John Brockman

Named on the documents as	”John Brockman” in the sender field of his own messages and in the subject lines of the office notes about him; “Brockman, John” where a mailbox exports surname first; “JB” as his own sign-off; “Brockman” alone in Epstein’s telegraphic call lists and in the office’s calendar alerts — and the bare surname is shared with at least five other people in this release (see below)123
What a document says he is	”President” over “Edge Foundation, Inc.” in his own signature block, over a business address at East 59th Street in 2009–2012 and at 260 Fifth Avenue in 2018; “Brockman, Inc./Edge Foundation Brockman, John” in the display name Epstein’s office had for his mailbox425
The two people the sheets place beside him	Katinka Matson and Max Brockman, named with him in his own invitation of 21 December 2018 — “Katinka Matson, Max Brockman, and I are pleased to invite you”. A separate sheet, written by Robert Trivers and not by any Brockman, calls Max “his son”67
Money the documents attach to his name	Epstein instructions to his accountant of 30 June 2010 (“send john brockman 50k from foundation for edge”) and 3 June 2011 (“send 50k to edge/ brockman 501 c3”); and in August 2018 a $25,000 cheque received against a $60,000 figure, reported to Epstein by his own assistant Lesley Groff as the sum Brockman said Epstein had promised him, followed six days later by a $35,000 cheque which Epstein’s accountant Richard Kahn wrote he had been instructed to “send brockman (edge foundation) … from Gratitude”891011
What the traffic shows him doing	Supplying Epstein’s office with routes to other people, and being the person Epstein’s own guests thanked for an introduction. His name is in a sender field in 806 of the 2,579 documents that print it, and 722 of those sender fields begin with it; the dated ones run from 26 November 2003 to 4 January 20191213
His last message in the release	4 January 2019, to Epstein, about a book launch he had just invited him to: “If you actually show up, it will end in tears, mine.”1
Whether he has answered	No. Two outlets that reported his Epstein funding in 2019 record that he did not respond to their requests for comment, and no statement by him or by his firm was located14

John Brockman signs his own letterhead “President” over “Edge Foundation, Inc.”, which is the only description of him the release carries in his own words. He is a literary agent and the organiser of the Edge Foundation’s dinners, conferences and annual question.⁴ His name reaches 2,579 documents in the release under the full form and 3,438 under the bare surname, and he is in a sender field in 806 of the narrower set, which makes him one of the most heavily documented correspondents in it. He is not the subject of any allegation in the documents read for this page. What those documents show him doing is introducing people to each other, and being paid, and what he himself wrote about Epstein outside them, in a 2013 e-mail published by the journalist who received it, is set out under The outside record below.

Nothing read for this page alleges wrongdoing by him, and the page says so at the outset rather than letting a large document count do an allegation’s work. Organising a dinner, forwarding a newspaper article, giving an assistant a telephone number for a third party and accepting a charitable cheque are ordinary acts. What makes the record worth setting out is its length, sixteen years, its density, and the fact that the last of it is dated after every public event that might have ended it.

”Brockman” alone is not him, and this has to come first

The obvious search for this subject is the surname. It is the wrong search, and the page states the decomposition before it states anything else, because every figure below depends on it.

"Brockman" returns 3,438 documents against 2,579 for "John Brockman". The 859 documents in the gap were each assigned to the first of eleven rules that matched it, over the whitespace-normalised extracted text of the whole document, case-insensitively, with word boundaries on every term:

assigned to	documents
Ellen Brockman — an attorney of Boies, Schiller & Flexner, named in the plaintiff’s signature blocks and service lists in the Giuffre litigation	90
Brockman, Inc. — his own firm, named without his forename	46
Max Brockman — a different man at the same firm, and on the evidence of one sheet his son	25
”Brockman Award” — an award of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, in a physician’s recurring credential block	17
him, with the forename John damaged in extraction (ohn, byJohn, wlJohn, Clossjohn, 1=hn, Jock, Brock)	11
the surname-first form Brockman, John — four of them charter passenger manifests for the flight of 17 March 2016 set out below, whose numbered passenger lists print “Epstein, Jeffrey”, “Brockman, John”, “Brockman, Max” and “Negroponte, Nicolas”, and which are him; one his mailbox display name; two laboratory reports whose patient this page does not identify	7
Robert T. Brockman — the defendant in a federal tax prosecution, named in expert-testimony correspondence	3
Alex Brockman	2
”Brockman 1280 Fifth Investments II, L.P.” and “Brockman Fund IV LP” — line items in investment statements	2
”Brockman Quarry”, St. Thomas, in a materials company’s address	1
him or nobody the sheet names, by the bare surname and nothing else	655
total	859

Five other people bear this surname in the release, and four other things do: an award, a quarry and two investment vehicles. The largest of the five is not a near-miss. Ellen Brockman’s 90 documents are court filings in the litigation against Epstein, and that is measurable over the whole class rather than over a sample: 85 of the 90 carry the case number 15-cv-07433 on the face of the document, 88 of 90 carry McCawley, 81 of 90 carry Boies and 37 carry Cassell. A figure keyed on Brockman therefore folds the plaintiff’s own counsel into a correspondent’s population.¹⁵

The eleven rules above are this page’s own run, and an earlier draft of them was not reproducible from its own wording: two independent re-implementations returned residuals of 651 and 655 against the same 859. Every run reconciles to 859 exactly, so the 859 is the number to trust and the class boundaries are not. The exact match strings behind the table as it now stands are printed in the footnote, so that a reader re-running it gets this page’s numbers and not a third set.¹⁶

And a reconciling total is not a membership test, so the residual was probed separately, and the probe is weaker than it looks. Every occurrence of the token brockman in the 655 was located and a forty-five-character window either side extracted: 869 occurrences and 475 distinct windows, and each distinct window was read. But the residual is by construction the class in which the forename appears nowhere, so what most windows show a reader is the bare surname and its neighbours and nothing that separates John Brockman from Max, Ellen, Philip, Robert T. or Alex. Measured over the same 655 against a stated list of nine disambiguating tokens, given in the footnote: 810 of the 869 occurrences (93%) carry none inside the window, 599 of the 655 documents (91%) have no window anywhere that carries one, and 569 (87%) carry none anywhere in the whole document. So membership in this class is a reading from adjacency, and this page does not state it as a verification. Widening the window buys identification at the cost of reading: ±120 characters returns 646 distinct windows, about 1.4 times the text.¹⁶

The window pass does establish two things about the class, and both cut against reading 655 as 655 separate pieces of evidence. The 655 documents carry only 386 distinct window-sets between them; 66 of them, a tenth of the residual, are copies of one message of 9 September 2013 whose subject line is a run of bare surnames, and nine more are copies of one guest list of 12 April 2003. Document count is not evidence count. Three of the 655 are not correspondence at all: two are copies of one newspaper feature citing a 1969 book of his, and one is a magazine revenue projection naming “Brockman” at 6% of projected seed revenue.¹⁶

One class in the residual is already on this wiki, and the published page handles it more carefully than an earlier draft of this one did. The nine copies of the 12 April 2003 item are the guest list Tom Pritzker’s page quotes, one line of which reads “blaine brockman Jarecki, Stroll maybe chicken”, and that page supplies no identification for “brockman”, because the sheet supplies none.¹⁷ That is the right treatment, this page adopts it, and the nine are counted in the residual with no identification asserted for them here either. The same goes for the 66 copies of the 2013 name-soup item.

The base of 2,579 is not clean either, and the way it fails is instructive. "Philip Brockman" returns 6 documents, all six inside the base, so the safer query does not exclude another Brockman, it merely happens to catch his brother inside John Brockman’s own messages. All six were read: each is a message from John Brockman’s own mailbox forwarding something his brother had written. The count was right for the wrong reason, which is why the documents had to be opened.¹⁸

What a document says he is

Two things, and both come from his own sheets rather than from anyone’s description of him.

The first is his signature block, and three sheets read at the image give three states of it. In November 2009 it is three lines: “John Brockman”, “Edge Foundation, Inc.”, “5 East 59th Street”.¹⁹ In September 2012 it has grown a title and a barred mobile value, and reads “John Brockman”, “Mobile”, then “President”, “Edge Foundation, Inc.”, “5 East 59th Street”, “New York, NY 10022”, closing with a line offering the Edge website under a newspaper’s description of it, “The World’s Smartest Website”.⁴ By August 2018 the title has gone and the address has changed:

Edge Foundation, Inc. 260 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10001

with barred values beside the labels “tel:” and “fax:”.² The word “President” is the only title any sheet read for this page puts on him, and it is his own.

The second is the display name Epstein’s office used for his mailbox. On a note of 21 September 2012 the To: value prints as “Brockman, Inc./Edge Foundation Brockman, John”, the agency and the foundation joined in one line, surname first. The note itself is four lines long: “Hello John! Jeffrey is asking if you could possibly come see him sometime over the weekend..might you have some time to come see him?”, then the street address of Epstein’s Manhattan house, then “Let me know!”. Its sender is barred. He answered the same evening, from his own mailbox: “Sure. In town and free all weekend.”⁵⁴

Those are the two institutions, and the release does not separate them: the money goes to the foundation, the books and the clients belong to the agency, and one man signs for both.

Katinka Matson and Max Brockman are placed beside him by his own hand. His invitation of 21 December 2018 opens: “Katinka Matson, Max Brockman, and I are pleased to invite you to join us in a gala evening to celebrate the publication of Possible Minds: 25 Ways of Looking at AI”.⁶ A separate sheet supplies the relationship, and it is not a Brockman who supplies it: writing to Epstein on 21 January 2018, Robert Trivers said that he “can not figure out=quite what to say to John Brockman—best would be to have his son M=x represent me”. The = characters are quoted-printable soft breaks printed on the face of the sheet and are not repaired here. Max Brockman is his son on the attribution of a third party, and no sheet read for this page states it in a Brockman’s own words.⁷

The money

Eleven documents put money beside his name. They are set out in date order, with what each is, because an instruction, a routing decision, a notification, a cheque going into the post and an acknowledgement of receipt are five different things and the release contains all five.

30 June 2010. Epstein wrote to his accountant Richard Kahn at 8:04 AM:

send john brockman 50k from foundation for edge.. and fed ex a check to me for 10 k for eta phi beta … tax id

(the value that follows “tax id” is barred; after it the line ends “gen number 5013”). Kahn answered at 9:34 AM: “Are both contributions to be made from J Epstein VI Foundation (enhanced) or COUQ. If COUQ we will need to fund as it only has 47,000 in checking account. Please advise.” Epstein’s reply is two words: “enhanced ed”.⁸ That is an instruction and a routing decision, naming two of Epstein’s vehicles: see COUQ Foundation and Enhanced Education.

