.
I also connected his office with IAVI and IAVI with his office — but again it has been impossible to pass through her.
His comments re Giving Pledge are harsh — but we heard the same from him directly.
The last clause is the significant one. On the document’s own account the Gates circle had already heard from Geffen directly, and what it lacked was not an introduction but a way past an assistant. Any account of this episode which has Epstein as the only available route to Geffen has to be set against that sentence, which is in the chain Epstein was sent.20
Gates answered the same day, with three further names on the copy line:
At some point I need to figure out my whole East Coast schedule.
There are a lot of things possible including the dinner Jeffrey proposed and some stuff you proposed.
It would be good to figure out which things we should lock in in the next week or so.
The next day Nikolic forwarded the whole chain to Epstein:
Lauren is helping. I asked her to give me all times/slots.
Please do not forward message below.
Getting Geffenn would be great
The instruction not to forward is Nikolic’s own, in the covering note, and it asks Epstein not to forward the chain beneath it. A “Lauren” also stands on the copy line of the message immediately above; neither sheet states her role.20
The one message in his own words
On 5 March 2013 Peggy Siegal wrote to Geffen to tell him his boat was off Epstein’s island, and forwarded his reply to Epstein under the single word “FYI”. This sheet was read at the image, at the paper’s own 96 pixels per inch, and the image and the released text do not agree.
Siegal’s message, as the paper prints it, opens:
David…your boat is right off Jeffrey Epstein’s island. He wants to know if you want to come over and see it and him
The two spaces after “island.” are the sheet’s, and the sheet prints no full stop after “him”. Geffen’s reply, as the paper prints it, in three lines:
I am on Diller’s plane returning to NY…we would have been delighted to but can’t…perhaps the next time we are in the neighborhood. Thanks…send Susan my regards, dg
The released text of this sheet has lost every one of those runs of dots and turned each of them into a line break, so the same reply read from the released text alone appears as six short lines and invites being written up as several sentences. It is three lines, and the dots are his.1
The sender line prints his name in lower case, “david geffen”, and his address is covered by the producing party and is not reproduced here. The reply’s own date line reads “Tuesday, March 05, 2013 01:19 PM”; the released text of the sheet truncates it after “March 05,”, so the year and the time are on the paper and not in the text.1
The covering forward is timed “Tue 3/5/2013 6:23:43 PM” in the export’s own header block and the reply “01:19 PM” in a mail client’s preamble inside the body. Those are two different kinds of stamp and this page derives no interval between them.1
This is the only document read for this page containing words written by David Geffen. He declines, and gives a reason, and sends his regards to a third party.
Rising Sun, and three different lengths
Three documents give a length for the boat and no two of them agree. Two of the three name it; the third does not.
A thank-you note of 30 August 2009, written to two other people and forwarded the next day, describes a conversation about
David Geffen/Larry Ellison’s 418’ boat, “Rising Sun” that Bruce just came off.
and lists, on the following line, “other passengers were Mike Nichols, Diane Sawyer, Hanks, Nom Ephron, Sandy Gallin…(Tony Blair was on earlier)”. The sheet prints “Nom Ephron”; the quotation follows the sheet.4
Earlier that month, on 4 August 2009, a message to Epstein about the previous weekend had said
about David’s 500’ boat and who gets invited
The quoted words begin a line on the sheet and are contiguous on it. Only that clause is taken from that sheet, and nothing else on it is reproduced, described or alluded to here.6
And on 5 January 2014, in a report quoted inside Epstein’s reply to it, the boat appears twice, in two passages standing on two different sheets of the same three-sheet document. The first, on the first sheet, reads: Davis Geffen’s 460 foot “Rising Sun”. The second, on the third sheet, reads: David Geffen on his 460 foot, “Rising Sun”. The first spelling of the forename is the sheet’s, and both appearances give 460 feet.5
418 feet, 500 feet, 460 feet. Two of the three figures are from the same correspondent within a month of each other. This page prints all three and resolves none of them; none of the three sheets was read at the image.
