Epstein Data Wiki

Joi Ito

Properties2
tagsperson, mit-media-lab, massachusetts-institute-of-technology, academia, science-philanthropy, anonymous-giving
aliasesJoichi Ito

31 min read

Described in the released files as”Joi Ito / Director / MIT Media Lab” in a Media Lab gift letter template; a bank presentation of September 2019 describes him as “a Japanese entrepreneur, the director of the MIT Media Lab, and a current Board Member at the New York Times Company”12
Correspondence with Epstein in the released filesFebruary 28, 2013 to May 6, 201934
Money into MIT that the documents record him arrangingA $100,000 gift in 2012 and a $150,000 gift for 2013 sent through Epstein’s accountant, the second of which Ito directed should be recorded as “an anonymous unrestricted gift to the MIT Media Lab”;1 $500,000 into what he and Epstein both called his “slush fund” account, which he reported receiving on May 29, 2014;56 a $5 million pledge letter of December 4, 2014 in the name of the Leon Black Family Foundation, of which he said $1 million had been received;7 and $467,000 he said in February 2019 had reached him from Arizona State University8
Money recorded by a bank as paid to him or to a vehicle he ledDeutsche Bank’s September 2019 presentation lists five entries on the “Joichi Ito” account: $250,000 (July 2, 2014), $500,001 (September 9, 2014), $250,000 (March 12, 2015), $1,983 (October 5, 2016, its recipient cell blank) and $1,000,000 to Neoteny 3, LP (April 13, 2015)29
AnonymityMIT’s own gift operations office recorded the $5 million pledge as anonymous; the Media Lab’s development director told him a donor could be made anonymous “easily”; a Media Lab gift administrator supplied him with “a template gift letter (including language to remain anonymous)“101112
What he asked Epstein to doInvest “through an entity with your lawyer as the signatory”; take MIT and the Media Lab off his public list of donation recipients while a Reuters correspondent was asking questions131415
AfterwardsResigned as director of the Media Lab in September 2019; MIT commissioned a fact-finding review by Goodwin Procter, released January 10, 20201617

Joi Ito, who signs himself Joi and is named in some documents as Joichi Ito, was director of the MIT Media Lab. He is named in that role in the released files from 2013, and resigned in September 2019.116 Emails released by the Justice Department under the Epstein Files Transparency Act record six years of correspondence with Jeffrey Epstein, from February 2013 to May 2019, in which Ito solicited money from Epstein for MIT and for his own investment funds, asked that gifts sent from Epstein’s office be recorded by MIT as anonymous, told Epstein that he was “still waiting on MIT to approve direct contributions”, asked him to invest through a vehicle signed by his lawyer, and asked him to remove MIT from the list of recipients on his public website while a reporter was making inquiries.1181314

The documents below are not a record of contact. They are a record of a procedure: how money reached MIT, whose name went on it, who at the university was told, and what Ito asked Epstein to do so that the arrangement would survive scrutiny. No statement by Ito answering these particular documents is recorded on this page.

Some of the emails quoted here carry transmission damage in the print itself, an ”=” standing where a character was lost. Supplied characters are given in square brackets, and nothing the print actually carries has been altered.

The first gifts, and the word “anonymous”

The correspondence opens with an introduction. On February 28, 2013 Ito replied to a message headed “Re: Jeff + Joi”, whose sender’s name and address are blacked out and which reads, in full: “Intro!”, “Xo”, and a blacked-out sign-off. His reply opens “Thanks”, followed by a blacked-out word, and goes on: “Nice meeting you Jeff! Please let me know if you’re ever in Boston. Would love to have you over.” Epstein was copied.3

The earliest transaction in the release is not described as anonymous by anyone but Ito. On November 17, 2013 he wrote to Epstein’s accountant, Richard Kahn of HBRK Associates: “If you could send the $150K / year to Beth Ogar: Beth Ogar, Recording Secretary, MIT … This will be an anonymous unrestricted gift to the MIT Media Lab. Beth can help if you have any questions. Thanks again!”1 Kahn forwarded that message to Epstein the next day with a note establishing that this was the second such gift: “Last year we donated $100,000 and they asked for this unrestricted letter Please advise if ok to do the same for current year $150,000 donation.”1 Pasted beneath it is the Media Lab’s own form of words, addressed “Joi Ito / Director / MIT Media Lab”, with the donor’s identity left as a blank: “In appreciation of the work being done at the MIT Media Lab, [donor name] would like to provide a One Hundred Thousand ($100,000) unrestricted gift for your continued research at the MIT Media Lab,” signed “(Sponsor Name) Representative”.1

