Barbara Sampson

UpdatedOctober 8, 2026

ByEpsteinWiki

Snapshot

Field	Documented information
Name	Barbara A. Sampson, M.D., Ph.D.
Profession	Forensic and cardiovascular pathologist
Relevant public office	New York City Chief Medical Examiner at the time of Jeffrey Epstein’s death in August 2019
Leadership chronology	Acting chief from 2013; formally appointed December 10, 2014; departure announced November 29, 2021
Epstein connection	Led the city agency responsible for the death investigation and publicly defended its determination
Autopsy date	August 11, 2019
Pathologist who performed the autopsy	Kristin Roman, M.D.
Reviewer named in the signed report	Jason K. Graham, First Deputy Chief Medical Examiner
Official cause and manner	Hanging; suicide
Public determination	August 16, 2019
Signed autopsy report	Electronically signed by Roman on August 27, 2019
Principal disagreement	Michael Baden, retained by Epstein’s brother, challenged the interpretation of the injuries
Later federal review	June 2023 DOJ Inspector General report found serious jail failures but no evidence contradicting the FBI’s finding of no criminality in how Epstein died
Scope of this profile	Sampson’s institutional role, statements, documentary appearances and the limits of the evidence
Last checked	October 7, 2026

Barbara Sampson was the head of New York City’s Office of Chief Medical Examiner when Jeffrey Epstein died in federal custody on August 10, 2019. Her office classified his death as suicide by hanging. Sampson became the public face of that determination, particularly when the pathologist retained by Epstein’s family disputed it.

The signed autopsy report identifies Kristin Roman as the examiner who performed the examination, and Jason K. Graham as its reviewing first deputy. Sampson’s position as chief does not make her the hands-on examiner, the author of every laboratory result, or the speaker in every subsequently released interview about the autopsy.

Her significance in the Epstein record is therefore specific: she headed the agency, authorized a private observer, communicated its conclusions and defended those conclusions publicly. A careful account separates that institutional responsibility from the medical work of individual examiners and from the failures of the federal jail.

Important Points

Sampson’s connection to the Epstein case is her public medical office. The records discussed here do not establish a social or financial relationship with Epstein.
Roman performed the August 11 autopsy. The signed report states that Graham reviewed it. Neither role should be reassigned to Sampson.
The examination, public announcement, supplementary laboratory work and final electronic signature occurred on different dates. Their dates should not be collapsed into one event.
On August 11, Sampson’s office said the determination was pending further information. Its final public determination followed on August 16.
The autopsy report expressly records neck fractures. The public dispute concerns how those findings should be interpreted alongside the rest of the evidence, rather than whether the official report concealed their existence.
Baden’s challenge was an expert opinion offered on behalf of Epstein’s family. It did not itself change the official classification.
Sampson stood by her office’s conclusion and said a second medical investigation by the office was unnecessary. That statement is preserved in released correspondence quoting press coverage.
The 2023 Inspector General report distinguishes the examining pathologist’s account from the chief medical examiner’s office as an institution. Its description of the examiner’s independent judgment should not be presented as an interview with Sampson.
Investigators documented major failures at the Metropolitan Correctional Center. Those findings concern federal custody and supervision; they are not findings that Sampson falsified an autopsy.
Released transcripts provide additional context about information the examining witness wanted but had not obtained. Those limitations deserve reporting alongside the witness’s stated confidence, without turning either into an independent medical diagnosis.
Sampson left the chief position in 2021. Later references to her as chief generally describe her historical role in 2019.

Professional Background and Public Responsibilities

New York City’s December 10, 2014 appointment announcement identifies Sampson as the first woman appointed chief medical examiner. She had been acting chief since 2013 and had joined the office as a forensic pathology fellow in 1998. Her earlier work included senior medical examiner, cardiovascular pathology consultant and first deputy chief responsibilities.

The appointment announcement describes an office responsible for investigating deaths involving criminal violence, accidents, suicide and unusual or suspicious circumstances. Its remit included maintaining death-investigation records and providing relevant records to prosecutors when criminality was indicated. Those functions explain why a death in a federal jail in Manhattan involved a municipal medical examiner’s office alongside federal investigators.

The city’s 2017 announcement of her appointment as an American Board of Pathology trustee establishes her professional standing during the period before Epstein’s detention. It also places the beginning of her permanent chief appointment in December 2014. Descriptions that say she was chief from 2013 are usually counting the acting period; they are not necessarily identifying a different appointment.

