Brad Karp
Former Paul, Weiss chairman whose communications with Jeffrey Epstein included Leon Black matters, social gatherings, personal favors, surveillance discussions, legal referrals, and advice concerning Epstein’s nonprosecution agreement
Snapshot
Full name: Brad Scott Karp
Also known as: Brad S. Karp
Born: July 25, 1959
Died: Living
Nationality or citizenship: American
Occupation or public role: Attorney, litigation partner, and former chair of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
EpsteinWiki classification: Professional associate, social contact, intermediary, and institutional enabler
Documented Epstein connection: Direct professional, social, and personal communications with Epstein after Epstein’s 2008 conviction
Legal status: Karp has not been charged with an Epstein related crime
Relevant period: Approximately 2013 through March 2019
Primary locations: New York City, Palm Beach, and London related legal discussions
Associated organizations: Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Apollo Global Management, Citigroup, and Leon Black’s family office
Known Epstein Data profile: Brad Karp entity profile
Key EFTA records: EFTA01031774, EFTA02353940, EFTA02488634, EFTA02493136, EFTA02492991, and EFTA02338171
Related cases: Epstein’s Florida nonprosecution agreement litigation, the Crime Victims’ Rights Act proceeding brought by Epstein survivors, and the later litigation between Leon Black and Guzel Ganieva
Content warning: This article discusses sexual abuse allegations, survivor treatment, surveillance, possible deportation, and efforts to preserve Epstein’s nonprosecution agreement
Key takeaway: The records do not establish that Karp participated in Epstein’s sexual abuse. They do establish that the leader of a major law firm maintained direct contact with Epstein after his conviction, socialized with him, requested personal favors, exchanged information about Leon Black’s affairs, participated in discussions concerning surveillance and possible immigration action against a woman, and provided feedback on Epstein’s effort to defend his nonprosecution agreement.
Key Takeaways
- Karp said his relationship with Epstein began through his representation of Apollo cofounder Leon Black. Paul, Weiss handled disputes involving the fees Black paid Epstein.
- Paul, Weiss maintains that neither Karp nor the firm represented Epstein and that the firm was legally adverse to him.
- The correspondence extended beyond fee negotiations. Karp and Epstein exchanged social messages, discussed personal matters, coordinated around Black’s problems, and requested assistance from one another.
- In 2015, Epstein and Karp discussed the visa status, possible arrest, possible deportation, recorded conversations, and physical surveillance of a woman identified as “GG.” Subsequent reporting connected those initials to Guzel Ganieva.
- Ganieva later accused Black of sexual abuse. Black denied her allegations and accused her of extortion. The released correspondence documents the response being developed around her. It does not resolve the competing allegations.
- Karp attended gatherings arranged by Epstein after Epstein became a registered sex offender. Following one 2015 evening, Karp thanked Epstein and described the experience as one he would never forget.
- Karp asked Epstein to help his son David obtain work on a Woody Allen film. Epstein contacted Allen, and David subsequently communicated with Epstein about the opportunity.
- Karp sought Epstein’s assistance locating counsel for former Citigroup president John Havens during a Florida prostitution prosecution.
- In March 2019, Karp reviewed a draft motion intended to protect Epstein’s nonprosecution agreement. He praised an argument claiming that the survivors had strategically delayed asserting their rights.
- The March 2019 correspondence occurred after a federal judge found that prosecutors had violated the Crime Victims’ Rights Act by concealing the agreement from Epstein’s victims.
- Karp resigned as chair of Paul, Weiss on February 4, 2026, after the correspondence became public. He remained a litigation partner at the firm.
Overview
Brad Karp is an American corporate attorney who served as chair of Paul, Weiss from 2008 until February 2026. His practice has involved major financial institutions, corporations, investigations, regulatory disputes, and crisis management.
Karp’s documented connection to Jeffrey Epstein originated through Leon Black. Black was a Paul, Weiss client and a cofounder of Apollo Global Management. An investigation commissioned by Apollo concluded that Black paid Epstein approximately $158 million between 2012 and 2017 for tax, estate, and related financial advice.