The same day it stalled, which is why an instruction is not a payment. At 1:53 PM Kahn wrote back: “Darren is the only signatory on Enhanced and is not in office today. Can checks wait until tomorrow or should I have Darren come in to office to sign. Please advise.” Epstein’s answer is one word: “wait”. The sheet names the signatory by forename only. This page does not identify him from that sheet, but it does not pretend the identification is unavailable either: Enhanced Education, linked above and published on this wiki, records Darren K. Indyke as that entity’s president on its own fiscal-year 2010 annual report, which is the year of this message, and one of the file indexes discussed below carries a folder title naming him in the same office. The sheet gives a forename; the identification is made on the Enhanced Education page and on that index, and is not asserted from this sheet. No sheet read for this page records what happened next.²⁰

That index entry reads, under the heading for the same foundation: “Resignation of Darren K. Indyke as President, Effective as of Feb 29, 2012”.²¹

3 June 2011. Epstein to Kahn again, the whole message:

send 50k to edge/ brockman 501 c3

The subject line is an empty printed field.⁹ Six days later, on 9 June 2011, a calendar alarm in Epstein’s office reads “Need address from Brockman to send check”.²²

21 August 2018, and this is the sequence the page turns on. At 12:32 PM Lesley Groff wrote to Epstein:

John Brockman received a check for $25,000. He says jeffrey had promised $60,000. John says he will hold on to the $25,000 and not deposit. He is hoping it was just an error.

Epstein answered at 12:57:22 PM EDT, in four words: “Tell him two different charities”. Groff forwarded the exchange to Kahn, who replied “thanks”.¹⁰

27 August 2018, and the release holds the whole afternoon. At 2:59 PM Kahn wrote to Lesley Groff, copying Bella Klein, under the same subject line as the 21 August exchange, “Re: John Brockman”, which his own sheet quotes back below it:

jee just instructed me to send brockman (edge foundation) 35,000 from Gratitude

His second line begins “bella please process check and”, continues after a barred value with “ok to inform john”, and his third is “thanks”. That sheet names the payee, names the vehicle the money came from, and attributes the instruction to Epstein, and it does all three inside the same thread as the $25,000 and the $60,000.¹¹ Twelve minutes later a reply came back from a sender whose value the producing party has barred, and it is three words: “great. will do.”²³

At 3:13 PM the office told him. Groff wrote to Brockman, copying Klein, under the subject “Jeffrey Epstein”:

Hello John… I wanted to let you know you will receive a check for $35,000 from “Gratitude” entity from Jeffrey…check will be cut today! Please advise what address is best to send to…

and signed it “Thanks, / Lesley / Assistant to Jeffrey Epstein”.²⁴

His answer, at 3:39 PM, is his own act, and it is the only thing in the sequence in his voice:

Send to the office please, below.

with the Edge Foundation signature block beneath it. On the copy of his reply read for this page the incoming line is prefixed with a single >, the salutation’s name is barred, the To: value is barred, and two people are named in the Cc: line, Bella Klein and Nina Stegeman.²

28 August 2018. The next afternoon Bella Klein wrote to him directly, copying Nina Stegeman:

John, Check will be mailed today. Thank you, Bella

A cheque going into the post is a step the rest of this record does not have. It is still not a record of arrival, and the page does not treat it as one.²⁵

7 September 2018. Eleven days after the second cheque was cut, he wrote to Epstein under the subject “Thanks!!”, from a sender field that prints the surname alone and in lower case:

Opening lunch at farm prior to check-in at hotel. I’ve been out of office for 2 weeks but both checks did arrive. THANK YOU!!

Will send reports.

JB

“Both checks did arrive” is his own acknowledgement of receipt, in his own words and in the plural, and “Will send reports” is what a grantee says to a donor.²⁶

$25,000 and $35,000 are $60,000, and the instruction between them says “two different charities”. The arithmetic, the six-day interval, the single subject line that runs through both, and his own plural are on the sheets; no sheet read here states in terms that the $35,000 was the balance of the $60,000, and this page does not put it higher than that. Read strictly, “Tell him two different charities” is an instruction about what to tell him and not a statement of what was sent. What the 27 August sheet adds is not the identification but the payer and the payee: the second cheque is expressly from “Gratitude” and is expressly for “brockman (edge foundation)”, and the first sheet says nothing about which vehicle it came from. The word “Gratitude” appears on the office’s notification to him in quotation marks and with no corporate suffix, and on the accountant’s own instruction with neither; the wiki’s page on Gratitude America, Ltd. is linked because it is the entity of that name in the release, and no sheet read here identifies the two as the same body.

No sheet read for this page is a cheque, a bank statement, a wire confirmation or a bank record of any kind for any of these eleven; the only confirmation that money arrived is his own sentence. The searches run to find one, and what each returned, are set out under What the search returned; the claim is bounded to those searches.

What he was actually for

A sender-field count catches him writing; it cannot weigh what he wrote, and his documented function is not writing but connecting. The evidence for it is in a population a reader can re-derive.

"from Brockman" returns 62 documents, and all 62 were read. Sixty of them were assigned to the first of nine rules that matched, on the same matching basis as the table above; the other two carry no literal “from Brockman” string and were assigned by reading:

what the phrase is doing	documents
”Below from Brockman:” — the office’s label for forwarding one of his messages on to Epstein	13
a named person’s contact details, asked of him — Albert-László Barabási’s (7), Salar Kamangar’s (3), Larry Page’s (1) and Daniel Kahneman’s (1)	12
travel to or from his farm	10
the final guest list for the Napa event, asked of him	7
passages quoted from the Edge website or from his published views	7
no reply from him yet (“i havent heard back from brockman yet”; “No word from brockman still”)	4
a book or a package he had sent	3
his postal address, wanted so a cheque could be sent	2
praise from him, reported back by Epstein to its subject (“you got rare high praise from brockman”)	2
two documents matched by the index across a header line break, with no literal “from Brockman” string on them at all — both messages of his own, assigned by reading	2
total	62

Twenty-one of the sixty-two are the office asking him for something it could not get otherwise: a route to a named person, or the list of who would be in a room. The pattern is the same one the Jacqui Safra page records from the other end, where Epstein’s office had no way to reach a man until Brockman supplied one; that instance belongs to that page and is not restated here.²⁷

The traffic runs in the other direction too, and the clearest sheet is a thank-you note. On 3 May 2016 the economist Moshe Hoffman wrote to Epstein:

Thanks again for making the time for me last time you were in town. And for your introductions to Brockman and Ehud. I have enjoyed all the conversations and been learning a lot. Hopefully, a book or two will come out of it eventually as well. Means a lot to me.

Epstein introduced people to Brockman, and the person introduced expected books out of it.²⁸ Victoria Stodden wrote to Epstein under a stamp of 14 November 2009, ahead of a roundtable she was convening at Yale Law School: “Brockman just put me in touch with Adam Bly - he tells me Bly’s a big fan of yours. :)” The sheet prints her name in the sender field; the extraction of it does not, reading the field as ictona to en, and the same extraction turns “Bly” into “Sly” in one of the two places it appears. Both were settled at the image.²⁹ The first of these movements is Epstein using Brockman as a destination; the second is Brockman using himself as a switchboard.

And he brought people to Epstein. On 22 September 2009 he wrote, under the subject line “Paul Kocher”: “Markoff says the guy yi want is Paul Kocher - at the interface of cryptology and biology.” Two links follow, and then “He said he will try to call to call you today. If not, he’s in the office all day:”, above two barred values. The doubled “to call” and the spacing are as printed.³⁰ Six weeks later he wrote about Robert Trivers under a paragraph marked “CONFIDENTIAL”, telling Epstein that Trivers needed research support and was “embarrassed to ask you”. That message, and the funding that followed it, are set out on Trivers’s own page and are not restated here.

17 March 2016: a chartered aircraft to the Media Lab

The single most documented day in this correspondence is a Thursday in March 2016, and it is documented as an itinerary rather than as a story.

On 15 March Brockman wrote to Epstein’s office, in a message the office then forwarded on with the question “Do I provide the details to John Brockman?”:

Jeffrey has offered me a ride to Boston Thursday am at 7:30am. Logistically, what does this mean?

The rest of his message asks which airport and how long the drive would be.³¹ That same evening Joi Ito asked Epstein “Are you flying out of NYC the morning of th= 17th? Nicholas is too. Can you fly him to Boston?”, and Epstein answered at 10:48 PM: “yes 10 30 wheels up, cooridnate with lesley =C2 brockman also flying with us, small plane i =hartered.” The =C2 and the =hartered are quoted-printable artefacts printed on the face of the sheet.³² The following day the charter operator returned a preliminary itinerary “reflecting the new passenger manifest”, above a list headed “Passenger List DOB and Weight”. One row is Epstein’s own; the rows for John Brockman, Max Brockman and Nicholas Negroponte print the names and bar the values, and two further rows are barred in their entirety, names included, so the sheet shows there were more passengers than it names.³³

The schedule for the day gives the shape of it: breakfast at Epstein’s East 71st Street house with Leon Black; 10:30am depart Teterboro; 11:12am arrive Bedford, Hanscom; a car with “Passengers: John Brockman / Max Brockman / Nicholas Negroponte”; noon, an appointment with Moshe Hoffman; 1pm lunch with a new faculty member; 1:30 to 2:30pm an appointment with Joi Ito and Tenzin Priyadarshi at the Media Lab; and from 3 to 5:30pm the “Celebration of Life Gathering for Marvin Minsky at the Media Lab”, with a reception after. The aircraft went back to Teterboro at 8pm.³⁴³⁵

The occasion was a memorial. Three days earlier Brockman had written to Epstein under the subject “Minsky memorial Thursday” the single line: “Are you flying up from NY??”³⁶ Marvin Minsky has his own page, and what is said there about him is not restated here. What this day adds to Brockman’s is that the aircraft, the car, the appointments and the memorial were all arranged through Epstein’s office around him; that the destination was the MIT Media Lab; and that the man booked into the noon appointment, Moshe Hoffman, wrote six weeks later to thank Epstein for “your introductions to Brockman”. No sheet read here says the introduction was made on 17 March, and this page does not say so.

What Epstein’s office did for him

The exchange is not one-way, and the clearest instance runs over eleven weeks in the spring of 2011. It is a medical referral obtained for his brother, and it is set out here as an act by Epstein’s office, with nothing said about anyone’s health that the sheets do not say themselves.