Epstein’s own reply to Kahn that afternoon was “no, in this case just follow her leaad”, and who “her” refers to is not established by any document cited here.19

The account Ito called a slush fund

On February 27, 2014, Epstein wrote to Ito: “set up funding?” A reply came back that morning from an address the released copy boxes out, carrying an Etisalat BlackBerry signature and talking of “prospects for Dubai”; Epstein answered it: “no , the ito slush fund.”20 Two months later he wrote to Ito, “we should set acct for ito slush,” among a numbered list of four things he wanted done.21 Ito replied on May 2, 2014: “The slush fund, if it’s at MIT is easy. Should I send you the instructions? Will it be come coming from Leon Black? How much?”21

On May 8, 2014, under the subject line “Slush fund paperwork”, Ito sent Epstein a sample letter and transfer instructions. His covering message reads: “Hey Jeffrey. Here is a sample letter and information on sending a check or wire transfer to send money to MIT so it ends up in my discretionary account. It was written assuming that it would be coming from Leon Black, but please have someone edit it if necessary.” Beneath a sign-off, the message itself forwards an earlier one, not otherwise cited here.5 The message’s own header lists five attachments: “Leon Black letter.docx,” “Untitled attachment 00004.htm,” “ML Gift Information 5.7.14.docx,” “Untitled attachment 00007.htm,” and “signature.asc”; the two named documents are the ones that recur later in the record.5

Five days later Epstein forwarded both of the named attachments to Melanie Spinella with the instruction “please have leon send 500k, from the foundation, to the attached”.22

On the morning of May 29, 2014 Ito wrote to Epstein under the subject “money”: “I just got notice that $500K came into my slush fund account. Thanks! Should I thank Leon Black?” Epstein replied “Yes”. Ito wrote back an hour and twenty minutes later: “Can you give me his email? Does he think he gave the money on your behalf or is it from him? Also, does he know he’s giving more money in Dec and Jan or should I not mention that? Thanks again!”623

That last question is the whole of what the release establishes about the arrangement’s disclosure to the person whose name was on it. Nothing cited here records an answer.

Putting the donor beyond reach of the university

Two weeks earlier Ito had described to Epstein what he had done inside MIT’s development apparatus. On May 15, 2014, forwarding a message from the Media Lab’s own fundraiser, he wrote: “I put Leon on a ‘do not contact’ list in MIT development and had his assigned to us as a donor. Do you know if he wants to be anonymous or wants recognition from MIT officially other than a thank you letter?”11

The message he was forwarding is from Peter F. Cohen, Director of Development and Strategy at the MIT Media Lab, addressed to Ito and to a colleague. It reads: “All is good. Leon will be assigned to Richard and me. He will not be contacted by anyone else. He will get a short acknowledgement from Rafael thanking him, that’s all. However, Richard needs to know if Leon wants to be an anonymous donor to MIT, or would want his name on a donor list. Can you ask Jeffrey to ask Leon that? We can make it anonymous easily, unless Leon would like the credit. If Jeffrey tells you that Leon would like a little love from MIT, we can arrange that too, but right now no one will attempt to visit him, including the president.”11 “Rafael” is L. Rafael Reif, then MIT’s president, who acknowledged in 2019 that he had signed a letter thanking Epstein for a 2012 donation.17

The question was settled the following January. On January 5, 2015 Cohen wrote to Ito and a colleague: “My assumption is that Leon Black does not wish to get inducted into any recognition societies (especially since his gift is anonymous). But, if you think he might enjoy it and want to ask him, he is eligible, apparently. If you agree with my assessment, I’ll just tell Richard that no recognition is the way to go.” Ito forwarded it to Epstein with three words, “Assume no, right?” Epstein answered “no group anything”, and Ito replied with a smiley.24

The Media Lab’s routine paperwork carried the same option. On March 30, 2017 Marissa (Wozniak) Marcoux, the Media Lab’s Contracts and IP Administrator, wrote to Ito, copying Barak Berkowitz: “I’ve attached a template gift letter (including language to remain anonymous) and a doc with gift information. As usual we need to receive the signed gift letter in order to allocate the funds correctly.” Ito forwarded the message and both attachments to Epstein the same evening, above the line “The request is 2M / yr if possible. Here are the details.”1225