The same 2014 report says of itself that “This endless item was originally approved by the party hosts, including David Geffen and Pat Riley…so enjoy.” The dots and the closing clause are the sheet’s.5
On 25 December 2012 the same correspondent wrote to Epstein from St Barths: “Had lunch on Rising Sun with David Geffen today. He is so smart, knows everything about entertainment and such a joy to talk to.” The line break after “and” is the sheet’s. The rest of that sheet is not used here.21
A list of guests for the 2010 St Barths season, compiled for a third party and then forwarded to Epstein under the line “Here is the list I just send Harvey”, runs to 42 numbered entries, some of them naming two people. Entry 18 is printed as three stacked lines:
- David Geffen a. On Roman’s boat
They are three lines on the sheet and are given as three lines here.22
Two lists from Epstein’s own address
Twice Geffen’s surname appears in an e-mail sent from Epstein’s own address: a run of names with no sentence anywhere in it, with no recipient shown in the released text, and with the list beginning in the subject line and continuing in the body.
The first is dated 28 October 2012. Its subject line and its body carry the same run of names in two slightly different renderings, and the body’s reads in part “peggy „ boris, geffen, jagband , terje, mette”.7
The second is dated 20 April 2013 and is far longer. “david geffen” appears in it within a long run of other surnames, and the run that in the earlier list reads “boris, geffen, jagband , terje” is present again in a more damaged form in which one of the names is not legible in the released text.8 Neither document is described as handwritten anywhere in its own released text, and this page does not call either one a note.
A message of 4 June 2012 from Nikolic, headed “travel”, carries the name in a list of its own inside an ordinary sentence: “25th is already very full — Geffen, Wolferson, axel, etc.” Nothing else on that sheet is used here.23
2014: a name offered as a lever
On 27 June 2014, in a thread extracted from a mobile device and stamped “Platform: SMS” with “Timezone: UTC+0000”, Nikolic wrote to Epstein about a woman’s application to something the thread calls only “ygl”:
if you want her in you might also ask Larry summerss, David Geffen or prince Andrew (Larry is the far best).
The man the thread calls “prince Andrew” has his own page here, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor. The line break is the thread’s, the spellings are the thread’s, and this page does not expand “ygl”, because no document read for it does. The woman is named in the thread by a forename alone and is not named here. The two messages in this exchange stand under a single date header, and this page derives no interval between them.9
What the documents read for this page do not show
- No correspondence between Epstein and Geffen in either direction. Every item above was written by, or forwarded by, somebody else. The one message Geffen wrote was written to a third party and forwarded on.
- No record of a meeting between them. The September 2012 dinner is recorded as being arranged, at another man’s home, and no document read for this page records it happening. Geffen’s one message declines.
- No money. No document read for this page records any payment, investment, donation or transaction between Geffen and Epstein or any entity named on this page.
- Nothing about the island visit on the Chicago sheet. The clause that would say who had been there is partly covered by the producing party, and this page neither completes it nor treats the released text’s version of it as the sentence.
- Thirty-four of the thirty-six documents behind this page were not read at the image, so nothing is asserted here about what is or is not marked on their paper, and no printed stamp is named for any of them.
- No account of the years after 2014. The latest dated material in any document cited here is of 3 August 2014. Documents read for this page but not cited on it, and other documents in the release that name Geffen, run later, and this page does not cover them.24
Notes on sources
Footnotes
-
Forward of 5 March 2013 carrying a reply of the same date, read at the image at the sheet’s native 96 pixels per inch. The served file is a scan with an invisible text overlay, and the only text rendering mode present in it is the invisible one, so the visible content is the paper. The foot of the sheet was measured against the body of the same sheet: 335 dark pixels against the body’s 4,406, and the printed Bates stamp read as ink at the foot right is
EFTA_R1_00331519, which belongs to a different numbering series from the identifier that addresses the document. Nothing is derived from either number. The sender’s e-mail address on the reply is covered by the producing party and is not reproduced. All quotations above are taken from the image, not from the released text, because the two differ. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01901749 p.1. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 -
Message of 24 June 2011, header “Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 23:06:24 +0000”, quoting an earlier message under an unzoned preamble dated 24 June 2011 12:14 PM. This project holds no page image of this document; quoted from the released text. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00914393 p.1. ↩ ↩2
-
