Epstein Data Wiki

Steven Sinofsky

Properties2
tagsperson, microsoft, technology, venture-capital, correspondence, 2013, separation-agreement, advice
aliasesSteven Sinofsky, Steve Sinofsky, Sinofsky, Steven, Sinofsky, Steve

37 min read

What the released correspondence isA direct e-mail correspondence with Jeffrey Epstein. It begins the night Microsoft sent him a draft resignation agreement and it continues into 201812
Where it starts12 November 2012. Brad Smith sent the draft agreement; within hours Sinofsky had forwarded it to Epstein and asked “any suggestions?”1
What Epstein was asked forAdvice on the separation negotiation with Microsoft, on the press handling of it, and on what to do with the shares it paid out134
What Epstein charged”I will charge you a one million dollar fee ( i will not get insulted if you choose not to )”, 3 April 20135
The invoiceSent 2 July 2013 with the covering line “no rush ,, but here is an invoice”. The attachment line on one copy names the file Invoice_to_Stephen_Sanofsky6
The paymentA JPMorgan statement for Southern Trust Company, Inc. records a fedwire credit of 1,000,000.00 settling 16 September 2013, the by-order-of line naming Sinofsky7
The instrument itselfRetirement Agreement and Full and Final Release of Claims between Microsoft Corporation and Steven Sinofsky, signed by him on 17 June 2013 and by Microsoft on 21 June 2013, filed as an exhibit to Microsoft’s annual report8
Also in the recordAn offer to a third party that Sinofsky “would visit at your request”; a proposal naming him among unpaid advisers; a lunch and an evening booked around him; a one-line message to a third party asking about an island schedule and, in the same line, what idea would make sense for Sinofsky910111213
What is not hereNo flight manifest, no visit to any Epstein property, no payment from Epstein to him, and no allegation against him of any kind. See the closing section of this page

Steven Sinofsky ran Microsoft’s Windows division until November 2012 and afterwards became a board partner at the venture firm Andreessen Horowitz. Between those two facts sits a body of released correspondence in which he asked Jeffrey Epstein to advise him on the money and the press handling of his departure from Microsoft, in which Epstein named a fee for doing it, and in which a wire for that amount reached an Epstein entity.

In this material he writes and is written to. Reading the passage around his name in a random draw of documents, the judgement of this page is that he is far more often the sender of a message or a named recipient of one than a name somebody else has written down; a reader who opens the documents cited below can overrule that reading. The exchange runs on for years after the matter that started it was closed.

He has not been charged with any offence and no document on this page alleges one.14 Every claim below is an act recorded in a document: a message sent, a message received, a meeting booked, a filing, a payment.

A note on what this page uses, and what it does not

Sinofsky is a public writer, and his own e-mail signature in this release points readers at a blog he kept.15 This page does not quote or characterise anything he has published, and it does not use his published writing to explain the correspondence or the correspondence to explain his published writing. The two are different kinds of document and they are kept apart here.

The page prints figures where a figure is the substance of the instrument quoted: the fee Epstein named, and the amount a bank statement records arriving. It does not reproduce account numbers, wire reference strings, balances, portfolio holdings, share counts, grant identifiers or vesting schedules, from that statement or from any other document, and it does not say where any such value appears. Telephone numbers and e-mail addresses are not reproduced for anyone. Where a document names a third party who is not the subject of this page and whose name adds nothing to the record of Sinofsky’s own acts, the page does not reproduce the name.

Before the correspondence begins

The earliest material in the release that carries his name is not correspondence with Epstein at all. In July 2011 a correspondent forwarded Epstein an item Sinofsky had sent out to a list, under the covering line “From Stevie.”16 Similar forwards continue through 2012, all of them from the same hand and none of them from Sinofsky.

In October 2011 Cecile de Jongh, who was assembling a guest list for a conference around Marvin Minsky, wrote to Epstein about him. Her message says that contact information for Sinofsky was not to hand in Epstein’s office and asks: “I see that he works at Microsoft - do you have any contact info for him?”17 Epstein answered the same afternoon.

Days later de Jongh sent Epstein the running tally for the same event. It is a two-column list of surnames and answers, and the last line reads “Sinofsy No”.18 The spelling is the sheet’s. In a further message of that planning sequence, quoted on the desk’s page for Barnaby Marsh, his surname appears again under the heading “Declines:”.

In February 2013 Epstein’s assistant again wrote to a third party for his contact details.19 Nothing in the released material shows the two men in direct contact before November 2012.

12 and 13 November 2012

On the afternoon of 12 November 2012 Brad Smith sent him a draft resignation agreement on Microsoft’s behalf, copying Lisa Brummel. Smith’s covering letter says the agreement “clarifies some of your current obligations and enhances some others (including a non-solicitation obligation that lasts 18 rather than 12 months), and in exchange it provides you with considerable remuneration”, and offers the names of two employment lawyers in Seattle.20

Sinofsky forwarded it to Epstein the same night. The exchange that followed sits on one sheet and is read from the bottom upward. It begins:1

any suggestions?

they are paying each of my directs (8 people) $1m over two years as a retention bonus in addition to promoting several of them (so more money). they are very worried I will recruit them. they would all go somewhere if I landed somewhere stable.