On November 4, 2015 a draft gift letter “for the anonymous donation to support Neri’s research” was sent to Ito by the same administrator, copied to Berkowitz and to Cohen. It reached Epstein the same day under the question “Is anonymous from your foundation ok?”; the address of whoever forwarded it is blacked out. Epstein replied to Ito, “of course.”2627

The $5 million pledge

On October 15, 2015 Ito sent Epstein the text of a letter dated December 4, 2014: “In appreciation of the work being done at the MIT Media Lab, I hereby inform you of an unrestricted gift of $5 million from the Leon Black Family Foundation to support your ongoing initiatives. $1 million will be paid immediately and the remaining $4 million will be paid by December 31, 2015. These funds will be wired from our Foundation account to the MIT Media Lab account at Bank of America.” Ito’s own covering line was: “I think we got the first 1M on Dec 4 and are waiting for the balance by the end of the year.”7 Earlier the same day he had written: “I found the receipt. This actually says that the money needs to be paid end of Sept. so it’s due.”28

That pledge appears in MIT’s own records without the donor’s name. On November 12, 2015 the Manager of Gift Operations in MIT’s Office of the Recording Secretary wrote to a Senior Director of Philanthropic Partnerships at MIT under the subject line “LB’s anonymous $5M ple[d]ge to Media Lab”: “The anonymous pledge of $5M has a $1M payment due by the end of Decemb[e]r. Should a reminder be sent?”10 The Senior Director put the question to Ito the same afternoon: “Leon Black will have a pledge payment due before the end [o]f the year; please let me know if you want us to handle this or if you [p]refer that we provide the template for this and you could customize. Or [i]f you want to handle privately — just let me know.”29 Ito forwarded that to Epstein at 7:05 that evening, with an attachment named “Anonymous Z-931 .pdf”, asking: “Hey Jeffrey. Do you have any information on the status of the [p]ledge?” Epstein answered, “send remindr”.2930

A pledge is not a payment, and the release records the first million as received on Ito’s own account of it and says nothing that settles the fate of the remaining four.7 The review MIT commissioned in 2020 put Epstein’s own giving to the university at $850,000 in ten donations between 2002 and 2017, on press accounts of it.17

What Ito told Epstein about MIT’s approval

On February 20, 2016 Epstein asked, “recovered? if the slugh fund is to be replenished how to the boys make out their checks”. Ito answered the same evening:

Yes. Funds could use a bit of refreshing. Would his be from your pals or one of your entities? I’m still waiting on MIT to approve direct contributions although as we discussed, I think we can get a “waiver” for Marvin related stuff. As always, appreciate it very much.18

“Marvin” is Marvin Minsky, a founding member of the Media Lab, who died the month before. The sentence is the clearest statement in the release of the position as Ito understood it: that Epstein’s own direct giving to MIT was not then approved, that Ito was waiting for approval, and that he expected an exception could be obtained.

The same caution runs through his own private investing. In January 2015 he forwarded Epstein an update on what he called “the electronic nose project”: “Dealing with the conflict of interest issues at MIT, but I’ll get an anti-dilution per below.” The message he forwarded, from a colleague at the company, continues onto a second page: a formal disclosure proposed for every document mentioning the company, stating that Ito’s stake had been “disclosed to MIT prior to his investment” and was permitted only because related activity inside MIT had “completely and permanently ceased prior to his investment.”31 In March 2015, of another investment, he told Epstein, “I got an OK from MIT to invest.”32

Money to Ito, and how he asked for it

Deutsche Bank’s presentation of September 2019, Exhibit P, “Notable Payments to High Profile Individuals,” lists four wires from Southern Financial LLC to Ito or to a vehicle he led: $250,000 on July 2, 2014, $500,001 on September 9, 2014, $250,000 on March 12, 2015, and $1,000,000 on April 13, 2015 paid “directly to Neoteny 3, LP, which is a Joichi Ito-led investment vehicle”. Against the September 2014 wire the bank recorded the payment reference as “subcr to Kyara Investment III, LLC to fund Blockstream Investment”; against the last it recorded “Subscription and Capital Call”. The bank’s own summary was that “Epstein appears to have provided capital for multiple Ito-led ventures.”29 The same exhibit table carries a fifth entry on the “Joichi Ito” account, printed above the Neoteny 3, LP wire and marked “C” rather than “W”: a $1,983 item of October 5, 2016, its recipient-name cell blank, which is the honest limit of what the page shows.9 The same exhibit is discussed on Southern Trust Company, which holds the other recipients.

