Chef Adam Perry Lang
Snapshot
| Field | Information |
|---|---|
| Full name | Adam Perry Lang |
| Common error | Adam Perry Lane |
| Other searchable forms | Adam Lang, Perry Lang, APL, AP, Adam Perry “Bog” |
| Occupation | Chef, restaurateur, barbecue specialist, and cookbook author |
| Epstein role | Full time private chef and traveling household employee |
| Employment period | Approximately 1998 through 2002 |
| Hiring contact | Ghislaine Maxwell |
| Primary supervisor | Ghislaine Maxwell |
| Documented locations | Manhattan, Palm Beach, Little St. James, and Zorro Ranch |
| Aircraft connection | Traveled aboard Epstein’s aircraft as a household employee |
| Survivor connection | Virginia Giuffre identified Lang as a potential corroborating witness |
| Law enforcement contact | Contacted during the original investigation and formally interviewed in September 2020 |
| Criminal status | No Epstein related criminal charge against Lang was identified in the reviewed record |
| Central evidence | Five page FBI FD 302 interview beginning with EFTA01246710 |
Adam Perry Lang worked as Jeffrey Epstein’s private and traveling chef for approximately four years. Lang’s employment placed him inside Epstein’s residences, aboard his aircraft, and around Ghislaine Maxwell, household employees, young women, and prominent guests during a period in which survivors described recruitment, grooming, trafficking, and sexual abuse.
Lang publicly said in 2019 that he had been unaware of Epstein’s criminal behavior. In a more detailed 2020 FBI interview, he acknowledged seeing numerous young women, knowing that massages were a major part of Epstein’s routine, observing an unidentified nude woman on Little St. James, traveling between Epstein’s properties, and working under restrictive rules imposed by Maxwell.
The available evidence does not establish that Lang participated in sexual abuse, recruited victims, knowingly transported minors, or understood that the women he encountered were being exploited. It does establish that he was a long term household employee with potential knowledge about Epstein’s routines, guests, travel, staff structure, and treatment of employees.
Correct Name and Search Variations
The correct name is Adam Perry Lang, not Adam Perry Lane.
“Adam Perry Lane” appears to be a transcription or spelling error. Scanned flight records, handwritten logs, court exhibits, and machine generated indexes can produce other malformed versions of his name.
Relevant search terms include Adam Perry Lang, Adam Lang, Perry Lang, APL, AP, Adam Perry Lane, Epstein chef, Epstein private chef, and Epstein traveling chef.
The initials require particular caution. “APL” is generally a stronger identification for Adam Perry Lang. “AP” can be ambiguous because Epstein’s records also reference French interior designer Alberto Pinto.
An entry containing only “AP” should not automatically be attributed to Lang unless the surrounding date, route, passenger list, handwriting, or testimony supports that identification.
See the EpsteinWiki search for Adam Perry Lang.
Early Culinary Career
Before entering Epstein’s household, Lang trained in professional kitchens associated with prominent chefs and restaurants. Published culinary profiles connect his early career to Le Cirque, Daniel Boulud, and Guy Savoy.
Lang told federal investigators that he had been working as a restaurant chef when he experienced back problems and underwent surgery. He began looking for private chef work because it appeared to offer a different working environment from a demanding restaurant kitchen.
A Bon Appétit profile of Lang describes his later development as a chef known for barbecue and live fire cooking.
Hiring by Ghislaine Maxwell
Lang told the FBI that Ghislaine Maxwell interviewed him for the private chef position.
He remembered being confused by the arrangement because Epstein was supposed to be the employer, yet Maxwell conducted the interview and later became the person to whom he usually reported.
Lang initially understood Maxwell to be Epstein’s girlfriend. As he spent more time inside the household, he came to perceive her as an employee or operational manager.
This distinction is important. Maxwell’s authority over Lang was not merely social. According to his account, she directed his work, enforced rules, controlled his interactions with guests, monitored his availability, and reacted aggressively when he requested time away.
The archived version of GhislaineMaxwell.com documents Maxwell’s public presentation of herself. It does not independently establish what she or Lang knew about Epstein’s crimes.
Employment Period
Lang told federal investigators that he worked full time for Epstein from approximately 1998 through 2002.
Some secondary sources place the beginning of his employment in 1999. The FBI report supports an approximate four year period beginning around 1998. Flight indexes also contain entries identifying Adam Perry Lang in October 1998.
The most responsible date range is therefore approximately 1998 through 2002, with the understanding that the precise start date remains subject to confirmation through employment, payroll, tax, or household records.