Mount Sinai’s December 2021 announcement records that she joined its pathology department as a professor and vice chair for laboratory strategic initiatives and academic affairs. It describes her medical degree from Weill Cornell, doctorate in microbiology from Rockefeller University, and residency and cardiovascular pathology fellowship at Brigham and Women’s Hospital. These qualifications provide background to her office; they do not substitute for examining the evidence in any particular case.

Which Official Did What?

The autopsy packet released as EFTA00063517 supplies the clearest allocation of roles. The packet begins with a March 2, 2022 Inspector General records request and a March 3 certification. Within it are the underlying 2019 autopsy documents. The packet’s later collection date is not the date of the autopsy.

Person or institution	Documented role	What should not be inferred
Barbara Sampson	Chief of OCME; public spokesperson for its conclusion; authorized Baden’s attendance	That she personally performed the autopsy or signed Roman’s report
Kristin Roman	Named examiner who performed the August 11 autopsy and electronically signed the report on August 27	That every statement attributed only to OCME is a quotation from Roman
Jason K. Graham	Named first deputy who reviewed the report	That he was the family’s private observer
Michael Baden	Private pathologist who observed at the request of Epstein’s representatives	That he conducted a separate, independently authorized second autopsy
DOJ Office of the Inspector General	Investigated custody, care, supervision and staff conduct; reviewed medical evidence	That it performed the autopsy or replaced the city’s medical classification
FBI	Investigated the circumstances of death alongside the OIG	That collection of a news report meant adopting its conclusions

The report’s final page names Graham as reviewer and bears Roman’s electronic signature. This is a stronger basis for identifying the examiner than a headline saying that the chief medical examiner “conducted” an autopsy. The same distinction matters when interpreting statements made several years later: the 2023 OIG report calls its interviewee the medical examiner who performed the autopsy, not Sampson by name.

August 2019: Examination, Pending Determination and Announcement

The August 11 OCME statement preserved in EFTA01687991 said a medical examiner had performed the autopsy that day and that the determination remained pending further information. It also said Sampson had allowed Baden to observe at the request of Epstein’s representatives, with the federal prosecutor’s awareness. The statement described that attendance as routine practice.

The statement separately deferred questions about other investigations to the relevant law-enforcement agencies. That division of responsibility is important. OCME was investigating the death medically; the FBI and OIG were also investigating the jail, its records and the conduct of federal personnel. A municipal medical finding and a federal institutional investigation did not have to finish simultaneously.

The OIG’s chronological account records the public release of the medical examiner’s findings on August 16. The official categories were cause of death, hanging, and manner of death, suicide. Those are distinct fields. A report that refers loosely to “suicide” as the cause should not obscure the actual wording of the autopsy document.

The signed report in EFTA00063517 records those categories explicitly. Its August 27 signature date does not mean an autopsy occurred on August 27. Similarly, the March 2022 request for the packet does not date the medical findings to 2022. The record contains an examination date, a public announcement date, dates for associated laboratory work, a signature date and later records-production dates.

The distinction also constrains claims about an “overridden” ruling. A pending determination is not a completed homicide determination. Establishing that an office initially sought further information does not, by itself, establish that a chief later reversed a pathologist’s contrary finding. Such a claim must be tested against the signed report and the actual interview record.

What the Autopsy Record Establishes

The opening diagnostic page of the signed report records fractures involving the thyroid cartilage and hyoid bone and refers to a separate anthropology report. It also records other findings and distinguishes injuries associated with attempted resuscitation. The existence of neck fractures was therefore part of the official record itself.

The final page of the autopsy report records submissions for toxicology, forensic biology, neuropathology and anthropology. It states that separately received clothing and a ligature were examined and photographed. These entries establish that such work and submissions were documented; they do not authorize a reader to invent results that are absent from the cited pages.

The appropriate evidentiary comparison is between the official medical interpretation, the underlying observations and any competing expert interpretation. An isolated injury, a cropped photograph or a description of the chief’s position cannot settle that comparison. This profile reports the identified examiners’ conclusions rather than offering a new forensic opinion.

EpsteinWiki’s detailed article on Baden’s autopsy review covers the competing interpretations in greater depth. The central issue for Sampson’s biography is that she publicly supported her agency’s determination, while the signed medical work identifies other specific officials.