How the last of those came to be structured is in the release. On February 19, 2015, sending Epstein the documents for a new fund, Ito wrote: “I’m going to send you the docs for the new fund I’m [m]aking. Let me know if you’re interested. Also, I hate to keep [m]aking you hide, but any chance that if you do invest, you can do it [t]hrough an entity with your lawyer as the signatory? It’s just [t]hat it’s likely the documentation will be reviewed by various [f]olks…”13 On April 2, 2015, after Epstein had agreed to a million dollars, Ito repeated the request in plainer terms: “It’s be great if you can do 1M via a vehicle that your lawyer [s]igns. Would that be OK?” Epstein replied “Ok”, and Ito answered, “Thanks. I’ll have my lawyers contact Darren”, meaning Darren Indyke, Epstein’s lawyer.3334

The Reuters inquiry

On January 23, 2015 the Media Lab’s press office passed Ito a query from a Reuters correspondent who had seen MIT and the MIT Media Lab listed as donation recipients on Epstein’s foundation website. Ito forwarded it to Epstein that evening:

Hi Jeffrey. This came in to my press team. The news about your funding the restoration of the Rothko murals is obviously not true. If the reporter contacted you, would it be possible for you to somehow confirm this fact to this reporter. Also, can you have your web person take down any reference to the MIT Media Lab on your site. That would be very helpful. Should we give the reporter your email or direct them to someone else?14

Epstein answered “take down” the same night. The next morning Ito wrote again, addressing Epstein and Darren Indyke by name in his salutation: “Hi Jeffrey and Darren, can we also have ‘MIT’ removed [f]rom the list?” Epstein replied “doing it”. On January 25 Ito wrote again, giving the address of the recipients page: “Hi Jeffrey. Sorry to be a nag. MIT and Media Lab still on page at:” and, below the link, “Going to need to get back to journalist soon. Thanks!”15

Visits, and where to meet

Epstein’s visits to the Media Lab are documented in the release mostly by their arranging. On March 30, 2014 Ito wrote to Epstein, Groff, Barnaby Marsh, Martin Nowak and Kevin Slavin, “Just talking to Jeffrey… Can we have a meeting at the Media Lab from 9AM-11AM on 4/21?”, and an itinerary sent to Epstein on April 19, 2014 lists “3-5:00pm Meeting at the Media Lab at MIT w/Joi Ito, Barnaby Marsh, Martin Nowak, Kevin Slavin”, the venue given as “Media Lab, Room 245 (Joi’s Office)”.3536 In March 2016 Ito’s office confirmed the same room to Epstein’s office: “Room 245 at the Media Lab - Joi’s office. It’s at the top of the stairs from the main lobby.”37

Where to meet was not always the Lab. On April 24, 2014, in a thread about an investment, Epstein wrote to Ito: “try to meet outside of the media lab”.38 In October 2015 the question ran the other way, and it was Epstein who wanted the Lab. Told that Epstein could meet on the Saturday, Ito asked Lesley Groff, “Perfect. Thanks. Assume at Martin’s place as usual?” She answered, “Hmm. He told me MIT I thought. Will double check. Could you meet at MIT if that is what he prefers?” Ito replied, “Yes. We can definitely do it at MIT and in some ways would prefer that.”39

In November 2016 Ito set out to connect Epstein with Robert B. Millard, chairman of the MIT Corporation. Epstein asked, “would you like to connect us, or should i wait until you can be there. - your call”; Ito answered, “Together would have been best, but one on one would be fine too I think. He was on the original email that I sent you guys, but let me connect you again.”40 On November 10, 2016 Epstein invited Millard to dinner at his Manhattan house that Sunday. Millard declined the next day: “Hey! Sorry can’t make it to dinner. But really happy you are involved w Joi. And happy to reconnect. Bob.”41 MIT’s 2020 review found that Ito had in 2016 tried to interest Millard in cultivating Epstein as a donor, and that Millard declined the dinner invitation.16

