Epstein Data Wiki

OCDETF and Operation Chain Reaction

Properties2
tagstopic, dea, ocdetf, fbi, usao-sdfl, fincen, asset-forfeiture, virgin-islands, court-records
aliasesOperation Chain Reaction, OCDETF Fusion Center Target Profile, NY-NYS-0829, C1-11-0049

52 min read

The document at the centreA sixty-nine-sheet memorandum from the Director of the OCDETF Fusion Center to an Assistant Special Agent in Charge, Special Operations Division, its subject line beginning “Target Profile:” and naming Epstein, dated May 18, 20151
Report numbersOFC-TP-15-12392 and SODOFC-15.12392, printed on every sheet1
Requested byThe Drug Enforcement Administration, New York, NY; the face page gives a date of request of April 28, 201512
DEA caseC1-11-0049, GDEP YNL3B, opened December 17, 2010, recorded on May 18, 2015 as “Pending Judicial”134
OCDETF case numberNY-NYS-08291
Operation name”Chain Reaction”, written once in the whole document, against the field headed OCDETF Operation Name on the face page1
TargetsFifteen. Target 4 is Jeffrey Epstein. Thirteen of the fifteen are carried under the heading “BIOGRAPHICAL/IDENTIFYING DATA” and two under “BUSINESS IDENTIFYING DATA”5
What the profile says the money is”DEA reporting indicates the above individuals are involved in illegitimate wire transfers which are tied to illicit drug and/or prostitution activities occurring in the U.S. Virgin Islands and New York City”2
What the profile says about its own figures”Many of their financial reports listed below include many/all of the targets as multiple subjects”2
What the profile says about its own useIt “should not be treated as a finished investigative product” and “may not be referenced in affidavits, indictments, extradition documents, other court related documents, press releases, or duplicated as a part of the discovery process” without written permission6
The OCDETF box on the Florida prosecutionUnmarked, with both of its fields empty, on the 2006 indictment approval cover sheet, on the 2009 one, and on the Operation Leap Year case initiation form; read at the page image on all three789

On May 18, 2015 the Director of the OCDETF Fusion Center sent an Assistant Special Agent in Charge in the Special Operations Division a sixty-nine-sheet profile of fifteen people and companies, three of them numbered before Jeffrey Epstein and eleven after him. The Drug Enforcement Administration’s New York office had asked for it on April 28; it was filed under a drug task force case opened on December 17, 2010; and it carried an operation name: Chain Reaction.12

This page is about that document and about the question it raises, which is a question about paperwork. The Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces programme (in the Department’s own description, reproduced in the release, a “prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach” aimed at “the highest-level criminal organizations that threaten the United States”) had a box on the forms.10 Federal prosecutors in Florida, investigating Epstein from 2006, had that box in front of them at least three times and never marked it. A drug task force in New York opened a case on him in 2010 and gave it a name. Both facts can be read off the paper.

What this page withholds. The profile covers fourteen people and companies besides Epstein whose names, dates of birth and other identifiers the producing party has covered, and this page completes none of them. Where the profile characterises a person the producing party has covered, the characterisation is reported and the person is not identified, described or reasoned about. No date of birth, driver’s licence number, account number, telephone number or street address appearing in any document cited here is reproduced. The page identifies no complainant and takes nothing from any complainant’s account. It makes no allegation and records none.

What this page does not cover. It does not cover the 2011 pen register analysis in which a telephone number was cross-referenced between the Florida investigation and a South Florida organised crime case; that is a separate matter and deserves its own page. It does not cover the contents of the sealed 2009 indictment, only the cover sheet in front of it. It does not cover the allegations about private individuals carried in the 2025 vetting memorandum described below, which are denied and which this page has no documentary basis to weigh. The Florida investigation itself is at Operation Leap Year, and the obstruction case that grew out of it is at Operation Stolen Globe.

What the profile is, and what it says it is not

The face page is a memorandum form. It gives the date twice, the report numbers twice, a request date of April 28, 2015, the DEA case number C1-11-0049 with a GDEP code, the OCDETF case number NY-NYS-0829, and, against the field headed OCDETF Operation Name, the words “Chain Reaction”. The names of the requestor, the unit chief, the desk officer, the intelligence analyst and the Special Operations Division contact are covered, and so are their telephone numbers. Under the heading “Agency information contained herein” the form carries nineteen small checkboxes. Read at the page image, seven are ticked: CBP, DEA, DSS, DOS, FBI, ICE and FinCEN. Twelve are not, among them ATF, IRS-CI, USMS, USPIS, USSS, BOP and DOC.1

Those seven are the same seven the document names in its own text. The Analytical Findings open: the profile “was prepared from a series of queries against the available OFC databases”, and reporting was found in “Customs and Border Protection (CBP); DEA; DOS Non-immigrant Visas (DOS NIV); Diplomatic Security Service (DSS); Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI); Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) Gateway; and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) databases as well as the commercial database Accurint.”2 The row’s own heading reads “Agency information contained herein”. Nothing on the face page describes it as a roster of agencies working a task force.1

The warning block beneath the subject line is the document’s own account of what it is worth:

“This product contains sensitive proprietary law enforcement information which may be either classified or the subject of stringent caveats. This product is compiled from multi-agency databases and open sources, and should not be treated as a finished investigative product.”6

And of what may be done with it:

“The recipient and attorney(s) are advised that this product may not be referenced in affidavits, indictments, extradition documents, other court related documents, press releases, or duplicated as a part of the discovery process without the express written permission of the OCDETF Fusion Center and the originating agencies. This product is provided to your agency for lead purposes only and may not be disseminated to third parties without approval of the originating agencies.”6

The last sheet of the sixty-nine ends with two lines, “Requestor:” and “Prepared by:”, and the names on both are covered.11

The money, and the sentence that governs how to read it

The profile’s financial summary runs over its first two printed pages and is a list of per-subject tallies. For Epstein it gives three figures:

CountTotalPeriod
Unified Suspicious Activity Reportsseven$5,672,9214 in 2015, 2 in 2014, 1 in 2013
Unified Currency Transaction Reportsthree$102,6481 in 2014, 2 in 2013
Currency Transaction Reportseight$233,3972 in 2011, 6 in 2010

212

The three currency transaction reports are itemised later in the document: $60,775 out on January 31, 2014, $21,150 on December 19, 2013 and $20,723 on November 15, 2013. The filing institution column names Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, in New York. The person who “conducted transactions on behalf of EPSTEIN” is covered, and this page does not supply the name from anywhere else.13

The figures for the other fourteen targets repeat. Four of them are each a subject of “three 2015 USARs totaling $4,193,637”. Two are each a subject of “three 2015 USARs totaling $2,754,983”. Three are each a subject of “two 2015 USARs totaling $4,079,102”, and a fourth is a subject of “two 2015 USARs totaling $4,079,101”, a dollar less, read at the page image.212

The analyst anticipated what a reader would do with figures like these and said so, in the second sentence of the financial section:

“Analyst’s Note 1: Many of their financial reports listed below include many/all of the targets as multiple subjects.”2

That is a caution against addition. On the analyst’s own account the repeated totals are the same bank filings counted against each of the people named in them, and the near-identical pair that differs by one dollar is what that would look like on the paper. A sum of the fifteen tallies is therefore not a sum of money, and the profile states no total of its own. Anyone quoting a headline figure for Operation Chain Reaction is quoting arithmetic the document warns against.