On Sunday 10 April 2011 he wrote to Epstein under the subject “more medical” (the word “more” is his, and no earlier request in the same series was located). His message opens with a location line, “New York”, a barred value and “(this weekend)”, and only then “JE,” and “More medical but this time my brother, the physicist.” He goes on to set out his brother’s prostate-cancer history and quotes his brother’s own message asking, “If you still has relationship with the people doing prostate cancer research, I would like to get some advice.” Epstein replied at 12:30:09 -0400, in one line: “milken is easy,, I will find the best person at duke”. Nothing is redacted there and the sheet supplies no forename. Read against the question it answers, which is who funds prostate-cancer research, the bare surname raises the question whether the referent is Michael Milken, whose Prostate Cancer Foundation is the best-known American funder of that research; that is this page’s reading of a bare surname and not a statement the sheet makes, it is offered at the question tier, and no act by anyone of that name is asserted anywhere on this page. Later that day a member of his office added: “I will remind you to follow up at Duke”. The two stamps on the sheet are of different kinds, so no interval between them is asserted.³⁷

Three days after that the office delivered. On 13 April 2011 it wrote to Epstein under the subject “Info for Brockman’s brother”: “I have forwarded the below information to John =rockman for his brother.” Beneath it is a message of the same afternoon from Richard Merkin naming two physicians and offering a third person who could “help facilitate” an appointment if there was “any issue about getting an appointment”. Every contact value on the sheet is barred, and the sender of the covering message is barred.³⁸

Eleven weeks later the loop closed, in Brockman’s own mailbox. On 27 June 2011 he forwarded Epstein a message from his brother and wrote above it:

JE,

See email from my brother the physicist below. He went to the oncologist =ou recommended at Duke.

Thanks!!

JB

The message he forwarded reads, above a sign-off carrying his brother’s forename:³⁹

JB,

I saw Dr. George today we liked him and he is taking over my treatment.

Thanks for the info.

Two sheets read for this page state his kinship with another person in the release, and both do it in kinship words rather than in names: this one, “my brother the physicist”, and his own message of 10 April 2011, “my brother, the physicist”. That is why a surname search alone would have made Philip Brockman look like a stranger.

He wrote to Epstein about his own health as well, more than once, in 2011.⁴⁰

What other people wrote about him

Two sheets carry another person’s characterisation of him, and both are attributions rather than findings.

At 6:43 PM on Saturday 11 July 2009, from a science conference, a correspondent whose name the producing party has barred wrote to Epstein:

now at Economics of Science Brockman is trying to introduce Nathan to beautiful women and then telling Nathan how he’s screwing it up. Marvin is talking about shrinking people and killing cats.

The message names “Marvin”, and the earlier message it quotes names “marvin, nathan Wolfe, Brockman” as the people its writer was with. The sheet does not identify its own sender, and this page supplies no identity for the sender or for “Nathan”. What is documented is that the sentence was written to Epstein on that date; nothing on the sheet describes anything unlawful, and the page draws no inference from it.⁴¹

The second is hostile, is about his manner, and has a name on it. Writing to Epstein and one other recipient on 18 March 2018, Robert Trivers, a long-standing Edge contributor and, on his own page, a recipient of Epstein’s money, set the Edge circulars against another correspondence he preferred:

=aving said that, i find Gordon’s missives much less burdensome than th=se from EDGE and certainly without the egomaniacal nonsense that infects J=hn Brockman—the key is to get the brightest minds in a room and ha=e them tell each other what they think is most important—or some s=ch nonsense

and added, of the same programme: “i doubt Jeffrey has made a huge amount of mon=y via the EDGE program”. The = characters are quoted-printable soft breaks printed on the sheet.⁴²

That sheet is also the page’s own instance of the text layer inventing a finding. Its extraction reads infects1=hn Brockman, welding the preceding word to a 1; the sheet prints infects J=hn Brockman, with a capital J. The forename is there on the paper and is lost in the index, which is why this copy sits outside every "John Brockman" search and inside the thirteen counted above as forename-damaged.⁴²

4 January 2019: “it will end in tears, mine”

On 21 December 2018 he sent Epstein an invitation opening “Katinka Matson, Max Brockman, and I are pleased to invite you” to a launch and gala dinner for Possible Minds: 25 Ways of Looking at AI, at the Brattle Theatre and the Charles Hotel in Cambridge on Thursday 21 February 2019.⁶

On Friday 4 January 2019 at 6:06 PM he wrote again, chasing the RSVP, naming fifteen people who had committed to the programme, and closing “Happy 2019!”. At 6:45 PM Epstein answered with two words:

Im in

At 6:58 PM (the sheet’s own header stamp is 23:58:19 +0000, and the two messages it quotes are stamped in the Eastern zone, 6:45 PM and 6:06 PM), in a message whose whole body is five sentences, Brockman answered:

Let’s talk in the morning. I sent the email to keep you in the loop and because I care. If you actually show up, it will end in tears, mine. You have to know this. And, of course, I don’t like it.

That message was read at the image, and it is the clearest statement in the release of how the relationship stood at its end.¹ He is still sending Epstein the invitations; he has just told him that turning up would be ruinous, and that the ruin would be his own. Both halves are on one sheet. Nothing read for this page says why, and the page offers no reason the documents do not supply. Epstein was arrested six months later.

Nothing read here shows him at the event. On 7 February 2019 Lesley Groff sent Epstein a reminder of “John Brockman’s event February 21 up at Harvard”; the February 2019 page of Epstein’s own printed schedule carries the launch as a reminder entry under a day headed for Palm Beach.⁴³⁴⁴ An invitation, a reminder and a schedule line establish that it was in his diary. None of them is a record of attendance, and this page makes no claim either way.

The outside record, and the absence of a response

He has not answered, and that has been true since 2019.

Two publications reported the Epstein funding of the Edge Foundation in 2019 on the Foundation’s own financial statements, and both record that he did not reply to them. The New Republic reported that a close analysis of the Foundation’s publicly available financial statements suggests that, “between 2001 and 2015, it has received $638,000 from Epstein’s various foundations”, said he had not spoken publicly about the connection, and wrote that “He did not return requests for comment left on his email and voicemail.” BuzzFeed News, on its own reading of the Foundation’s IRS filings for 2001 to 2017, put total receipts for the period at almost $857,000 and carried the same $638,000 total on The New Republic’s credit, gave at least $50,000 a year for 2009, 2010 and 2011 and $30,000 in 2015 as the last recorded contribution, and wrote that “Brockman did not respond to requests for comment from BuzzFeed News” and that Max Brockman “did not respond to a request for comment.”¹⁴

The documents read for this page bear on that reporting in one specific way, and it is not a correction of it. The public filings the reporting rests on record a last contribution in 2015. The correspondence read here records a $25,000 cheque, a $60,000 figure, an Epstein instruction naming “two different charities”, a $35,000 cheque sent to “brockman (edge foundation)” from a “Gratitude” entity on Epstein’s instruction, a message saying the cheque would be mailed, and his own “both checks did arrive”, all in August and September 2018, three years later. The two need not conflict: filings and correspondence are different records, and the 2018 money is described on the sheets as coming from charitable entities rather than from Epstein personally. What can be said is that the correspondence continues past the point at which the published account of the funding stops, and that no response from him or from his firm to any of it was located.

The September 2013 e-mail, and why this page carries it

The New Republic article cited above exists because of one e-mail, and it is an e-mail of Brockman’s own. Its author, Evgeny Morozov, was one of Brockman’s literary clients. He writes that on 12 September 2013 he received from Brockman a message reading only “JE, FYI, JB” above his own bio and some clippings, apparently misdirected; that he asked what it meant; and that Brockman answered with a message the article reproduces, in the article’s own words, “in full”. It is not in this release, being a private exchange between two people neither of whom is Epstein, and the only trace of the episode in the release is inside annotated Wikipedia printouts, which are not records and are not cited here as any.

In that reply Brockman describes Epstein as “the billionaire science philanthropist”, says he “showed up at this weekend’s event by helicopter”, tells Morozov that Epstein “asked me who he should meet. You are one of the people I suggested and I told him I would send some links”, records that Epstein “also got into trouble and spent a year in jail in Florida”, and recommends the meeting: “If he contacts you it’s probably worth your time to meet him as he’s extremely bright and interesting.” He then describes a visit:

Last time I visited his house (the largest private residence in NYC), I walked in to find him in a sweatsuit and a British guy in a suit with suspenders, getting foot massages from two young well-dressed Russian women.

The message goes on to identify the other man as the Duke of York, and, when Morozov declines, Brockman replies, “A billionaire who owns Victoria’s Secret plus a modelling agency is a different kind of animal. But I hear you and basically agree.”⁴⁵

The tier this sits at, stated rather than assumed. It is documented that the article prints these words and attributes them to Brockman; it is a credible account by a named journalist writing in the first person as the recipient, who links a PDF of the correspondence, that Brockman wrote them. No sheet read for this page corroborates or contradicts it, and Brockman has not answered it; the same article records that he did not return requests for comment. The page carries it because a page that cites this article and takes only its funding figure would leave out the part of it that is about its subject. It is not an allegation of wrongdoing by him and is not treated as one, and no private person in the described scene is named here.

The search for a response, stated so a reader can re-run it. Two web searches were run on 12 September 2026, John Brockman Edge Foundation Jeffrey Epstein funding statement response and "Brockman" Epstein files 2026 statement "did not respond" OR "declined to comment" literary agency Edge, and the two articles they returned that could be fetched in full were read end to end; a third is behind a subscription wall and a fourth returned a payment-required error, and nothing is asserted from either. Both of the two record a request for comment to him and no reply. The disconfirming document would be a quoted statement by him, by Brockman, Inc. or by the Edge Foundation, dated after August 2019, addressing the funding or this correspondence. None was found. This page’s account of his side is therefore incomplete, and the record says the incompleteness is his choice rather than the desk’s.

What the search returned

The matching rule for every figure on this page, without exception. Each is an FTS5 phrase query over the full-text index pages_fts of the release corpus, run on 12 September 2026, counted in documents (distinct pages.efta_number), never in pages. FTS5 folds case and ignores punctuation, so "Brockman Inc" and "Brockman, Inc" are one query returning one number, and any phrase whose distinctiveness depends on its punctuation has none. Where a decomposition is given, each document is assigned to the first rule that matches it, over the whitespace-normalised extracted text of the whole document, case-insensitively, with word boundaries on every term.