Salaries, and larger asks

A researcher’s pay was split between MIT and Epstein. On October 30, 2013 Ito wrote: “From MIT’s perspective, Joscha should be at about $60K/yr. He wants $100K. It’s going to be tough to pay him that via MIT. You could either gift him money while he is still in Berlin, we could set him to 80% time and he could apply for another visa”; then, after Epstein’s answer, “So you just gift him money to make up for the diff between our 60K and his 100K?”, and finally: “OK, so I’ll process him at 60K at MIT and tell him that you’ll work with him on the spread.”424344 In November 2013 Ito wrote that “The fully loaded cost for supporting Joscha as a Research Fellow at the Media Lab will be $150K,” gave MIT’s recording secretary as the payee, and confirmed on November 21 that “We’ve received the funds to cover Joscha’s costs on the MIT side.”4546 He asked for a $100,000 top-up in September 2014 and $300,000 in March 2015 to extend the appointment for the researcher’s visa.4748

Larger proposals ran through the whole correspondence: a draft attached as “Templeton Media Lab proposal October 2014 Joi.docx”, which Ito sent on September 3, 2014 to Barnaby Marsh, copying Epstein, with the note that it was “very very early draft that we haven’t even shared internally [y]et, but Jeffrey thought it would be good for you to have it in advance [o]f our call on Friday”; a Media Lab document for Epstein to send to Mortimer Zuckerman in January 2016; an “Antidisciplinary Science Fellows” proposal of about $10 million in April 2016, which Epstein told him to rename because “anti is good for kids but bad for funding”; and, in 2018, a fund into which Epstein was asked to come “for 5-15M as an anchor”.49505152

The largest is the clearest. On July 5, 2018 Epstein wrote: “please prepare a requsts for 25million for a maverick program.” Ito asked, “For my fund or Media Lab? To give me or pay me? ;-)” Epstein answered, “media lab , program. slush”. Ito then asked, twice, whose money it was: “Is it MBS?” and, a fortnight later, “Oh, I was asking if the 25M person was MBS. / Mohammad bin Salman”. Epstein replied, “no, it is a friend. but his foundation needs a proposal.”53 Ito’s working list of what the money might be for ran: “A - A non-profit research/deployment lab attached to the Media Lab … B - A slush fund for Joi. C - The Center for Extreme Bionics … D - Some sort of new initiative like a ‘One Science’ initiative…”.53 On July 25 he asked a further question about the structure: “Should it come into MIT or should we make a non-profit or a DAF so that I can direct some of it to non-MIT stuff?”54 A proposal for $25 million was sent on August 11, 2018, and a second version the same morning “without the number”.55

December 2018 to March 2019

In late December 2018 Epstein set about moving money he had given to Arizona State University’s Origins Project to the Media Lab. He told Kahn: “i need to know which of our entitiee gave money to ASU. we will ask for it to be redirected.”56 On January 4, 2019 he wrote to the chief executive of the ASU Foundation, attaching the Media Lab’s gift information: “below find info to transfer to MIT media lab. the funds previously donated to Origins,” and copied the message to Ito.5758 He asked on February 15, “did the black money arrive. from asu?”, and on February 19 Ito replied: “I got $467K from ASU. Thanks!! We’ll fund the plant guy. Also, what do you think about funding Martin’s son at the Media Lab?”8

Nine days later Ito reported the one refusal in the record. On February 28, 2019 he wrote: “Hey Jeffrey. How are things? Just to let you know. We were able to keep the Leon Black money, but the [$]25K from your foundation is getting bounced by MIT back to ASU. Sorry…” Epstein answered, “No problem- Trying to get more black for you”, and Ito wrote, “Thanks!”59

On March 4, 2019, four months before Epstein’s arrest, Epstein wrote to Ito: “brutal press. . sorry . it s[e]ems im a symbol for all ills. :). if you hate the [r]ich, the men , the trump types . im your boy . =A0 at least for the moment. . hope you are well”. Ito replied at 4:09 that afternoon that he was doing well, adding “Good luck!” and signing ”- Joi”.5960

The correspondence continues past that exchange, in a copy of the thread held by the House Oversight Committee rather than in the EFTA production cited elsewhere on this page. On April 18, 2019 Epstein sent a link to a New York Times opinion piece about Oliver Sacks’s gardens; Ito replied, “Nice.” On May 6, 2019, on the same thread, Epstein wrote, “i can have andrew farkas , he gave a building to the hasty pudding harvard. fund plant guys. …” and, after an exchange of greetings, asked “how should farkas give the money”. Ito asked, “Can he give a gift to me at MIT?” and “What is the size of the gift?” Epstein answered, “100-200”. Ito wrote back, “Thanks!” This is the last exchange in the production reviewed here.4