A second note on the same sheet bounds the window: “Only financial reporting from 2010 through 2015 is included in this report. Older financial information on the targets is available.”2

The attachments are not here

Sixteen times, counted in the released text of the profile, a bullet ends by sending the reader to Attachment 1, Attachment 2 or Attachment 3 “for more information”. Attachment 1 is cited after the suspicious activity report tallies, Attachment 2 after Epstein’s currency transaction report tally, and Attachment 3 after a further twenty-two currency transaction reports totalling $730,000 shared between two covered subjects.2121314 A search of the released files for the profile’s own report numbers returns the profile and nothing else; the attachments do not appear under them.15 What a search of the released files under these terms returns is not a statement about what exists.

The same gap runs through the offline query section. Each of its tables carries a note that the detail “is contained in the corresponding attached Offline NCIC file”, named in the note as a spreadsheet, “which provides the date/time and Agency ORI terminal the target was queried”.16 None of those spreadsheets is in the released files under the profile’s numbers either.15

Who had been asking about him, and over what period

The profile’s offline query section for Epstein is a three-sheet table of law enforcement terminals that had run his name, with a count and a first and last date for each. Read at the page image across all three sheets, it carries thirty-one rows totalling three hundred and fourteen queries. The earliest date on it is May 11, 2013 and the latest May 2, 2015.171613

That window is the form’s default and the document says so: “By default, OFC requests will query NCIC for the last 2 years of data unless otherwise requested by the requestor.”16 Three hundred and fourteen queries is therefore a two-year figure ending a fortnight before the report, and the table is silent about everything before May 2013 rather than empty of it.

The largest single row by a wide margin is a customs enforcement terminal at Newington, with 145 queries between May 11, 2013 and May 2, 2015. Rows whose printed name begins with Customs and Border Protection, CBP, US Customs or USC account for 276 of the 314 queries.171618 Among the single-query rows:

Terminal, as printed on the sheetCountDate
VIRGIN ISLANDS POLICE DEPARTMENT106/28/2013
HARVARD UNIVERSITY CAMPUS POLICE111/06/2013
DOJ U S ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE ST THOMAS101/08/2014
CBSA ASFC HQ IBQ103/17/2014
US SECRET SERV UNIFORM DIV WASHINGTON108/12/2014
U S SECRET SERVICE WHITE HOUSE DIVISION108/12/2014
FBI NOPU112/01/2014

16

Two divisions of the United States Secret Service each queried him once, on the same day, August 12, 2014. The table gives the count and the dates and nothing else; the column that would carry each terminal’s telephone number is covered. No document read for this page says why either query was run, and this page does not guess. The document’s own guidance note is the correct caution: an offline report “lists other law enforcement agencies that have previously queried the same individual” and “does not necessarily mean the agencies listed on the offline NCIC report have additional documents on that individual.”16

Three of the printed terminal names are worth reading carefully, because the machine-read text of the release gets all three wrong. The St Thomas row begins “DOJ” at the page image, where the released text gives “DOI” and so turns the Department of Justice into the Department of the Interior. The airport row reads “CBP JFK INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT”, where the released text gives “CBP MK”. The last row of the table, which the released text renders “FEU ClIS DIVISION”, reads “FBI CJIS DIVISION”, three queries between May 14 and May 28, 2013.1613

The five linked investigations

The profile’s Linked Investigations table for Epstein runs over two printed pages and carries five rows. Four of the five give a case number, an opening date and a status; the DEA’s own row gives a status of “Pending Judicial” and, in the column whose heading prints “File Title/” over “Operation Name”, a covered cell.417

Agency and locationCase numberOpenedStatusFile title, as printed on the sheet
DEA, New York, NYC1-11-004912/17/2010Pending Judicialcovered
FBI, Miami, FL31E-MM-10806207/25/2006Active”EPSTEIN, JEFFREY” and a covered span
ICE, Paris, FrancePA07-QK13PA000206/07/2013Closed, 10/03/2013OPERATION ANGEL WATCH / RCSO PRESENSE / TRANSITING INFO SHARING, on three lines
ICE, Las Vegas, NVLV15-HT09LV000902/02/2009Pending, 01/27/2010covered
ICE, West Palm Beach, FLWP07-QI06WP001107/28/2006Closed, 07/28/2008”Jeffrey EPSTEIN (ET AL)”

417

The Miami row is the one to read twice. On May 18, 2015, with the file having opened on July 25, 2006 and the Florida plea entered on June 30, 2008, both dates printed in the same table, the FBI’s Epstein case was recorded as Active. The published page on Operation Leap Year carries the Bureau’s own later designation of that file as pending inactive, dated to July 2017 in the FBI’s 2025 case-summary table; the 2015 entry sits earlier than that and is consistent with it.19

Each row carries a one-line detail beneath it, and the details are the profile summarising other agencies’ reporting. The Miami detail reads: “FBI reporting indicates Jeffrey EPSTEIN and Ghislaine MAXWELL are companions (FBI FD-302, 31E-MM-108062, 07/08/2013).” The Paris detail records a 2008 conviction “of procuring a person under age 18 for prostitution in Florida”. The Las Vegas detail records a guilty plea on 06/30/2008 “on charges relating to solicitation of prostitution and procurement of minors to engage in prostitution”.4

The West Palm Beach row is the one most easily lost. It is the last row, it sits alone at the top of the next printed sheet above the start of the query table, and its detail reads that “Jeffery EPSTEIN”, the document’s own spelling, pleaded guilty on 06/30/2008 “to state offences relating to solicitation of prostitution and procurement of minors to engage in prostitution”.17

Two companies and one associate

The profile lists two businesses for Epstein. Of the first it says: “FinCEN indicates this company provides aircraft maintenance. Accurint indicates this business consists of one 2001 Bell 430 aircraft (S/N: 49078) which was registered on 09/06/2013.” Of the second, SLK Designs LLC, a New York company recorded as Active with no corporate number and no officers listed: “EPSTEIN and SLK DESIGNS LLC are listed as subjects together in a 2014 USAR. FinCEN indicates EPSTEIN sent SLK DESIGNS LLC $20,000 from an external bank account in 2014.”4

The asset table names eight financial institutions across twelve account rows, in four jurisdictions: BNP Paribas and HSBC in Paris, Fortis Banque in Paris, HSBC Private Bank SA in Geneva, Valartis Bank AG in Zurich, Highbridge Capital Corporation in Grand Cayman, and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas and JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. in New York. Every account number is covered. The owner address given against almost every row is in St. Thomas, in the Virgin Islands.2021

Then, under the heading “Family Member/Associate Identifying Information”, there is one row. One. The relationship column reads “Associate”; the name, date of birth and social security number columns are covered. The detail beneath it reads that the person and Epstein “are subjects together in a 2014 USAR”, and that FinCEN indicates the person “would act as a recruiter and facilitator for EPSTEIN’s illicit activities.” A further note records that this person’s name “was listed on the DOS NIV application as the sponsor of” one of the other fourteen targets.21

This page does not identify that person, does not characterise them, and does not supply a name from any other document. What is reported here is that a federal financial intelligence assessment written in 2014 described an Epstein associate in those words, more than four years before his arrest in July 2019.22 Whether the assessment is sound is not something the profile, which disclaims being a finished investigative product, allows anyone to judge.621

The box nobody ticked

The Florida prosecution packages read for this page carry the OCDETF box, and none carries a mark in it. So does the paperwork that opened the Florida file in the first place. All three documents were read at the page image.