The name forms

query	documents	note
"John Brockman"	2,579	the base
"Brockman"	3,438	859 outside the base; decomposed above
"Brockman Inc" = "Brockman, Inc"	177	identical counts — FTS5 is punctuation-blind. 47 outside the base
"Edge Foundation"	547
"Edge.org"	768
"Katinka Matson"	117
"Russell Weinberger"	22
"Max Brockman"	149	26 outside the base
"Philip Brockman"	6	all 6 inside the base
"Brockmann" (two n)	15	not carried here. name_forms.py --verify classes the token REAL in the extraction, which is a statement about the text layer and not about the paper; no sheet was rendered to test it
"Brockrnan" · "Brocknan"	0 each	measured, clean zeros

Union of the base with Brockman Inc, Edge Foundation, Edge.org and Katinka Matson = 2,815, an increment of 236 over the base. That union is a population to open, not a finding. An Edge document is not automatically a Brockman document, and this page takes nothing from the 236 that it has not read.

Act against mention, and the hinge the two figures turn on

act_rate.py --selftest was run first and printed PASS. The tool takes a population and a name key matched inside the sender field, and the key is a branch point worth 17 documents that a figure quoted without it cannot be checked against:

population	name key	sender-field act	of population
"John Brockman" — 2,579 docs	John Brockman	806	31%
"John Brockman" — 2,579 docs	Brockman	817	32%
"Brockman" — 3,438 docs	John Brockman	806	23%
"Brockman" — 3,438 docs	Brockman	823	24%

Quote the first row. On the key John Brockman over the base, the strict figure (the key at the head of the sender field rather than anywhere in it) is 722 of 806. The 84-document gap is forwarded chains: the tool builds the sender field by joining every sender line on the first sheet, so a message by somebody else that forwards two of his lands in the loose count and not the strict one. On the key Brockman the strict figure collapses to 2 over the base of 2,579 and to 4 over the wider 3,438, because his sender field almost always begins with the forename, and a strict test on a surname key measures that rather than him. Naming the population matters here as much as naming the key. Beside the 806 the same run gives 669 addressed only, 57 header-less authored, 2 header-less press, 955 neither, and 90 documents the parser declined on an ambiguous header mapping; the tool reports the refusals separately and says in terms that a refusal is not a non-act, so the 806 is a floor.

The seventeen documents in the gap between 823 and 806 were listed and opened, one by one, and they do not split the way a first pass over them reported. Three are Max Brockman in a sender field. Two carry Philip Brockman’s name in the field the parser built but are not his: on one the top-level sender is Epstein, on the other it is barred. Five are genuinely this subject: three whose sender field prints the bare surname in lower case, one that prints a truncated John Brockma, and one whose top-level sender is John Brockman and where the parser has taken the forwarded header of his brother’s message instead. Seven are documents with no real sender field at all, where the classifier has taken a subject line or a body phrase (“I asked Brockman RE breakfast or lunch”, “Did you go to Brockman”, “Below from Brockman:”) as though it were a header value. So the larger figure is the less accurate one, but not because the gap is all other men’s mail: it is three other men’s documents, seven parse failures, two mis-attributed headers and five of his own that the narrower key cannot see.¹²

Two press sheets in three thousand documents. That is the opposite of the pattern the tool’s own documentation warns about, where a famous name’s mass turns out to be clippings; the mass here is correspondence.

Membership, checked separately from the totals

• The 859 outside the base partition exactly into the eleven classes tabulated above, and the partition reconciles to 859 in every run made; the class boundaries do not. Two independent re-implementations of the stated rules returned residuals of 651 and 655. The partition was not taken as evidence of membership. The 655 residual class was probed by enumerating every distinct 45-character context window around the token (869 occurrences, 475 distinct windows) and reading each; but 93% of the occurrences and 91% of the documents carry nothing inside the window that separates this subject from the other five bearers of the surname, so this page reports that probe as a reading from adjacency and not as an identification.¹⁶
• Ellen Brockman’s 90 were measured over the whole class rather than sampled: 85 of 90 carry 15-cv-07433, 88 of 90 carry McCawley, 81 of 90 carry Boies, 37 carry Cassell. A twelve-document sample drawn with a fixed seed was also read, and 12 of 12 are Boies, Schiller & Flexner signature blocks, service lists or discovery requests in the Giuffre litigation, one of them naming her in an interrogatory’s definition of the plaintiff’s attorneys. The other 78 were not read individually, and the class-wide figures are machine measures over the extraction, not readings.¹⁵
• The base of 2,579 was sampled at forty drawn with a fixed seed and each hit passage read: 40 of 40 concern this subject.⁴⁶
• Dates were taken from the 722 strict documents, not the 806, because the loose set includes forwarded chains whose top-level date belongs to somebody else. A date was parsed mechanically from the first 400 characters of each first sheet; 665 of the 722 yielded one, and the other 57 are counted as undated rather than guessed at. The 665 run from 26 November 2003 (EFTA00579406, a Reality Club circular to a Third Culture mailing list, read at the image) to 4 January 2019 (EFTA01009359, also read at the image). By year: 2003 1 · 2004 6 · 2005–2008 0 · 2009 44 · 2010 54 · 2011 176 · 2012 72 · 2013 108 · 2014 52 · 2015 52 · 2016 63 · 2017 11 · 2018 24 · 2019 2. The four-year hole is a property of this release and not a statement about him, and this page makes no claim about those years. One date in this set had to be settled at the image, and it is a warning about the other 664. EFTA01010803 is dated 21 December 2018 on the sheet; its extraction renders the month Dee, so a mechanical parser skips the header, finds the event date printed in the body, a Thursday in February 2019, and files the document fourteen months late. A parsed date is a claim about the text layer.¹³

Absence: no receipt, and how that was tested

The eleven money documents are instructions, a routing decision, a report by an assistant of what he had said, an instruction about splitting, an acknowledgement of that instruction, a notification, his own reply, a message saying a cheque would be posted, a calendar alarm and his own acknowledgement of receipt. What would disconfirm the statement that no sheet read here records money reaching him is a bank record, a cancelled cheque, a wire confirmation, a grant agreement or a gift acknowledgement naming him or the Edge Foundation. Phrase searches for each, intersected with the 3,438-document "Brockman" population and every hit read: "Form 990" (195 documents, 3 in the population, all three file-cabinet indexes of Epstein’s charitable entities), "grant agreement" (35, 3, the same three indexes), "wire transfer" (3,396, 2, a securities closing index), "check number" (2,000, 1, a crushed-stone delivery ticket from Brockman Quarry), "deposited" (3,426, 7, six of them the same discovery request in the Giuffre litigation and one a physics textbook), "acknowledgment letter" (42, 0), "gift acknowledgment" (2, 0), "donor advised" (366, 0) and "tax deductible" (365, 0). Sixteen hits, sixteen read; none of them is a record of money reaching him, and three of them are not the nothing an earlier draft of this page called them.

Those three are file-cabinet indexes of the papers held for Epstein’s charitable entities, and all three were read at the image for this pass. Each carries, under a heading for Enhanced Education, which is the vehicle Epstein’s own two-word reply routed the June 2010 $50,000 through, a numbered folder:

13. Edge Foundation/John Brockman

It sits between “12. Consulting Agreement Enhanced Education & Ben Goertzel” and “14. Marvin Minsky”, in a list that also holds “10. Thank you Letters”, “16. Form 990” and “18. Grant Agreement Oct. 1, 2008 (btwn J Epstein Virgin Islands Foundation aka Enhanced Education & the COUQ Foundation)”.⁴⁷

A second section of the same index carries a folder for the same body under a different vehicle. It is headed “COUQ Foundation Charitable Contributions/Consulting Agreements” and its second folder is “2. Edge Foundation Inc.”⁴⁸

A folder title is not a payment and this page does not write it as one. What it is, is a filing record: the charity that paid him kept a file in his name and his foundation’s, beside its thank-you letters, its Form 990 and its grant agreements. No sheet read here shows what was in either folder, and the claim is bounded to these searches and is not a claim about the whole release.⁴⁹

What this page does not claim

• That he knew of, participated in or facilitated any abuse. Nothing read for this page suggests it, no document read here alleges it, and the page asserts nothing of the kind.
• That any of the eleven money documents is a bank record. Ten are instructions, notifications, reports or reminders written by other people or by him; the eleventh is his own “both checks did arrive”, which is his account of two cheques and not a bank record. “Check will be mailed today” is a statement about the post and not about arrival. The disconfirming document would be a cancelled cheque, a bank statement, a wire confirmation or a gift acknowledgement. The searches run to find one are listed above; none returned one.
• That the folder titled “Edge Foundation/John Brockman” in Enhanced Education’s file index records a payment. It records a folder. Nothing read for this page shows what was in it.
• That the 655 documents carrying the bare surname and nothing else are all him. The page sets out what the window pass measured and what it could not separate, and it leaves the 2003 guest list and the 2013 name-soup item unidentified, as Tom Pritzker’s page does.
• That the $35,000 of 27 August 2018 was the balance of the $60,000. The figures, the dates and his own plural are on the sheets; the identification is not.
• That the “Gratitude” entity named on the 2018 sheet is Gratitude America, Ltd. The sheets give the word with no corporate name, twice in quotation marks and once without.
• That he attended anything. An invitation, a passenger list and a reminder entry are three different things and none of them is a record of attendance. The one day on which the documents place him in a party, 17 March 2016, rests on a charter itinerary and a car list, which record a plan and a booking.
• That the patient named in two laboratory reports in this release is him. Two documents in the surname-first class are Quest Diagnostics reports of September 2015 for a patient recorded as “BROCKMAN, JOHN”. No other sheet read for this page connects them to this subject, no identification is made here, and nothing is taken from them.
• That the 2005–2008 silence means anything about him. It is a hole in the release.
• That any class of material about him is absent from the release. No search run for this page audited the release by document class.

