Federal Grand Jury Testimony EFTA00224005: Operation Leap Year

UpdatedSeptember 10, 2026

ByEpsteinWiki

Snapshot

Field	Details
Document	Federal grand jury testimony in In re: Operation Leap Year
EFTA identifier	EFTA00224005
Proceeding	Federal Grand Jury 07-103
Court	United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida
Location	West Palm Beach, Florida
Testimony date	May 8, 2007
Transcript certification date	May 23, 2007
Length	35 pages, stamped EFTA00224005 through EFTA00224039
Witness	Redacted law enforcement case agent
Questioner	Redacted Assistant United States Attorney
Grand jury foreperson	Josette Jones-Parsons
Court reporter	Philip W. May
Exhibit label	Exhibit 24
Release	DOJ Data Set 9 under the Epstein Files Transparency Act
Duplicate status	Existing EpsteinWiki page. This draft is an update, not a new article.

Content warning: This record discusses the sexual exploitation of minors, grooming, recruitment, payments, and an allegation of sexual assault. This article summarizes the evidence without identifying anonymous survivors or reproducing unnecessary graphic detail.

What Is This Record?

EFTA00224005 is the first stamped page of a certified 35 page transcript from Federal Grand Jury 07-103. The testimony was taken in West Palm Beach on May 8, 2007, during the Southern District of Florida investigation known as Operation Leap Year.

The witness was a law enforcement case agent assigned to the investigation. Her name, employer, and much of the identifying information about survivors and other people are redacted in the public copy. The transcript does not contain direct testimony from a survivor. Instead, the agent summarizes interviews, records, and investigative work for the grand jury.

The testimony addressed evidence supporting a proposed indictment. No federal indictment arising from this presentation was filed in 2007. The distinction matters: the transcript records what the agent told the grand jury under oath, but it is not a verdict and does not itself establish that every proposed charge was proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Source and Provenance

The cover identifies the matter as In re: Operation Leap Year, Federal Grand Jury 07-103, and labels the transcript Exhibit 24. The last page contains court reporter Philip W. May’s certification that pages 1 through 35 are a true transcript of the witness’s May 8 testimony.

The released file belongs to DOJ Data Set 9. Epstein Data catalogs it as a 35 page transcript and preserves the sequential stamps EFTA00224005 through EFTA00224039. The public copy contains extensive redactions. Those redactions should remain respected when the record is summarized or cross referenced.

Evidence and Document Index

Transcript pages	EFTA pages	Contents
1	EFTA00224005	Cover, proceeding, date, appearances, witness redaction, and Exhibit 24 label
2	EFTA00224006	Statement that the witness was sworn and the testimony was reported
3 to 16	EFTA00224007 to EFTA00224020	Agent’s summary of an immunized interview, age evidence, recruitment, repeated paid appointments, referrals, grooming, and consultation with Ken Lanning
17 to 21	EFTA00224021 to EFTA00224025	Proposed defendants, Epstein’s Palm Beach residence, two aircraft corporations, and sources of investigative evidence
22 to 34	EFTA00224026 to EFTA00224038	Jane Doe evidence, proposed overt acts and counts, phone and flight analysis, controlled calls, voicemail, notes recovered from trash, payments, and grand juror questions
35	EFTA00224039	Witness excused and reporter’s certification dated May 23, 2007

Testimony Overview

The agent first described an interview with a young woman whom investigators connected to Epstein through message pads seized from his Palm Beach residence. According to the testimony, Palm Beach police and the FBI initially could not obtain her cooperation. After she received statutory immunity, described in the transcript as “6001 immunity,” she agreed to an interview in late April 2007 with investigators, a prosecutor, her attorney, and others present.

The agent testified that the interviewee described beginning paid massages for Epstein while she was a minor and later bringing other girls to the residence. The interviewee recalled being 16 when she began. The agent said phone records placed relevant calls in April 2004, when the interviewee would have been 15. This is an example of the transcript separating a witness’s recollection from investigators’ documentary analysis.

The agent also described a referral system. A girl could be paid for a massage and receive additional money for bringing another girl. Appointments were arranged through telephone calls, including calls attributed to Epstein’s assistants. Investigators compared statements with phone records, flight records, voicemail, payment records, message pads, and other physical evidence.

