Epstein Data Wiki

Lesley Groff

Properties2
tagsperson, epstein-employee, new-york, assistant, non-prosecution-agreement
aliasesLeslie Groff

16 min read

RoleExecutive assistant to Jeffrey Epstein, New York1
Office575 Lexington Avenue, 4th Floor, New York; listed on an internal administration sheet under “HBRK” alongside Epstein’s attorney, his project manager and an estate manager1
Period2001 to summer 2019, per a December 2019 SDNY memorandum2
2007 NPANamed in the co-conspirator clause of Epstein’s Non-Prosecution Agreement3
2019 indictmentIdentified by the FBI as “one of the employees identified in the indictment”4
Civil litigationDefendant, Jane Doe 43 v. Epstein, No. 17 Civ. 616 (S.D.N.Y., filed January 26, 2017)5
SDNY investigationReverse proffer July 18, 2019; counsel declined a proffer August 7, 2019; proffer agreement signed for a meeting on July 23, 202167

Lesley Groff worked as Jeffrey Epstein’s New York-based executive assistant.12 She is one of four people named in the co-conspirator clause of Epstein’s 2007 federal Non-Prosecution Agreement,3 and one of the individuals the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York examined as a potential co-conspirator after Epstein’s July 2019 indictment and August 2019 death.8 That office gave her a reverse proffer in July 2019 and was told in early August that her attorney would not bring her in; a proffer agreement was signed for a meeting with her in July 2021, and the part of the office’s December 2019 memorandum that analysed whether to charge her is blank in the released copy.679

Role in Epstein’s offices

An undated internal administration sheet in the Southern District of New York’s grand-jury production sets out two Epstein offices.1 The Virgin Islands office, Southern Trust Company at 6100 Red Hook Quarters, is described as handling purchasing, vendor payments, expense tracking, staff payroll and contractor payments.1 The New York entry, headed “HBRK,” gives the address 575 Lexington Avenue, 4th Floor, and lists four roles: Epstein’s attorney Darren Indyke, his project manager Richard Kahn, an estate manager, and “Executive Assistant: Lesley Groff.”1 A September 2014 LinkedIn invitation delivered to her mailbox describes the recipient as “Lesley Groff (Executive Assistant at DKIPLLC)”, the initials of Darren K. Indyke, PLLC, whose staff used the same 575 Lexington Avenue address.1011 Epstein wrote to her at a personal email address.12

She drafted Epstein’s daily itineraries and kept his calendar and the office’s staff reminders: a November 5, 2013 message to him sets out a Palm Beach to Teterboro flight, the day’s appointments, and which of his advisers would be away and when.13 A November 8, 2013 email headed “Call List” gives him two names and numbers to return.14 On March 31, 2014 she put clarifying questions to him about a multi-leg April–May itinerary running between Little Saint James, Palm Beach, Scottsdale, New York, Boston and Paris, following an instruction of his that noted ”( plane down )” for one leg.15 She booked his medical and dental appointments, copying household staff.16

Those schedules were revised through the day. At 10:33 on the morning of Wednesday, September 10, 2014 she circulated one headed “Wed. Sept. 10, 2014 NY,” an hour-by-hour list running from a ten o’clock appointment to an eight o’clock entry reading “Les Miserables (2 Tickets)” at the Imperial Theater on West 45th Street; some entries name the person to be seen and some are blacked out. It went to Epstein and was copied to members of the household staff.17 Fifty-eight minutes later she sent the same recipients a message headed “Schedule changes”: the eleven o’clock appointment was off, Epstein wanted lunch moved to Minetta Tavern and she would “try to make reservations,” a member of the household staff was to take him there, and the two o’clock appointment was moved to Friday.18 At 11:50 the previous morning she had sent the same recipients a message headed “Schedule change” moving one appointment to eleven o’clock and a meeting to one.19 Both revisions were sent from her telephone.1819

On August 20, 2010 a staff member of the New Mexico Attorney General’s office wrote to Groff from an nmag.gov address to arrange a meeting in Santa Fe between Attorney General Gary King and Epstein, confirming “the arrangement we spoke about on the telephone just awhile ago” and later supplying King’s cell number; Groff forwarded the exchange to Epstein.20

The 2007 grand jury subpoena

On September 18, 2007 an Assistant U.S. Attorney in West Palm Beach emailed Epstein’s defence counsel Jay Lefkowitz a draft “plea proffer” (“This is the factual proffer that I drafted up earlier this afternoon, to give you an idea of what it would look like”), setting out a factual basis for a witness-tampering charge under 18 U.S.C. § 1512.21 The sender’s name is redacted on the released page; a filing by Bradley J. Edwards in Epstein’s Florida state suit against him identifies the sender as AUSA A. Marie Villafaña and reproduces the proffer in full.22