Related

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

• People named on sheets cited here: Jeffrey Epstein (the correspondent throughout); Lesley Groff (arranged travel, relayed the 2018 cheque question); Richard Kahn (the accountant who received both $50,000 instructions and the 2018 forward); Robert Trivers (subject of his 2009 message, author of the 2018 criticism and of the sheet naming Max Brockman as his son); Joi Ito (asked Epstein to fly a passenger to Boston on 17 March 2016); Leon Black (breakfast on the same schedule sheet); Marvin Minsky (the memorial that day); Karyna Shuliak and Larry Visoski (the 2013 farm travel); Bella Klein (copied on the 27 August 2018 instruction, and the writer of “Check will be mailed today”); Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor (named, as the Duke of York, in the 2013 e-mail of Brockman’s that The New Republic published).
• Entities: Edge Foundation, Inc. does not have a page on this wiki and this page does not create one. Epstein vehicles named on the sheets: COUQ Foundation, Enhanced Education, Gratitude America, Ltd., HBRK Associates. The destination of the 2016 flight: MIT Media Lab.
• Where the Edge science-funding material this page does not restate is set out: Jacqui Safra (the 2010 approach, the $25K Edge line and the 2014 call, all of which stay there); John Templeton Foundation; Martin Nowak; Lawrence Krauss; Barnaby Marsh; Charles Harper.
• Where the surname already appears on this wiki. A phrase check of the published tree on the bare surname returns five pages: Jacqui Safra, Robert Trivers, John Templeton Foundation, the June 2016 subpoena to a journalist and Tom Pritzker. A check on the full name returns only the first three, which is exactly the trap this page is about.
• Not him: the Brockman named in the June 2016 subpoena to a journalist is Ellen Brockman, an attorney, and that page is about her firm’s client and not about this subject.
• Not identified either way: the “brockman” on the 12 April 2003 guest list quoted at Tom Pritzker and in nine copies inside this page’s residual. That page supplies no identification and neither does this one.

---

Footnotes

1. E-mail, John Brockman to Epstein, Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2019 23:58:19 +0000, Subject beginning “Re: Please RSVP for Event & Dinner”. EFTA01009359 p.1; the run is 2 sheets. Read at the image at 400 dpi. Five values on the sheet are barred: the sender’s address, the value beside “Mobile” in his signature block, the address in the “On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 6:06 PM John Brockman” line, the RSVP value in the quoted message, and the value after the quoted headline “10 Business Books You Need to Read in 2019”. The header stamp is Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2019 23:58:19 +0000 and the body time given on this page, 6:58 PM, is that converted to the Eastern zone in which the two quoted messages on the same sheet are stamped (6:45 PM and 6:06 PM). The five-sentence body is quoted here in full and nothing on the sheet follows it before the signature. The message it quotes is his own of the same day at 6:06 PM, and between them sits Epstein’s reply of 6:45 PM, printed as two words, “Im in”, with no apostrophe. The fifteen names in the quoted message are printed in one paragraph: Mary Catherine Bateson, George Church, Kate Darling, George Dyson, Peter Galison, Neil Gershenfeld, Jennifer Jacquet, Caroline Jones, David Kaiser, Seth Lloyd, Neri Oxman, Sandy Pentland, Steven Pinker, Gloria Rudisch, Stephen Wolfram. A second copy of the same exchange is EFTA01009365, not rendered. ↩ ↩² ↩³

2. E-mail, John Brockman, Sent: Mon 8/27/2018 7:39:18 PM, Subject “Re: Jeffrey Epstein”. EFTA02254983 p.1, the whole run. Read at the image at 400 dpi. On this copy the To: value is barred and the salutation’s name is barred; two names are printed in the Cc: line with their address values barred. The quoted incoming line is prefixed on the sheet with a > and is reproduced above as printed, including its ellipses and its double space before “Please advise”. His own reply is three lines: “Send to the office please, below.”, “Best,”, “JB”. The signature block prints his name, a barred value beside the word “mobile”, then “Edge Foundation, Inc. / 260 Fifth Avenue / New York, NY 10001”, with barred values beside the labels “tel:” and “fax:” and a third barred block above them in the same right-hand column, beside no printed label. Only the first line of the quoted incoming message carries a >; its two continuation lines do not. The stamp is a bare Sent: field; on the desk’s measured rule that field is UTC, and no conversion is asserted here because nothing on the page turns on the hour. ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴

3. Epstein’s shorthand call and dinner lists, in which the bare surname stands for a person among several. All three were read at the image at 400 dpi for this pass, and one of them overturned what an earlier draft of this page printed. EFTA00429605 p.1, Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2011 12:29:37 +0000, whose single body line is, in full, a barred value followed by “oppenheim? brockman, reichart,igala, gary, chris knight ,, jay first. ? rich kahn,- ” a barred value ” 2k,” — an earlier draft quoted only its middle and did not say the line runs on. EFTA00433087 p.1, Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2011 10:34:13 +0000, to Lesley Groff, body one line: “bernard anderson, selgman, brockman, propseerui,”. The sheet prints bernard; the extraction of it reads bemard, an rn→m fault, and an earlier draft of this page reproduced the extraction’s spelling as the document’s face. selgman and propseerui are printed as given. EFTA00933595 p.1, Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 21:17:04 +0000, to Ian Osborne, body one line: “bloomberg, eike, brockman, schedule. ?” — exact. The sheets are cited only for the form in which the surname is used, not for any claim about who the other names are, and no reading is offered of the damaged tokens. ↩

4. E-mail, John Brockman, Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 20:52:32 +0000, Subject “Re: Jeffrey Epstein”, body “Leslie,” above the quoted incoming line and then “Sure. In town and free all weekend.” EFTA00404407 p.1, the whole run. Read at the image at 400 dpi. The sender’s and recipient’s address values are barred, as is the value beside “Mobile” and two blocks set to the right of the address lines. The signature block reads “John Brockman / Mobile / President / Edge Foundation, Inc. / 5 East 59th Street / New York, NY 10022”, closing with a line offering the Edge website under the quoted description “The World’s Smartest Website” attributed on the sheet to The Guardian. The spelling “Leslie” is his. ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴

5. Office note to John Brockman, Sent: Fri 9/21/2012 8:42:33 PM, Subject “Jeffrey Epstein”. EFTA02158860 p.1, the whole run. Read at the image at 600 dpi. The To: value prints as “Brockman, Inc./Edge Foundation Brockman, John” followed by a barred value; the extraction of this sheet loses the comma and the full stop and reads “/Edge Foundation Brockman, John”, which is why the form is stated from the image. The From: value is barred and the sign-off below “Let me know!” is barred. The third line of the body gives the street address of Epstein’s Manhattan house, which is set out at Jeffrey Epstein. ↩ ↩²

6. E-mail, John Brockman to Epstein, Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2018 21:01:23 +0000, Subject beginning “Invitation: Launch Event”. EFTA01010803 p.1; the run is 2 sheets. Read at the image at 400 dpi. The sender’s address value is barred and the Brattle Theatre’s street address is barred on this sheet. The opening line is a quotation of his own, set in italic and attributed on the sheet to him. The message continues onto further sheets with a long “BACKSTORY” section, not quoted here. The header month is rendered Dee by the extraction of this sheet; the sheet prints Dec — see [^dates]. ↩ ↩² ↩³

7. E-mail, Robert Trivers to Epstein, Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2018 4:55 PM. EFTA02537240 p.1, the whole run. Read at the image at 400 dpi. The sender’s address value is barred. The = characters throughout are quoted-printable soft breaks printed on the face of the sheet and are not repaired here or anywhere else on this page. The sentence quoted is the fourth paragraph; the message closes “all best, as always”. The wider Trivers material is set out on his own page and is not restated here. ↩ ↩²

8. E-mail, Jeffrey Epstein to Rich Kahn, Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 13:34:54 +0000, Subject “Re:”, body “enhanced ed” above Kahn’s message of 9:34 AM and Epstein’s own of 8:04 AM. EFTA00894469 p.1. Read at the image at 600 dpi for this pass. Two address values are barred — the header To: and the value in the “On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 9:34 AM, Rich Kahn” line — three values in Kahn’s signature block are barred (tel, fax, cell, under one continuous block), and the value after “tax id” in the 8:04 AM message is barred. The 8:04 AM line does not end at “tax id”: after the barred value it ends “gen number 5013”, and both are given in the body so that nothing is truncated without saying so. The sheet prints “send john brockman 50k from foundation for edge..”; the extraction of this copy reads it “send ‘ohn brockman 50k…”, which is why this copy is invisible to a "John Brockman" search and sits among the thirteen forename-damaged documents counted above. A second copy of the same chain, EFTA01815358 p.1, extracts the same line as “send john brockman 50k” and is inside the base. The run is 2 sheets. ↩ ↩²

9. E-mail, Jeffrey Epstein to Richard Kahn, Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2011 18:24:47 +0000. EFTA00912608 p.1, the whole run. Read at the image at 400 dpi. The To: address value is barred. The Subject: field is printed and empty — an empty printed field, not an absent one and not a barred one. The body is one line and is quoted above in full, with its double space before “501 c3” as printed; everything below it on the sheet is the standing confidentiality notice. ↩ ↩²

10. E-mail, Richard Kahn to Lesley Groff, Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2018 19:47:09 +0000, Subject “Re: John Brockman”, body “thanks”, above Groff’s forward of 1:10 PM (“FYI”), Epstein’s message of August 21, 2018 at 12:57:22 PM EDT (“Tell him two different charities”) and Groff’s own of 12:32 PM. EFTA00480422 p.1. Read at the image at 600 dpi for this pass. Five address values are barred — Kahn’s From:, the header To:, the value in Groff’s 1:10 PM line, the To: in Epstein’s forwarded header, and the value in Groff’s 12:32 PM line — three values in Kahn’s signature block are barred, and a block below Groff’s 12:32 PM message is barred. Her sentence is quoted above as printed: single spaces after “$25,000.” and after “not deposit.”, and a gap of about three spaces before “John says”. An earlier draft of this page printed double spaces in the first and third of those places and certified them as the sheet’s; they are not on the sheet, and the certification was wrong. The run is 2 sheets. ↩ ↩²

11. E-mail, Richard Kahn, Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 18:59:31 +0000, Subject “Re: John Brockman”, copied to Bella Klein. EFTA00480701 p.1; the run is 2 sheets, the second carrying only the standing confidentiality notice. Read at the image at 400 dpi for this pass. Three address values are barred — Kahn’s own in the From:, the header To:, and Klein’s in the Cc: — the block below his printed business address is barred, and a value in the second line of the body, between “and” and “ok to inform john”, is barred. His three body lines are “jee just instructed me to send brockman (edge foundation) 35,000 from Gratitude” / “bella please process check and [barred] ok to inform john” / “thanks”, and the first is quoted above exactly as printed. Below his signature the sheet quotes the 21 August thread in full: a forward of 1:10 PM with two barred address values, Epstein’s message of August 21, 2018 at 12:57:22 PM EDT (“Tell him two different charities”) and Lesley Groff’s of 12:32 PM — the same subject line and the same thread as [^groff25k]. The +0000 stamp converts to 2:59 PM Eastern, which is the hour the sheet at [^kahn35k2] prints when it quotes this message back. A second copy is EFTA02256494, not rendered. ↩ ↩²