Michael Baden’s Challenge and Sampson’s Response

The October 31, 2019 FBI public-affairs briefing summarized Baden’s public challenge from the previous day. It reported his view that the pattern of neck injuries warranted investigating a possible homicide and contrasted that view with Sampson’s defense of the suicide determination. This is a news digest inside a government release, rather than an FBI forensic finding.

EFTA00165534 preserves an email quoting Sampson’s response as reported by Fox News. In that statement, she maintained the cause and manner, described the original investigation as complete, said her office continued sharing medical information with Epstein’s family and their representatives, and rejected the need for a second investigation by her office.

The document’s form matters. It is an electronic message reproducing a statement from coverage of Baden’s appearance. It is not a newly signed autopsy opinion from Sampson, and its presence in the release does not show that every recipient endorsed it. The dated public-affairs digest helps place the dispute in late October 2019 without treating an obscured email header as a readable timestamp.

Baden’s attendance was a direct connection to the examination, but his family-retained role was different from that of the city examiner. His disagreement should be attributed to him and considered alongside the official finding. Sampson’s response should likewise be reported as her office’s position, rather than as an independent resolution of every criticism raised by the family.

The OIG Interview and the Limits of the Information Available

The sworn interview released as EFTA00113220 is dated May 31, 2022. The cover itself supplies that date. The transcript concerns an OCME witness’s examination and interpretation of the Epstein autopsy. Its public copy withholds speaker names, so individual passages should be attributed to the medical witness in the transcript rather than relabeled as Sampson’s testimony.

Pages 43 and 44 address the decision to wait for additional information. The witness said she had sought information from the officer who found Epstein and wanted to inspect the cell; she said the requested cell visit was not allowed. She also said she was allowed to view some footage. She described the additional inquiries as an effort to be thorough and expressed confidence in her conclusion.

The same exchange records a remaining uncertainty about whether the item provided to her was the actual ligature involved and about details of the body’s original position. These are limitations in the witness’s account of the information available to her. They should not be omitted from an account that cites her confidence, and they should not be converted into a finding that the death was homicide.

The June 2023 OIG report, pages 79 and 80, summarizes the examining pathologist’s explanations. It reports her interpretation of the injury pattern, the absence of expected evidence of a struggle, and the medical basis she gave for the suicide classification. The report also says she described the ruling as her independent medical judgment and said she had not been pressured to reach it.

That attribution is narrower than saying “Sampson told the OIG she was not pressured.” The report expressly identifies the interviewee by her role as the examiner who performed the autopsy. The signed report separately identifies Roman as that examiner. Even where the documents support a role comparison, the published redactions in a particular transcript should not be filled in or treated as invitations to reconstruct withheld personal information.

Federal Findings and the Continuing Official Classification

The 2023 OIG investigation found grave failures in Epstein’s custody. These included failure to provide the required cellmate, missed rounds and inmate counts, false records, and failures affecting security-video recording. Its conclusions explain why scrutiny of the jail remained justified even while the medical classification remained suicide.

The OIG’s investigative focus was the conduct of Bureau of Prisons personnel. The report states that the FBI investigated the cause of death and found no criminality in how Epstein died; the OIG said it uncovered no evidence contradicting that finding. This is an account of those agencies’ conclusions. It does not mean every custodial action was lawful or satisfactory, and it is not an exoneration of every prison employee on every issue.

The DOJ and FBI’s July 2025 memorandum again said investigators concluded that Epstein died by suicide and cited earlier findings and available video. That memorandum did not announce a new autopsy or a change in OCME’s classification. Its description of the video also does not turn the available footage into a recording of the inside of Epstein’s cell.

As of the October 7, 2026 research check for this article, the official records reviewed retain the suicide classification. Public criticism, later document releases and a renewed debate about medical evidence should be distinguished from an official amendment. No amendment is established by the records cited here.

FBI Records Requests and Administrative Appearances

The FBI’s August 13, 2019 letter, EFTA00173288, addresses Sampson as chief medical examiner, directs attention to Deputy Commissioner Frank DePaolo and requests OCME reports, crime-scene photographs and a three-dimensional scan of the cell. It is a direct, named documentary connection between Sampson’s office and the federal investigation.