Thirty-six documents were read for this page and twenty-one are cited on it. Two were read at the image, at the paper’s own resolution; for the other thirty-four nothing is said here about marks or stamps on their paper. None of the thirty-six carries an entry in any of the four registers this project can query, against a real barred identifier planted in the same invocation which returned a citation bar; and none is named in this project’s file of document rulings, against two controls from that file which did fire. The registers answer only what the project’s own instruments enforce, and a clean result from them is not a clearance. ↩
-
Forward of 31 August 2009, header “Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 01:31:04 +0000”, carrying beneath it a thank-you note stamped “Sent: Sun Aug 30 20:58:50 2009” whose salutation names two people who are not Epstein. The recipient field of the covering forward is empty in the released text, so this page does not say to whom it was forwarded. The quoted passage is in that inner note, not in the covering forward. The sheet prints “Nom Ephron”, and the sentence the quotation comes from begins on the sheet with the words “then dove into a conversation about”, which are not quoted above. This project holds no page image of this document; quoted from the released text. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00769597 p.1. ↩ ↩2
-
Reply of 5 January 2014 from Epstein, header “Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2014 18:00:00 +0000”, quoting beneath it a report under an unzoned preamble dated 5 January 2014 12:35 PM. Both appearances of the vessel and its length, and the sentence about approval, are in the quoted report and not in Epstein’s reply, which is about an estate accounting and does not mention Geffen. The quoted report runs across all three sheets of this document: the first appearance of the vessel and the sentence about approval stand on served p.1, and the second appearance stands on served p.3. This project holds no page image of this document; quoted from the released text. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00980653 pp.1-3. ↩ ↩2 ↩3
-
Message of 4 August 2009, stamped “Sent Tue 8/4/2009 2:13:35 PM” with no zone, subject “Hamptons past weekend”. Only the clause quoted above is taken from this sheet. This project holds no page image of this document; quoted from the released text. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02440622 p.1. ↩ ↩2 ↩3
-
Message of 28 October 2012 sent from Epstein’s own address, header “Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 15:45:27 +0000”, whose subject line is itself the beginning of the list. The released text of this sheet carries a sender line and no recipient line of any kind. The character printed before “boris” is a low double quotation mark in the released text and is reproduced as it stands. The subject-line rendering and the body rendering of the same run differ in their spacing and punctuation; the body rendering is quoted. This project holds no page image of this document; quoted from the released text. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00701218 p.1. ↩ ↩2
-
Message of 20 April 2013, header “Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 21:12:57 +0000”, whose subject line is also the beginning of its list. Its sender line carries the same address as the October 2012 message, with one character of it damaged in the released text, and the released text of this sheet carries no recipient line of any kind. In the run corresponding to the 2012 list, the released text of this sheet gives a sequence that is not a legible name where the earlier document gives one, and this page does not supply it from the earlier document. This project holds no page image of this document; quoted from the released text. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00642466 p.1. ↩ ↩2
-
Thread extracted from a mobile device, headed “Platform: SMS” and “Timezone: UTC+0000”, running to seven sheets whose date headers run from 2014/04/06 to 2014/08/03. The lines quoted above stand on served p.5, under the date header 2014/06/27. The two messages under that header carry clock times of “09:35:07 pin” and “09:37:13 pin” as the released text renders them, in that order on the sheet. The released text renders the meridiem of each as “pin”, so no interval is derived here. This project holds no page image of this document; quoted from the released text. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01617580 pp.1,2,3,4,5,6,7. ↩ ↩2
-
Counts taken from the released files on 24 October 2026 by exact-phrase search, column-scoped, documents counted distinctly. “David Geffen”: 660 sheets, 537 documents. “Geffen”: 813 sheets, 677 documents. “Geffen School of Medicine”: 508 sheets, 396 documents. “David Geffen Hall”: 9 sheets, 9 documents. Two invented phrases run in the same invocation returned 0 sheets and 0 documents. The two set differences were computed as sets of distinct documents rather than by subtracting the counts, because one document may carry more than one of the phrases: 138 documents carry “David Geffen” and carry neither institutional phrase, and 272 carry “Geffen” and carry neither. An invented phrase run in that same invocation returned 0 documents and “Epstein” returned 578,565, which matches this project’s independently derived figure. Denominators: 1,425,556 documents and 2,925,025 sheets, taken from three independent measurements made elsewhere at this project and not measured again here. A document that carries both an institutional phrase and this man’s name is counted out by these differences, so 138 is a floor on the documents about the man and not a count of them. ↩ ↩2 ↩3
-
Message of 17 July 2011, subject “Jes”, header “Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 21:53:52 +0000”. The dash in the quotation is an em dash on the sheet. This project holds no page image of this document; quoted from the released text. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00915212 p.1. ↩