The proffer states that on August 21, 2007 two FBI special agents came to Groff’s home to serve her with a federal grand jury subpoena, and that when she telephoned Epstein while they were there he instructed her not to speak to them and “reprimanded her for allowing them into her home.” It adds that he warned her against turning over documents responsive to the subpoena and pressed her to delay her appearance before the grand jury.21 The conduct it sets out is Epstein’s. The agreement he signed later that month required guilty pleas to two Florida state charges (solicitation of prostitution, and solicitation of minors to engage in prostitution) and no federal plea.23 The agents’ surnames are redacted on that page; a second copy of the proffer in the released files has every name redacted, Groff’s included.2124 The passage was quoted in Edwards’s Florida state-court filing;22 the copy of it that reaches this wiki through the congressional production carries the names that the released copies withhold, and none of them is reproduced here. It was also reported by the Daily Mail.25

An April 2020 SDNY memorandum records that Epstein told Groff at the time that he was being “blackmailed,” and that Darren Indyke, one of Epstein’s lawyers, told her the same.26

The 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement

The Non-Prosecution Agreement signed on the authority of U.S. Attorney R. Alexander Acosta in September 2007 provides:

In consideration of Epstein’s agreement to plead guilty and to provide compensation in the manner described above, if Epstein successfully fulfills all of the terms and conditions of this agreement, the United States also agrees that it will not institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein, including but not limited to Sarah Kellen, Adriana Ross, Lesley Groff, or Nadia Marcinkova.3

Groff was not a signatory to the agreement, and neither were the three others named in the clause.27 When SDNY examined the clause in its June 11, 2019 prosecution memorandum on Epstein, it concluded that the agreement “was signed only by representatives of SDFL and spoke, in relevant part, only to binding that Office,” and so would not preclude another district from bringing properly venued charges; the memorandum notes that Groff and one other named person “are believed to have worked for Epstein to schedule massages.”27 See the 2008 Non-Prosecution Agreement.

Jane Doe 43 v. Epstein, 2017–2018

On January 26, 2017 a plaintiff proceeding as Jane Doe 43 sued Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, Sarah Kellen, Groff and a fifth defendant in the Southern District of New York under the civil remedy of the federal trafficking statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1595.528 The complaint alleged that Groff “coordinated schedules” between Epstein and the young women he abused, made their travel arrangements, tended to their living needs, and communicated with them to keep them compliant with the rules the pleading ascribes to the enterprise.29 That is an allegation in a pleading.

Epstein, Groff and Kellen answered jointly in a Rule 26(f) report that “the Complaint is factually and legally infirm and should be dismissed,” and that the claims failed to state a claim and were barred by the statute of limitations.28 Epstein and Groff, represented by Michael C. Miller of Steptoe & Johnson, moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and failure to state a claim, and moved separately for Rule 11 sanctions.3031 Groff’s own answer to the amended complaint, filed August 31, 2018, opens by asserting the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination and states that “in cases of any doubt or ambiguity, her response be construed as an assertion rather than a waiver of such privilege.”32 The plaintiff noticed Groff’s videotaped deposition for August 24, 2018 and re-noticed it for October 30, 2018.3334 A protective order was entered in the case on November 29, 2018.35

The SDNY investigation, 2019–2021

A federal grand jury in the Southern District of New York returned a sealed indictment against Epstein on July 2, 2019, and he was arrested on July 6.36 The indictment alleged that Epstein used “employees and associates,” among them a New York-based employee it called “Employee-1,” to contact victims by telephone and schedule appointments on his behalf.37 An FBI case summary records that Groff “was an assistant to Epstein in New York and is one of the employees identified in the indictment.”4 An internal SDNY email of July 22, 2019 listing the office’s contacts with “employees / potential co-conspirators” reports, under the entry for “Employee-1 in Indictment,” that “we gave a reverse proffer to Groff last week and she is weighing whether to come in.”38

The reverse proffer took place on July 18, 2019.4 SDNY’s December 19, 2019 memorandum to U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman records that after Epstein’s death the investigation into potential co-conspirators “focused on Ghislaine Maxwell, [redacted] and Leslie Groff.”8 Under a heading “Counsel for Leslie Groff,” the memorandum describes her as Epstein’s “primary New York-based assistant from at least in or about 2001 through the summer of 2019,” whose responsibilities included scheduling his massages at the New York residence and booking flights for girls who travelled to meet him at his residences. It says she made those arrangements by telephone from the New York office, had limited interaction with victims beyond scheduling, and spent little time in Epstein’s residence.2