June 2006, the case initiation form. The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida opened a criminal matter under the name Operation Leap Year. Its “CRIMINAL MATTER/CASE INITIATION FORM” gives one participant, “OPERATION LEAP YEAR”, a summary of facts reading “Internet Solicitation – Interstate travel to have sex with a minor”, a primary charge of “18 USC 2422(b), 2423(b)”, and the FBI as investigating agency with the agency file number left blank. Beneath a heading “CHECK ALL THAT APPLY” stands a list of nine lines, among them “This case involves Victim(s)”, “Forfeiture of Assets may be involved” and “OCDETF Case”, the last followed by two fields headed Operation Name and OCDETF Number. At the image, every box in that list is an empty rule and both OCDETF fields are blank. Four lines above, under “PRIORITY: (Check one)”, all four options, national, district, both and neither, are also unmarked.9

The supervisory signature line is covered; the date beside it is written in manuscript ink and reads 5/31/06. The following day the packet went by fax from West Palm Beach to the district’s Fort Lauderdale docketing office with the comment “Please see attached case that needs a USAO/LIONS #.”923

The program category sheet. Bound behind the initiation form is a two-column sheet headed “PROGRAM CATEGORY (Check ALL categories that apply)”, listing offence categories with their priority codes, running from code (011) to code (091). Eight of them are OCDETF categories: “OCDETF (N-ALL)” under DRUGS, and seven running from “OCDETF - Anti-Terrorism/Environment” to “OCDETF - Anti-Terrorism/All Others”. At the image the entire sheet carries three marks, all of them an X: “18 U.S.C. 2251-2256 (Child Protection Act of 1984)”, “All Others Not Covered Above”, and the section code NC1, Northern Criminal I. None of the eight OCDETF categories is marked.24

Two offence marks on a list that long, and the second of the two is the box the form provides for a case that its own categories do not cover.

The LIONS input sheet, and what is not on it. The same packet holds the office’s LIONS input sheet. It names the Assistant U.S. Attorney as A. Marie Villafaña. Its case-name box reads “U.S.” followed by a covered field and then “OPERATION LEAP YEAR”; its defendant-name box reads “Operation Leap Year”. Above them stand two boxes, one headed OCDETF Operation Name and one headed OCDETF # with the printed prefix “FC/FLS/”. Both are empty.25

Below them is a grid: nineteen rows of events, each with a date column. Declination. Complaint Filed. Arrest Warrant Issued. Defendant Arrested. Indictment Returned/Information Filed or True Bill Returned. Change of Plea. Jury Trial Commenced. Sentencing. Every date cell on the sheet is blank, on a form whose purpose is to put the office’s case into the system that tracks those events. Nothing on the sheet records that any of them happened.25

Its reverse is a page of ruled Remarks lines, all blank, closing with a block headed “Please “X” all that apply to the Sentencing for the OCDETF defendant:” above seven options, the first of them “Defendant received sentencing guidelines enhancement as an organizer, leader, manager or supervisor” and the third “Defendant is a Consolidated Priority Organization Target (CPOT) or part of the command structure of a CPOT”. At the page image all seven are empty squares.26

That sheet is the strongest reason on this page to read the paper rather than the machine-read text. In the machine-read text of the release, six of those seven empty squares come out as the letter K, standing immediately before their sentences: a reader working from the text alone can read, in a federal prosecutor’s own file, marked boxes recording Jeffrey Epstein as a Consolidated Priority Organization Target, as connected to one, and as a fugitive. The page image shows seven empty boxes on a blank form.26

The first approval cover sheet, undated. The office’s “INDICTMENT/INFORMATION/RULE 20 APPROVAL COVER SHEET” for “JEFFREY EPSTEIN, et al”, under LIONS number 2006R01181, is a single sheet, and it carries no date of its own anywhere: the delivery line, the presentation line and every approval line are blank. The only date printed on it is the form’s own revision mark, which reads “Rev. 8/1/06”, and which places its completion on or after August 1, 2006 and no closer than that. At the image, X marks stand against “Indictment” and against “SEALED”. The line beneath them, which prints “OCDETF - FC/FLS/” and then “Operation” with a blank rule after each, is unmarked and both rules are empty, in the same column of empty rules as FIRREA, CORRUPTION, PSN, PSC and VIOLENT CRIME. The victim/witness line is marked YES and the estimated number of victims is given as 19 persons against 40 witnesses subpoenaed. Asset Forfeiture Count, Prosecution Memorandum Attached and Arrest Warrant(s) Attached are each marked Yes. “Date and Time of Presentation” is blank, and all six approval lines, Section Deputy Chief down to United States Attorney, are blank in both the Final Approval and the Rtn’d for Revisions columns.7

June 2009, the second one. The same form was filled out again, under the same LIONS number 2006R01181, and this time it was dated and signed. The line headed AUSA Delivered to Supervisor reads 6/8/09 against the date rule and 10:00 p.m. against the time rule. The OCDETF line is again unmarked with both rules empty; this time the “PSC (Project Safe Childhood) Case” box carries an X. The estimated number of victims has gone from 19 to 33; the witness figure is unchanged at 40. Reactive Case is answered “No”. The presentation line reads “Tuesday, June 16, 2009”. In the Final Approval column, two manuscript dates stand in ink: 6/9/09 against the Section Chief line and 6/9/08 against the Deputy Chief, Criminal Division line, the second as written, with a signature above it and the names covered.8

That sheet is the first of seventy-seven. Behind it come a motion to seal, a sealed order and an indictment, and every sheet in the run carries a printed stamp in a P- series, the cover sheet itself being P-011701 and marked “EXHIBIT 86” above the printed case number 08-80736-CV-MARRA. This page reads the cover sheet and goes no further into the run.8

So the record, read at the image, is this: the box was in front of the office in June 2006, again on an undated sheet that cannot have been completed before August 2006, and again in June 2009, and it was never marked. What follows from that is a question rather than an answer, since the forms show the designation was not made and say nothing about why; but the three documents settle that it was not made, which the released text alone does not.