12. python3 scripts/act_rate.py --selftest was run first and printed PASS, including its two undetermined-value fixtures and its documented known miss. The four figures tabulated are four runs of act_rate.py '<phrase>' '<key>', re-run for this pass; all four reproduce to the digit. The tool’s output changed between drafts and the page now reports what it currently prints: parser refusals are reported as their own class rather than folded into “neither”, so the five-number breakdown beside the 806 is 669 / 57 / 2 / 955 / 90 refused, summing with the 806 to 2,579. An earlier draft gave “1,045 neither”, which was the 955 and the 90 added together and charged a parser refusal against the subject. The strict figures were computed separately, by importing the tool’s own fields() parser and testing whether the key matches at the start of the returned sender field rather than anywhere in it: 722 of the 806 on the key John Brockman over the base; 2 on the key Brockman over the base; 4 on the key Brockman over the 3,438. The seventeen documents in the 823–806 gap were listed and each opened. Three are Max Brockman in a sender field: EFTA00327803, EFTA01806970, EFTA02055622. Two carry Philip Brockman’s name in the field the parser built but are not his: on EFTA01871666 the top-level sender is Epstein, and on EFTA02020206 it is barred. Five are this subject’s own: EFTA01019559, EFTA01024065 and EFTA02259207, whose sender fields print the bare surname in lower case (brockman, once under a damaged label reading Fran:); EFTA02055798 p.1, which prints a truncated “John Brockma”; and EFTA01776976, whose top-level sender is John Brockman and where the parser has taken the forwarded header of his brother’s message instead. The remaining seven are sheets with no usable header, where the parser has taken body or subject text as a sender value. Of the seventeen, only EFTA01776976 and EFTA02020206 were rendered, both for this pass. A caution about both totals, which this page cannot settle. The desk has two open defects filed against this tool that its --selftest does not catch — one in which a barred sender label makes the alternating-header branch walk forward into prose and return body text as a sender value, and one in which an alternating-layout top-level sender is discarded when a deeper forwarded header carries an inline value. The first inflates a surname-keyed count and the second depresses every count. The figures above are what the tool printed on the day; they are not asserted as final, and nothing on this page rests on the rate alone. The tool’s own documentation records that a low sender-field rate is a fact about where a subject’s words sit and not about whether he acted; the figures here are high and the caution runs the other way, which is why the page’s account of what he did rests on read documents rather than on the rate. ↩ ↩²

13. Dates were taken over the 722 documents whose sender field begins with his name, not over the 806, because the wider set includes messages by other people that forward his. A date was parsed from the first 400 characters of each first sheet, accepting three printed forms; 665 yielded one and 57 did not, and the 57 are reported as undated rather than estimated. The distribution by year is given in the body. The extremes were settled at the image: EFTA00579406 p.1, Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 17:18:39 +0000, a “REALITY CLUB - THANKSGIVING SPECIAL” circular to a Third Culture mailing list, its sender address barred and its recipient a list address which is not reproduced here; and EFTA01009359 p.1, at [^jan2019]. One document in the set proves the method’s limit: EFTA01010803 is dated 21 December 2018 on the sheet, its extraction renders the month Dee, and a parser that skips the header then finds the event date printed in the body and files the document fourteen months late. A parsed date is a claim about the text layer, and the year table above should be read as one. ↩ ↩²

14. Evgeny Morozov, “Jeffrey Epstein’s Intellectual Enabler”, The New Republic, August 2019, https://newrepublic.com/article/154826/jeffrey-epsteins-intellectual-enabler; and Peter Aldhous, “How Jeffrey Epstein Bankrolled The Exclusive Edge Foundation And Reaped The Benefits”, BuzzFeed News, 2019, https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/jeffrey-epstein-john-brockman-edge-foundation. Both were fetched and read for this page on 12 September 2026. They are cited at the credible-allegation tier for their reporting and at the documented tier only for the fact of a non-response, which each states of itself. The $638,000 figure is The New Republic’s reading of the Edge Foundation’s own financial statements and is carried by BuzzFeed News on that credit; the $857,000 is BuzzFeed News’s own reading of the Foundation’s IRS filings for 2001 to 2017. Neither set of filings is in this release and neither was seen by this desk; the year-by-year figures are the reporters’ likewise. Neither article is a substitute for a document, and no figure from either is used anywhere else on this page. A February 2026 trade item also reports that he did not respond to a request for comment on the newly released files; it is behind a subscription wall, its text was not read, and nothing is asserted from it here. ↩ ↩²

15. The 90 documents assigned to Ellen Brockman were measured over the whole class by FTS5 phrase intersection, not sampled: 85 of 90 return on "15-cv-07433", 88 of 90 on "McCawley", 81 of 90 on "Boies" and 37 on "Cassell". These are machine measures over the extraction and are not readings. A twelve-document sample drawn with a fixed seed was read in the extraction: 12 of 12 are Boies, Schiller & Flexner signature blocks, service lists or discovery papers in the Giuffre litigation, one of them (EFTA02799969) naming her inside an interrogatory’s definition of the plaintiff’s attorneys and one (EFTA01182998) carrying the ECF header of case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS; that identifier carries a SUPPRESSED register entry, which permits citation, and nothing beyond the header is taken from it. No sheet in the class was rendered, and the other 78 were not read individually. An earlier draft of this page put the class at 91; the phrase returns 90. Her firm’s role is set out at the June 2016 subpoena to a journalist and is not restated here. ↩ ↩²

16. Method for the residual, stated so that it re-runs to this page’s numbers and not to a third set. The 859 documents returned by "Brockman" and not by "John Brockman" were assigned to the first matching rule of the eleven tabulated, over whitespace-normalised extracted text of the whole document, case-insensitively, with a word boundary at each end of every string. The strings, in the table’s order, are: ellen brockman · brockman,? inc · max brockman · brockman award · any of ohn brockman, byjohn brockman, wljohn brockman, clossjohn brockman, 1=hn brockman, jock brockman, brock brockman · brockman, john · robert t\.? brockman · alex brockman · brockman 1280 fifth investments or brockman fund iv · brockman quarry; everything unmatched is the residual. That run returns 90 / 46 / 25 / 17 / 11 / 7 / 3 / 2 / 2 / 1 / 655 = 859, which is the table. Seven of the class sizes are also exact FTS5 phrase counts intersected with the 859, and reproduce independently: "Ellen Brockman" 90, "Brockman Inc" 47, "Max Brockman" 26, "Brockman Award" 17, "Robert T Brockman" 3, "Alex Brockman" 2, "Brockman Quarry" 1 — the phrase count exceeds the first-match count where an earlier rule has already taken a document. The reproducibility defect is recorded rather than smoothed over: rule 5 is a list of observed damage forms and not a rule, 1=hn brockman returns zero as an FTS5 phrase, and a reader who writes the rules differently gets a different residual — two independent re-implementations returned 651 and 655. The hinge is priced rather than merely named: dropping rule 5 altogether moves the residual to 666. All eleven of its documents fall through to the residual and no other class changes, so the rule is worth 11 documents, nearly three times the four-document spread between the two re-implementations. Every run reconciles to 859 exactly; the 859 is the number to trust and the class boundaries are not. An earlier draft of this page gave Ellen 91, Brockman, Inc. 47, Max 34 and the residual 646. The 91 and the 34 are wrong: "Ellen Brockman" returns 90 documents in the whole corpus, and "Max Brockman" returns 26 inside the 859 — the same 26 this page’s own name-form table reports as “outside the base”. Membership. Every occurrence of the token brockman in the 655 was located and a 45-character window either side extracted, normalised to lower-case letters and spaces: 869 occurrences, 475 distinct windows, each read. Scored for a disambiguating token (edge, edge.org, katinka, matson, literary agent, possible minds, jb, third culture, reality club) anywhere in the window: 810 of 869 occurrences (93%) carry none; 599 of 655 documents (91%) have no window that carries one; 569 (87%) carry none anywhere in the document. At ±120 characters the distinct-window count is 646 and at ±200 it is 676. An earlier draft of this page reported 400 distinct windows at this setting and said all 400 were this subject. Neither figure survives: no reading of the stated method returns 400 (±25 → 395, ±45 → 475, letters-only → 472, a 45-character total span → 341), and at ±45 the window is blind to the distinction it was supposed to test in nine cases out of ten. The class also collapses on duplication: the 655 documents carry 386 distinct window-sets, 66 of them being copies of one item of 9 September 2013 whose subject line is a run of bare surnames and nine being copies of one guest list of 12 April 2003 which Tom Pritzker’s published page quotes and correctly leaves unidentified. Three of the 655 are not correspondence: EFTA00607426 p.1 and EFTA02725574 p.1, two copies of one newspaper feature carrying the bibliographic reference “Brockman (1969)”, and EFTA00730006 p.1, a magazine revenue projection with a line “Brockman 6%” among projected seed customers. None of the three was rendered and none is quoted for anything beyond the form of the reference. The window method cannot see a document in which the subject is discussed without the token; no claim is made about that class. The four charter manifests in the surname-first class were checked at the image: EFTA00304853 p.1, read at 400 dpi for this pass, prints a numbered passenger list of six under the heading “Passengers: (6)”, of which the first two entries are barred and the next four are “Epstein, Jeffrey”, “Brockman, John”, “Brockman, Max” and “Negroponte, Nicolas”; the sheet is leg 1 of 2 of the 17 March 2016 charter set out below. EFTA00304855, EFTA00304929 and EFTA02705024 carry the same list and were not rendered. An earlier draft of this page assigned only three documents to this class and described none of them as his. ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴

17. E-mail, Tom Pritzker to “G. Max”, Sent: Sat 4/12/2003 3:22:52 PM, Subject “Re:”, quoting the message it answers and two earlier ones. EFTA02332567 p.1, the whole run. Read at the image at 400 dpi for this pass. The quoted guest list runs across three prefixed lines and the line quoted above is the second of them, reproduced as printed and not joined to the line above it. The sheet supplies no forename, role or identification for “brockman” and none is supplied here. The exchange is set out at Tom Pritzker and is not restated here; nine copies of it sit inside the residual class tabulated above. ↩

18. "Philip Brockman" returns 6 documents, and all six also return on "John Brockman". All six were opened. Each is a message from John Brockman’s own mailbox forwarding, or replying to, something his brother had written. The lesson recorded here is that the narrower query was not safer for the right reason — it does not exclude the other man, it happens to catch him inside the subject’s own correspondence. The six are EFTA00908928, EFTA01776976, EFTA01834961, EFTA01871666, EFTA02020206 and EFTA02040138; only EFTA01776976 was rendered. ↩