The same memorandum records that at the July 18 reverse proffer prosecutors told her that “numerous victims” had said she was responsible for scheduling the massages at which they were abused; that on August 7, 2019 her attorney said he would not bring her in for a proffer and had advised her to invoke the Fifth Amendment if subpoenaed; and that the office had since told counsel it could offer her no agreement without a proffer.6 Women interviewed by the government during 2019 described Groff scheduling appointments at the New York residence and arranging travel.394041 A separate SDNY memorandum of April 14, 2020 concerning a different assistant calls Groff “the primary scheduler” in New York, working “at an office off-site” from Epstein’s Manhattan mansion, and says she “does not appear to have ever been present when victims arrived for massages in New York.”42

Part IV of the December 2019 memorandum, the section analysing whether charges should be brought, is withheld in the copy released by the Department of Justice: the pages carry their headings, including “D. Leslie Groff”, and nothing else.943

A proffer agreement dated July 23, 2021 names Audrey Strauss, United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, in its letterhead above a “by” signature line for the government; that line and the Assistant United States Attorney’s typed name beneath it are both redacted, so the agreement does not show who signed for the office. It records “the meeting of Lesley Groff ‘Client’ and her attorney, Michael Bachner, Esq., with Assistant United States Attorney [redacted] to be held on July 23, 2021,” on the standard terms that the agreement “is not a cooperation agreement” and that the government made no representation about any immunity or non-prosecution agreement.7

Named in the House record

On August 31, 2026 Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky was recognised for one minute in the House of Representatives, under the heading “Bring Epstein Perpetrators to Justice.” He said that a year after the Epstein Files Transparency Act was signed “the government continues to withhold over 3 million files,” and that a second bill, the Epstein Files Transparency Act II, had been introduced. He then said he wanted “perpetrators of these crimes to be investigated and prosecuted,” naming thirteen men and, of the fourteenth, saying: “and women like Leslie Groff, not a victim, who conspired with Epstein to traffic other women.” He closed: “Perhaps hearing these names will shame the Department of Justice into delivering justice.”44 The other thirteen names are not reproduced here. That Groff “conspired with Epstein to traffic other women” is Massie’s own assertion, made under privilege on the floor of the House; it is not a charge, a referral, an indictment or a finding, and being named in it is not evidence of anything. The Congressional Record spells her forename “Leslie,” which this wiki already records as an alias; this page keeps the spelling Lesley in its own prose. No statement of hers addressing an allegation of this kind is recorded on this page: her only recorded position on comparable conduct is the Fifth Amendment privilege she invoked in her August 31, 2018 answer in Jane Doe 43 v. Epstein, above, which is an assertion of privilege rather than a denial.

Coverage

  • The Sunday Times, March 13, 2011, named Groff as one of the “potential co-conspirators” in the Non-Prosecution Agreement.45
  • The Daily Mail quoted the 2007 plea proffer’s account of the grand jury subpoena; the article was forwarded to Groff’s own mailbox in January 2015.25
  • The Daily Beast, in a profile of Indyke and Kahn, described Groff as working routinely out of the New York office.46

Footnotes

  1. Epstein administration reference sheet, SDNY grand-jury production. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01304254 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6

  2. Same memorandum, p.64. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02731082 ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  3. Non-Prosecution Agreement, In re: Investigation of Jeffrey Epstein, signed September 2007, filed as Exhibit 1 to Dkt. 6-1 in United States v. Epstein, 19 Cr. 490. https://epstein-data.com/DOJ-OGR-00000290 p.6 ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  4. FBI, Case Initiation Summary, entry for 07/18/2019. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01649143 p.3 ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  5. Jane Doe 43 v. Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, Sarah Kellen, Lesley Groff and Natalya Malyshev, No. 1:17-cv-00616 (S.D.N.Y.), Complaint filed Jan 26, 2017. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00594577 ↩ ↩2

  6. Same memorandum, p.65. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02731082 ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  7. Proffer agreement, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, for a meeting on July 23, 2021. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01682023 ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  8. SDNY, Memorandum to U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman, “Investigation into Potential Co-Conspirators of Jeffrey Epstein,” Dec 19, 2019, p.2. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02731082 ↩ ↩2

  9. Same December 2019 memorandum, pp.77–86. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02731082 ↩ ↩2

  10. LinkedIn invitation email to Lesley Groff, Sept 5, 2014 (“This email was intended for Lesley Groff (Executive Assistant at DKIPLLC)”). https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02098062 ↩

  11. Email signature block of a legal assistant, “DARREN K. INDYKE, PLLC, 575 Lexington Avenue, 4th Floor, New York, New York 10022,” Sept 3, 2014. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02098670 ↩

  12. Email header, Epstein to “Lesley Groff[[email protected]],” Apr 8, 2014; read from the page image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01928270 ↩

  13. Lesley Groff to Jeffrey Epstein, “Rich Kahn,” Nov 5, 2013, with appended schedule. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01755390 ↩

  14. Lesley Groff to Jeffrey Epstein, “Call List,” Nov 8, 2013. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01755254 ↩

  15. Lesley Groff to Jeffrey Epstein and reply, “Re: new travel schedule,” Mar 31, 2014. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01928684 ↩