What MIT found

MIT commissioned a fact-finding review from the law firm Goodwin Procter, released on January 10, 2020. Press accounts of it held in the release report that the firm found Epstein made ten donations to MIT between 2002 and 2017 totalling $850,000, beginning with $100,000 in 2002 to Marvin Minsky; that nine donations were made after Epstein’s 2008 conviction, amounting to $525,000 to the Media Lab and $225,000 to the professor Seth Lloyd; and that Epstein visited the MIT campus nine times between 2013 and 2017.1716 The report found that the donations breached no university policy on controversial donors because MIT had none, that senior administrators had made “significant mistakes of judgment”, and that President Reif had no role in approving the funds.17 The same review is reported to have found no evidence for Epstein’s own claim to have arranged major donations to MIT from other people, and that he claimed credit for gifts he did not in fact make.16 MIT placed Lloyd on paid leave; it announced no discipline for the administrators.1716

The same accounts report that Ito acknowledged having raised $1.7 million from Epstein for the Media Lab and for his own outside investment funds, that he resigned as director in September 2019, and that he also left the board of the New York Times Company, several other boards and a visiting professorship at Harvard.17 They report that MIT committed to the external review after his resignation “over reports that he’d deliberately concealed donations from Epstein”, and that the Media Lab rejected a $25,000 gift from Epstein in 2019.16 Reid Hoffman, who sat on the Media Lab’s advisory board and took part in fundraising meetings at which Epstein was present, said in 2019: “By agreeing to participate in any fundraising activity where Epstein was present, I helped to repair his reputation and perpetuate injustice. For this, I am deeply regretful,” and said he had vouched for Epstein because Ito told him Epstein had cleared MIT’s vetting process.61

No statement by Ito addressing the specific documents described above is recorded on this page.

Harvard University and Jeffrey Epstein; Martin Nowak; Marvin Minsky; Leon Black; Richard Kahn; Darren Indyke; Lawrence Krauss; Southern Trust Company; HBRK Associates; Gratitude America; DP World.

Footnotes

  1. Richard Kahn to Jeffrey Epstein, Nov 18, 2013, forwarding Ito’s message of Nov 17, 2013 and the Media Lab’s template gift letter. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01946492 p.1. A telephone number on this page is blacked out and is not reproduced here. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7

  2. Deutsche Bank presentation of September 2019, Exhibit P, “Notable Payments to High Profile Individuals,” first page, carrying three of the four wires and the bank’s description of Ito. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01681865 p.37. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  3. Ito’s reply of Feb 28, 2013 to an introduction of Feb 27, 2013, copied to Epstein. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00955671 p.1. The introducer’s name and address are blacked out and this page does not identify the sender; the word after “Thanks” in his first line is blacked out. ↩ ↩2

  4. The same thread, carrying the exchanges of Apr 18 and May 6, 2019 in the quoted block of Ito’s message of May 6, 2019, 1:18 p.m. This copy is from the House Oversight Committee production; the corpus holds no text layer for it, so every quotation above is transcribed from the page image, read on 2026-09-14. The sheet is headed Date: Monday, May 6 2019 01:18 PM / Subject: Re: $25K from ASU / From: Joichi Ito / To: Jeffrey Epstein. Two corrections were made against the image on that reading: the sheet prints a space before the comma in andrew farkas , and a full stop after harvard, where an earlier version of this page closed the space and turned the stop into a comma; and the sheet prints 100-200 with no full stop, where an earlier version supplied one. The line runs on past the quotation above into how are you and then, after a line break, a bare question mark; the cut is marked with an ellipsis rather than guessing at the spacing across that break. https://epstein-data.com/HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025606 ↩ ↩2

  5. Ito to Epstein, “Slush fund paperwork,” May 8, 2014, with attachments “Leon Black letter.docx” and “ML Gift Information 5.7.14.docx”. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02365699 p.1. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  6. Ito to Epstein, “money,” May 29, 2014, 17:18 UTC. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00990778 p.1. ↩ ↩2

  7. Ito to Epstein, Oct 15, 2015, 21:04 UTC, quoting the letter dated Dec 4, 2014. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00644750 p.1. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  8. Ito to Epstein, Feb 19, 2019, carrying Epstein’s question of Feb 15 in the quoted block. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01030310 p.1. ↩ ↩2

  9. The same exhibit, continued: a row on the “Joichi Ito” account, dated Oct 5, 2016, amount $1,983, marked “C” in the C/W column, its recipient-name cell blank; then the Neoteny 3, LP entry of April 13, 2015. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01681865 p.38. Nothing else in this production is cited here. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  10. The Manager of Gift Operations, MIT Office of the Recording Secretary, to a Senior Director of Philanthropic Partnerships at MIT, Nov 12, 2015, 12:11 p.m., inside the thread Ito forwarded to Epstein. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02480763 p.2. ↩ ↩2