Epstein: “All one sided.. You definitely will need advice”

Sinofsky: “I gotta sleep .. but advise me or tell me who to advise me? Obviously our legal folks have heard everything before ;-)”

Epstein: “I’ll set aside time tomorw, congratulations . You are free…”

No earlier direct exchange between the two men appears in the released material, and the earliest one that does is a request for advice on a contract.

November 2012 to spring 2013: the negotiation

A single sheet carries the exchange of the following fortnight in one sequence.21 On 14 November Epstein wrote, “lots of chatter . stay focused on what you want and how to mazimize its liklihood”. On 20 November Sinofsky reported back:21

Chatter over. Exhausting and more.

WSJ doing “defense of Sinofsky” on their own. I can talk on Monday if I want before it runs.

Price/lefkowitz talking. Fixated on specific companies I won’t work for and non-solicit. They balked at full vesting.

Epstein answered “Push on 20 do not fold”. Sinofsky replied “Not sure what leverage i have.” and set out what leverage he thought he had: “I could get the story written of being asked to be CEO but choosing to support Steve. It would be on the eve of the shareholder meeting.” Epstein wrote back, “They will want resolution just repeat 20 20 20 we will revisit next week”, and Sinofsky answered “Ok”.21

On 16 November Melanie Walker forwarded Epstein the message Sinofsky had sent the previous evening to Microsoft’s Windows and Windows Live senior managers, under the covering line “Confidential please…”22 It is a long valedictory note. Its second paragraph reads: “I won’t say goodbye, since we’ll see each other. But I think a short note is in order.”

Two further threads of the period are on the record. On 22 November Epstein wrote to Bobby Kotick, then the chief executive of Activision Blizzard: “have you guys decided your schedule . for island …what idea makes sense for Steve sinofsky,”13 The line carries two questions separated by seven full stops. The first is addressed to Kotick about a schedule; the second asks what idea would suit Sinofsky. Whether Epstein meant the second to follow from the first is not something the sheet settles, and this page does not resolve it either way. The message does not say which island, and nothing in the released material records an answer from Kotick, a visit, or any travel by Sinofsky to any Epstein property. On 28 November Epstein wrote, “tim cook was excited to meet, howevr he said that he was told that you were starting a co with farstall ? ( sp ) and in that case he would have to decline”, and Sinofsky answered, “Are you joking? That’s what bloggers have said.”23

By March 2013 the negotiation was still open and a job was in view. On 9 March Sinofsky told Epstein: “I am heading to korea. they offered me a partner at Andreessen horowitz. sounds more fun than Samsung. told them I like it, need to close with Microsoft”, and set out the difference between the firm’s two grades of partner. Later in the same chain, having asked Epstein what he thought of the idea, he described the work: “The day to day of being a vc is very similar. Helping people make stuff.”24

April 2013: the fee

On 3 April 2013 Sinofsky wrote a long message apologising for not having acknowledged what Epstein had been doing for him:5

My gosh, I am sooo sorry that I was not explicit in showing my appreciation. I am deeply appreciative from the moment of referral to you checking in on things to the side dialogs you’ve had. I’m terribly sorry I did not express that in a way that made it clear.

and, a few lines later:5

I’m more than happy to turn this over to you. Any fee you want is fine. That isn’t an issue for me at all. Or if you don’t want to be involved that is fine too. I would rather be friends more than anything.

The rest of the message is an argument that the negotiation is not really about money: “For me, the currency in this negotiation isn’t money. Steve doesn’t care about the money because he knows I am not motivated by the money. The most important thing for Steve is foreclosing options for me.”5

Epstein replied the same day, and named a number:5

Brad is really at 10. being gracious and above reproach in this negotiation will go a long way to stopping steve from trashing you. you are right about the pr and i am very sensitve to it. I will handle it moving foward with jay, you can always blame jay , we will tell brad that you have removed yourself. I will charge you a one million dollar fee ( i will not get insulted if you choose not to ).

The sentence continues past that point on the same sheet.5

May and June 2013: the drafting

The lawyers in the thread are named on the sheets. Scott D. Price of Kirkland & Ellis LLP wrote to Sinofsky and to “Lefkowitz, Jay P.”, copying Epstein, about the non-disparagement clause:25

I’m not positive what they are trying to achieve, but what this language prohibits you from doing is disparaging Windows and any other product put out while you were with MSFT, even if you’re not using confidential information.

Sinofsky wrote back with a worked example of being misquoted in the technology press, and asked: “And anything viewed as disparagement (legally, not in English) I could correct as per earlier in the agreement?” At the head of the sheet Epstein answers both of them: “relax , ,you are making yourself crazy. sign and go on”25 The sheet prints no mark after “on”. The page for Jay Lefkowitz carries the same sheet from his side.