What the Bureau was doing with the companies in 2007

One thing the Florida file was doing in 2007 is not a question. On May 1, 2007 FBI Miami raised two payment requests on form FD-794 under case 31E-MM-108062, both payable to the Delaware Secretary of State. The title block of each names Jeffrey Epstein, then a covered name, then, on its own line, “WSTA - CHILD PROSTITUTION”. The first asks for “advance of $340.00 to pay for certified copies of corporate records regarding JEGE, Inc.”; the second for “advance of $946.00 to pay for certified copies of corporate records regarding Hyperion Air, Inc.” Each records that on 4/27/07 an Assistant U.S. Attorney had asked an asset forfeiture investigator to obtain all the corporate records “for the purpose of prosecution of captioned case and potential seizure of aircraft registered to” the company.2728

Both were authorised two days later from the FY 2007 Asset Forfeiture Fund, on a form noting that the authorisation “expires in 90 days”.29 Bound in behind each request is the Delaware certification sheet itself, naming JEGE, Inc. at Delaware file number 3284812 and Hyperion Air, Inc. at 2268758, each ticked for a certified copy of all charter documents and certified copies of all annual reports.2728

The non-prosecution agreement was signed on September 24, 2007.19 The profile of May 18, 2015 listed Hyperion Air, Inc. as one of the two businesses carried for Target 4.4

The other operations in the release

A search of the released files for the word OCDETF returns forty-two sheets across twenty-seven documents, on three different production routes.15 Among those twenty-seven are the Florida approval cover sheets described above, where the word appears only as the label of a box nobody ticked.78 Several more are standard sentencing-memorandum boilerplate about the programme, and several are the printed classification grid on FD-794 forms. Three documents carry an operation name alongside an OCDETF number.

Likquid Longhorn. An FBI New York Field Office squad accomplishment report lists, among the cases of one branch, “Case Number: 245D-NY-7786783; LIKQUID LONGHORN NY-NYS-1106 OCDETF; NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE DTO”, and attributes it to “C32 (Hudson Valley Safe Street Task Force)”. The sentence runs across a sheet boundary and is printed here on each side of the break rather than joined. Earlier in the same report, under its own heading, is the entry: “Jeffrey Epstein: Case was opened in December 2018 relating to Epstein’s involvement of sex trafficking numerous minors.” That case is attributed to Squad C-20. This page takes nothing else from that report, several of whose other entries concern complainants.22

New Blood. A Guardian complaint form of October 8, 2021, filed under the Epstein case number 50D-NY-3027571, records that “A Sentinel query revealed a previous case 245D-NY-307101 680 (U) NEW BLOOD - (OCDETF ny-nys-0879)”. The cross-reference is to the person who sent the complaint, not to Epstein, and nothing in the document connects the two cases. The complaint’s contents concern a person who may be a survivor and are not reported here; the complainant is not named.30

The same document is also the place to settle a numbering question. Its case identifier is printed 50D-NY-3027571 on both of its sheets, read at the page image. The released text of the second sheet renders it SOD-NY-3027571, turning a five into an S and a zero into an O. There is one case number here, not two, and no Special Operations Division.30

Trip Knot. An FBI import form dated 04/08/2025, titling an email “(U//LES) FW: ARMS - Tim Draper”, gives its case identifier as 245H-WF-2182018, and beside it, on three printed lines, “(U//FOUO) OPERATION TRIP KNOT”, “PA-CAE-0525” and “OCDETF - EURASIAN ORGANIZATIONS”. The email it imports is a response to a security vetting request, and it uses Epstein’s conduct as a comparator in assessing someone else. The allegations it makes about named living people have been publicly denied by them, this page has no documentary basis on which to weigh them, and they are not reproduced here. What is reported is the filing: in April 2025 an Epstein comparison was written into a vetting response filed under an OCDETF case.31

Of the operation named on the profile’s own face page there is no second trace. Searched as a phrase, Operation Chain Reaction returns nothing at all across the released files. The two-word form Chain Reaction returns fifty-two sheets across forty-eight documents, and of the twenty read for this page every one is something else: polymerase and ligase chain reactions in scientific papers, a nuclear chain reaction, financial contagion after the Lehman default, and a retailer’s name in a list of card transactions. The OCDETF number NY-NYS-0829 returns one sheet of one document, and the DEA case number C1-11-0049 three sheets of the same one. Those are statements about what these searches return, not about what the release holds.15

What the record does not say

  • What became of Operation Chain Reaction. The only status in the released files is “Pending Judicial” on May 18, 2015, in a cell of the profile’s own table. No document read for this page records a closure, a declination, a charge or a disposition.4
  • Who the other fourteen targets are. Their names, dates of birth and identifying numbers are covered throughout, and two of the fifteen are companies.5
  • What the three attachments contain. They are pointed to sixteen times and are not in the released files under the profile’s numbers.1514
  • Why the two Secret Service divisions ran their queries on August 12, 2014. The table gives a count and a date.16
  • Why the OCDETF box was never marked. The forms record that it was not. They do not record a decision, and no document read for this page does.978

How to check this page

Twenty-six sheets were rendered at the page image for this page, at the native resolution of the served file, which on this route is 96 pixels per inch. Each sheet’s foot was read at the image, and exactly one of the twenty-six carries a production stamp there: the 2009 approval cover sheet, which prints a civil case number, “EXHIBIT 86” and the stamp P-011701. Fourteen others carry the target profile’s own centred classification line over its folio, and the remaining eleven carry nothing below their last line of text. No sheet of the twenty-six carries a printed EFTA-series stamp. So the EFTA numbers in the footnotes below are this project’s addressing identifiers for the documents, not ink on paper, and the sheet references here are to served pages or to the folio a document prints on itself.32

The three ICE case numbers on this page are printed with a single hyphen inserted after their first four characters. The sheets print them unbroken, and the hyphen is this page’s own: it marks nothing about how the numbers are built.

Where a figure or a phrase was read at the page image, the footnote says so. Where it was read only in the released text, the footnote says that instead. Every quoted span of twelve characters or more on this page was then checked, character for character after folding whitespace and curly quotation marks, against the released text of the documents cited: 166 spans, of which 148 reproduce the released text exactly and 18 do not, every one of those eighteen standing in a footnote that declares the span was read at the page image and every one a place where the released text is damaged. Nothing on this page is quoted from the released text where the paper was available and disagreed with it, and no quotation on this page is extended across a span the producing party covered.163026