19. E-mail, John Brockman to Epstein, “trivers in Nature,” Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 19:29:59 +0000, attachments nature.altruism.pdf and author.abstractions.pdf. EFTA00768588 p.1; the run is 2 sheets. Read at the image at 400 dpi. The sender’s address value is barred. The signature block at the foot prints three lines only — “John Brockman / Edge Foundation, Inc. / 5 East 59th Street” — and carries no title. The body of this message is quoted and used on Robert Trivers’s page, which read the same sheet at the image; it is not restated here. ↩

20. Same day, later. E-mail, Jeffrey Epstein to Rich Kahn, Sent: Wed 6/30/2010 5:54:36 PM (a bare field), Subject “Re:”, body “wait”, above Kahn’s message of 1:53 PM and Epstein’s own of 8:04 AM. EFTA01815358 p.1; the run is 2 sheets. Read at the image at 400 dpi. The To: address value is barred, as are two values in Kahn’s signature block and the value after “tax id”. The signatory is named on the sheet by forename only and no surname, role or employer is supplied here. ↩

21. File-cabinet index, the section headed “J. Epstein Virgin Islands Foundation-Organizational”. EFTA00299927 p.16; the run is 26 sheets. Read at the image at 400 dpi for this pass. Item 18 of that section is quoted above in full. Item 19 records “Consent of Sole Trustee Electing Jeffrey Epstein & Erika Kellerhals as directors, Effective as of March 1, 2012” and item 20 a “Unanimous Consent of Trustees Electing Officers” of the same date, so the sheet dates a change of officers at that foundation to the turn of February and March 2012. The heading “ENHANCED EDUCATION” and its item 13 are lower on the same sheet. ↩

22. Calendar alarm in Epstein’s office, Sent: Thur 6/9/2011 2:50:01 PM, Subject “Alarm - Need address from Brockman to send check”, body repeating the same words under a time of “June 9, 2011 11:00 AM”. EFTA02187340 p.1, the whole run. Read at the image at 400 dpi. The To:, From: and Sent: label block prints with the first two values absent. A second copy is EFTA02187477, not rendered. ↩

23. E-mail replying to it, Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 19:11:37 +0000, Subject “Re: John Brockman”, to Rich Kahn and copied to Bella Klein, body three words: “great. will do.” above the quoted message under a line reading “On Aug 27, 2018, at 2:59 PM, Richard Kahn”. EFTA00480704 p.1; the run is 2 sheets. Read at the image at 600 dpi for this pass. The From: value is barred in its entirety and no sender is identified here. The double space after “great.” is on the sheet. A second copy is EFTA02256587, not rendered. ↩

24. E-mail, Lesley Groff to John Brockman, copied to him again and to Bella Klein, Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 19:13:41 +0000, Subject “Jeffrey Epstein”. EFTA00480706 p.1, the whole run. Read at the image at 600 dpi for this pass. Four names are printed in the header — hers, his twice, and Klein’s — and every address value beside them is barred. The whole body is the two quoted lines and the sign-off “Thanks, / Lesley / Assistant to Jeffrey Epstein”; nothing else is on the sheet. The quoted line is reproduced above as printed, including its ellipses and its double space before “Please advise”; the sheet sets “Gratitude” in curly quotation marks. The +0000 stamp converts to 3:13 PM Eastern. ↩

25. E-mail, Bella Klein to John Brockman, Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 15:16:55 +0000, Subject “Re: Jeffrey Epstein”, copied to a barred value and to Nina Stegeman. EFTA00480762 p.1, the whole run. Read at the image at 400 dpi for this pass. Her name, his, and Nina Stegeman’s are printed with every address value beside them barred; the first Cc: entry is barred in its entirety, name included; and a block below her sign-off is barred. The four-line body is quoted above in full. Below it the sheet quotes his own message under the line “On Aug 27, 2018, at 3:39 PM, John Brockman”, down to his Edge Foundation signature block, with one line of that block barred. A second copy is EFTA02255025, not rendered. ↩

26. E-mail, From: brockman, to Epstein, Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2018 17:32:45 +0000, Subject “Thanks!!”, Importance: normal, one attachment named on the sheet. EFTA01024065 p.1, the whole run. Read at the image at 600 dpi. The sender’s address value is barred and one line of the signature block is barred. The sender field prints the surname alone and in lower case, which is one reason a classifier keyed on the full name and one keyed on the surname return different populations. The body is quoted above in full. ↩

27. "from Brockman" returns 62 documents; all 62 were opened. Each was assigned to the first matching rule of the nine tabulated, on the same basis as the other decompositions on this page. The twelve-document contact-details row is named in full because the release names every one of them. Seven of the twelve are copies of one exchange of 2 April 2012 — Lesley Groff’s “Reminder: Barabasi, in Boston” and Epstein’s answer, “get his contact dtails from brockman if we don’t have them” — so the largest member of that class is Albert-László Barabási, a network scientist, printed in plain text on all seven; "barabasi" returns 8 of the 62, the eighth being a book of his that Brockman had sent, which belongs to a different row. An earlier draft of this page described the seven as “one unnamed third party’s”, which hid the majority of the row behind its three smaller members. Two of the 62 contain no literal “from Brockman” string at all — FTS5 matched the two tokens across a header line break — and both are messages whose sender field prints his name in lower case and without a forename: EFTA01019559 and EFTA01024065. They were assigned by reading. Those same two are among the seventeen documents in the 823–806 act-rate gap, and this page counts them as his in both places: they are his, the surname-keyed run finds them and the forename-keyed run cannot, and that is the whole point of the key discussion under Act against mention. That is the punctuation-blindness of the index working in the other direction, and it is the reason the class totals are stated after reading rather than from the rule alone. No sheet in this population was rendered except EFTA01024065; the phrases quoted from the table rows are from the extraction and are given as the route to the documents, not as verified quotations. ↩

28. E-mail, Moshe Hoffman to Epstein, Date: Tue, 03 May 2016 16:51:28 +0000, Subject beginning “Greetings, Thanks, and Top Five Questions for the Social Sciences”. EFTA00703565 p.1. Read at the image at 400 dpi. The sender’s address value is barred. The passage quoted is the paragraph immediately below the salutation and is reproduced in full; the message continues with five numbered questions, the first two of which and the head of the third are on this same sheet, none of which concerns this subject. The run is 2 sheets. ↩

29. E-mail, Victoria Stodden to Epstein, Sent: Sat 11/14/2009 3:59:18 AM (a bare field), Subject “roundtable on open science”. EFTA02435499 p.1, the whole run. Read at the image at 400 dpi. The Cc: value is barred. The sender field on the sheet gives her name; the extraction of that field reads ictona to en, so this document is reachable by no query on her name; it was found through the token brockman. The extraction also reads the surname in the quoted sentence as “Sly” in its first occurrence and “Bly” in its second; the sheet prints “Bly” in both. Two values on the sheet that are of no evidential use are not reproduced here. The stamp is a bare Sent: field. ↩

30. E-mail, John Brockman to Epstein, Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 19:50:25 +0000, Subject “Paul Kocher”. EFTA00770426 p.1, the whole run. Read at the image at 400 dpi. The sender’s address value is barred, as are two values beside the labels “office” and “mobile” and one block in the signature. The extraction of this sheet loses the opening of the second sentence, rendering “He said he will try” as “11 try”, which is why both sentences are given from the image. The signature block is the 2009 three-line form. ↩

31. E-mail forwarded within Epstein’s office, Sent: Tue 3/15/2016 8:38:59 PM (a bare field), Subject “Fwd: details?”, body “Do I provide the details to John Brockman?”, above his own message of March 15, 2016 at 4:35:11 PM EDT. EFTA02057786 p.1, the whole run. Read at the image at 400 dpi. The forwarding sender is barred, the recipient of his message is barred, the name in his salutation is barred, and two blocks of his signature are barred. The first two sentences of his message are quoted above and no more; the remainder asks which airport and how long a car journey would take, and names a street intersection which is not reproduced here. ↩

32. E-mail, Epstein to Joi Ito, Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2016 10:48 PM, Subject “Re: Flying to Boston”, quoting Ito’s message of the same day at 6:45 PM. EFTA02468466 p.1, the whole run. Read at the image at 400 dpi. Ito’s address value is barred. Both quoted sentences are reproduced above as printed, including the =C2, the =hartered and the th= of Ito’s message, which are quoted-printable artefacts on the face of the sheet. A clause following “small plane i =hartered.” concerns an unrelated journey and is not quoted. ↩

33. E-mail, JetSuite Guest Services to Richard Kahn, Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 19:18:20 +0000, Subject beginning “Re: JetSuite Reservation”, whose reservation number is barred and which ends | TEB-BED-TEB | 3/17, quoting Kahn’s message of 11:37 AM. EFTA00327672 p.1; the run is 7 sheets. Read at the image at 400 dpi. The reservation number, the attachment name, four address values and three values in Kahn’s signature block are barred. The quoted message is headed “Passenger List DOB and Weight:” and carries six rows. One row is Epstein’s own; the rows for John Brockman, Max Brockman and Nicholas Negroponte print the names with their values barred; two further rows are barred in their entirety, names included. No value from the sheet is reproduced here, and none of the four field states on it is conflated with another. The sentence quoted from the operator’s own message is its second. ↩

34. E-mail, Lesley Groff to Epstein, Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 18:58:00 +0000, Subject “Joi Ito set up lunch w/Kevin Esvlet”, carrying the schedule for Thursday 17 March 2016. EFTA00327658 p.1. Read at the image at 400 dpi. Both address values, a value after “at 71st”, a value after the car confirmation number, values in parentheses after each of the three passenger names, a value after “Appt w/Moshe Hoffman”, a value after “Cambridge,” and two values at the foot are barred. The three passenger names are printed. The day heading carries a three-letter code before “-Cambridge-NY” which is not reproduced here, because a second copy of the same schedule renders it differently and no reading of it is asserted. The run is 2 sheets. ↩

35. Same document, its own second sheet. EFTA00327658 p.2. Read at the image at 400 dpi. It carries five entries: a line naming an assistant with two barred values; “3-5:30pm Celebration of Life Gathering for Marvin Minsky at the Media Lab”; “75 Amherst St., Cambridge, MA (reception following)”; a name with a barred value; “7:00pm Tristar Pick Up SUV Confirm #8471769” with a barred value; “8:00pm Depart Bedford, Rectrix Aerodrome”; “8:52pm Arrive NY, Teterboro, Meridian”. ↩