Epstein’s own view of how the clause should be handled is on a sheet of 14 May:26

I agree, what i propose is to get the agreement signed and filed with the sec. THen you can say whatever you like , aslong as you refer to the publicly filed agreement that says you will not disparage,

followed by a worked script for a press answer.26 The message Sinofsky had sent him that morning runs across the sheet break and is not complete on the sheet quoted here; the part of it that stands on that sheet includes “All I ask in return is money.” and “But they can’t buy silence about the workings of our industry or how management works.” The remainder is on the second sheet of the same run and nothing is quoted from it.

On 16 May Sinofsky reported the outcome of the other negotiation: “told the Andressen guys I would join as a board partner. no announcement until we’re done (one way or another).” Epstein answered with one word, “great”.27

On 17 June Sinofsky raised the last commercial point: “Are you ok without the accelerated first payment? / I can be ok. I just can’t be ok with the disclosure plan.”28 Epstein answered: “lets agree documents and after signing and only after suggest that we think upon review that the entire agreement needs to be attached, it is not part of our agreement … you and I only”29

He signed the Retirement Agreement and Full and Final Release of Claims that day. Microsoft signed it four days later, and it was filed as an exhibit to the company’s annual report. The agreement fixes his separation date at 31 December 2012, bars him for twelve months from taking employment with seven named companies, and provides that he “agrees not to make any disparaging remarks about Microsoft, its officers or directors, its products, or the Released Parties”, with that restriction relaxing from 1 January 2016.8

Summer 2013 and the invoice

Two days after the agreement was countersigned, Sinofsky forwarded Epstein an internal note from Andreessen Horowitz saying the firm would announce its board partners on 26 June. His covering lines read: “this is the same day I am hosting Andrew at the firm… / they will hold this if I ask. they are doing this to announce me as the other folks have all been with the firm for a while. / I am going to do a blog post all about startups, learning, and the firm.”30

The June message gives no more of “Andrew” than the name. Two days after the Wednesday it names, Sinofsky forwarded Epstein a thank-you written to him directly by Amanda Thirsk, private secretary to the Duke of York. Neither sheet says the two are the same person; the date and the subject matter are what connect them:31

Thank you so much for wednesday - it was so interesting. The Duke was fascinated by the Andressen Horowitz model and found the discussion incredibly stimulating.

She goes on: “The portfolio companies were stunning - such incredible energy and vision. I really hope we can help them in terms of their UK aspirations.” and “More widely lots to think about in terms of HRH’s aspirations - any thoughts observations would be greatly appreciated.”31 Epstein is not a party to that meeting on any sheet; he received it as a forward. See Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor.

On 2 July Epstein sent the invoice. The covering line reads: “no rush ,, but here is an invoice”. One copy of the message carries an attachment line naming the file Invoice_to_Stephen_Sanofsky; the misspelling is in the filename as printed.6

On 30 August, in a thread headed “Re: Wow” that Sinofsky had opened with “Microsoft is crazy town!!”, Epstein wrote: “more than you know. by the way, I assume you will pay my invoice when you get paid in sept?” Sinofsky answered: “Yep. Jay was first wire from new account and just got it rolling.”32

16 and 17 September 2013: the payment

On 16 September Epstein wrote to Sinofsky: “no money received”. Sinofsky replied by forwarding a message from his bank’s private-client desk reporting that the wire was completed.33 Epstein forwarded that on to his accountant, Richard Kahn, within the minute.34

Kahn wrote back the same afternoon that his own bank could not see it and asked which set of instructions had been used. The next morning he closed the matter:35

Wire hit JPM yesterday to a brokerage account that I did not give wire instructions for.. Confirming 1,000,000 in JPM STC

The sheet prints no mark after “STC”.35

A JPMorgan statement for Southern Trust Company, Inc., covering the period 1 to 30 September 2013, records the same transaction from the receiving side. Under Contributions it carries one row: a Misc Credit, settle date 9/16, described as a fedwire credit, with the by-order-of line naming Sinofsky, in the amount 1,000,000.00. The statement is a JPMorgan production stamped Confidential Treatment Requested by JPMorgan Chase.7 The amount matches the fee Epstein had named in April and invoiced in July.

Introductions, and what Epstein did with the name

Epstein offered Sinofsky to other correspondents.

On 2 July 2013, replying to Ariane de Rothschild about a Greek government’s interest in building a software industry, he wrote: “IMF problem a serious one, - software very difficult. but Steve Sinofsky , former head of microsoft windows would visit at your request.”9 The next day, writing to her and two others, he offered to assemble a group, and the four men he named were Jes Staley, Joi Ito, Lawrence Summers and Sinofsky:10

If you would like , I could help put together some advisors. ( unpaid ). Jes Staley, former head of private bank J P Morgan, Head of MIT Media Joi Ito. . Larry Summers, / Steve Sinofsky, software guru. etc. young thinkers.