Black asked Karp to handle disputes concerning Epstein’s fees. This placed Karp between a major client and Epstein. Paul, Weiss has emphasized that its legal duty was to Black and that the firm was adverse to Epstein.
The correspondence shows that the relationship did not remain confined to formal fee negotiations. Karp and Epstein discussed Black’s personal affairs, possible action against a woman, investigative information, social events, medical matters, prominent acquaintances, legal referrals, media responses, and personal favors.
Karp’s direct contact with Epstein continued until March 2019. By then, Epstein’s 2008 conviction, sex offender status, unusual jail arrangement, and treatment by federal prosecutors had been publicly reported. The Miami Herald had also published its investigation into the survivors, the concealed agreement, and the failures that allowed Epstein to avoid federal prosecution.
Karp resigned as Paul, Weiss chair after the 2026 document release brought renewed scrutiny to these communications. The firm said he would remain as a partner focused on serving clients.
Identity Verification
The Brad Karp identified in the Epstein records is Brad Scott Karp, the longtime Paul, Weiss attorney and former firm chair.
Karp was raised on Long Island. He earned a bachelor’s degree in political science from Union College and received his law degree from Harvard Law School in 1984.
Except for a clerkship with Judge Irving R. Kaufman of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Karp spent his legal career at Paul, Weiss. He began at the firm as a summer associate. He chaired its Litigation Department from 2000 through 2007 and became firm chair in 2008.
The current Paul, Weiss biography identifies him as a litigation partner and former chair of the firm from 2008 through 2026.
The identity is corroborated by the Paul, Weiss email information, references to his leadership role, his representation of Leon Black and major financial institutions, references to his son David, and appointment records identifying him by name.
Documented Epstein Connection
Leon Black and the fee disputes
Karp’s stated professional reason for dealing with Epstein was his representation of Leon Black.
The released correspondence indicates that Black asked Karp to handle negotiations concerning Epstein’s compensation. The sums under discussion were substantial. In EFTA00465675, Epstein described claimed tax savings exceeding $150 million and sought compensation between $50 million and $60 million.
The emails show Karp carrying messages between Epstein and Black. In October 2018, Epstein asked Karp to resolve another disagreement concerning his fees. Karp reported that he had raised the issue with Black without making progress and would try again.
In EFTA02546883, Karp told Epstein that he believed they were the two people Black trusted most and understood as trying to protect him.
That language is significant. It presents Karp and Epstein as people cooperating to protect the same individual, even though Paul, Weiss later described its position as adverse to Epstein.
The woman identified as “GG”
A major cluster of 2015 communications concerns a woman identified as “GG” who was in a dispute with a man identified as “Leon.”
Subsequent reporting connected the initials to Guzel Ganieva and Leon Black. Ganieva later accused Black of sexual abuse. Black denied her allegations, described their relationship as consensual, and accused her of extortion.
On July 29, 2015, Epstein asked Karp whether his contacts could determine the woman’s visa status and whether a filing could cause her tourist visa to be revoked. Karp responded that both were good ideas and that he would work on them. The exchange appears in EFTA02353940.
On August 16, Epstein asked whether Karp and a person identified as “Lorin” could have the woman arrested for federal extortion, subjected to high bail, and possibly deported. Karp responded that he would check and believed the answer was yes, particularly if the referral came from a recent leader of the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York. See EFTA02493136.
The references to “Lorin” have been linked to Paul, Weiss partner Lorin Reisner, a former chief of the criminal division of the Southern District of New York. The relevant messages generally use only his first name, so that identification depends upon surrounding records and professional context.
Further questions concerning detention, bail, deportation, confidentiality, and the identity of a possible complainant appear in EFTA02492997.
Karp and Reisner also received transcripts of recorded conversations concerning the dispute. These records include EFTA00590667, EFTA01128746, EFTA01190807, and EFTA01200840.
The communications also document physical surveillance. Epstein asked Karp where the woman had gone after lunch. Karp supplied an apartment location, information about her movement toward John F. Kennedy International Airport, a description of the vehicle used, and confirmation that license plate numbers had been collected. That exchange appears in EFTA02488634.