  11. Ito to Epstein, May 15, 2014, forwarding Peter F. Cohen, Director of Development and Strategy, MIT Media Lab. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00989593 p.1. A mobile number in the signature block is blacked out and is not reproduced here. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  12. Ito to Epstein, Mar 30, 2017, forwarding the Media Lab administrator’s message of the same day. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00678106 p.1. ↩ ↩2

  13. Ito to Epstein, “Fund docs,” Feb 19, 2015. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02511320 p.1. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  14. Ito to Epstein, “Fwd: Reuters inquiry,” Jan 23, 2015. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01747895 p.1. No other page of this document is cited here. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  15. Ito to Epstein, Jan 25, 2015, carrying the exchanges of Jan 23 and 24 in the quoted block. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02512048 p.1. ↩ ↩2

  16. Colleen Flaherty, “More Epstein Fallout at MIT,” Inside Higher Ed, Jan 13, 2020, reproduced in full in the Southern District of New York daily news clips of that date. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00105378 pp.7–8. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7

  17. Tiffany Hsu, David Yaffe-Bellany and Marc Tracy, “Jeffrey Epstein Gave $850,000 to M.I.T., and Administrators Knew,” The New York Times, Jan 10, 2020, reproduced in full in the Southern District of New York daily news clips of that date. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00064817 pp.4–5. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7

  18. Ito to Epstein, Feb 20, 2016, 21:22 UTC, carrying Epstein’s message of 3:52 p.m. in the quoted block. The message continues with a further paragraph about planning a closed research meeting, not quoted here. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00698514 p.1. ↩ ↩2

  19. Epstein’s reply to Kahn of the same afternoon, Nov 18, 2013. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01946642 p.1. ↩

  20. Epstein’s message and the boxed-sender reply it answers, both Feb 27, 2014, read bottom-up in the same thread. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00984659 p.1. ↩

  21. Ito to Epstein, May 2, 2014, quoting Epstein’s message of the same morning. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01927709 p.1. ↩ ↩2

  22. Epstein to Melanie Spinella, May 13, 2014, forwarding both attachments. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00989868 p.1. ↩

  23. Ito to Epstein, May 29, 2014, 18:41 UTC, carrying Epstein’s reply “Yes” of 13:21 and Ito’s own earlier message in the quoted block. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00990789 p.1. ↩

  24. Ito to Epstein, Jan 5, 2015, forwarding Cohen’s message of the same day and carrying Epstein’s reply. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00691072 p.1. ↩

  25. Ito to Epstein, Mar 31, 2017, with the same two attachments; the administrator’s title and department are given in this copy. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00678104 p.1. ↩

  26. Forwarded to Epstein, Nov 4, 2015, with attachment “Jeffrey_letter.doc”; the forwarding sender’s address is blacked out. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00634804 p.1. ↩

  27. Epstein’s reply, Nov 4, 2015, addressed to Ito and to Richard Kahn. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02482678 p.1. ↩

  28. Ito to Epstein, “Fwd: Signed Leon D. Black agreement,” Oct 15, 2015, 21:06 UTC, with attachment “Leon_Black_Family_Foundation_Inc._$5M.pdf”. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00630999 p.1. ↩

  29. Richard A MacMillan, Senior Director, Philanthropic Partnerships, MIT, to Ito, Nov 12, 2015, 1:53 p.m., forwarded by Ito to Epstein at 7:05 p.m. with attachment “Anonymous Z-931 .pdf”. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02671423 p.1. A mobile number in the signature block is blacked out and is not reproduced here. ↩ ↩2

  30. Epstein’s reply, “send remindr,” Nov 12, 2015, 7:07 p.m. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02480763 p.1. ↩

  31. Ito to Epstein, “Fwd: update,” Jan 13, 2015, forwarding a message from a colleague at the company. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00649516 pp.1–2. ↩

  32. Ito to Epstein, Mar 7, 2015. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00658581 p.1. ↩

  33. Ito to Epstein, Apr 2, 2015. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02507507 p.1. ↩

  34. Epstein’s reply and Ito’s answer, Apr 2, 2015. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02507612 p.1; https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02507684 p.1. ↩