  16. Lesley Groff to Jeffrey Epstein, cc household staff, “Dr. Magnani,” Apr 22, 2014. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01927528 ↩

  17. Lesley Groff to Jeffrey Epstein, copied to household staff, “Schedule,” Sept 10, 2014, 10:33 am. Read from the page image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02098261 p.1. ↩

  18. Lesley Groff to household staff, “Schedule changes,” Sept 10, 2014, 11:31 am. Read from the page image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02098377 p.1. ↩ ↩2

  19. Lesley Groff to household staff, “Schedule change,” Sept 9, 2014, 11:50 am. Read from the page image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02098801 p.1. ↩ ↩2

  20. Email, “Wood, Elisa” (nmag.gov) to Lesley Groff, Aug 20, 2010, forwarded by Groff to Epstein Aug 24 and by Epstein Aug 28. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00779086 ↩

  21. Email to Jay Lefkowitz, “Factual proffer,” Sept 18, 2007, and the attached “United States vs. Jeffrey Epstein — Plea Proffer.” https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00213368 pp.1–2 ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  22. Epstein v. Rothstein and Edwards, Case No. 50 2009 CA 040800 (Fla. 15th Cir.), Statement of Undisputed Facts of Bradley J. Edwards, ¶20: “in a September 18, 2007, email from AUSA Villafaña to Lefkowitz (attached hereto as Exhibit ‘H’), she attached the proposed plea agreement describing Epstein’s witness tampering as follows:” and then the proffer in full. The surname is legible as Villafaña on the page image; the released text layer corrupts it six different ways within the same filing — Villafacia, Villafafia (three times), Villafaiia, Villafaila, Villafalia and Villafeia. https://epstein-data.com/HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010575 ↩ ↩2

  23. Non-Prosecution Agreement, terms 1–2. https://epstein-data.com/DOJ-OGR-00000290 p.4 ↩

  24. Copy of the same plea proffer with names redacted. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00215238 ↩

  25. Daily Mail report quoting the plea proffer, forwarded to Groff’s mailbox Jan 5–6, 2015. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02088081 ↩ ↩2

  26. SDNY prosecution memorandum, Apr 14, 2020, p.5. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02731200 ↩

  27. SDNY, Prosecution Memorandum, United States v. Epstein, June 11, 2019, p.16. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02731039 ↩ ↩2

  28. Joint Rule 26(f) Report, Dkt. 28, Apr 5, 2017. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00310348 pp.1–2 ↩ ↩2

  29. Complaint, ¶18. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00594577 p.5 ↩

  30. Memorandum of law for Epstein and Groff in support of a supplemental motion to dismiss the first amended complaint under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(2) and (6). https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00801426 pp.1, 5 ↩

  31. Notice of motion for sanctions under Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(c) by Epstein and Groff. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00308099 ↩

  32. Answer of Lesley Groff, Dkt. 147, Aug 31, 2018. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00283693 p.1 ↩

  33. Plaintiff’s Notice of Taking Videotaped Deposition of Lesley Groff, for Aug 24, 2018. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00793314 ↩

  34. Plaintiff’s Re-Notice of Taking Videotaped Deposition of Lesley Groff, for Oct 30, 2018. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00808197 ↩

  35. Protective order, Jane Doe 43 v. Epstein, Dkt. 177, Nov 29, 2018. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01263275 p.6 ↩

  36. FBI, Case Initiation Summary, p.2. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01649143 ↩

  37. Sealed Indictment, United States v. Jeffrey Epstein, 19 Cr. 490 (S.D.N.Y.), ¶¶11, 22(c). https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01265886 pp.5, 9–10 ↩

  38. Email, AUSAs to Geoffrey Berman and others, “Epstein interview updates,” July 22, 2019. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00085273 p.1 ↩

  39. Same memorandum, p.29. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02731082 ↩

  40. Same memorandum, p.31. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02731082 ↩

  41. Same memorandum, p.47. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02731082 ↩

  42. SDNY prosecution memorandum, Apr 14, 2020, p.2. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02731200 ↩

  43. Same memorandum, p.86 (headings “D. Leslie Groff” and “E. Ghislaine Maxwell” only). https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02731082 ↩

  44. Congressional Record, August 31, 2026, p.H5349, “Bring Epstein Perpetrators to Justice” (Mr. Massie). https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CREC-2026-08-31/html/CREC-2026-08-31-pt1-PgH5349-3.htm ↩

  45. Michael Bilton, Kate Mansey and John Harlow, “Lawyers drag prince into underage sex scandal,” The Sunday Times, Mar 13, 2011, preserved at https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00702759 p.2 ↩

  46. The Daily Beast, “Jeffrey Epstein’s Right-Hand Mystery Men,” preserved at https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01654937 p.15 ↩

Backlinks