This period overlaps with survivor testimony describing Epstein and Maxwell’s operation in Palm Beach, Manhattan, New Mexico, and the United States Virgin Islands.
It also overlaps with Virginia Giuffre’s account of being recruited by Maxwell in Palm Beach in 2000.
Nature of Lang’s Work
Lang described himself as a full time private chef who could be summoned through a pager. He said he was essentially available “on call 24/7.”
His responsibilities reportedly included preparing Epstein’s meals, following household schedules, cooking for guests, preparing food for aircraft travel, traveling to Epstein’s properties, and responding to Maxwell’s instructions.
Lang sometimes cooked at Maxwell’s East 65th Street residence in Manhattan. This shows that his work was connected to Maxwell’s household as well as Epstein’s properties.
His position was not limited to occasional catering. He was part of a mobile domestic staff that supported Epstein’s residences, aircraft, travel, meetings, and entertainment.
Properties Where Lang Worked
Lang’s own FBI account places him at several important Epstein properties.
Manhattan Townhouse
Lang cooked at Epstein’s Manhattan residence and sometimes at Maxwell’s nearby home.
Epstein’s Manhattan townhouse functioned as a residence, office, meeting place, and entertainment venue. Lang’s work would have required access to meal schedules, guest preparation, kitchen deliveries, and household personnel.
Lang told investigators that Donald Trump attended a dinner at Epstein’s Manhattan residence on one occasion. Lang did not allege that he witnessed Trump engage in misconduct.
Palm Beach Residence
Lang worked at Epstein’s Palm Beach property. That residence later became the center of the Palm Beach Police Department’s investigation into Epstein’s sexual abuse of teenage girls.
Lang acknowledged seeing young women in Epstein’s environment. He said he perceived them as college age rather than minors.
His estimate was based on appearance and recollection. It does not establish the actual ages of the women he observed.
Little St. James
Lang cooked on Little St. James, Epstein’s private island in the United States Virgin Islands.
During his FBI interview, Lang recalled seeing an unidentified nude woman while he was grilling on the island.
The report does not identify the woman, her age, her status, or the circumstances surrounding her nudity. The observation does not prove that Lang witnessed abuse. It does establish that nudity involving women was visible within the working environment of at least one household employee.
Zorro Ranch
Lang also worked at Zorro Ranch in New Mexico.
He recalled that Epstein was furnishing or developing the ranch during his employment. Later culinary profiles described Lang’s experience cooking at a private ranch but did not initially identify Epstein as the owner.
Zorro Ranch later became the subject of survivor allegations, investigative reporting, and renewed scrutiny by New Mexico authorities.
Household Management Structure
Lang’s account provides information about how Epstein’s household operated.
He reported primarily to Maxwell. When Maxwell was unavailable, he could receive instructions from another woman named Lesley, apparently Lesley Groff.
He also remembered staff members or household contacts identified as:
| Name or identifier | Reported function or context |
|---|---|
| Ghislaine Maxwell | Interviewed Lang and served as his principal supervisor |
| Lesley | Apparently Lesley Groff, who could issue instructions when Maxwell was unavailable |
| Lyn | Described as a main house manager who interacted with arriving women |
| Richard | Household staff member mentioned by Lang |
| Jojo | Driver mentioned during the FBI interview |
| Epstein’s pilots | Transported Epstein, Maxwell, employees, guests, and other passengers |
| Adam Perry Lang | Chef responsible for meals, travel food, and guest service |
The FBI report appears to render the house manager’s name as “Lyn,” with a possible surname resembling Fontanilla. The identification should remain qualified until confirmed through employee records or clearer source material.
Restrictions on Speaking With Guests
Lang said Maxwell instructed him not to speak with Epstein’s guests.
He recalled an occasion when a guest asked for his opinion about real estate. Lang answered the question but later suspected that the exchange might have been a test of whether he would follow Maxwell’s rule.
According to Lang, Maxwell subsequently stopped speaking to him for approximately a day.
This account is significant because it describes compartmentalization inside the household. Employees could serve guests while being discouraged from developing independent relationships with them or discussing what they observed.
Such restrictions do not independently prove criminal concealment. Wealthy households often impose privacy rules. In the context of Epstein’s established abuse operation, however, rules limiting communication between staff and visitors have potential evidentiary importance.
Maxwell’s Conduct Toward Lang
Lang described Maxwell as capable of moving between upbeat, withdrawn, and aggressive behavior.