The interviewee minimized or denied some conduct, including conduct that other interviewed girls had reported. The prosecutor asked the agent about her consultation with Ken Lanning, an expert on child exploitation investigations. The discussion concerned why minors may minimize, deny, normalize, or feel responsible for exploitation and why apparent cooperation does not make a child legally responsible for an adult’s conduct. The terminology used in the 2007 transcript should be read as historical investigative language, not as blame directed at survivors.

Investigative Methods Described

The transcript identifies several categories of evidence used in Operation Leap Year:

Interviews conducted by the Palm Beach Police Department and the FBI
Message pads seized during the search of Epstein’s residence at 358 El Brillo Way
Phone records associated with girls, recruiters, assistants, and Epstein related numbers
Controlled telephone calls and recorded voicemail
Payment records and survivor accounts of payments
Notes recovered through Palm Beach police trash pulls
Corporate records for aircraft owned through J.E.G.E., Inc. and Hyperion Air, Inc.
Flight manifests and travel records obtained by grand jury subpoena
Comparison of travel dates with calls used to arrange appointments

This list is important because the presentation was not based on one interview alone. The agent repeatedly described efforts to compare accounts with independent records. At the same time, the public transcript does not attach those underlying records, so readers should not treat the agent’s summary as a substitute for reviewing each source document where available.

Proposed Defendants and Corporate Evidence

The agent was shown photographs of four proposed human defendants: Epstein and three women described as his personal assistants. The three assistants’ names are redacted in the released transcript. The agent also discussed J.E.G.E., Inc. and Hyperion Air, Inc.

According to the testimony, Epstein was president, sole director, and sole shareholder of both companies. J.E.G.E. was associated with a Boeing 727 bearing tail number N908JE. Hyperion Air was associated with a Gulfstream aircraft bearing tail number N909JE. The agent said investigators obtained corporate records and flight manifests and analyzed travel together with appointment related calls.

The transcript describes these as Epstein owned aircraft corporations. It does not, by itself, prove that either company was a shell company or that every flight had a criminal purpose.

Jane Doe Evidence and Proposed Counts

The latter part of the transcript turns to Jane Does 1 through 5 and a draft indictment. Most of the developed testimony in this installment concerns Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2.

For Jane Doe 1, the agent described recruitment by another girl and a man whose name is rendered phonetically in the transcript as Tony “Figurello.” The agent said the man had admitted serving as a recruiter and driver. The presentation then matched statements, telephone contacts, flight timing, and payments to proposed overt acts and an enticement count.

For Jane Doe 2, the agent testified that she was 14 during the relevant period. The presentation addressed calls used to arrange an appointment, transportation to the Palm Beach residence, payments to Jane Doe 2 and the referring girl, a controlled call, voicemail, and handwritten appointment notes recovered from Epstein’s trash. The agent also discussed proposed travel and attempted enticement counts.

A grand juror asked about an earlier allegation involving Jane Doe 6. The agent said that evidence would be addressed in a later session. This transcript does not develop that allegation, so it should not be presented as a complete account of Jane Doe 6’s evidence.

What the Record Establishes

The transcript establishes that, on May 8, 2007:

A sworn case agent presented evidence to Federal Grand Jury 07-103 under the Operation Leap Year caption.
Federal investigators were working from Palm Beach police evidence and additional FBI interviews and records.
Prosecutors had prepared a draft indictment naming four human defendants and two corporations.
The presentation connected proposed overt acts and counts to phone, travel, payment, voicemail, physical, and interview evidence.
Investigators were still attempting to locate and interview additional girls.
The grand jury presentation was expected to continue in a later session.

What the Record Does Not Establish

The transcript does not establish that:

The grand jury returned the proposed indictment.
Every allegation summarized by the case agent was independently proven.
Every person mentioned committed a crime.
Every aircraft trip or telephone call had a criminal purpose.
The testimony is the full Operation Leap Year grand jury record.
The public redactions can safely or reliably be reconstructed from other files.

The proposed counts were never tested at a federal trial in 2007. References to defendants and overt acts describe a draft charging theory, not filed convictions.