In a later exchange, Epstein asked whether surveillance was continuing. Karp said it had stopped and discussed the possibility of proceedings in London or New York. See EFTA02486513.
The documents do not establish that the woman was arrested, deported, or stripped of her visa. They establish that Epstein and Karp discussed those possibilities and that Karp provided Epstein with surveillance information.
Social contact after Epstein’s conviction
Karp’s communications with Epstein included social contact unrelated to resolving a specific fee dispute.
After a July 2015 gathering, Karp thanked Epstein for including him in an evening he said he would never forget. He described the experience as rare and expressed hope that Epstein would invite him again. Epstein responded that Karp would receive more invitations. Karp then called Epstein amazing.
The correspondence appears in EFTA02492991.
Paul, Weiss later said that Karp attended two group dinners and engaged in only a small number of social exchanges. Even under that characterization, the contact occurred after Epstein’s conviction and sex offender registration.
Appointment records provide additional evidence of planned direct contact. EFTA00370499 records an April 25, 2014 appointment for Karp to see Epstein. EFTA02216282 and EFTA00933629 contain additional scheduling references.
EFTA02213016 includes planned contact involving Karp and Kathy Ruemmler. A calendar entry proves that an event was scheduled. It does not independently prove that every listed participant attended.
Personal assistance for David Karp
Karp used his access to Epstein to request help for his son David, an aspiring filmmaker.
In June 2016, Karp asked whether David could work in any capacity on an upcoming Woody Allen film. Karp said his son did not need to be paid. The request appears in EFTA02460029 and EFTA02338171.
Epstein contacted Allen and described David as willing to perform any task without compensation. David later met with Allen’s assistant and reported to Epstein that he expected to be connected with assistant directors for work as an additional production assistant.
Earlier records show David communicating with Epstein about questions for Allen and attending a screening arranged through Epstein. In 2018, Epstein again asked whether David could attend a screening of an Allen film. That invitation appears in EFTA00911338.
The records do not accuse David Karp of criminal conduct. Their relevance is that Brad Karp requested a personal career favor from Epstein after Epstein’s conviction.
Citigroup assistance
Karp told Epstein in March 2016 that he had asked senior Citigroup executives Michael Corbat and Jamie Forese to reconsider a decision affecting Epstein. According to Karp’s account, the executives deferred to the bank’s compliance personnel.
This was potentially sensitive because Paul, Weiss acted as outside counsel to Citigroup. Karp was telling Epstein that he had approached senior bank officials concerning a compliance determination.
Independent legal journalist David Lat later reported that Karp told colleagues he had not actually contacted Citigroup or The New York Times and had claimed otherwise to placate Epstein.
The available email proves what Karp represented to Epstein. Without the outside communications or testimony from the people involved, it does not independently prove whether the described outreach occurred.
Confidential information
In May 2018, Karp and Epstein exchanged messages concerning the confidentiality of information being transmitted. The correspondence appears in EFTA01055473.
Reuters reported that the released records included Karp sharing a confidential stock related document with Epstein.
The record is relevant because it shows that Epstein received material expressly treated as confidential. Determining whether its disclosure violated a legal duty would require additional information about its ownership, purpose, authorization, and the duties governing Karp’s possession of it.
John Havens and Robert Kraft
In February 2019, Karp and Epstein discussed the Florida prostitution investigation that resulted in charges against several prominent men.
Epstein offered to help arrange local Palm Beach representation if Robert Kraft needed it. Kraft was a Karp client.
Karp then told Epstein that former Citigroup president John Havens had called and needed immediate assistance. Karp asked Epstein to identify the best lawyer to help him. Epstein responded that people were already discussing the matter. The exchange appears in the records surrounding EFTA02634667.
The charges against Kraft and Havens were later dropped.
The significance of the exchange is not that requesting counsel was improper. It is that Karp treated Epstein as a source of trusted legal contacts in Palm Beach despite Epstein’s own prosecution and conviction there.
Assistance concerning Epstein’s nonprosecution agreement
The most consequential correspondence occurred in February and March 2019.
On February 21, 2019, United States District Judge Kenneth Marra ruled that federal prosecutors had violated the Crime Victims’ Rights Act by concealing Epstein’s nonprosecution agreement from his victims.
The agreement had protected Epstein from federal prosecution in South Florida. It also extended protection to named and potential coconspirators. Survivors argued that prosecutors negotiated and finalized the agreement without providing the notice required by federal law.
On March 2, Epstein asked Karp for his judgment and friendship concerning a proposed response to a New York Times editorial. Karp said he wanted to review and comment on a draft. The exchange appears in EFTA02633010.
Epstein then sent Karp a draft motion opposing efforts to alter or invalidate the nonprosecution agreement. On March 3, Karp called the motion overwhelmingly persuasive. He praised its reliance on United States v. Fokker Services and referred to the positions as “our arguments.”
Karp specifically approved an argument claiming that the survivors had waited to assert their rights for strategic advantage. He placed the word victims in quotation marks.
The exchange appears in EFTA01031774.
Epstein forwarded Karp’s comments to members of his legal circle, including Kathy Ruemmler, Martin Weinberg, and Darren Indyke.
Karp’s comments did not acknowledge that prosecutors had concealed the agreement from the victims or that a federal judge had already found a statutory violation. The wording instead adopted a defense theory that placed responsibility for the delay on the survivors.
The correspondence occurred after the Miami Herald had renewed public scrutiny of Epstein’s treatment by prosecutors and only four months before his July 2019 federal arrest.
Paul, Weiss maintains that Karp never represented Epstein. The record nevertheless establishes that Karp reviewed Epstein’s legal strategy, offered substantive feedback, and identified himself with the arguments being developed to protect the agreement.
Evidence Appearances
EFTA00465675
Date: Relevant to the Black and Epstein fee dispute
Document type: Email correspondence
Karp’s role: Attorney handling negotiations involving Leon Black and Epstein
Evidence link: View EFTA00465675
What the record establishes: Epstein asserted that his work produced more than $150 million in tax savings and sought a payment between $50 million and $60 million. The document helps establish the financial scale of the dispute Karp was assigned to handle.
What the record does not establish: It does not independently verify Epstein’s claimed tax savings or prove that the demanded amount was owed.
EFTA02353940
Date: July 29, 2015
Document type: Email exchange
Karp’s role: Recipient who agreed to investigate proposed immigration related actions
Evidence link: View EFTA02353940
What the record establishes: Epstein asked Karp whether contacts could determine a woman’s visa status and whether a filing could revoke her tourist visa. Karp responded that both were good ideas and said he would work on them.
What the record does not establish: It does not prove that government records were accessed, a filing was made, or the woman’s visa was revoked.
EFTA02493136
Date: August 16, 2015
Document type: Email exchange
Karp’s role: Attorney responding to questions about possible arrest and deportation
Evidence link: View EFTA02493136
What the record establishes: Epstein asked whether the woman could be arrested for federal extortion, subjected to high bail, and possibly deported. Karp said he would check and expressed confidence that action might be possible.
What the record does not establish: It does not prove that probable cause existed, that a prosecutor approved the theory, or that an arrest or deportation occurred.
EFTA02492997
Date: August 2015
Document type: Email exchange
Karp’s role: Attorney consulting with the person identified as “Lorin” about criminal and immigration procedures
Evidence link: View EFTA02492997
What the record establishes: The participants discussed detention, bail, possible deportation, confidentiality, and the mechanics of making a complaint.
What the record does not establish: It does not prove that law enforcement opened a case or adopted the proposed strategy.
EFTA00590667
Date: August 14, 2015
Document type: Draft transcript of a recorded conversation
Karp’s role: Recipient
Evidence link: View EFTA00590667
What the record establishes: Karp and Lorin Reisner received a transcript connected to the dispute involving the woman associated with Leon Black.
What the record does not establish: The transcript alone does not establish that every statement in the recorded conversation was true.
