EFTA01620824: Redacted iMessages Attributed to Melanie Walker and Jeffrey Epstein About Angiography Art, Surgery, and Time Perception

PostedSeptember 21, 2026

UpdatedSeptember 21, 2026

ByEpsteinWiki

An eight page August 2018 message export documenting medical image sharing, operating room interruptions, and an extended speculative discussion about how living organisms perceive time

Snapshot

Evidence ID: EFTA01620824

Page stamps: EFTA01620824 through EFTA01620831

Record type: iMessage export

Date range shown: August 13, 2018 through August 28, 2018

Timezone shown: UTC plus 0000

Length: Eight pages

Participants: Names redacted in this rendering. The longer conversation has been attributed by outside reporting and congressional investigators to physician Melanie Walker and Jeffrey Epstein.

Primary subjects: Angiographic images presented as art, vascular anatomy, surgery, time perception, sensory systems, plants, and a telephone contact

Evidentiary value: Strong evidence of a sustained and familiar message exchange between the two redacted participants. Contextual evidence supports the Walker and Epstein attribution, but the names are not printed in this particular record.

Privacy status: Contains images apparently derived from medical care and an unredacted telephone number. EpsteinWiki should not reproduce the number or the patient images without a documented public interest reason and a privacy review.

What Is This Record?

EFTA01620824 is an eight page export of an iMessage conversation. The visible messages begin on August 13, 2018 and end on August 28, 2018. The production prints the timezone as UTC plus 0000 and assigns consecutive page stamps from EFTA01620824 through EFTA01620831.

The exchange begins with one participant describing a private web collection of angiography and brain images organized around fragility, resilience, and humor or perspective. Over the following days that participant sends several medical images and comments on anatomy, image artifacts, vascular access, surgery, and teaching. The conversation later becomes an extended discussion about whether humans and other organisms possess a sense of time and what biological mechanisms might support it.

The visible participant labels are blacked out. This record alone therefore does not directly name either person. The attribution to Melanie Walker and Jeffrey Epstein rests on continuity with a much larger iMessage corpus, occupational details inside that corpus, public reporting that traced the thread to Walker, and a 2026 congressional interview in which investigators described another section of the same numbered conversation as an exchange between Walker and Epstein.

Source and Provenance

The PDF is part of the United States Department of Justice Epstein Library production released under the Epstein Files Transparency Act. A public mirror indexes the record as dataset 10, identifies it as an eight page message chain, and provides a direct copy of the released PDF.

The document appears to be a rendered export rather than a native Apple message database. It preserves dates, times, bubble placement, attachment filenames, read or sent indicators on some pages, and the platform and timezone header. It does not expose the native database identifiers, complete attachment metadata, message GUIDs, Apple account identifiers, device identifiers, or a cryptographic chain of custody.

The first page carries EFTA01620824. The next seven rendered pages carry EFTA01620825 through EFTA01620831. The number in the article title therefore identifies the complete PDF, while the footer stamps identify its individual pages.

What the Record Contains

Date	Page stamps	Content summary
August 13, 2018	EFTA01620824	The medical participant sends a small icon attachment and asks the other participant to review an unpublished site containing angiography and brain art. The proposed sections concern fragility, resilience, and humor or perspective. The reply is a brief acknowledgment.
August 16, 2018	EFTA01620825	The medical participant explains that an image which resembles lipstick or dental hardware is actually motion artifact caused by swallowing during an external carotid injection. An image attachment named IMG_5788.JPEG is shown. The other participant responds positively. The sender calls it art, says there are hundreds of such images, and mentions travel to Denver for teaching and learning.
August 17, 2018	EFTA01620826	The medical participant sends another altered or annotated vascular image and describes difficulty navigating an unusual innominate artery from the chest toward the brain. The other participant calls it beautiful.
August 21 and August 25, 2018	EFTA01620827	A visually altered surgical image receives praise. Another paired image is labeled as a normal vessel on the left and a dramatically abnormal vessel on the right.
August 26, 2018	EFTA01620828	The medical participant asks whether the other person is free to talk, says surgery may be required within about twenty minutes, and gives the local time in Seattle. The other participant supplies a telephone number.
August 28, 2018	EFTA01620828 through EFTA01620831	The participants discuss the biological perception of duration. Proposed mechanisms include autonomic activity, basal ganglia oscillation, the heart, the cerebellum, the retina, light, gravity, sleep, anesthesia, depression, psychedelics, and learned succession. The discussion expands to plant senses and decision making. The medical participant ends the exchange to perform surgery on a bilateral cavernous carotid fistula.