He offered investigators his impression that Epstein might have possessed some form of leverage over Maxwell. Lang reportedly felt that it was almost as if Epstein “had something” on her.
This was Lang’s personal impression. The FBI report does not provide supporting evidence, and the statement must not be presented as proof that Epstein blackmailed Maxwell.
Lang’s observation is relevant because it reflects how one employee interpreted the power relationship between Epstein and Maxwell after working under them for several years.
The Personal Day Confrontation
Lang described an incident involving a request for personal time.
He prepared food in advance and left it in the refrigerator so meals would remain available during his absence. Maxwell nevertheless called and yelled at him. She instructed him to apologize and told him Epstein expected to see him the next morning.
Lang described Epstein as aggressive, intense, and frightening during the resulting confrontation.
The episode does not concern sexual conduct. Its significance lies in what it reveals about control, employee availability, and intimidation inside the household.
Lang’s recollection that he was nervous about leaving the job further supports his description of an unusually controlling work environment.
Nondisclosure Agreement
Lang told the FBI that he signed a nondisclosure agreement before beginning his employment.
He did not recall signing additional documents when he left.
The agreement itself has not been identified among the records reviewed for this article. Its precise language, duration, and exceptions are therefore unknown.
The existence of an agreement does not prove that it was intended to conceal criminal conduct. Nondisclosure agreements are common in wealthy households. It remains relevant because it added a formal confidentiality obligation to Maxwell’s verbal restrictions on speaking with guests.
Young Women Around Epstein
Federal investigators asked Lang about the women he saw around Epstein.
Lang said that he would not describe them as minors but acknowledged that there were “definitely young women.” He said they gave him a “college girl impression” and estimated that women he remembered appeared to be approximately 19 to 25 years old.
These were retrospective visual estimates made approximately two decades later. They were not age verifications.
Survivor accounts and criminal investigations established that Epstein’s operation included minors. A household employee could therefore misidentify a teenager as a college student, particularly in an environment designed to normalize the presence of young women.
The public FBI report does not establish that Lang knew a particular girl was underage or that a survivor disclosed abuse to him while he worked for Epstein.
Massages in Epstein’s Routine
Lang told investigators that massages were a major part of Epstein’s life.
He remembered women arriving and interacting with the main house manager. He described some as active or college age and said that others appeared older.
This is an important observation because the criminal investigations established that Epstein used supposed massage appointments as a primary mechanism for recruiting, grooming, and sexually abusing girls and young women.
Lang did not claim that he entered massage rooms or witnessed sexual activity. His testimony instead establishes that the flow of women associated with massages was visible to household staff.
Observation of a Nude Woman
When investigators asked about nudity, Lang recalled seeing a nude woman while he was grilling on Little St. James.
The available report does not establish whether the woman was Virginia Giuffre, another survivor, an employee, or an adult guest.
It also does not establish whether the woman was acting voluntarily or whether the incident was connected to abuse.
The observation must be preserved without speculation. Its significance is that Lang’s environment was not completely separated from the sexualized conditions survivors described on the island.
Flight Records
Lang traveled aboard Epstein’s aircraft as part of his employment.
Flight evidence involving Lang comes from handwritten pilot logs, court exhibits, pilot testimony, and later indexes. These sources do not always use his full name. Some entries use initials, and some identifications were added as annotations by lawyers or researchers.
Flight Evidence Table
| Date | Reported route or context | Identification | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| October 9, 1998 | Teterboro to the Washington area | Compiled indexes spell out Adam Perry Lang | Strong secondary identification pending direct log review |
| October 12, 1998 | Return travel associated with the October trip | Lang appears in compiled chronology | Requires confirmation against original handwritten page |
| May 12, 2000 | Teterboro to Palm Beach | Reporting identifies Epstein, Maxwell, Prince Andrew, Lang, and redacted passengers | Strongly reported but original passenger notation should remain controlling |
| December 14, 2000 | Flight involving Epstein, Maxwell, Virginia Giuffre, and “AP?” | Court exhibit annotation suggests Alberto Pinto or Adam Perry Lang | Disputed identification |
| January 26, 2001 | Date cited in the Giuffre flight evidence | Passenger interpretation requires original page review | Unresolved |
| January 27, 2001 | Date cited in the Giuffre flight evidence | Passenger interpretation requires original page review | Unresolved |
| January 30, 2001 | Date cited in the Giuffre flight evidence | Passenger interpretation requires original page review | Unresolved |
| Other 2000 and 2001 flights | Palm Beach, New Mexico, and Virgin Islands travel | Lang is identified in reporting and litigation material | Multiple flights established, exact count unresolved |
The article should not assign a single definitive flight total without auditing every original log page. Compiled databases may count legs differently, merge duplicate logs, or expand ambiguous initials.
See the EpsteinWiki flight log materials.
The December 14, 2000 “AP” Entry
One particularly important flight exhibit contains an entry dated December 14, 2000 for aircraft N908JE.
The court material associates the flight with Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, Virginia Roberts, and a passenger marked “AP?” An annotation proposes either Alberto Pinto or Adam Perry Lang.
That annotation is not a definitive identification.
The possibility that the passenger was Lang is relevant because it could place him aboard an aircraft with Giuffre during the period he worked for Epstein. The possibility that the passenger was Pinto prevents the entry from being treated as confirmed Lang travel.
Responsible presentation requires preserving both possibilities.
David Rodgers’s Deposition
Pilot David Rodgers was questioned under oath about Epstein’s travel records during litigation involving Giuffre and Maxwell.
A released appellate record reproduces a question asking Rodgers whether he knew how Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, Adam Perry Lang, and Virginia left St. Thomas or departed the island. Rodgers answered that he did not know.
The exchange appears in Case 18-2868, Document 279.
The question is significant because it places Lang within counsel’s reconstruction of an island travel sequence involving Giuffre. It does not establish that Rodgers personally saw all four people travel together. It also does not establish what Lang witnessed on the island.
The distinction between a lawyer’s question and a witness’s answer is essential. The question identifies the factual theory being investigated. Rodgers’s answer shows that he could not explain the departure.
Prince Andrew Flight
A reported May 12, 2000 flight from Teterboro to Palm Beach included Epstein, Maxwell, Prince Andrew, Lang, and additional redacted passengers.
Lang separately told the FBI that Maxwell was excited about Prince Andrew’s first visit and regarded it as a major event.
Lang remembered seeing Andrew in Florida and the Virgin Islands. He also recalled Andrew traveling on Epstein’s aircraft on one occasion.
These independent parts of Lang’s account support his presence around Andrew within Epstein’s social environment. Lang did not tell investigators that he saw Andrew commit sexual misconduct.
Prominent Guests Identified by Lang
Lang identified several prominent people he remembered seeing or serving.
| Person | Lang’s reported recollection | Limitation |
|---|---|---|
| Bill Clinton | Clinton traveled aboard an aircraft and ate food from Lang’s cutting board | Lang did not allege misconduct |
| Prince Andrew | Seen in Florida and the Virgin Islands and remembered aboard an aircraft | Lang did not claim to witness sexual conduct |
| Donald Trump | Attended dinner at Epstein’s Manhattan residence on one occasion | A dinner visit does not establish knowledge of Epstein’s crimes |
| Larry Summers | Remembered as an Epstein guest | No allegation of misconduct by Lang |
| Nathan Myhrvold | Remembered as a guest | No allegation of misconduct by Lang |
| Glenn and Eva Dubin or members of the Dubin family | Occasionally present aboard aircraft, according to Lang | Presence does not establish wrongdoing |
These recollections help reconstruct Epstein’s social and travel network. They do not transform every named visitor into a participant in Epstein’s crimes.
Virginia Giuffre’s Identification of Lang
Virginia Giuffre regarded Lang as a person who might corroborate aspects of her experience inside Epstein’s operation.
In Giuffre v. Maxwell, a proposed witness disclosure described Lang as a traveling chef for Epstein and Maxwell. The disclosure stated that he might possess knowledge about alleged trafficking conduct and interactions involving underage minors.
The 2016 proposed witness disclosure records Giuffre’s litigation position. It is not a judicial finding that Lang possessed all of the knowledge described.
His inclusion is nevertheless important. Giuffre and her lawyers believed that a household employee who traveled with Epstein and Maxwell could potentially corroborate locations, dates, people, and household conditions.
Giuffre’s Attempt to Obtain an Affidavit
Journalist Tara Palmeri reported that Giuffre tried to obtain Lang’s cooperation as a witness.
Giuffre traveled to Los Angeles and attempted to contact him. According to Palmeri, Lang responded but would communicate only through lawyers. Giuffre wrote to him asking him to provide an affidavit and help corroborate her account.
Palmeri documents the effort in “What Virginia Giuffre Taught Me About Being Believed”. Additional details appear in New York Magazine’s account of Giuffre’s search for witnesses.
The available reporting indicates that Lang did not provide Giuffre with the affidavit she requested.
His decision to communicate through counsel does not establish guilt or concealment. It does show that a survivor seeking corroboration was unable to secure his direct support before federal investigators interviewed him.
Giuffre’s Reported Memories of Lang
Giuffre reportedly remembered Lang as someone who had occasionally treated her with ordinary kindness, including preparing food for her.
That recollection is important because survivor accounts are not always divided into simple categories of heroes and perpetrators. A person could behave kindly in an individual interaction while still occupying a position from which broader patterns might have been observed.
Giuffre did not publicly accuse Lang of sexually assaulting her.
Her focus was his potential ability to corroborate her presence, movements, treatment, and the people around Epstein and Maxwell.
Why a Chef Could Be an Important Witness
A private chef in a mobile household can possess information extending well beyond recipes and meal preparation.
Lang may have been able to observe:
| Category | Potential information |
|---|---|
| Travel | Who required aircraft meals and when the household moved |
| Guest presence | Who attended breakfasts, dinners, meetings, or extended stays |
| Property occupancy | Which people were present in Manhattan, Palm Beach, New Mexico, or the Virgin Islands |
| Scheduling | Meal timing connected to flights, massages, appointments, and visitors |
| Household staffing | Who exercised authority and who interacted with arriving women |
| Survivor corroboration | Whether a survivor was present during a particular trip or meal |
| Workplace rules | Instructions preventing staff from speaking with guests |
| Household atmosphere | Maxwell’s supervision and Epstein’s treatment of employees |
| Young visitors | Approximate frequency and visible patterns involving young women |
| Documentation | Menus, shopping receipts, delivery records, calendars, pager messages, and travel notes |
A chef’s evidence can therefore corroborate chronology even when the chef did not witness abuse directly.
Early Law Enforcement Interest
An evidence inventory released with the EFTA materials lists several entries connected to Lang.
EFTA00095751 identifies records described as:
| Date | Inventory description |
|---|---|
| November 4, 2006 | Law enforcement report regarding Adam Perry Lang |
| December 4, 2006 | Search results associated with Lang |
| December 4, 2006 | Search view by name |
| August 15, 2007 | Law enforcement record concerning Lang |
| September 22, 2020 | Notes from a call with attorney Larry Lustberg regarding Lang |
| September 25, 2020 | Adam Perry Lang interview FD 302 |
| September 25, 2020 | Notes associated with the Lang interview |
The inventory establishes that law enforcement records involving Lang existed during the original federal investigation.
It does not establish that he was a suspect. Former employees were logical potential witnesses because they could explain household operations and identify people appearing in schedules, photographs, and travel records.
The underlying 2006 and 2007 records should be linked separately if their full EFTA pages are identified.
Earlier FBI Contact
Lang told the FBI in 2020 that he had previously spoken with a female FBI agent before Epstein’s 2008 Florida conviction.
He recalled that the agent informed him near the end of the conversation that the investigation concerned sex trafficking.
This indicates that Lang knew no later than the original investigative period that federal authorities were examining possible trafficking connected to his former employer.
The public record does not establish precisely when the conversation occurred, what questions were asked, what Lang disclosed, or whether agents prepared an FD 302 from that earlier contact.
Those underlying records remain important unresolved evidence.
Lang’s Departure
Lang left Epstein’s employment around 2002.
He told investigators that his wife had completed college, his back had improved, and he wanted to build his own business.
Lang recalled being nervous about telling Epstein that he intended to leave. Epstein reportedly appeared untroubled by the decision.
Lang did not describe signing exit paperwork or a new confidentiality agreement when his employment ended.
Contact With Epstein After Employment
Lang’s relationship with Epstein did not end immediately when he stopped working as the private chef.
He acknowledged speaking with Epstein afterward and seeking business advice. Later reporting places their final known direct conversation around 2007.
This distinction matters. Lang’s full time employment ended around 2002, but some personal or advisory contact reportedly continued during the period in which law enforcement began investigating Epstein.
The reviewed evidence does not establish that Lang returned to Epstein’s employment or participated in Epstein’s later business activities.
Career After Epstein
In 2003, Lang opened Daisy May’s BBQ USA in New York.
Early profiles described him as having recently completed approximately four years as a personal chef for an unnamed billionaire. Those descriptions align with the employment period he later attributed to Epstein.
Lang subsequently became associated with several restaurant and publishing projects, including:
| Project | Role or connection |
|---|---|
| Daisy May’s BBQ USA | Founder and chef |
| Carnevino | Consulting or culinary partnership |
| Barbecoa | Partnership with Jamie Oliver |
| APL in Hollywood | Founder and chef |
| Serious Barbecue | Author |
| BBQ 25 | Author |
| Charred & Scruffed | Author |
For years, public culinary profiles discussed the billionaire employer without naming Epstein. Lang publicly confirmed Epstein’s identity only after records and reporting connected him to the household.
Public Statement in 2019
Following Epstein’s 2019 arrest and the unsealing of court records, Lang acknowledged that he had worked for Epstein.
His statement characterized his role as meal preparation and said that he had been unaware of Epstein’s depraved behavior. He expressed sympathy and admiration for the women who came forward.
The statement was reported by Eater and The Hollywood Reporter.
Lang’s statement did not mention his extensive travel, Maxwell’s supervision, the young women, the massage culture, the nude woman, the nondisclosure agreement, or his earlier FBI contact.
Cooperation With Federal Investigators
In September 2020, Lang’s attorneys confirmed that he was cooperating with federal investigators examining Epstein’s operation.
Eater Los Angeles reported the cooperation while discussing Giuffre’s attempt to reach him.
The public confirmation occurred shortly before Lang’s documented September 25, 2020 FBI interview.
The term “cooperating” should not be interpreted as proof of a formal immunity or cooperation agreement. The evidence establishes that Lang voluntarily participated in an interview while represented by attorneys. It does not establish that he received immunity, testified before a grand jury, or became a trial witness.
September 2020 FBI Interview
Federal investigators interviewed Lang by video conference on September 25, 2020.
The participants included federal prosecutors, a detective, an FBI special agent, Lang, and attorneys Larry Lustberg and Marquis Whitney.
The interview was recorded in a five page FBI FD 302:
| Page | Direct evidence |
|---|---|
| Page 1 | EFTA01246710 |
| Page 2 | EFTA01246711 |
| Page 3 | EFTA01246712 |
| Page 4 | EFTA01246713 |
| Page 5 | EFTA01246714 |
The interview occurred on September 25, 2020. The report was entered or finalized in February 2021.
An FD 302 is an agent’s summary. It is not a word for word transcript. The report may condense answers, change their sequence, and omit questions or context. Any analysis must account for that limitation.
Principal FBI Disclosures
Lang’s FBI account established or alleged that:
| Subject | Lang’s reported account |
|---|---|
| Employment | Worked full time for Epstein for approximately four years |
| Hiring | Interviewed by Maxwell |
| Supervision | Reported primarily to Maxwell |
| Availability | Remained on call through a pager |
| Travel | Worked across Epstein’s properties and aircraft |
| Guests | Prepared food for several prominent visitors |
| Young women | Saw young women whom he perceived as college age |
| Massages | Understood massages to be a major part of Epstein’s routine |
| Nudity | Saw an unidentified nude woman on Little St. James |
| Staff rules | Was told not to speak with guests |
| Confidentiality | Signed a nondisclosure agreement |
| Intimidation | Described Epstein as frightening during a confrontation |
| Earlier investigation | Had previously spoken with a female FBI agent |
| Departure | Left around 2002 to pursue his own business |
| Later contact | Continued occasional contact and sought business advice |
| Media | Declined to discuss the matter with reporters before his public statement |
Comparison of the 2019 Statement and 2020 Interview
| Issue | 2019 public presentation | 2020 FBI account |
|---|---|---|
| Role | Limited to preparing meals | Full time, traveling, and available around the clock |
| Properties | Not detailed | Manhattan, Palm Beach, Little St. James, and Zorro Ranch |
| Maxwell | Not discussed in detail | Interviewer, supervisor, and enforcer of household rules |
| Young women | Not mentioned | Numerous young women perceived as college age |
| Massages | Not mentioned | Major part of Epstein’s life |
| Nudity | Not mentioned | Nude woman seen on Little St. James |
| Guests | Not identified | Clinton, Andrew, Trump, Summers, Myhrvold, and the Dubins |
| Confidentiality | Not mentioned | Nondisclosure agreement signed |
| Law enforcement | Not detailed | Earlier FBI contact and 2020 interview |
| Knowledge of abuse | Denied awareness | Did not admit knowledge of abuse or verified minors |
The two accounts are not necessarily irreconcilable. Lang could have observed young adult women, massages, nudity, and secrecy without knowing that Epstein was abusing minors.