36. E-mail, John Brockman to Epstein, Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 14:53:55 +0000, Subject “Minsky memorial Thursday”, body one line: “Are you flying up from NY??”. EFTA00698328 p.1, the whole run. Read at the image at 400 dpi for this pass, and every element verifies: the sender field prints his name with its address value barred, the recipient is Epstein, and the body is the one quoted sentence and nothing else. The memorial itself is on the schedule sheet at [^itin2], which was read at the image. ↩

37. E-mail within Epstein’s office, Sent: Sun 4/10/2011 5:58:15 PM (a bare field), Subject “Re: more medical”, body “I will remind you to follow up at Duke”, quoting Epstein’s message of Sun, 10 Apr 2011 12:30:09 -0400 to John Brockman and, below it, Brockman’s own of 11:57 AM that day. EFTA02020206 p.1; the run is 3 sheets. Read at the image at 600 dpi, and again at 400 dpi for this pass. The office sender’s value is barred, Brockman’s address value is barred in both places, a Cc: value is barred, Philip Brockman’s address value is barred on the innermost forwarded header, and one value in the body is barred. Epstein’s line is quoted above exactly as printed, including its doubled comma and its spacing. His own message does not open with “JE,”: it opens with the line “New York”, a barred value and “(this weekend)”, and “JE,” is the line after. The page takes from this sheet only that a request was made, what it was for, what its subject was, and what Epstein answered. ↩

38. E-mail within Epstein’s office, Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2011 6:59 PM, Subject “Info for Brockman’s brother”, body “I have forwarded the below information to John =rockman for his brother.”, above a forwarded message from Richard Merkin of the same afternoon. EFTA01805855 p.1, the whole run. Read at the image at 400 dpi. The From: value of the covering message is barred; Merkin’s address value and recipient are barred; and every contact value in his message is barred. The = characters are quoted-printable soft breaks printed on the sheet. Merkin’s message names two physicians and a third person who could “help facilitate” an appointment. ↩

39. E-mail, John Brockman to Epstein, Sent: Monday, June 27, 2011 10:37 PM, Subject “Fwd: Jeffrey Epstein (info for your brother)”, forwarding a message from Philip Brockman of the same day at 6:16:45 PM EDT. EFTA01776976 p.1. Read at the image at 400 dpi. Part of the sender’s address value is barred. The =ou in “the oncologist =ou recommended” is a quoted-printable soft break printed on the sheet. The forwarded message is quoted above down to its sign-off and no further: below the sign-off the sheet prints the treating physician’s full name and a link to his hospital profile page, which are on the sheet and are not reproduced here. A property-list block follows that and is machine output, not text. The run is 2 sheets. ↩

40. Two examples: EFTA01778405 p.1 (7 April 2011) and EFTA01855527 p.1 (18 September 2011), both from his own mailbox to Epstein and both reporting on his own surgery and recovery at length. UNVERIFIED, from search hits: neither sheet was rendered, and neither is quoted. They are recorded because the class of message is a fact about the relationship; verifying them would cost two page renders. ↩

41. E-mail to Epstein, Sent: Sat 7/11/2009 6:43:37 PM (a bare field), Subject “Re: Sitting…”, quoting Epstein’s message of 11:21 AM and a message of 2:11 PM. EFTA02439746 p.1, the whole run. Read at the image at 400 dpi. The From: value is barred, and no identity is supplied here for the sender or for the “Nathan” named in the body. The quoted 2:11 PM message has its sender name and address barred and is signed “Stone” on the sheet; it is a different message from the one whose author is barred at the top, and this page attributes nothing to either. The passage is reproduced above with the sheet’s own line breaks and nothing is joined across them. One value printed in the body is of no evidential use and is not reproduced. A second copy is EFTA01827899, not rendered. ↩

42. E-mail, Epstein to Robert Trivers, Sent: Monday, March 19, 2018 10:15 AM, Subject “Re:”, quoting Trivers’ message of Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 11:19 PM addressed “dear men” and signed “bob”. EFTA02498151 p.1; the run is 2 sheets. Read at the image at 600 dpi. Trivers’ address value is barred. The = characters are quoted-printable soft breaks printed on the sheet. The passage quoted is the fifth paragraph of his message; the sheet prints “infects J=hn Brockman” and the extraction of this sheet reads “infects1=hn Brockman”, welding the preceding word to a numeral. The quotation and the forename were both settled at the image. The paragraph beginning “i doubt Jeffrey” is the seventh. A copy in the House Oversight production, HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_032733, was read at the image for this pass at its native 300 dpi and prints the same paragraph undamaged: “having said that, i find Gordon’s missives much less burdensome than those from EDGE and certainly without the egomaniacal nonsense that infects John Brockman—the key is to get the brightest minds in a room and have them tell each other what they think is most important—or some such nonsense”. A second printing therefore corroborates the forename independently of the copy above. (The /pdf/HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_*.pdf route returns HTTP 403; the page image is served, and an earlier draft of this page wrongly said the document could not be rendered at all.) ↩ ↩²

43. E-mail, Lesley Groff to Epstein, Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2019 12:21:46 +0000, Subject beginning Reminder:Possible Minds, body “Reminder of John Brockman’s event February 21 up at Harvard”, forwarding his own messages of 20 November 2018. EFTA00490377 p.1. Read at the image at 400 dpi for this pass, and every element verifies: the sender, the recipient field (which prints Epstein’s forename with three fs, the sheet’s own typo), the subject, the date, the attachment name and the body line. It forwards two of his own messages of 20 November 2018. The word “Harvard” is Groff’s; the forwarded invitation names the Brattle Theatre and Benedetto at the Charles, in Cambridge, and no sheet read here names a Harvard venue. The forwarded circulation list of some thirty names is not reproduced here and nothing is said about it. ↩

44. Epstein’s printed schedule for February 2019, the entry under the day heading “Thurs. Feb 21, 2019 PB”: Reminder: John Brockman’s “Possible Minds” launch event at Brattle Theater, [barred]. 7:30-10pm Dinner at Charles Hotel. EFTA00285740 p.4. Read at the image at 400 dpi. The street address after “Brattle Theater,” is barred, and several values elsewhere on the sheet are barred. The day heading is “PB” on the image; the extraction of this sheet reads it “P8” and reads the forename “ohn”. The sheet is a plan and not a record of attendance, and the surrounding entries for 19, 20, 22 and 24 February all carry the same “PB” heading. The run is 5 sheets. ↩

45. Evgeny Morozov, “Jeffrey Epstein’s Intellectual Enabler”, The New Republic, August 2019 — the same article cited at [^outside], fetched again and read in full for this pass on 12 September 2026. Its author writes in the first person as the recipient of the correspondence, dates the message that prompted it 12 September 2013, introduces Brockman’s reply as “reproduced here in full”, and links a PDF of the exchange. The passages given above are that reply and the two short messages that follow it; they are quoted from the article and nothing is taken from the linked PDF, which was not opened. This is an outside source and not a document in this release. "Morozov" returns 30 documents in the corpus and "Morozov" AND "Brockman" returns 9, all nine opened: six are Edge circulation or dinner lists naming him among many recipients, one is the newspaper feature about the Edge annual question already cited at [^resid], and two are sheets of a 32-page annotated Wikipedia printout which itself refers to this article. A printout of a Wikipedia page is not a record, and neither is cited here as one. No Brockman–Morozov correspondence, and no Epstein-side document about the episode, is in the release. The public figure Brockman identifies in the quoted passage has his own page on this wiki, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, and what is said there is not restated here. The two women described in the passage are not named on this page and nothing identifying them is reproduced. ↩

46. The 2,579-document base was sampled at forty, drawn with a fixed seed, and the first passage carrying the name in each was read in the extraction: 40 of 40 concern this subject. Twelve of the forty carry his name in a sender field; the rest are office notes about him, schedule entries, forwarded circulars and two press items. No sheet in the sample was rendered, and the remaining 2,539 were not read. ↩

47. File-cabinet index of the papers held for Epstein’s charitable entities. EFTA00299850 p.3; the run is 9 sheets. Read at the image at 400 dpi for this pass. The sheet is a numbered list of folder titles under underlined entity headings; the heading above the passage quoted in the body is “Enhanced Education”, and its nineteen numbered items include 10, 12, 13, 14, 16 and 18 as given there. Nothing on this sheet is redacted. The same heading and the same numbered item 13 are printed on EFTA00299901, whose copy of the list runs to twenty-six items, and on EFTA00299927, where the heading is set in capitals; both were read at the image at 400 dpi for this pass and neither is quoted here. An earlier draft of this page said these sheets carried no Brockman entry; they do, all three of them. ↩

48. Same document, its own second sheet. EFTA00299850 p.2. Read at the image at 400 dpi for this pass. The sheet opens with items 26 to 36 of a numbered folder list continued from the preceding sheet, every title on it carrying the FSF prefix, and then carries three further headings, “COUQ Foundation Transactions”, “COUQ Foundation Charitable Contributions/Consulting Agreements” and “FSF LLC”, before “J. Epstein Virgin Islands Foundation”. The eleven folder titles under the charitable-contributions heading are headed by a confidentiality agreement for William Daniel Hillis and include consulting agreements for Mark Lloyd, Kyle Godfrey, Marvin Minsky and David Grosof, a website for COUQ, Rwandan student scholarships at City College, and Dr. Marc Hauser; two of the eleven carry a barred name. Nothing is taken from this sheet beyond the heading and the numbered item quoted in the body. ↩

49. The nine phrase searches, their corpus-wide document counts and their intersections with the 3,438-document "Brockman" population are given in the body. All sixteen intersecting documents were opened. The "Form 990" and "grant agreement" hits are three file-cabinet indexes of the papers held for Epstein’s charitable entities, EFTA00299850 (9 sheets), EFTA00299901 (26) and EFTA00299927 (26); all three were read at the image at 400 dpi for this pass and each of the three carries the folder title quoted in the body, at [^fileindex]. An earlier draft of this page described them as “one file index for the COUQ Foundation … which lists folder titles and carries no Brockman entry”. Both halves of that were false, and correcting them is why the body of this section now runs longer than the searches that produced it. A folder title is not a payment, no sheet read here shows what either folder held, and nothing further is inferred from them. The "wire transfer" hits are two of the same three indexes; the "check number" hit is EFTA00600499, a delivery ticket from Brockman Quarry in St. Thomas, which is the sixth bearer of the surname tabulated above; and six of the seven "deposited" hits are copies of one discovery request in the Giuffre litigation, the seventh a page of a physics book. Those thirteen were not rendered, and none of the sixteen is a record of money reaching him. The disconfirming document is named in the body. The claim is bounded to these searches and is not a claim about the release as a whole. ↩