-
Message of 19 July 2011, header “Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 20:30:28 +0000”. This project holds no page image of this document; quoted from the released text. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00878405 p.1. ↩
-
Message of 1 August 2011, header “Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2011 02:26:01 +0000”. This project holds no page image of this document; quoted from the released text. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00916359 p.1. ↩
-
Message of 7 January 2012, header “Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2012 23:33:01 +0000”. This project holds no page image of this document; quoted from the released text. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00877590 p.1. ↩
-
Reply of 11 January 2012, header “Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 00:13:04 +0000”, quoting the 7 January message beneath it. Both headers state the +0000 offset, which is why an interval is derived here; elsewhere on this page, where two stamps are of different kinds, none is. This project holds no page image of this document; quoted from the released text. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00928098 p.1. ↩
-
Message of 22 September 2012, header “Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2012 01:11:25 +0000”, quoting an Epstein message beneath it under an unzoned preamble dated 21 September 2012 4:44 PM. It is this copy of the quoted line that ends “ehud bank”. This project holds no page image of this document; quoted from the released text. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00943672 p.1. ↩ ↩2
-
Reply of 22 September 2012, header “Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2012 01:13:28 +0000”, two minutes after the message it answers, both headers stating +0000. This document quotes the same Epstein line beneath it, and this copy of it ends “ehud barak”. This project holds no page image of this document; quoted from the released text. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00943673 p.1. ↩ ↩2
-
Message of 24 September 2012, subject “Pls make few calls”, stamped “Sent: Mon 9/24/2012 3:24:09 PM” with no zone. This project holds no page image of this document; quoted from the released text. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01989377 p.1. ↩
-
Message of 24 October 2012, header “Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 01:27:17 +0000”, subject line empty on the paper; read at the image at the sheet’s native 96 pixels per inch. The served file is a scan with an invisible text overlay. Two short producer coverings stand in the second paragraph and are marked ▮ above; the released text shows neither and breaks the line at each. The sender’s and recipient’s address fields are also covered and are not reproduced. The foot of the sheet was measured against the body of the same sheet, at 0 dark pixels against the body’s 11,312 and minimum grey 255 against 0, so this sheet carries no printed Bates stamp at all, and it is cited here by document and served page. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00668816 p.1. ↩ ↩2
-
Two-sheet chain forwarded to Epstein on 12 August 2013, header “Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 22:22:13 +0000”. Served p.1 carries the forward, the Gates message of 11 August 2013 5:46 PM and the Nikolic reply of 11 August 2013 4:58 PM; served p.2 carries the Gates message of 7 August 2013 12:45 PM and the message of 2 August 2013 3:11 PM from the account of Warren Buffett’s assistant, addressed “Bill and Melinda:” and signed “Warren”. The inner dates and times are unzoned preambles. The copy line of the 11 August Gates message names three members of staff; one forename from it is quoted above and nothing further is taken from it. This project holds no page image of this document; quoted from the released text, and no printed stamp is asserted for either sheet. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00966930 pp.1-2. ↩ ↩2
-
Message of 25 December 2012, subject “St. Barths”, header “Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2012 23:22:39 +0000”. This project holds no page image of this document; quoted from the released text. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00646338 p.1. ↩
-
Forward of 21 December 2010, header “Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 23:23:51 +0000”, subject “Fw: St. Barths”, opening “Here is the list I just send Harvey. Peg”. The 42 figure is a count of numbered entries in the list as the released text carries them, taken on 24 October 2026; the entries are not all single individuals. This project holds no page image of this document; quoted from the released text. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00900412 pp.1-5. ↩
-
Message of 4 June 2012, subject “travel”, header “Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2012 15:10:54 +0000”. Only the clause quoted above is taken from this sheet; the rest of it concerns other people and is not reproduced, described or alluded to here. This project holds no page image of this document; quoted from the released text. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00712572 p.1. ↩
-
The earliest document cited on this page is the message of 4 August 2009. The latest dated material in the cited set is on the mobile-device thread, whose seven sheets carry date headers running from 6 April 2014 to 3 August 2014; the lines quoted from it on this page stand under the date header of 27 June 2014. Documents read for this page but not cited on it, and other documents in the release that name Geffen, run later than both. ↩