Timeline

DateEventSource
23 May 2006The U.S. Attorney’s Office opens its Operation Leap Year filepublished page, citing the Department’s 2020 review19
31 May 2006Manuscript date beside the covered supervisory signature on the case initiation form; the OCDETF box and both its fields blankEFTA00187109 served p.29
1 June 2006The packet is faxed to district docketing: “Please see attached case that needs a USAO/LIONS #“EFTA00187109 served pp.4–523
25 July 2006FBI Miami opens 31E-MM-108062EFTA00173953 printed p.164
28 July 2006ICE West Palm Beach opens WP07-QI06WP0011, “Jeffrey EPSTEIN (ET AL)“EFTA00173953 printed p.1717
27 April 2007An Assistant U.S. Attorney asks the FBI for all Delaware corporate records on JEGE, Inc. and Hyperion Air, Inc., for prosecution and “potential seizure of aircraft”EFTA01728810 served pp.4, 102728
1 May 2007Two FD-794 payment requests, $340.00 and $946.00, to the Delaware Secretary of StateEFTA017288102728
3 May 2007Both authorised from the FY 2007 Asset Forfeiture Fund, expiring in 90 daysEFTA01728810 served pp.3, 929
24 September 2007The non-prosecution agreement is signedpublished page19
30 June 2008Epstein pleads guilty in Florida, as the DEA profile records itEFTA00173953 printed p.164
28 July 2008The ICE West Palm Beach case is closedEFTA00173953 printed p.1717
2 February 2009ICE Las Vegas opens LV15-HT09LV0009EFTA00173953 printed p.164
8 June 2009, 10:00 p.m.The second indictment package is delivered to a supervisorEFTA00224444 served p.18
9 June 2009Two manuscript dates in the Final Approval column; OCDETF blank, Project Safe Childhood marked, 33 victimsEFTA00224444 served p.18
16 June 2009The presentation line reads “Tuesday, June 16, 2009”EFTA00224444 served p.18
17 December 2010DEA New York opens C1-11-0049EFTA00173953 printed p.164
11 May 2013First date in the profile’s two-year query windowEFTA00173953 printed p.1717
7 June 2013ICE Paris opens PA07-QK13PA0002, Operation Angel WatchEFTA00173953 printed p.164
28 June 2013A Virgin Islands Police Department terminal queries him onceEFTA00173953 printed p.1816
8 July 2013An FBI FD-302 records Epstein and Maxwell as companionsEFTA00173953 printed p.164
6 November 2013A Harvard University Campus Police terminal queries him onceEFTA00173953 printed p.1816
8 January 2014A Department of Justice U.S. Attorney’s Office terminal in St Thomas queries him onceEFTA00173953 printed p.1816
12 August 2014Two Secret Service divisions each query him onceEFTA00173953 printed p.1816
1 December 2014An FBI terminal queries him onceEFTA00173953 printed p.1816
28 April 2015”Date of Request” on the profile’s face pageEFTA00173953 face page1
2 May 2015Last date in the query windowEFTA00173953 printed p.1717
18 May 2015The target profile is completed; the FBI Miami case is recorded ActiveEFTA0017395314
December 2018FBI New York opens its Epstein case, on Squad C-20EFTA00174481 served p.622
8 October 2021A Guardian complaint is cross-referenced to Operation New BloodEFTA0006707730
8 April 2025An FBI import form files an Epstein comparison under Operation Trip KnotEFTA0012909531

Five gaps in that sequence are findings rather than absences. The office’s own LIONS input sheet for Operation Leap Year carries no date against any of its nineteen events, including the indictment, the plea and the sentencing.25 The 2006 approval cover sheet carries no presentation date and no approval signature, where the 2009 one carries both.78 The profile’s query table starts in May 2013 because that is the form’s default, not because nobody asked earlier.16 The attachments that carry the financial detail are not in the released files under the profile’s numbers.15 And the DEA case is “Pending Judicial” on the last day the record speaks of it.4

Footnotes

Footnotes

  1. Memorandum, Director, OCDETF Fusion Center, to an Assistant Special Agent in Charge, Special Operations Division, “Target Profile: EPSTEIN”, report numbers OFC-TP-15-12392 and SODOFC-15.12392, dated May 18, 2015. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00173953 served p.1 (the document’s own folio numbering begins on served p.7 at “Page 1 of 63”, so the folio and the served page differ by six on every sheet checked for this page). Read at the page image at the served file’s native 96 ppi. The face page is laid out as a label column and a value column, and this footnote gives the values rather than joining each label to its value as one string: against Date of Request, “April 28, 2015”; against Case File Number / Agency, “C1-11-0049 GDEP: YNL3B (DEA)”; against OCDETF Case Number, “NY-NYS-0829”; against OCDETF Operation Name, “Chain Reaction”. Counted over all sixty-nine sheets of the released text, “Chain Reaction” occurs once in the document, on this sheet. Under “Agency information contained herein” nineteen checkboxes stand in three rows; read at the image, ticks appear against CBP, DEA, DSS, DOS, FBI, ICE and FINCEN, and the boxes against ATF, DOC, DOL OIG, AFP, NCA/SOCA, BOP, IRSCI, USMS, USPIS, USSS, NZP and a twelfth labelled “FBI Guardian Incident” carry none. The requestor, unit chief, desk officer, intelligence analyst and Special Operations Division contact lines, and their telephone numbers, are covered by the producing party and are not reproduced. The subject line names Jeffrey Epstein among other names the producing party has covered. The foot of the sheet carries the centred classification line and nothing below it. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8 ↩9 ↩10 ↩11

  2. Same memorandum, “Analytical Findings”, printed “Page 1 of 63”, https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00173953 served p.7. Read at the page image. The quoted Background sentence, the database list, Analyst’s Note 1 and Analyst’s Note 2 all stand on this sheet in the words given. Epstein’s seven-USAR total was read at the image as $5,672,921; the released text of this sheet breaks the figure as “$5,672, 21” and the digit was settled on the paper. The subject names in four of the six bullets on this sheet are covered. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8 ↩9 ↩10

  3. Same memorandum, printed “Page 3 of 63”, https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00173953 served p.9, read in the released text: a one-row table headed “Cases and Contacts: The targets are subjects in the following case:” giving DEA/New York, NY, C1-11-0049, 12/17/2010, “Pending Judicial”, with the operation-name and case-agent columns covered. ↩

  4. Same memorandum, “Corporate/Business Affiliations” and “Linked Investigations”, printed “Page 16 of 63”, https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00173953 served p.22. Read at the page image. The five-row table and the quoted details stand on this sheet. The ICE case numbers in this table are federal investigative case numbers and are not account identifiers of any kind, whatever their shape, and they are correct as printed. The Hyperion and SLK Designs details are quoted from this sheet; the entity name in the sentence about signors is covered and is not supplied. The Analyst’s Note on this sheet calls the first business “this company” and the name of that business belongs to an earlier sheet of the same document: “HYPERION AIR, INC.” is printed against a Business/Employer heading, under the same FinCEN report identifier this sheet’s business row carries, at https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00173953 served p.20, read in the released text. That sheet is where this page takes the name from, and no other document supplies it. All case-agent telephone columns are covered. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8 ↩9 ↩10 ↩11 ↩12 ↩13 ↩14 ↩15

  5. Same memorandum, table of contents, https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00173953 served pp.2–6, read in the released text. Targets 1 to 13 are each introduced by a “BIOGRAPHICAL/IDENTIFYING DATA” heading; Targets 14 and 15 by “BUSINESS IDENTIFYING DATA”. The contents line for Target 4 reads “TARGET 4” and then, after an em rule the document itself prints, “JEFFREY EPSTEIN”. The other fourteen target names are covered in the contents as they are in the body. ↩ ↩2