The FBI interview nevertheless demonstrates that his exposure to Epstein’s environment was considerably broader than the phrase “limited to meal preparation” suggested.
Evidentiary Tensions
Several tensions remain unresolved.
Lang said he did not know about Epstein’s criminal conduct. He also acknowledged that young women were frequently present, massages were important to Epstein, staff communication was restricted, and nudity was visible on the island.
Lang said he perceived the women as adults. His estimates were based on appearance and may have been mistaken.
Lang said he had not witnessed anything particularly strange on the aircraft. Flight and court evidence nevertheless places him within travel sequences involving Epstein, Maxwell, Giuffre, prominent guests, and destinations connected to survivor allegations.
Lang cooperated with federal investigators in 2020. Giuffre had previously been unable to obtain the affidavit she requested from him.
None of these tensions proves criminal knowledge. They identify areas where additional records and testimony could clarify what Lang saw, understood, remembered, or chose to disclose.
Photographic Evidence
No authenticated photograph reviewed for this article clearly depicts Lang participating in Epstein’s household activities.
Public photographs of Lang primarily relate to his restaurant career, culinary events, television appearances, and book promotion.
A future photographic evidence review should search:
| Archive | Search purpose |
|---|---|
| EFTA image collections | Identify photographs seized from Epstein properties or devices |
| House Oversight releases | Locate estate photographs and scanned albums |
| Getty Images | Establish public event appearances and professional chronology |
| Associated Press archives | Locate restaurant and media appearances |
| Court exhibits | Identify staff, passengers, or property photographs |
| Epstein property evidence | Determine whether Lang appears in kitchens, aircraft, or island photographs |
A facial resemblance or automated match should not be treated as identification without manual verification and supporting context.
Chronology
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Approximately 1998 | Lang begins working for Epstein after an interview with Maxwell |
| October 9, 1998 | Compiled flight index identifies Lang on Epstein aircraft travel |
| October 12, 1998 | Associated return travel appears in compiled flight chronology |
| 1998 through 2002 | Lang works across Epstein’s residences and aboard aircraft |
| May 12, 2000 | Reported flight includes Epstein, Maxwell, Prince Andrew, Lang, and redacted passengers |
| 2000 | Giuffre says Maxwell recruited her in Palm Beach |
| December 14, 2000 | Flight record lists “AP?” with Epstein, Maxwell, and Giuffre; identification remains disputed |
| January 2001 | Several dates involving Giuffre’s flight evidence become subjects of litigation |
| Approximately 2002 | Lang leaves Epstein’s employment |
| 2003 | Lang opens Daisy May’s BBQ USA |
| 2006 | Law enforcement records and searches concerning Lang appear in the evidence inventory |
| 2007 | Additional law enforcement record appears; later reporting places Lang’s last contact with Epstein around this period |
| 2008 | Epstein pleads guilty to Florida state offenses |
| 2016 | Lang is identified as a potential witness in Giuffre v. Maxwell |
| 2019 | Court records renew attention to Lang’s employment and travel |
| September 2019 | Lang publicly confirms that Epstein was his former employer |
| September 2020 | Lang’s attorneys say he is cooperating with investigators |
| September 25, 2020 | Federal investigators interview Lang |
| February 2021 | FBI interview report is entered or finalized |
| 2025 | Palmeri publishes additional detail about Giuffre’s effort to obtain Lang’s affidavit |
| 2026 | EFTA releases renew examination of the FBI interview and investigative inventory |
Document and Evidence Appearances
| Evidence | Importance |
|---|---|
| EFTA01246710 | First page of Lang’s FBI interview |
| EFTA01246711 | Continued employment and household account |
| EFTA01246712 | Young women, massages, staff, or property details |
| EFTA01246713 | Guest, travel, and workplace recollections |
| EFTA01246714 | Departure, later contact, and investigative history |
| EFTA00095751 | Inventory of 2006, 2007, and 2020 records involving Lang |
| Giuffre proposed witness disclosure | Identifies Lang as a possible corroborating witness |
| Case 18-2868, Document 279 | Contains Rodgers deposition exchange involving Epstein, Maxwell, Lang, Giuffre, and St. Thomas |
| Flight log exhibits | Establish multiple trips while preserving ambiguity surrounding “AP” |
| 2019 public statement | Confirms employment while denying knowledge of abuse |
| 2020 cooperation reporting | Confirms participation in the renewed federal investigation |
| Palmeri reporting | Documents Giuffre’s effort to obtain Lang’s affidavit |
What the Evidence Establishes
The evidence establishes that Lang worked for Epstein for approximately four years.