EFTA01128746
Date: August 13, 2015
Document type: Draft transcript of a recorded conversation
Karp’s role: Recipient
Evidence link: View EFTA01128746
What the record establishes: Karp received additional recorded material concerning the dispute and the woman identified as “GG.”
What the record does not establish: It does not resolve whether the woman’s demand constituted extortion or whether her underlying allegations were true.
EFTA01190807
Date: August 19, 2015
Document type: Recorded meeting transcript
Karp’s role: Recipient
Evidence link: View EFTA01190807
What the record establishes: The document shows continuing collection and distribution of recorded conversations to attorneys involved in the response.
What the record does not establish: It does not prove that the recording was complete, consensual, or independently authenticated in court.
EFTA01200840
Date: October 15, 2015
Document type: Recorded meeting transcript
Karp’s role: Recipient
Evidence link: View EFTA01200840
What the record establishes: Recorded material concerning the dispute continued to be supplied to Karp and Reisner months after the initial discussions.
What the record does not establish: It does not establish a judicial finding about the dispute or the truth of every claim made during the conversation.
EFTA02488634
Date: August 23, 2015
Document type: Email exchange containing surveillance information
Karp’s role: Source of location and vehicle information supplied to Epstein
Evidence link: View EFTA02488634
What the record establishes: Karp reported the woman’s movements, an apartment location, travel toward John F. Kennedy International Airport, a vehicle with tinted windows, and collected license plate information.
What the record does not establish: It does not identify every person who authorized, conducted, or paid for the surveillance.
EFTA02486513
Date: 2015
Document type: Email exchange
Karp’s role: Participant discussing the termination of surveillance and possible legal action
Evidence link: View EFTA02486513
What the record establishes: Epstein asked whether surveillance was continuing. Karp reported that it had stopped and discussed possible proceedings in London and New York.
What the record does not establish: It does not prove that a viable criminal or civil case existed in either jurisdiction.
EFTA02492991
Date: July 2015
Document type: Social email exchange
Karp’s role: Guest thanking Epstein following a gathering
Evidence link: View EFTA02492991
What the record establishes: Karp thanked Epstein for an evening he said he would never forget, expressed interest in another invitation, and called Epstein amazing.
What the record does not establish: The exchange does not identify every attendee or establish that Karp witnessed criminal conduct during the gathering.
EFTA02338171
Date: June 2016
Document type: Email request
Karp’s role: Father requesting professional assistance for his son
Evidence link: View EFTA02338171
What the record establishes: Karp asked Epstein whether David Karp could work in any capacity on an upcoming Woody Allen film and said David did not need to be paid.
What the record does not establish: It does not show that David was promised a permanent position or that Brad Karp offered Epstein anything in exchange.
EFTA00911338
Date: 2018
Document type: Screening invitation and related correspondence
Karp’s role: Contact through whom Epstein invited David Karp
Evidence link: View EFTA00911338
What the record establishes: Epstein remained in contact with the Karp family concerning access to a Woody Allen film screening.
What the record does not establish: It does not accuse David Karp of criminal conduct or establish that the screening involved illegal activity.
EFTA01055473
Date: May 19, 2018
Document type: Email correspondence concerning confidential material
Karp’s role: Sender or participant handling information identified as confidential
Evidence link: View EFTA01055473
What the record establishes: Karp and Epstein exchanged material whose confidentiality was expressly discussed.
What the record does not establish: It does not, without additional evidence, determine ownership of the information or whether its transmission violated a legal duty.
EFTA02546883
Date: 2018
Document type: Email exchange concerning Leon Black
Karp’s role: Black’s attorney and adviser
Evidence link: View EFTA02546883
What the record establishes: Karp described himself and Epstein as the two people Black most trusted to protect him.
What the record does not establish: It does not prove that Black authorized every action discussed by Karp and Epstein.
EFTA02634667
Date: February 2019
Document type: Email exchange concerning legal representation
Karp’s role: Attorney seeking immediate legal assistance for John Havens and receiving an offer involving Robert Kraft
Evidence link: View EFTA02634667
What the record establishes: Karp treated Epstein as a source of legal contacts during the Florida prostitution prosecution.