The letter establishes that investigators requested those materials. It does not independently establish when every requested item was received, which employee fulfilled the request, or whether Sampson personally handled the response. The opening address and the salutation also have different institutional functions; neither should be turned into proof of personal authorship or operational control over every requested record.

The March 2022 OIG request and business-record certification show another stage of records collection. The certification includes language about authority delegated by Sampson. That wording in a later records form does not establish that she remained chief in March 2022, particularly when the city had already announced her departure in November 2021.

Routine forms bearing a chief’s name are evidence of the office’s administration. They are not equivalent to a personally signed diagnostic conclusion. This distinction is especially useful when searching a large release in which letterheads, certifications, duplicate packets and press clippings may produce repeated name hits.

Later Career and the Historical Title

New York City announced Sampson’s departure on November 29, 2021 and named Graham acting chief. The announcement discussed her wider tenure, including leadership during the COVID-19 mass-fatality response. It did not announce an adverse finding about the Epstein case.

The American Board of Pathology’s 2024 annual report identifies her as its 2024 president and describes later work at Boston Children’s Hospital and OCME. It describes the Mount Sinai vice-chair position in the past tense. These dated professional records are preferable to assuming that the job announced in 2021 remained unchanged indefinitely.

Her employment history should not be used as evidence for a theory about the death investigation. The record supports a transition from the chief position and later professional work. It does not establish that she was removed because of Epstein, that a later appointment rewarded a particular finding, or that she remained the official responsible for every subsequent OCME action.

Evidence Appearances

Record	Date or period	What it establishes	Principal limitation
NYC appointment announcement	December 10, 2014	Sampson’s permanent chief appointment after service as acting chief	A career record, not evidence about the 2019 findings
EFTA01687991, PDF page 15	OCME statement of August 11, 2019, in a forwarded email chain	Completed examination, pending determination and Baden’s observer status	A preserved press statement inside correspondence
EFTA00173288	August 13, 2019	FBI request to OCME naming Sampson and seeking investigative materials	A request is not proof of complete fulfillment
EFTA00063517, pages 3, 4 and 9	Autopsy August 11; signed August 27, 2019; packet collected March 2022	Roman’s examination, Graham’s review, and the cause and manner	The packet mixes original medical dates and later administrative dates
EFTA00165534	Statement reported during the October 2019 dispute	Sampson’s defense of the determination	Email reproduces a statement quoted in press coverage
EFTA00161079, pages 3 and 4	October 31, 2019	FBI press digest reporting Baden’s challenge and Sampson’s response	News monitoring is not an FBI medical conclusion
EFTA00113220, pages 43 and 44	May 31, 2022	OCME witness’s explanation of further inquiries and remaining informational limits	Speaker names are withheld; not identified here as Sampson testimony
OIG Report 23-085 and EFTA00039025 viewer	June 2023	Federal custody findings and summary of the examining pathologist’s account	Primarily a review of federal personnel and custody, not a new autopsy
DOJ and FBI memorandum	July 2025	Continued federal conclusion of suicide	Does not amend or replace the signed OCME report

Chronology

Date	Event	Relevance
1998	Sampson joins OCME as a fellow	Beginning of the institutional career described by NYC
2013	Becomes acting chief	Distinct from the permanent appointment
December 10, 2014	Appointed chief medical examiner	Holds this role during the Epstein investigation
August 10, 2019	Epstein dies in federal custody	Triggers city medical and federal investigations
August 11, 2019	Roman performs autopsy; office says determination is pending	Baden observes with permission
August 13, 2019	FBI writes to OCME	Named records request to Sampson’s office
August 16, 2019	Official findings released publicly	Cause hanging; manner suicide
August 27, 2019	Roman electronically signs report	Separate from the examination and announcement dates
October 30 and 31, 2019	Baden’s challenge and Sampson’s response enter press and FBI news digest	Public dispute over interpretation
November 29, 2021	City announces Sampson’s departure	Graham becomes acting chief
March 2022	OIG requests and receives certified OCME records packet	Later production of original medical records
May 31, 2022	OIG sworn interview of OCME witness	Additional context about the medical investigation
June 2023	OIG publishes Report 23-085	Serious custodial failures; no contrary finding about criminality in the death
July 2025	DOJ and FBI publish memorandum	Federal suicide conclusion maintained

Sources

PostedOctober 8, 2026