On 21 September 2013 he wrote to Joshua Cooper Ramo and Joi Ito: “how about also lunch on wed with steve sinofsky . oliveir colom and sultan from dubai, that joi met.”36 Epstein’s office schedule for the following Wednesday, 25 September, carries a 12:00pm lunch with Sultan bin Sulayem and others, and a separate line at 12:30pm: “Steve Sinofsky to Join the Lunch”.11 That is a booking. Nothing in the released material records who attended.

In February 2018, five years later, a founder who had been to see Epstein wrote to Lesley Groff asking her to pass on his thanks, and added: “Please also let him know that we made contact with Steven Sinofsky yesterday, per his recommendation. Steven said that meeting early stage companies via Skype is not effective, and therefore suggested an in-person in the Bay Area the next time we go out west (he told us not to make a trip out specifically to meet with him).”37

Meetings arranged

Two arrangements of February 2013 are on the record in detail, and neither is closed by any later document.

In February 2013 Epstein’s office arranged an evening. The office schedule for Tuesday 19 February carries the line “8:00 SNACKS Evening with Steve Sinofsky & Benny Shabtai”, the second name being that of Benny Shabtai.12 On the morning of the 19th Groff wrote to a third party, “I do not have any contact details for Steve…might you be able to pass along to me?”, and that afternoon wrote to him directly to move the time to 8:30pm at Epstein’s Manhattan house.19 A week later an alert in the office diary asks whether Sinofsky and Shabtai need reconfirming.38

The following morning, 20 February, Sinofsky wrote to Groff, “Hey there. We will want to update JEE in a bit on what is going on.”, and the exchange that ran through that morning ends with him asking to come at “4-430 to catch Newark flight” and Groff answering, “(JE knows and has confirmed he will see you!!…)”39 Both entries are arrangements. No document in the released material reports either meeting taking place.

After the agreement

The correspondence does not stop when the matter that started it is closed. It runs on into 2018, much of it forwarded articles and short exchanges.

In October 2013 he forwarded Epstein a reply he had had from Tim Cook. His own message to Cook, quoted beneath it, reads: “I wanted to just send a quick note following up on our morning 1:1 at the All Things D Conference this past Spring.” Cook’s answer is two lines: “Great to hear from you. I’ll get something set up.” Epstein answered the forward with one word, “good”.40

In October 2013, in a thread about the Silk Road prosecution and bitcoin, Epstein floated something else: “should we orgaznie a fun meeeting in the carib in dec. tech. types. can also visit bransons island”. Sinofsky’s reply is “would love to…schedule pretty tricky but lets talk tomorrow and see what and when would be good?” and “I’m east.”41 The message he was answering both asked for ideas and floated the December meeting, and his reply does not say which of the two it answers. No document in the released material records any such meeting.

In February 2014, asked for news, Sinofsky wrote: “nope…still want to make sure it works for all. need to do couple more deals to be full time vc. didn’t hear from apple.”42

In December 2014 Epstein pressed him for information about a company the firm had invested in. Sinofsky wrote “We are already in coinbase.”; Epstein asked “understood, are they partipciating in the c round?”; Sinofsky answered “I am east right now and not at deal review meetings.”; Epstein wrote “can you ask??”; and Sinofsky closed it:43

It would be awkward to share. It isn’t my company.

Prorata rounds are not usually discussed as a whole team.43

Exchanges continue at intervals through 2016 and 2017. The last dated message in the released material with him in a header role is of 14 November 2018, a forwarded news item under the subject “Greenberg cost cutting”, with one line of body: “haha—thought this was fake but apparently not :-)“2

What he has said about it

Nothing that the desk can find. Reporting on these documents began in early 2026. The Register reported on 2 February 2026 that Sinofsky had sought Epstein’s advice on his Microsoft exit.44 Fortune reported on 12 March 2026 that he “hired Jeffrey Epstein as a paid negotiator on his Microsoft exit deal” and that Epstein “collected a $1 million fee”, and stated in terms: “Sinofsky did not provide a comment to Fortune, and a16z did not immediately respond to Fortune’s request for comment.” The same article notes that he “hasn’t been charged with any crime, nor accused of any wrongdoing.”14

No statement by him on this subject is recorded on this page, and none was found. That is a statement about this page and about what the desk could reach, not about the world.

What the documents do not show

  • No travel. Nothing in the material swept for this page places him on an aircraft, at Little Saint James, at the New Mexico ranch (Zorro Ranch) or at any other Epstein property; no flight manifest or passenger list found here carries his name. The November 2012 message that mentions an island is one Epstein put to somebody else, and the question in it about Sinofsky is not stated to be an island question; no answer to it is in the released material.13
  • No payment to him. The one payment recorded between them runs from him to an Epstein entity.7
  • No attendance. Two meetings are booked on the record and a third is proposed. None of the three is closed by any later document. A booking is not an attendance, and a message reporting that something went well would close an event rather than anyone’s presence; no such message exists for any of these.
  • No allegation. No filing, deposition, complaint or investigative record found in the material swept for this page names him in connection with any allegation of wrongdoing, and no press account read for this page reports one.
  • What was agreed for the fee is not written down. Sinofsky said any fee would be fine and Epstein then named one. No engagement letter, retainer or scope of work appears in the material swept for this page, only the fee sentence, the invoice covering note, the reminder to pay and the wire.
  • The final terms are not taken from the correspondence. Figures discussed between the two men in November 2012 and April 2013 were negotiating positions. What Microsoft and Sinofsky actually agreed is in the filed agreement, which is a public document.8

Also named in the record used here, without pages on this wiki: Brad Smith and Lisa Brummel (Microsoft); Scott D. Price (Kirkland & Ellis LLP); Amanda Thirsk (Private Secretary to the Duke of York); Tim Cook (Apple); Jonathan Halata.

Coverage

  • Carly Page, “Microsoft’s Sinofsky saw Surface fail coming - then hit up Epstein for advice on exit”, The Register, 2 February 2026.44
  • Lily Mae Lazarus, “a16z exec Steven Sinofsky had murky dealings with Jeffrey Epstein in his previous life working for Microsoft”, Fortune, 12 March 2026.14

Footnotes

Footnotes

  1. E-mail thread, 13 November 2012, subject “Re: FW: Resignation Agreement”, one sheet read bottom-up: Sinofsky to Epstein; Epstein’s reply; Sinofsky’s reply; and Epstein’s answer at the head. ⚠ The sheet carries an export header and inline stamps that do not agree, so no time of day is stated here and the order given is the order of the quoting. EFTA00947401 p.1. Read at the image at 300 dpi. The text layer renders the retention figure as $lm with a lower-case L; the sheet prints $1m. Sinofsky’s address on the To: line is covered. A second copy of the innermost message, produced from the other side of the thread, is at EFTA00701402 p.1. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  2. Steven Sinofsky to Jeffrey Epstein, 14 November 2018, subject “Greenberg cost cutting”. EFTA02615237 p.1. Read at the image at 300 dpi. This is the latest dated message in the released material in which he is a header party; the claim is made about the material swept for this page and about nothing else. ↩ ↩2

  3. Steven Sinofsky to Jeffrey Epstein, 9 June 2013, subject “next”, asking what to do about press handling once the agreement is signed. EFTA01970186 p.1, read at the text layer and not at the image. Cited here only for the fact that press handling was among the things Epstein was asked about. ↩

  4. Steven Sinofsky to Jeffrey Epstein, 10 June 2013, subject “Re: grant vesting”, quoting his own earlier message asking what to buy in order to hedge the vesting, and Epstein’s reply. EFTA01972029 pp.1-2, read at the text layer and not at the image. Cited here only for the fact that hedging advice was asked for and answered. The share counts, grant identifiers, per-grant values and vesting schedule printed on the same sheets are not reproduced. ↩

  5. Jeffrey Epstein to Steven Sinofsky, 3 April 2013, subject “Re:”, one sheet of a four-sheet run, read bottom-up: Epstein’s prompt of the early morning; Sinofsky’s long reply of 9:59 AM; and Epstein’s answer at the head. EFTA01896626 p.1 of 4. Read at the image at 300 dpi. Two text-layer errors on this sheet are corrected here against the image: s000 for sooo, and one verb in Epstein’s message which the extraction replaces with a milder word. Sinofsky’s address is covered on the sheet. Sheets 2 to 4 continue his message and were read at the text layer; the negotiating figures they contain are not reproduced. Epstein’s fee sentence is quoted because the fee is the substance of the arrangement this page reports. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6

  6. Jeffrey Epstein to Steven Sinofsky, 2 July 2013. Two copies. EFTA01968322 p.1 prints Invoice on the subject line and no attachment line. EFTA01135121 p.1 prints an empty subject line and the attachment line Attachments: Invoice_to_Stephen_Sanofsky. Both read at the image at 300 dpi. The text layer of both renders the covering line’s double comma as a single damaged glyph; the sheets print two commas. The invoice itself is not in the released material at either identifier. ↩ ↩2

  7. Portfolio Activity Detail page of a J.P. Morgan statement headed SOUTHERN TRUST COMPANY, INC, for the period 9/1/13 to 9/30/13, stamped Confidential Treatment Requested by JPMorgan Chase and produced with an SDNY Bates range. EFTA01500125 p.1. Read at the image at 300 dpi, and the image corrects the text layer in seven places, including the total-income figure, two settle dates, an accrued-interest amount, a security identifier and the spelling of the surname on the by-order-of line. Cited only for the one Contributions row: a Misc Credit, settle date 9/16, fedwire credit, 1,000,000.00, the by-order-of line naming Sinofsky. The account number, the wire reference strings, the balance figure, the securities positions and every other row on the sheet are not reproduced. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  8. Retirement Agreement and Full and Final Release of Claims between Microsoft Corporation and Steven Sinofsky, signed by Sinofsky on 17 June 2013 and by Microsoft on 21 June 2013, filed as Exhibit 10.19 to Microsoft Corporation’s annual report on Form 10-K for fiscal 2013. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0000789019/000119312513310206/d527745dex1019.htm A public filing, not part of the released Epstein material. Fetched 2026-09-28 at HTTP 200. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  9. Jeffrey Epstein to A. de Rothschild, 2 July 2013, subject “Re:”, quoting her message of 3:21 PM and his own of 15:15. EFTA01968576 p.1 of 2. Read at the image at 300 dpi. The second sheet carries only a disclaimer. ↩ ↩2

  10. Jeffrey Epstein to A. de Rothschild, Olivier Colom and Terje Rod-Larsen, 3 July 2013, no subject line. EFTA01969385 p.1. Read at the image at 300 dpi. E-mail addresses printed on the To: line are not reproduced. ↩ ↩2

  11. Lesley Groff to Jeffrey Epstein, 24 September 2013, subject “Schedule a call w/Linda Stone on Wed orThurs? Thurs is better…”, setting out the diary for Wednesday 25 and Thursday 26 September 2013. HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_000967. Read at the image, which is one JPEG for the sheet; the text layer renders the day heading as “Wednesday Sept 25,2043” where the sheet prints 2013, and garbles three of the times. Nothing covered on this sheet is supplied or described here. This is a schedule, and a schedule records an intention. ↩ ↩2

  12. Office schedule for Tuesday 19 February 2013, sent to Epstein on 15 February 2013 under the subject “The Hodges on Tues. Feb. 19th in NY”. EFTA01906242 p.1 of 4, read at the text layer and not at the image. Cited only for the 8:00 line. The travel-agency material on the later sheets concerns two private travellers and is not reported here. The same day’s schedule is printed again, under a different covering message, at EFTA01907592 p.1, text layer only. ↩ ↩2

  13. Jeffrey Epstein to Bobby Kotick, 22 November 2012, no subject line. EFTA01976586 p.1. Read at the image at 300 dpi. The text layer closes a gap the sheet prints as seven full stops; the quotation here follows the sheet, and the gap is load-bearing because it is what leaves the line’s two questions unjoined. No contact value is reproduced here. A second copy is at EFTA02011128 p.1, text layer only. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  14. Lily Mae Lazarus, “a16z exec Steven Sinofsky had murky dealings with Jeffrey Epstein in his previous life working for Microsoft”, Fortune, 12 March 2026. https://fortune.com/2026/03/12/a16z-exec-steven-sinofsky-murky-dealings-jeffrey-epstein-previous-life-microsoft Fetched 2026-09-28 at HTTP 200. Cited for what the publication reported, including its statement that no comment was provided to it, and for nothing else. ⚠ The figure that article gives for the Microsoft package differs from the figure Sinofsky himself used in the correspondence, and this page takes neither as the final terms, which are in the filed agreement. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  15. Sinofsky’s own signature block, printed at the foot of his messages in the release, gives the address of a blog he wrote and a social handle. EFTA01972916 p.1, read at the image at 300 dpi. Cited only for the existence of the blog. Nothing published on it is quoted or characterised anywhere on this page. ↩

  16. A correspondent to Jeffrey Epstein, 16 July 2011, subject “Fwd: ‘Atlas Shrugged’: From Fiction to Fact in 52 Years .”, forwarding an item Sinofsky had circulated that morning, under the covering line “From Stevie.” EFTA02541575 p.1 of 2, read at the text layer and not at the image. The sender’s name is covered on the sheet and is not supplied here, nor is any role or attribute for them. ↩

  17. Jeffrey Epstein to Cecile de Jongh, 17 October 2011, subject “Re: Steve Sinofsky”, quoting her message of 1:02 PM. EFTA01853987 p.1. Read at the image at 300 dpi. The sentence quoted in the body is whole as printed. Nothing covered on this sheet is supplied or completed here. Epstein’s own reply carries a covered word and is not quoted. ↩

  18. Forwarded message from Cecile de Jongh to Epstein, 20 October 2011, subject “Future in Computing Conference”, reproduced inside a message of 21 October 2011. EFTA02182030 p.1 of 2. Read at the image at 300 dpi. “Sinofsy” is as spelled on the sheet. The sender of the outermost message is covered and is not identified here. A related sheet quoted on Barnaby Marsh, of 15 November 2011, prints his surname under the heading “Declines:”. ↩

  19. Message chain of 19 February 2013 between Lesley Groff and a third party, with Sinofsky copied, arranging an 8:30pm visit that evening. EFTA02146128 p.2 of 3, read at the text layer and not at the image. Groff’s line “I do not have any contact details for Steve” is quoted from that sheet. A further copy of the chain is at EFTA02146806 p.1. ↩ ↩2