It establishes that Maxwell interviewed and supervised him.
It establishes that Lang traveled between Epstein’s properties and aboard his aircraft.
It establishes that Lang saw young women, knew that massages were important to Epstein, and saw an unidentified nude woman on Little St. James.
It establishes that Lang prepared food for or encountered prominent guests.
It establishes that law enforcement showed interest in him during the original investigation and interviewed him again in 2020.
It establishes that Giuffre considered him a potentially important corroborating witness.
It establishes that Lang publicly denied knowing about Epstein’s criminal behavior.
What the Evidence Does Not Establish
The evidence does not establish that Lang sexually abused anyone.
It does not establish that he recruited girls or women.
It does not establish that he arranged massage appointments.
It does not establish that he knowingly transported a victim.
It does not establish that he knew a specific person was a minor.
It does not establish that the unidentified nude woman was a survivor.
It does not establish that every “AP” flight entry identifies Lang.
It does not establish that Lang knowingly concealed a crime.
It does not establish that prominent guests named by Lang participated in Epstein’s abuse.
It does not establish that Lang was charged with an Epstein related offense.
Investigative Significance
Lang’s importance comes from the duration and reach of his employment.
He was not a single event caterer or occasional visitor. He was a full time household employee who traveled with Epstein’s operation for approximately four years.
His duties potentially exposed him to guest lists, meal schedules, travel preparations, staff instructions, deliveries, aircraft departures, property occupancy, and the repeated presence of young women.
His information could be compared with flight logs, household calendars, survivor accounts, staff testimony, photographs, receipts, telephone records, and property records.
The central investigative question is not simply whether Lang personally witnessed abuse. It is whether his observations can corroborate the structure and chronology described by survivors.
Unanswered Questions
- What do the underlying November 2006 and August 2007 law enforcement reports say about Lang?
- Was an FD 302 prepared after Lang’s earlier conversation with the female FBI agent?
- Did investigators show Lang photographs of Giuffre or other survivors?
- Did Lang identify Giuffre during his 2020 interview?
- What did Lang remember about the December 14, 2000 flight?
- Does the “AP” notation on that flight identify Lang or Alberto Pinto?
- Which original flight pages spell out Adam Perry Lang’s full name?
- How many verified flight legs included Lang?
- Which flights included both Lang and known survivors?
- Did Lang keep menus, shopping receipts, calendars, pager records, photographs, or travel notes?
- What were the precise terms of Lang’s nondisclosure agreement?
- Who was the house manager identified as “Lyn”?
- What responsibilities did Richard and Jojo perform?
- Did Lang prepare meals for young women staying in guest rooms or separate buildings?
- Did Maxwell ever discuss the ages, recruitment, employment, or travel of the young women?
- Did prosecutors ask Lang to testify before a grand jury?
- Was Lang considered as a witness in Maxwell’s criminal trial?
- Did Lang provide investigators with names or information omitted from the public FD 302?
- Why was Giuffre unable to obtain the affidavit she requested?
- Are there photographs, payroll records, employment files, or household calendars that further document Lang’s role?
Sources
Primary Evidence and Court Records
- EFTA01246710 begins the FBI FD 302 documenting Lang’s September 25, 2020 interview.
- EFTA01246711, EFTA01246712, EFTA01246713, and EFTA01246714 complete the five page interview report.
- EFTA00095751 lists the earlier law enforcement records, search activity, attorney contact notes, and 2020 interview material associated with Lang.
- The Giuffre v. Maxwell proposed witness disclosure identifies Lang as Epstein and Maxwell’s traveling chef and a potential witness.
- Case 18-2868, Document 279 contains the released appellate material reproducing the Rodgers deposition exchange about Epstein, Maxwell, Lang, Giuffre, and St. Thomas.
Survivor and Investigative Reporting
- Tara Palmeri’s account documents Giuffre’s efforts to obtain Lang’s affidavit.
- New York Magazine provides additional reporting on Giuffre’s search for people who could corroborate her account.
- Ellie Leonard provides broader survivor centered context concerning Little St. James and Epstein’s island operations.
Employment and Public Statements
- Eater documents Lang’s confirmation that he worked for Epstein and discusses the flight and deposition evidence.
- Eater Los Angeles reports that Lang was cooperating with federal investigators.
- The Hollywood Reporter covers Lang’s 2019 public statement.
- Bon Appétit provides background on Lang’s culinary career.