What the record does not establish: It does not prove that Epstein represented Havens or Kraft or that either man committed the charged offense. The charges were later dropped.
EFTA02633010
Date: March 2, 2019
Document type: Email exchange concerning Epstein’s public and legal response
Karp’s role: Adviser offering judgment and comments
Evidence link: View EFTA02633010
What the record establishes: Karp offered help and agreed to review a draft response concerning the controversy over Epstein’s agreement.
What the record does not establish: It does not establish a formal attorney and client engagement between Epstein and Karp.
EFTA01031774
Date: March 3, 2019
Document type: Substantive legal email
Karp’s role: Reviewer commenting on a draft motion prepared for Epstein
Evidence link: View EFTA01031774
What the record establishes: Karp praised the motion, discussed its legal authorities, referred to its positions as “our arguments,” and approved an argument accusing Epstein’s victims of strategic delay.
What the record does not establish: It does not prove that Karp drafted the motion, signed it, appeared as Epstein’s counsel, or was formally retained by him.
EFTA00370499
Date: April 25, 2014
Document type: Appointment record
Karp’s role: Scheduled visitor
Evidence link: View EFTA00370499
What the record establishes: Epstein’s schedule listed an appointment with Karp.
What the record does not establish: A scheduled appointment alone does not prove that the meeting occurred or establish what was discussed.
EFTA02213016
Date: 2017
Document type: Schedule record
Karp’s role: Listed participant in planned contact involving Epstein and Kathy Ruemmler
Evidence link: View EFTA02213016
What the record establishes: The record shows planned contact connecting Karp, Epstein, and Ruemmler.
What the record does not establish: It does not independently prove that every listed participant attended.
Relevant Timeline
2008: Epstein pleads guilty in Florida to state prostitution charges, including a charge involving a minor. He becomes a registered sex offender. Karp becomes chair of Paul, Weiss.
Approximately 2013: Leon Black asks Karp to handle negotiations concerning Epstein’s fees.
April 25, 2014: Epstein’s calendar lists an appointment with Karp.
July 2015: Karp thanks Epstein for hosting a social evening and expresses interest in attending another gathering.
July 29, 2015: Epstein asks Karp about determining a woman’s visa status and attempting to revoke her tourist visa.
August 2015: Epstein and Karp discuss arrest, high bail, deportation, possible referrals to prosecutors, and the treatment of the woman identified as “GG.”
August through October 2015: Karp and Reisner receive transcripts of recorded conversations concerning the dispute.
August 23, 2015: Karp gives Epstein detailed surveillance information about the woman’s movements and vehicle.
2015: Karp later reports that surveillance has stopped and discusses possible proceedings in London or New York.
March 2016: Karp tells Epstein that he sought reconsideration of a Citigroup compliance decision from Michael Corbat and Jamie Forese.
June 2016: Karp asks Epstein to help David Karp obtain work on Woody Allen’s film project.
August 2016: Epstein contacts Allen about David. David later reports meeting with Allen’s assistant.
October 2017: Epstein asks Karp how damaging the Harvey Weinstein reporting will become.
2017: A schedule record lists planned contact involving Epstein, Karp, and Kathy Ruemmler.
March 24, 2018: Michael Wolff tells Epstein that Karp is offering substantial help with Wolff’s next book.
May 2018: Wolff mentions Karp as a possible participant in a proposed favorable media project about Epstein.
May 2018: Karp and Epstein communicate about material identified as confidential.
2018: Epstein invites David Karp to another Woody Allen film screening.
October 2018: Epstein presses Karp to resolve another disagreement with Black concerning fees.
February 21, 2019: Judge Kenneth Marra rules that federal prosecutors violated the Crime Victims’ Rights Act by concealing Epstein’s nonprosecution agreement from his victims.
February 2019: Epstein offers assistance involving local representation for Robert Kraft. Karp asks Epstein for immediate legal help for John Havens.