  20. Brad Smith (LCA) to Steven Sinofsky, copying Lisa Brummel, 12 November 2012 4:34 PM, subject “Resignation Agreement”, surviving as the innermost message of a forward to Epstein. EFTA00947401 pp.1-2 of 3. First sheet read at the image at 300 dpi; the second sheet, which carries the body of Smith’s letter, was read at the text layer only. The draft agreement itself is not quoted here. ↩

  21. One sheet carrying six messages of the fortnight after the draft arrived, read bottom-up: Epstein of 14 November 2012; Sinofsky of 20 November; Epstein of 21 November; Sinofsky of 20 November again; Epstein of 21 November again; and Sinofsky’s one-word reply at the head, whose own subject line is “RE:”. EFTA01973997 p.1. Read at the image at 300 dpi. ⚠ The sheet carries two clocks: the export header of the outermost message is timed earlier than the inline stamp of the message it replies to, so no time of day is stated here and the order given is the order of the quoting, which is not in doubt. The image corrects the extraction again on the same sheet: the text layer renders the newspaper’s initials as WS1 where the sheet prints WSJ. Epstein’s 14 November message opens with a covered value and the quotation of it here begins after that opening. A further copy of the 21 November pair is at EFTA01973956 p.1, text layer only. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  22. Melanie Walker to Jeffrey Epstein, 16 November 2012, subject “FW: Office Hours Posts - (Not) A very special post”, forwarding Sinofsky’s message of 15 November 2012 to “Windows and Windows Live Senior Managers”. EFTA01977118 p.1 of 4. Read at the image at 300 dpi. The text layer of this sheet drops five words: it renders “But I think ’ in order. This is also m last stevesi mail :-” where the sheet prints “But I think a short note is in order. This is also my last stevesi mail :-)”. Values following that sentence are covered and none is supplied here. Sheets 2 to 4 carry the remainder of the message and were read at the text layer only; nothing is quoted from them. ↩

  23. Steven Sinofsky to Jeffrey Epstein, 28 November 2012, subject “RE:”, quoting Epstein’s message of the same day. EFTA01999648 p.1. Read at the image at 300 dpi. ↩

  24. A three-sheet run of one chain of 9 and 10 March 2013, subject “Re:”. EFTA01900363 pp.1-2 of 3. The second sheet, which carries the continuation of Sinofsky’s message of 9 March and Epstein’s prompt of the same day, was read at the image at 300 dpi; the text layer renders the firm’s fund size there as $36 where the sheet prints $3B. The first sheet, which carries his message of 10 March describing the work, was read at the text layer only. ⚠ Two clocks run on this sheet and no time of day is stated here; the order given is the order of the quoting. ↩

  25. E-mail thread, 10 June 2013, subject “Re: privileged”, one sheet read bottom-up: Scott D. Price to Steven Sinofsky and “Lefkowitz, Jay P.”, copying Jeffrey Epstein; Sinofsky’s reply; and Epstein’s answer at the head. EFTA00962143 p.1 of 5. Read at the image at 300 dpi. The text layer drops the word “you” from Epstein’s line and renders it “relax , are making yourself crazy”; the sheet prints “relax , ,you are making yourself crazy.” Interior runs of spaces are set as single spaces here. The remaining sheets carry the rest of the thread and were read at the text layer only. ↩ ↩2

  26. Jeffrey Epstein to Steven Sinofsky, 14 May 2013, subject “Re:”, quoting Sinofsky’s message of 7:15 AM the same morning. EFTA01975259 p.1 of 4. Read at the image at 300 dpi. Sheets 2 to 4 were read at the text layer only. ↩ ↩2

  27. Jeffrey Epstein to Steven Sinofsky, 16 May 2013, subject “Re: hey there”, quoting Sinofsky’s message of 10:49 AM. EFTA01972916 p.1. Read at the image at 300 dpi. ↩

  28. Steven Sinofsky to Jeffrey Epstein, 17 June 2013, subject “Accelerated payment”. EFTA01969279 p.1. Read at the image at 300 dpi. ↩

  29. Jeffrey Epstein to Steven Sinofsky, 17 June 2013, subject “Re: Accelerated payment”, quoting the message above. EFTA01969516 p.1. Read at the image at 300 dpi. The three full stops inside the quotation are the sheet’s own. ↩

  30. Steven Sinofsky to Jeffrey Epstein, 19 June 2013, subject “Fw: Board partner announcement - June 26”, forwarding an internal note from the firm’s communications team of 18 June. EFTA01968506 p.1. Read at the image at 300 dpi. The forwarded note names seven other recipients and three members of staff; none is reproduced here, because none of them adds anything to the record of Sinofsky’s own acts. ↩

  31. Steven Sinofsky to Jeffrey Epstein, 28 June 2013, subject “Fw: Thank you”, forwarding a message from Amanda Thirsk, Private Secretary to HRH The Duke of York, addressed to him and sent earlier that day. EFTA01965801 p.1. Read at the image at 300 dpi. “Andressen Horowitz” is as printed. Nothing on the sheet places Epstein at the meeting, and nothing here says he was there. ↩ ↩2

  32. Steven Sinofsky to Jeffrey Epstein, 30 August 2013, subject “Re: Wow”, one sheet carrying four messages of that afternoon read bottom-up. EFTA01958033 p.1 of 2. Read at the image at 300 dpi. A copy of Epstein’s message alone is at EFTA01959983 p.1, text layer only. ↩

  33. Steven Sinofsky to Jeffrey Epstein, 16 September 2013, subject “Re:”, forwarding a message from his bank’s private-client desk and quoting Epstein’s “no money received” beneath it. EFTA01959192 p.1, read at the text layer. The same forwarded text is printed on the sheet cited at [^kahnconfirm], which was read at the image. The two bank employees named on the forwarded message are private individuals in a clerical role and are not named here, and the wire reference string it carries is not reproduced. ↩

  34. Jeffrey Epstein to Richard Kahn, 16 September 2013, subject “Fwd:”, forwarding the message above. EFTA01959237 pp.1-2, read at the text layer and not at the image. Kahn’s first reply of the same afternoon, asking which instructions had been used, is at EFTA01954713 p.1 of 2, also text layer only; his business address and contact block on that sheet are not reproduced. ↩

  35. Richard Kahn to Jeffrey Epstein, 17 September 2013, subject “Re:”, quoting the forwarded chain beneath. EFTA01955672 p.1 of 2. Read at the image at 300 dpi. The two full stops after “for” are the sheet’s own and the sheet prints no mark after “STC”. The wire reference string printed on this sheet is not reproduced. ↩ ↩2

  36. Jeffrey Epstein to Joshua Cooper Ramo and Joi Ito, 21 September 2013, no subject line. EFTA00971063 p.1. Read at the image at 300 dpi. The text layer omits the full stop the sheet prints after “sinofsky”. ↩

  37. Jonathan Halata to Lesley Groff, 16 February 2018, subject “Re: Steven Sinofsky Email Address!”. EFTA00469658 p.1 of 2. Read at the image at 300 dpi. Addresses are covered on the sheet. The second sheet carries only a disclaimer. ↩

  38. Lesley Groff, diary alert of 26 February 2013 repeating an alert of 15 February, subject “Alert - do I need to reconfirm Sinofsky & Shabtai for 19th at 8pm? what about 20th?”. EFTA02146670 p.1, read at the text layer and not at the image. ↩

  39. Lesley Groff to Steven Sinofsky, 20 February 2013, subject “Re: Jeffrey Epstein”, one sheet carrying the whole of that morning’s exchange read bottom-up. EFTA02146128 pp.1-2 of 3; the first sheet was read at the image at 300 dpi and the second at the text layer only. The opening message of that morning stands on the second sheet, and the rest of the exchange on the first. The text layer renders Groff’s last line as “(JE knows and has confirmed he will see you!! )”; the sheet prints “(JE knows and has confirmed he will see you!!…)”. ↩

  40. Steven Sinofsky to Jeffrey Epstein, 17 October 2013, subject “Fwd: Greetings and follow-up”, forwarding Tim Cook’s reply of 12:27:06 PM EDT and, beneath it, his own message of 16 October. EFTA01949282 p.1. Read at the image at 300 dpi. The addresses are covered. Epstein’s reply of the same afternoon, quoting the whole chain beneath it, is at EFTA01949339 p.1 of 2, text layer only; its body is the single word quoted here. ↩

  41. Steven Sinofsky to Jeffrey Epstein, 6 October 2013, subject “RE: bitcoin and silk road”, quoting Epstein’s message of 10:54:53 -0400 and his own of 10:51 AM. EFTA01754969 p.1. Read at the image at 300 dpi. Epstein’s message alone is printed again at EFTA01951206 p.1, text layer only. ↩

  42. Steven Sinofsky to Jeffrey Epstein, 16 February 2014, subject “RE:”, quoting Epstein’s one-word prompt. EFTA01933256 p.1. Read at the image at 300 dpi. ↩

  43. Steven Sinofsky to “jeffrey E.”, 1 December 2014, subject “Re:”, one sheet carrying five messages of that afternoon read bottom-up. EFTA01787807 p.1. Read at the image at 300 dpi. ↩ ↩2

  44. Carly Page, “Microsoft’s Sinofsky saw Surface fail coming - then hit up Epstein for advice on exit”, The Register, 2 February 2026. https://www.theregister.com/2026/02/02/microsoft_sinofsky_epstein/ Fetched 2026-09-28 at HTTP 200. Cited for what the publication reported and for nothing else; the article records no request for comment. ↩ ↩2

Backlinks