Chronology and Investigative Context

Date	Event
2005	Palm Beach police began investigating Epstein after the family of a 14 year old reported a paid massage.
2006	Palm Beach investigators referred the broader matter to the FBI in West Palm Beach.
Late April 2007	The immunized interview summarized at the start of this transcript took place.
May 8, 2007	The case agent testified before Federal Grand Jury 07-103.
May 23, 2007	The court reporter certified the 35 page transcript.
May 2007	According to the later DOJ review, the line prosecutor submitted a draft 60 count indictment and prosecution memorandum to supervisors.
September 24, 2007	Epstein signed the federal nonprosecution agreement.
June 30, 2008	Epstein entered state guilty pleas under the resolution contemplated by that agreement.

The DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility later reported that the nonprosecution agreement ended the federal investigation in exchange for a state based resolution. OPR found no professional misconduct under its governing standard, but concluded that former U.S. Attorney R. Alexander Acosta exercised poor judgment and that significant investigative steps remained incomplete when the federal matter was resolved.

Reliability and Limitations

This is a certified, contemporaneous transcript of sworn grand jury testimony. That gives it strong value as evidence of what the case agent presented and what questions prosecutors and grand jurors asked on May 8, 2007.

Its limits are equally important. Much of the testimony is hearsay in the ordinary sense because the agent summarizes what interviewees told investigators. The transcript contains redactions, transcription errors, phonetic spellings, and references to exhibits that are not included in the PDF. Several statements are framed as investigative conclusions or proposed charging allegations. The transcript also ends before the planned presentation concerning other Jane Does.

Researchers should cite a particular transcript page for each claim and use the official PDF image when OCR text is unclear.

Survivor Safety and Privacy Review

The public file redacts survivor names and personal details, although OCR and nearby records can create reidentification risks. EpsteinWiki should preserve the Jane Doe labels used in the released transcript and should not infer identities from context.

The testimony includes historical language suggesting that some minors were “compliant.” That term does not mean a minor consented to sexual exploitation or shared responsibility for it. The agent’s own explanation was that minors may be groomed, manipulated, embarrassed, or reluctant to disclose and that the law places responsibility on adults.

Why This Record Matters

EFTA00224005 offers a contemporaneous view of the federal case before the nonprosecution agreement. It shows prosecutors organizing evidence into proposed counts, agents correlating accounts with records, and grand jurors asking questions about recruitment, transportation, assistants, and the scope of the investigation.

The document is therefore relevant to two distinct subjects. First, it preserves evidence about the recruitment and exploitation system investigators attributed to Epstein and others. Second, it helps measure how developed the federal investigation was before the government chose a state based resolution and agreed not to prosecute Epstein or potential coconspirators in the Southern District of Florida.

Fact Check

Reviewed September 10, 2026.

The title page confirms the court, grand jury number, location, date, foreperson, and Exhibit 24 label.
The PDF contains 35 pages and sequential EFTA stamps from EFTA00224005 through EFTA00224039.
The testimony is by a redacted case agent summarizing an investigation. It is not direct survivor testimony.
The agent said the investigation was continuing and that additional girls were still being located and interviewed.
The transcript discusses a draft indictment. It does not show that the proposed indictment was returned or filed.
The DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility confirms that a draft 60 count indictment and prosecution memorandum were submitted in May 2007.
The federal nonprosecution agreement was signed on September 24, 2007. Epstein’s related state pleas occurred on June 30, 2008.
No exact article or draft for this EFTA number was found in the user’s saved files, but an existing live EpsteinWiki page was confirmed. This text is an update draft for that page.

Questions Still Unanswered

Who was the redacted case agent, and which agency record formally identifies her role in this session?
What exhibits accompanied the testimony, including the photographs, chart, draft indictment, phone analysis, and travel records?
What testimony followed in the next grand jury session?
Which proposed counts and defendants remained in the final May 2007 draft indictment?
What investigative steps were planned but left incomplete before the nonprosecution agreement?
Which underlying records are now public and can be linked directly to each overt act discussed here?

Related EpsteinWiki Pages

Sources

EFTA00224005 Download

PostedFebruary 1, 2026

ByEpsteinWiki

Tags: