By Aaron Miller And Ben Kerrigan-
JP Morgan Chase has claimed that the government of the US Virgin Islands is “complicit in the crimes of Jeffrey Epstein” in a legal filing on Tuesday, saying the convicted sex trafficker maintained a “quid pro quo relationship” with some of the territory’s highest officials over two decades.
The ongoing swirl of allegations comes a day after it was claimed that Epstein(pictured) had reportedly threatened to blackmail Bill Gates over his extramarital affair with a Russian bridge player.
The claim comes as part of an ongoing legal war that began with the US Virgin Islands alleging in a New York court that JP Morgan “facilitated and concealed wire and cash transactions that raised suspicion of – and were in fact part of – a criminal enterprise whose currency was the sexual servitude of dozens of women and girls”. JP Morgan denies the claims.
JP Morgan only recently committed to invest over $200 million in buying credits for carbon removal and is also helping carbon capture businesses to take off.
“We’re jumping in the pool all in,” JP Morgan’s head of operational sustainability, Brian DiMarino, told the Journal an interview.
“This is us putting our weight and our capital behind something we believe is truly important to bring to market now,” DiMarino added.
Officials from the Wall Street Journal said JP Morgan is betting big on carbon removal and is buying credits from direct air capture developers to offset its environmental footprint,
USVI has sought legal depositions of the bank’s CEO, Jamie Dimon, and a host of high-profile names from tech, hospitality and finance, including Elon Musk, Sergey Brin, Thomas Pritzker and others, as part of an effort to gather more information about Epstein’s relationship with JPMorgan.
Epstein maintained a home on a private island in the territory where he sexually abused young women over the years, using money from accounts he maintained at JP Morgan. Last week, Deutsche Bank agreed to settle a similar proposed class action by an Epstein victim for $75m.
JP Morgan claims that the government of the US Virgin Islands, not JP Morgan, is the entity “that most directly failed to protect public safety and most actively facilitated and benefited from Epstein’s continued criminal activity”.
“Epstein could have lived anywhere in the world. He chose USVI. Discovery obtained in this case reveals why,” JP Morgan claims.
“For two decades, Epstein maintained a quid pro quo relationship with USVI’s highest-ranking officials. He gave them money, advice, influence and favors. In exchange, they shielded and even rewarded him, granting him [millions of dollars] in tax incentives … looking the other way when he walked through USVI airports accompanied by girls and young women …”
JPMorgan also claims that Epstein supported a USVI government official for office who would later awarded him tax breaks in the territory, and that his “primary conduit for spreading money and influence throughout the USVI government was First Lady [Cecile] de Jongh”.
Epstein further “exerted influence over USVI sex offender legislation and received lax monitoring”, according to the filing, and maintained such close connections with government officials that he was able to pass through the “USVI’s airport accompanied by young women as a registered sex offender”.
Earlier on Wednesday, it was reported that the governor of the USVI, Albert Bryan, is scheduled to be deposed next month as part of the lawsuit. JPMorgan is believed to have requested Bryan’s deposition.
The USVI-JPMorgan lawsuit was filed last year by the then Virgin Islands attorney general Denise George. But days after filing the claim, she was fired by the governor, reportedly because she failed to alert him that she planned to sue the bank.
JP Morgan’s claim that the U.S. government was complicit in Epstein’s crimes is a serious accusation. The bank alleged that Epstein’s criminal activities were enabled and protected due to his connections and influence over high-ranking officials. The implications of such an allegation, if proven true, would be far-reaching and have profound consequences for the government’s credibility, as well as for the justice system itself.
While allegations of government complicity in Epstein’s crimes have been circulating for s it is important to note that mere speculation and unverified claims do not constitute concrete evidence. Accusing a government of being complicit in such heinous acts requires substantial proof to ensure that justice is served and to avoid spreading baseless conspiracy theories. As with any serious allegation, a rigorous examination of evidence is essential to separate fact from fiction.
The Epstein case has become fertile ground for conspiracy theories due to its sensational nature and the involvement of influential figures. It is crucial to approach such theories with skepticism and employ critical thinking. While it is essential to question those in positions of power and scrutinize potential corruption, it is equally important to base claims on verifiable evidence and avoid falling prey to unfounded speculation.
Investigative Efforts and Transparency
In order to address the allegations of government complicity in Epstein’s crimes, it is imperative to conduct thorough investigations with integrity and transparency. Independent and unbiased inquiries, backed by solid evidence, are necessary to determine the extent of any potential involvement by government officials or agencies. The public’s trust in the justice system relies on its ability to uncover the truth and hold those responsible accountable, regardless of their stature.
Implications for Trust in Government:
If JP Morgan’s claim were substantiated, it would undoubtedly have severe implications for public trust in the government. Such allegations could erode citizens’ faith in the institutions designed to uphold justice and protect society. Restoring trust would require comprehensive reforms, increased transparency, and a commitment to holding individuals accountable, regardless of their positions of power or influence.
While the allegations of government complicity in Epstein’s crimes are significant, it is essential to remember the true victims in this case: the survivors of Epstein’s abuse. The focus should remain on supporting these survivors, ensuring they receive justice, and preventing similar crimes from occurring in the future. It is crucial not to lose sight of the primary goal of addressing the systemic issues that allowed Epstein’s crimes to persist unchecked.
While the implications of such an accusation are far-reaching, it is essential to approach the issue with scepticism, critical thinking, and an emphasis on evidence-based analysis. Only through transparent investigations and accountability can the truth be uncovered and justice be served. Ultimately, the focus should be on supporting survivors and working towards a society where such crimes are prevented and swiftly addressed.