  6. Same memorandum, the WARNING block on the face page, read at the page image. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00173953 served p.1. The released text of this block renders the words this page gives as “third parties” and “a part” as “third panics” and “a pan” respectively, and prints full stops where the paper prints commas in the list of document kinds; the block was read on the paper before being quoted here. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  7. U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Florida, “INDICTMENT/INFORMATION/RULE 20 APPROVAL COVER SHEET”, United States of America v. Jeffrey Epstein, et al, LIONS USAO No. 2006R01181, form revision marked “Rev. 8/1/06”. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00214563 served p.1 of 1. Read at the page image. The sheet is one page; its served page count reconciles with the one sheet the project’s index holds for it. X marks stand against “Indictment” and against “SEALED”; the OCDETF line and the FIRREA, CORRUPTION, PSN, PSC and VIOLENT CRIME lines below it carry the same unmarked rule, against a within-sheet control of the two X marks two lines above. On the victim/witness line the X stands against YES; the rule after “ESTIMATED NUMBER OF VICTIMS: Persons” carries 19, and the rule after “ESTIMATED NUMBER OF WITNESSES:” carries 40. Blank rules in this form are not reproduced inside quotation marks anywhere in this footnote, because their length is not something a quotation can carry. “Date and Time of Presentation” is blank and all six approval rules are blank in both columns. Part of the caption block is covered, as is the Assistant U.S. Attorney’s name. The line reading “AUSA KING participated in this case/had supervisory authority over this case”, preceded by a rule, is a checkbox line; at 96 ppi this page does not read a mark in it and makes no claim either way about the box on this sheet. The asset forfeiture Assistant U.S. Attorney’s name is printed on the face of the sheet and is not reproduced here. The foot of the sheet carries no printed matter below the last form line. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  8. Same form, filled out again in June 2009, LIONS USAO No. 2006R01181. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00224444 served p.1. Read at the page image. The served file is seventy-seven pages and that count reconciles with the seventy-seven sheets the project’s index holds for it; behind this cover sheet stand a motion to seal, a sealed order and an indictment, none of which is read or cited here. Against the line headed AUSA Delivered to Supervisor, 6/8/09 and 10:00 p.m.; X against “Indictment” and against “PSC (Project Safe Childhood) Case”; the SEALED line and the OCDETF line unmarked with both OCDETF rules empty; on the victim/witness line the X against YES; 33 against “ESTIMATED NUMBER OF VICTIMS: Persons” and 40 against “ESTIMATED NUMBER OF WITNESSES:”; “No” against Reactive Case; and, against the presentation line, “Tuesday, June 16, 2009”. In the Final Approval column, 6/9/09 beside the Section Chief line and 6/9/08 beside the Deputy Chief, Criminal Division line, both in manuscript ink, the second as written and not corrected here, with a manuscript signature above the second and the printed names covered. The AUSA KING line is unmarked. The defendant line names Jeffrey Epstein followed by covered names, which are not supplied. The foot of the sheet carries, printed, “Case No. 08-80736-CV-MARRA” at the left and “EXHIBIT 86” over “P-011701” at the right, read at the image. The asset forfeiture Assistant U.S. Attorney’s field on this sheet is covered. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8 ↩9

  9. U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Florida, “CRIMINAL MATTER/CASE INITIATION FORM”, form “USAO 001 (01CRM07a) REV.(08/12/02)”, participant “A. OPERATION LEAP YEAR”. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00187109 served p.2. Read at the page image. “SUMMARY OF FACTS: Internet Solicitation – Interstate travel to have sex with a minor.” (an en dash on the paper); “PRIMARY CHARGE: 18 USC 2422(b), 2423(b)”; “Agency Name: FBI” with “Agency File Number” blank and the agent’s name and telephone covered. Under “CHECK ALL THAT APPLY” every rule is unmarked, including “OCDETF Case”, and the fields “Operation Name:” and “OCDETF Number: FC/FLS/” are empty. Under “PRIORITY: (Check one)” all four options are unmarked. “ASSIGNED TO: AUSA” and “SUPERVISORY AUSA SIGNATURE” are covered; the date rule beside the signature reads 5/31/06 in manuscript ink. The foot of the sheet carries no printed matter below the form’s revision line. The served file is eight pages, reconciling with the eight sheets the project’s index holds. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  10. The programme’s self-description is quoted from a Department of Justice daily news digest in the release, which reproduces a departmental press release: “the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF). OCDETF identifies, disrupts, and dismantles the highest-level criminal organizations that threaten the United States using a prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach.” https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01655631 served p.8, read in the released text. That document is twenty sheets long, its other nineteen sheets were not read, they concern unrelated matters, and nothing else on this page rests on it. The sentence is quoted for the expansion of the acronym and the programme’s own account of its purpose, and for nothing else. ↩

  11. Same memorandum, printed “Page 63 of 63”, https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00173953 served p.69. Read at the page image: the sheet carries one covered block and, at its foot right, the two lines “Requestor:” and “Prepared by:”, each followed by a covered field. ↩

  12. Same memorandum, printed “Page 2 of 63”, https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00173953 served p.8. Read at the page image. This sheet carries the remaining per-subject tallies, including “eight CTRs (2 in 2011 and 6 in 2010) totaling $233,397” for Epstein, a 2014 UCTR for $40,000, three 2013 UCTRs totalling $157,152, “22 CTRs (1 in 2013, 9 in 2012, 7 in 2011, and 5 in 2010) totaling $730,000”, and single-subject USAR totals of $157,898, $4,236,995, $1,077,898 and $45,107. The figures $1,077,898 and $4,079,101 were each enlarged from the native raster and read digit by digit; the released text of this sheet gives the first as “898” alone and does not carry the second reliably. Every subject name on this sheet except Epstein’s is covered. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  13. Same memorandum, printed “Page 19 of 63”, https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00173953 served p.25. Read at the page image. The last query row is “FBI CJIS DIVISION”, 3, 05/14/2013 to 05/28/2013 — the released text gives “FEU ClIS DIVISION”. Below it stand the USAR analyst’s note, which reads “EPSTEIN is a subject of seven USARs. See Attachment 1 for more information.”, and the three-row UCTR table: 01/31/2014, $0 in and $60,775 out; 12/19/2013, $21,150; 11/15/2013, $20,723. The filing institution cell is laid out over several printed lines with a covered span among them, and it is described here rather than quoted as one string, because a single quotation of it would read across that span. The co-subject and the point of contact are covered. The detail sentence beneath the table names a covered person as having conducted the transactions and gives the account affected; neither the name nor the account number is reproduced here, and the name is not supplied from any other document. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  14. Counted in the released text of the memorandum, over all sixty-nine sheets: thirteen pointers of the form “attachment 1” (including the capitalised instance on the sheet at note 13 and the released text’s rendering of the numeral as a capital I), two to attachment 2 and one to attachment 3, sixteen in all. Occurrences of the word “attachment” inside the recurring Bank Secrecy Act warning and the offline query guidance note were excluded; they describe a different thing and are boilerplate repeated on many sheets. The count is of the released text and not of the paper. ↩ ↩2

  15. Searches run against the full-text index of the released files on 25 October 2026, column-scoped, by phrase, with no limit applied, every query in the same session as a negative control that returned nothing and a positive control that returned hits. "OCDETF" returns 42 sheets across 27 documents, on the EFTA, DOJ-OGR and HOUSE_OVERSIGHT routes. "OCDETF Fusion Center" returns 2 sheets, both of EFTA00173953. "NY-NYS-0829" returns 1 sheet of 1 document; "C1-11-0049" 3 sheets of 1 document. "Operation Chain Reaction" returns 0 sheets and 0 documents. "Chain Reaction" returns 52 sheets across 48 documents; twenty of those sheets were read with surrounding context and each is a polymerase, ligase or nuclear chain reaction, a financial-contagion metaphor, or a retailer’s name on a card statement — the remaining thirty-two were not read, so the statement that none of the forty-eight is this operation is a reading of twenty and not of all of them. Searches for the profile’s report numbers return the profile and no attachment. Measured in the same session, the index holds 1,425,556 documents across 2,925,025 sheets, and the positive control Epstein returns 879,730 sheets across 578,565 documents, which is 40.6 per cent of the documents; those are the denominators the counts above should be read against, and all three reproduce figures derived independently elsewhere on this site. The index is tokenised and discards punctuation, so a phrase containing a currency symbol or a hyphen may match more broadly than it reads, and no claim on this page rests on a search for a sum of money. Whether material these phrasings do not reach exists in the released files is not settled by this page. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6