March 2, 2019: Karp offers Epstein assistance and agrees to review a proposed response concerning the nonprosecution agreement.
March 3, 2019: Karp praises a draft motion defending the agreement and approves an argument accusing the survivors of strategic delay.
July 6, 2019: Federal authorities arrest Epstein on sex trafficking charges.
August 10, 2019: Epstein dies in federal custody.
January 30, 2026: The Justice Department releases millions of additional pages, including extensive Karp correspondence.
February 3, 2026: Paul, Weiss says Karp regrets his social interactions with Epstein and characterizes them as limited.
February 4, 2026: Karp resigns as chair of Paul, Weiss. Scott Barshay succeeds him. Karp remains a litigation partner.
February through March 2026: Further reporting examines Karp’s role in the surveillance, immigration discussions, fee disputes, confidential communications, personal favors, and legal assistance provided to Epstein.
June 2026: American Freakshow publishes a wider investigation of attorneys and institutions surrounding Epstein and Leon Black, including Karp.
Legal Status and Evidence Limits
Karp has not been charged with participating in Epstein’s sexual abuse or trafficking operation.
The cited evidence does not establish that Karp visited Little Saint James, traveled aboard Epstein’s aircraft, recruited victims, received women from Epstein, or personally witnessed sexual abuse.
His connection cannot accurately be reduced to an incidental name appearance. The primary records establish direct correspondence, planned meetings, social contact, personal requests, legal referrals, surveillance information, discussions of immigration and criminal action, Leon Black related strategy, and substantive comments on Epstein’s effort to protect his nonprosecution agreement.
Paul, Weiss states that it was adverse to Epstein and never represented him. The available records do not include an engagement letter naming Epstein as a Paul, Weiss client.
Karp’s March 2019 correspondence nevertheless shows him analyzing Epstein’s draft motion, offering strategic comments, using collective language about the legal arguments, and expressing support for an argument directed against the survivors.
Determining whether this created an attorney and client relationship or violated professional conduct rules would require evidence about engagement terms, expectations, conflicts, confidentiality, authorization, and communications that may not be public. No cited disciplinary authority has issued a finding that Karp committed professional misconduct in connection with Epstein.
The “GG” records require similar care. They establish surveillance, recorded conversations, immigration discussions, and consideration of possible criminal allegations. They do not adjudicate Ganieva’s allegations against Black or Black’s extortion allegations against her.
Ganieva accused Black of sexual abuse. Black denied the allegations and described their relationship as consensual. Her lawsuit was dismissed based upon a nondisclosure agreement, not after a trial determining the truth of every allegation.
The treatment of Epstein’s survivors in the March 2019 email also requires context. The survivors argued that federal prosecutors had concealed the agreement and violated their statutory rights. Judge Marra agreed that the Crime Victims’ Rights Act had been violated. Karp’s approval of an argument accusing them of strategic delay reflected Epstein’s defense position, not a neutral judicial determination.
Sleuth and Independent Reporting
American Freakshow
Nina Burleigh and Katie Chenoweth’s The Epstein Lawyers Association examines Karp within a broader network of lawyers, former prosecutors, corporate investigators, and elite law firms connected to Epstein and Leon Black.
The investigation links directly to records showing Karp and Epstein discussing Black, possible threats to Black, legal strategy, personal concerns, and their claimed roles as trusted protectors.
American Freakshow argues that formal representation captures only part of the institutional structure surrounding Epstein. Attorneys could represent Epstein’s associates, conduct internal investigations, negotiate settlements, transmit information, socialize with Epstein, or provide informal help without entering an appearance as his counsel.
Ellie Leonard
In Why Resignation Isn’t Good Enough, Ellie Leonard includes Karp among prominent people who left leadership positions after new Epstein disclosures.
Leonard argues that resignation alone does not answer questions about institutional conduct or provide meaningful accountability for survivors. Her analysis places Karp’s departure within the wider pattern of wealthy and influential people retaining money, professional status, and institutional protection after their Epstein relationships became public.
Leonard’s Michael Wolff’s Emails to Jeffrey Epstein preserves a March 24, 2018 message in which Wolff told Epstein that Karp was offering substantial help with Wolff’s next book.
In May 2018, Wolff also suggested Karp as a possible participant in a favorable media project about Epstein. Those messages establish that Wolff discussed Karp as a helpful contact. They do not prove that Karp agreed to participate in an Epstein profile or documentary.
Butterfly Bureau
The Butterfly Bureau EpsteinWiki news update highlights the American Freakshow investigation and its examination of Karp, Reid Weingarten, Andrew Levander, and Jay Clayton.
The Butterfly Bureau emphasizes the institutional roles played by attorneys, banks, accountants, investigators, settlement agreements, and corporate advisers. This framework is relevant to Karp because his documented role arose through representation of an Epstein associate rather than formal representation of Epstein himself.
David Lat and Original Jurisdiction
Legal journalist David Lat reviewed a substantial collection of the Karp correspondence in 5 Takeaways From Brad Karp’s Emails With Jeffrey Epstein.
Lat concludes that Karp’s contact originated through his work for Black but became increasingly difficult to reconcile with a strictly adverse role. He highlights the Citigroup intervention, surveillance discussions, social contact, personal favors, and March 2019 comments about the survivors.
Lat also reports that Karp told colleagues he had not actually contacted Citigroup or The New York Times and had only claimed to have done so to placate Epstein. That account provides context but does not alter what Karp wrote to Epstein.
Related EpsteinWiki Pages
- Jeffrey Epstein
- Leon Black
- Guzel Ganieva
- Kathy Ruemmler
- Lorin Reisner
- Woody Allen
- Michael Wolff
- Robert Kraft
- Darren Indyke
- Epstein’s Nonprosecution Agreement
- Crime Victims’ Rights Act Litigation
- Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
Sources
- Epstein Data Brad Karp entity profile
- EFTA00465675, Epstein fee demand and claimed tax savings
- EFTA02353940, visa status and revocation discussion
- EFTA02493136, arrest and deportation discussion
- EFTA02492997, detention and deportation follow up
- EFTA00590667, recorded conversation transcript
- EFTA01128746, additional recorded conversation transcript
- EFTA01190807, recorded meeting material
- EFTA01200840, additional recorded meeting material
- EFTA02488634, physical surveillance information
- EFTA02486513, surveillance status and possible legal action
- EFTA02492991, social gathering correspondence
- EFTA02460029, David Karp and Woody Allen correspondence
- EFTA02338171, request for film work for David Karp
- EFTA00911338, Woody Allen screening correspondence
- EFTA01055473, confidential material correspondence
- EFTA02546883, Karp and Epstein discussing protection of Black
- EFTA02634667, Robert Kraft and John Havens counsel discussion
- EFTA02633010, March 2019 offer of assistance
- EFTA01031774, comments on Epstein’s nonprosecution agreement motion
- EFTA00370499, April 2014 appointment record
- EFTA02216282, additional appointment record
- EFTA00933629, scheduled appointment
- EFTA02213016, planned contact involving Kathy Ruemmler
- Paul, Weiss official biography of Brad Karp
- Reuters, Epstein emails lead Karp to resign as Paul Weiss chairman
- Reuters, Karp regrets Epstein interactions
- Associated Press, Paul Weiss chairman resigns after release of Epstein emails
- Bloomberg Law, Karp advised Epstein on the plea agreement fight
- Bloomberg Law, Karp requested Epstein’s help for his son
- The Guardian, Epstein and Karp discussed deportation and surveillance
- Financial Times, Karp’s correspondence with Epstein
- Financial Times, Apollo, Paul Weiss, and Epstein
- Cornell Daily Sun, Epstein’s correspondence with David Karp
- American Freakshow, The Epstein Lawyers Association
- Ellie Leonard, Why Resignation Isn’t Good Enough
- Ellie Leonard, Michael Wolff’s Emails to Jeffrey Epstein
- Butterfly Bureau, Wall Street enablers and institutional accountability
- David Lat, 5 Takeaways From Brad Karp’s Emails With Jeffrey Epstein