  35. Ito to Epstein’s office, Mar 30 and Mar 31, 2014. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01788410 p.1; https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01788557 p.1. ↩

  36. An itinerary sent to Epstein on Apr 19, 2014, headed “Jeffrey’s Harvard Trip: April 21-23, 2014”; the sender’s name and address are blacked out and this page does not identify the sender. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01927556 p.1. ↩

  37. Ito’s office to Epstein’s office, Mar 15, 2016. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00327864 p.1. ↩

  38. Epstein to Ito, Apr 24, 2014, in the thread “Re: Investment in SmartThings”. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01925355 p.1. Nothing on the other pages of this document is cited here. ↩

  39. Lesley Groff to Ito, Oct 23, 2015, and Ito’s reply, whose quoted block carries the earlier exchange of that morning. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00337141 p.1; https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00337144 p.1. ↩

  40. Ito to Epstein, Nov 7, 2016, carrying Epstein’s messages of Nov 6 and 7 in the quoted block. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01738640 p.1. ↩

  41. Robert B. Millard to Epstein, Nov 11, 2016, replying to Epstein’s invitation of Nov 10. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01742039 p.1. A telephone number in the signature block is blacked out and is not reproduced here. ↩

  42. Ito to Epstein, “Joscha,” Oct 30, 2013, 22:51 UTC. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00632203 p.1. ↩

  43. Ito to Epstein, Oct 30, 2013, 22:57 UTC. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00632204 p.1. ↩

  44. Ito to Epstein, Oct 30, 2013, 22:58 UTC. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00632206 p.1. ↩

  45. Ito to Epstein, “Support for Joscha,” Nov 15, 2013. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01948168 p.1. ↩

  46. Ito to Epstein, “Funds,” Nov 21, 2013. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01948421 p.1. ↩

  47. Ito to Epstein, “Joscha,” Sept 9, 2014. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00996798 p.1. ↩

  48. Ito to Epstein, “Joscha,” Mar 26, 2015. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00698946 p.1. ↩

  49. Ito to Barnaby Marsh, copied to Epstein, Sept 3, 2014, with attachment “Templeton Media Lab proposal October 2014 Joi.docx”. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02708809 p.1. ↩

  50. Ito to Epstein, Jan 20, 2016, with attachment “MIT_Media_Lab—Zuckerman—January_2016.docx”. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00698029 p.1. ↩

  51. Ito to Epstein, “Antidisciplinary Science Fellows Proposal,” Apr 29, 2016, and Epstein’s reply of May 1, 2016. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02394538 p.1; https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00828360 p.1. ↩

  52. Ito to Epstein, “Fund docs,” Feb 6, 2018, quoted in Epstein’s reply of Feb 7, 2018. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02531719 p.1. ↩

  53. Ito to Epstein, July 25, 2018, whose quoted block carries the whole exchange of July 5 and July 19, 2018 and Ito’s lettered list. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01006397 p.2. ↩ ↩2

  54. Ito to Epstein, July 25, 2018, top message. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01006397 p.1. ↩

  55. Ito to Epstein, Aug 11, 2018, 14:32 and 14:36 UTC, with attachments “MIT_Media_Lab_Proposal_-8_6_18(1).pdf” and “MIT_Media_Lab_Proposal_August_2018.pdf”. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01007005 p.1; https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01007007 p.1. ↩

  56. Epstein to Richard Kahn, Dec 28, 2018. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01010185 p.1. ↩

  57. Epstein to the chief executive of the ASU Foundation, Jan 4, 2019, 13:18 UTC, with attachment “ML_Gift_Information_(1).pdf”. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01009476 p.1. ↩

  58. The same message forwarded to Ito, Jan 4, 2019, 16:21 UTC. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01009461 p.1. ↩

  59. Ito to Epstein, Mar 4, 2019, 4:09 p.m., whose quoted block carries Epstein’s message of that morning and the exchange of Feb 28, 2019. The apostrophe in “I’m” renders as a corrupted character in this copy rather than a clean loss, so it is paraphrased here rather than quoted. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02631916 p.1. ↩ ↩2

  60. Epstein to Ito, Mar 4, 2019, 12:46 p.m. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02632112 p.1. ↩

  61. Theodore Schleifer, “A new MIT report on Jeffrey Epstein raises questions about how much to blame billionaires like Bill Gates,” Recode, Jan 10, 2020, reproduced in the Southern District of New York daily news clips of Jan 13, 2020. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00105378 pp.5–6. ↩

Backlinks