  16. Same memorandum, printed “Page 18 of 63”, https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00173953 served p.24. Read at the page image. Twenty-five rows, including the two Secret Service rows at one query each on 08/12/2014, HARVARD UNIVERSITY CAMPUS POLICE 1 on 11/06/2013, VIRGIN ISLANDS POLICE DEPARTMENT 1 on 06/28/2013, “DOJ U S ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE ST THOMAS” 1 on 01/08/2014, “CBP JFK INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT” 3, CBSA ASFC HQ IBQ 1 on 03/17/2014 and FBI NOPU 1 on 12/01/2014. The released text of this sheet gives the first of those as “DOI” and the airport row as “CBP MK”; both were read on the paper. The quoted guidance note and the two-year default sentence stand on this sheet and on the corresponding sheets of the other targets’ sections. Thirty-one rows and three hundred and fourteen queries is the sum of this sheet’s twenty-five rows, the five on the preceding sheet and the one on the following sheet, each row’s count read at the image and added in a single pass. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8 ↩9 ↩10 ↩11 ↩12 ↩13 ↩14 ↩15

  17. Same memorandum, printed “Page 17 of 63”, https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00173953 served p.23. Read at the page image. This sheet carries the fifth Linked Investigations row, giving ICE, West Palm Beach, FL; case number WP07-QI06WP0011; date opened 07/28/2006; a status cell printing “Closed/” over “07/28/2008”; and a file title cell reading “Jeffrey EPSTEIN (ET AL)”. Beneath it stands its detail, and then the head of the offline query table with its first five rows, whose printed names are in capitals on the sheet: CBP CYRIL E KING AP INTL ARRIVALS, 30; US CUST SERV ENFORCEMENT SYSTEMS NEWINGTON, 145; FL DEPT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMAND CENTER, 8; NY STATE DIV CRIMINAL JUSTICE SVCS ALBANY, 12; DRUG ENFOR ADMIN NEW YORK, 5. The “Agency ORI Phone” column is covered on this sheet and on the next two. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8 ↩9

  18. Classification and arithmetic over the three sheets of the query table, each row’s printed name and count read at the page image. Eighteen rows whose printed name begins with “CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION”, “CBP”, “US CUST”, “US CUSTOMS” or “USC” carry 30, 145, 13, 14, 4, 3, 20, 2, 15, 6, 5, 4, 5, 1, 2, 3, 3 and 1 queries, totalling 276. The remaining thirteen rows carry 8, 12, 5, 1, 2, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1 and 3, totalling 38. The two totals reconcile to the table’s 314 across its 31 rows. The Canadian border row, CBSA ASFC HQ IBQ, is counted in the second group, not the first. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00173953 printed pp.17–19. ↩

  19. The opening of the Operation Leap Year file on 23 May 2006, the signing of the non-prosecution agreement on 24 September 2007, and the Bureau’s later designation of case 31E-MM-108062 as pending inactive are documented, with primary sourcing, at Operation Leap Year; they are not independently re-sourced here, and nothing on this page rests on them beyond placing the documents above in sequence. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  20. Same memorandum, the section band printing “Assets” above the sub-heading “Financial Account(s)”, printed “Page 20 of 63”, https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00173953 served p.26. Read at the page image. Eleven account rows across eight owner blocks name BNP Paribas (Paris 75009), Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas (New York 10154), Fortis Banque (Paris 75008), Highbridge Capital Corporation (Grand Cayman), HSBC Private Bank SA (Geneva), HSBC Paris (Paris 75015) and JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. (New York 10065, twice). The whole Account Number column is covered on this sheet. The owner column is partly covered and is not reproduced here beyond the town. ↩

  21. Same memorandum, printed “Page 21 of 63”, https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00173953 served p.27. Read at the page image. The twelfth account row, Valartis Bank AG (Zurich 8021), stands at the head of this sheet, making eight named institutions in four jurisdictions across twelve rows. Below it, “Family Member/Associate Identifying Information” carries exactly one row, relationship “Associate”, with the Name, DOB and SSN columns covered, and a footnote on the same sheet reading “Note: Names indicated with an * (asterisk) will be detailed further.” The quoted detail and the quoted analyst’s note stand beneath that row with their subject names covered; this page quotes the predicate and supplies no name. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  22. Federal Bureau of Investigation, New York Field Office, “Branch C Impact Performance Responses”, https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00174481 served pp.6–7, read in the released text. The Epstein entry stands whole on served p.6: “Jeffrey Epstein: Case was opened in December 2018 relating to Epstein’s involvement of sex trafficking numerous minors.” The sentence that follows attributes the July and August 2019 search warrants to C-20. The Likquid Longhorn entry begins at the foot of served p.6 — “Case Number: 245D-NY-7786783; LIKQUID LONGHORN NY-NYS-1106 OCDETF; NICHOLAS TARTAGLIONE DTO; Summary: C32 (Hudson Valley Safe Street Task Force)” — and continues at the head of served p.7 with “initiated an joint investigation with the New York State Police”. The two spans are printed here on either side of the sheet boundary and are not joined into one quotation. The New Blood and Heroin Mill case numbers stand on served p.7. Several other entries in this report concern complainants in other investigations and nothing is taken from them. The served file is nine pages. Read in the released text only; not rendered. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  23. Same packet, fax cover and transmission report, United States Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Florida, West Palm Beach, “DATE: June 1, 2006”, “ORGANIZATION: USAO/Ft. Lauderdale”, “SUBJECT: In the Matter of: Operation Leap Year”, “NUMBER OF PAGES, INCLUDING THIS PAGE: 4”, comment “Please see attached case that needs a USAO/LIONS #.” https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00187109 served pp.4–5, read in the released text. The recipient’s name, the sender’s name and the fax numbers are covered and none is reproduced here. The transmission report records “06/01 17:09” and “TRANSMISSION OK”. ↩ ↩2

  24. Same packet, “PROGRAM CATEGORY (Check ALL categories that apply)”, https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00187109 served p.3. Read at the page image. Three marks stand on the sheet, each an X: against “18 U.S.C. 2251-2256 (Child Protection Act of 1984)” at code (087) under PORNOGRAPHY/OBSCENITY, against “All Others Not Covered Above” at code (090) under OTHER CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS, and against “NC1” and “NORTHERN CRIMINAL I” in the region/division/section block. The eight OCDETF categories, being “OCDETF (N-ALL)” at code (047) under DRUGS and the seven “OCDETF - Anti-Terrorism” categories at codes (07A) to (07G), are unmarked, against the three X marks on the same sheet as a within-sheet control. A network file path is printed at the foot and is not reproduced here. ↩

  25. Same packet, the sheet headed “SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA” above “LIONS INPUT SHEET”, printed “Page 1 of 2”, form revision “Rev. 05/03”. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00187109 served p.6. Read at the page image. Against AUSA, “A. MARIE VILLAFAÑA”, with the tilde on the paper, which the released text does not carry; NAME OF CO-COUNSEL blank; the boxes headed OCDETF Operation Name and OCDETF #, the second printing the prefix “FC/FLS/”, both empty; the case-name box reading “U.S.” then a covered field then “OPERATION LEAP YEAR”; and against DEFENDANT NAME, “Operation Leap Year”. The DATE column of the nineteen-row event grid is blank on every row. “USAO ID NO.”, “DISTRICT COURT NO.” and “ENTERED IN LIONS” are all blank. The foot carries the folio and the revision mark and nothing below them. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  26. Same sheet’s reverse, printed “Page 2 of 2”, https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00187109 served p.7. Read at the page image. The Remarks block is a field of blank ruled lines. Beneath it: “Please “X” all that apply to the Sentencing for the OCDETF defendant:” above seven options, every one preceded by an empty square. In the released text of this sheet the first square comes out as the letter O and the remaining six as the letter K immediately before their sentences, which is why the boxes were read on the paper and not in the text. ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  27. Federal Bureau of Investigation, payment request on form FD-794 (revised 10-11-2005) and the electronic communication supporting it, Precedence PRIORITY, Date 05/01/2007, From Miami L-1/PBCRA, against Case ID #, “31E-MM-108062” followed by “(Pending)”; and in the title block, “JEFFREY EPSTEIN;” then a covered name then, on its own line, “WSTA - CHILD PROSTITUTION”. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01728810 served pp.2 and 4, with the Delaware certification sheet at served p.7. Served p.4 read at the page image; served pp.2 and 7 read in the released text. “Synopsis: Request advance of $340.00 to pay for certified copies of corporate records regarding JEGE, Inc. reference captioned case.” The Details paragraph records that on 4/27/07 an Assistant U.S. Attorney, whose name is covered, asked an asset forfeiture investigator, whose name is covered, to obtain certified copies of all corporate records “for the purpose of prosecution of captioned case and potential seizure of aircraft registered to JEGE, Inc.” The certification sheet names “JEGE, Inc.” at “File Number 3284812” and is ticked for a certified copy of all charter documents, a short form good standing and certified copies of all annual reports, with the quoted amounts $34.00, $30.00 and $276.00 totalling $340.00 on served p.5. The served file is thirteen pages, reconciling with the thirteen sheets the project’s index holds. The requesting employee’s name and social security field and all telephone numbers on these sheets are covered or are not reproduced. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  28. Same document, the second request. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01728810 served pp.8 and 10, with the Delaware certification sheet at served p.13. Served p.10 read at the page image; served pp.8 and 13 read in the released text. “Synopsis: Request advance of $946.00 to pay for certified copies of corporate records regarding Hyperion Air, Inc. reference captioned case.”, and the same Details paragraph naming Hyperion Air, Inc. in place of JEGE, Inc. The certification sheet names “Hyperion Air, Inc.” at “File Number 2268758”. The quoted amounts $102.00, $30.00 and $814.00 total $946.00 on served p.11. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  29. Same document, two memoranda from the Forfeiture & Seized Property Unit, Finance Division to the Forfeiture Unit, Miami Division, each dated 5/1/2007, under a subject line about authorisation for an FBIHQ asset forfeiture expense for FY 2007. The sentence “Authority is given to pay the below-indicated expense from the FY 2007 Asset Forfeiture Fund” stands in the released text of both. Against Amount Authorized the two forms carry $340.00 and $946.00; against Case Number, 31E-MM-108062; against Vendor Name, “Delaware Secretary of State”; against Date of Authorization, May 3, 2007, followed by a parenthesis stating that the authorisation expires in 90 days. These sheets were not rendered, the released text of the form’s own labels is damaged in places, and the labels are therefore named here rather than quoted. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01728810 served pp.3 and 9, read in the released text. The approving initials are covered. Facsimile numbers printed on the form are not reproduced. ↩ ↩2

  30. Federal Bureau of Investigation, import form, form type “FD-71A - Guardian Complaint Form”, dated 10/08/2021, giving against Case ID # the number “50D-NY-3027571” and beside it, on two printed lines, “(U) EPSTEIN, JEFFREY; CHILD SEX” and “TRAFFICKING”. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00067077 served pp.1–2. Read at the page image. The quoted Sentinel sentence stands on served p.2, as does the “Re:” line, which reads 50D-NY-3027571 on the paper where the released text of that line gives SOD-NY-3027571. The served file is two pages. The complaint’s substance concerns a person the document does not name and who may be a survivor; none of it is reported here, the complainant is not named, and no identifier of the complainant is reproduced. The approving and drafting officers are covered. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  31. Federal Bureau of Investigation, import form, against Form Type, “EMAIL - Email”; against Date, “04/08/2025”; against Title, “(U//LES) FW: ARMS - Tim Draper”; against Case ID #, “245H-WF-2182018”, and beside it on three printed lines “(U//FOUO) OPERATION TRIP KNOT”, “PA-CAE-0525” and “OCDETF - EURASIAN ORGANIZATIONS”. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00129095 served p.1 of 1. Read at the page image; the released text gives the date as 34/08/2025 and the case identifier as 243H-WF-21820I8, and both were settled on the paper. The approving and drafting officers are covered. The email the form imports is a separate document and is not cited here; its allegations about named living individuals have been publicly denied by them and this page neither reproduces nor weighs them. ↩ ↩2

  32. Twenty-six sheets were fetched and rendered for this page from the site’s own per-document path, read-only, one request per document, with an invented identifier used as a negative control on each occasion and refused each time while the target returned the file. Each served file’s page count was reconciled against the number of sheets the project’s index holds for it before any sheet was read: 69, 77, 13, 8, 2, 1, 1 and 1. On every one of these documents the visible content of each sheet is a single raster at a native 96 pixels per inch and the only text drawing operator present is the invisible mode, so the render shows the paper and not a reconstruction of it. Requesting a higher resolution on this route enlarges the same raster and adds nothing, and where a mark could not be settled at 96 ppi this page says so rather than guessing. Each foot was settled by reading it, and the pixel count below is corroboration rather than the warrant. Counting pixels darker than mid-grey in the lowest 3.5 per cent of each rendered sheet: fifteen of the twenty-six carry ink there, being the fourteen target-profile sheets at 161 to 181 pixels, where the ink is that document’s own classification line and folio, and the 2009 approval cover sheet at 173, where the ink is the exhibit and P-series stamp. The other eleven read 0 to 2 pixels at a minimum grey of 115 to 255. An earlier draft of this footnote reported the stamped sheet as the only one with ink in that band and gave 0 for every other sheet; that was wrong, the fourteen profile sheets carry their own footer there, and the figure is corrected here rather than quietly replaced. The count alone therefore separates a sheet with a foot stamp from one without only once the footer is accounted for, which is why each foot was read. Sheets not rendered are identified as read in the released text in their own footnotes. Of the sixty-nine sheets of the target profile, fourteen were rendered. All sixty-nine were read in the released text: served pp.1–39 were read in full, and served pp.40–68 were read through a filter that removed the recurring warnings and guidance notes and returned nothing else from them, so they are reported as carrying only boilerplate and the covered sections of the other targets, on that filter’s warrant and not on a line-by-line read. ↩

Backlinks