The PDF displays at least four medically derived images. They include angiographic or radiographic anatomy, an altered image involving vascular anatomy, a graphic artistic composition using an operating room image, and a comparison of normal and abnormal vessels. The accompanying messages frame these images as a personal art collection. No patient name is visible in the rendered pages reviewed for this article.

The record also contains one visible telephone number. Because the number is not necessary to understand the exchange and may create privacy or misuse risks, it is not repeated here.

Key Evidence Points

The exchange is sustained rather than incidental. It spans sixteen calendar days and includes professional updates, medical images, a request to talk, travel information, and a lengthy intellectual discussion.
One participant plainly presents as a physician working in neurovascular care. That person discusses external carotid injection, the innominate artery, an urgent operation, Seattle time, and a cavernous carotid fistula.
The medical participant treats clinical images as art and describes maintaining a collection numbering in the hundreds. The conversation therefore documents access to and informal sharing of medically derived imagery outside the immediate care setting.
The other participant responds briefly to most of the medical images but participates more actively in the discussion of time perception. The exchange shows intellectual familiarity and an established conversational rhythm.
The right side participant sends a telephone number after the left side participant asks to speak. This supports direct contact capability but does not establish that a call occurred.
The record contains no discussion of Epstein’s sexual abuse, trafficking operation, victims, financial transactions, or recruitment activity.
The record contains no proof of an in person meeting, a visit to an Epstein property, travel on an Epstein aircraft, or Epstein’s physical presence in Seattle, Denver, or an operating room.
The Walker and Epstein identification is an attribution based on the larger message sequence. It is not a name disclosure within EFTA01620824 itself.

What the Record Does and Does Not Prove

Proposition	Assessment	Reason
A redacted medical professional exchanged iMessages with a second redacted person in August 2018	Proven by the face of the record	Dates, message bubbles, medical descriptions, and replies appear throughout the PDF.
The medical participant was in or working on Seattle time	Strongly supported	The participant expressly states the current Seattle time and repeatedly describes imminent surgery.
The medical participant was Melanie Walker	Strong contextual attribution, not direct proof from this PDF	Public reporting identified the longer thread through self identification, a telephone number, and references to Harborview. Congressional investigators separately attributed nearby pages in the same conversation to Walker and Epstein.
The other participant was Jeffrey Epstein	Strong contextual attribution, not direct proof from this PDF	The surrounding corpus and outside investigations identify Epstein as the counterparty, but this PDF redacts the participant label.
The two participants spoke by telephone on August 26	Not proven	A request to talk and a telephone number appear, but no call log or confirmation of a completed call appears.
Jeffrey Epstein was physically present with Walker	Not proven	The record is a remote message exchange and provides no shared location evidence.
Epstein went to Seattle or Denver in connection with these messages	Not proven	Seattle and Denver are mentioned only in the medical participant’s own scheduling and travel comments.
The medical images were lawfully obtained, deidentified, or shared with patient consent	Not established	The export contains no consent form, institutional approval, deidentification record, or provenance for the images.
The scientific ideas discussed are medically validated	Not proven	The participants describe hypotheses and questions. The conversation is not a peer reviewed study or medical guidance.
This exchange documents criminal conduct	Not proven	No criminal act is described in these eight pages.

The narrow and supportable conclusion is that this record documents continuing contact between a physician strongly attributable to Walker and a counterparty strongly attributable to Epstein. It also shows that their contact included clinical work, images, speculative science, travel, and attempts to arrange a call.

People and Entities Appearing in the Record

Person or entity	How the record presents them	Identification status
Melanie Walker	Probable author of the medically detailed messages and image attachments	Strong contextual attribution. Her name is redacted in this PDF.
Jeffrey Epstein	Probable recipient of most images and participant in the time perception discussion	Strong contextual attribution. His name is redacted in this PDF.
Unnamed patients	Their anatomy may be represented in several medical images	Not identified. No names should be inferred.
Denver	Destination for a teaching and learning engagement	Directly mentioned, but no venue or event is named.
Seattle	Time reference and probable professional location of the medical participant	Directly mentioned.
Unpublished art website	A private site organizing angiography and brain art into three themes	Directly described, but no site address is visible in the rendering.
Apple iMessage	Messaging platform named in the export header	Directly identified.

No Bill Gates, Boris Nikolic, Reid Hoffman, Neal Kassell, Neal Spetzler, or other public figure is named in these eight pages. Some such people appear in nearby messages in the broader production, but they should not be presented as participants in this specific record.

Timeline Significance

EFTA01620824 falls within a longer series of 2018 exchanges attributed to Walker and Epstein. Earlier pages in the same production contain discussions of plants, brain theory, research collaborators, mitochondria, travel, and professional meetings. Later pages continue with plant biology, conferences, surgery, and calls.

Date	Record	Significance
March through July 2018	EFTA01620806	Earlier exchange includes plant behavior, brain theory, neurovascular research, and research collaborators. It establishes topical continuity with the August discussion.
August 13 through August 28, 2018	EFTA01620824	Present record. It documents medical image sharing, surgery scheduling, and the discussion of time perception.
August 30 through August 31, 2018	EFTA01620833	The same apparent exchange continues with allergies, plant signaling, vascular images, clot research, and another proposed call.
September 8 through September 17, 2018	EFTA01620841	Later messages discuss a BrainMind conference, Reid, a proposed call, New York, and a Rockefeller fellowship event.
September 18 through September 20, 2018	EFTA01620847	Later messages refer to travel from New York to Seattle, Mary Erdoes, Boris, Neal, and another attempt to speak.
September 24 through September 29, 2018	EFTA01620851	Later messages discuss a patient death, proposed plant imaging experiments, Neal, and sensory systems.

This sequence matters because it reduces the chance that EFTA01620824 is a detached screenshot or isolated contact. The adjacent exports show consistent topics, travel references, professional details, message formatting, and conversational roles.

Related Evidence

EFTA01620806: Earlier iMessages about plant behavior, the holonomic brain theory, brain and leaf imagery, mitochondrial research, and meetings in Boston.

EFTA01620819: A scientific article titled Fungal associations of basal vascular plants: reopening a closed book? Its placement immediately before the present message export is consistent with the surrounding interest in plant biology, but placement alone does not prove who sent or read it.

EFTA01620833: A continuation involving plant allergies, airborne signaling, vascular malformations, clot research, and an attempt to arrange another conversation.

EFTA01620841: A later continuation involving the BrainMind conference, Reid, calls, New York, and a Rockefeller fellowship event.

EFTA01620847: A later continuation involving a flight to Seattle, Mary Erdoes, Boris, Neal, and a proposed idea described as unsuitable for text.

EFTA01620851: A later continuation involving surgery, a patient death, proposed plant scans, neurotransmitters, and sensory systems.

The broader corpus should be used to test identity and continuity, but each document must still be evaluated on its own terms. Adjacency in a production does not by itself establish authorship, truth, or legal significance.

Reliability and Limitations

High confidence observations: The PDF contains eight rendered pages. It displays the iMessage platform label, a UTC timezone label, dates from August 13 through August 28, 2018, multiple message bubbles, medical image attachments, and page stamps EFTA01620824 through EFTA01620831.

Moderate to high confidence attribution: Walker and Epstein are the most strongly supported identities for the participants. WIRED reported that the longer message series could be tied to Walker through a self identification, a number associated with her, and a Harborview reference. In a later congressional interview of Bill Gates, committee counsel said investigators understood pages EFTA01620736 through EFTA01620742 to be a Walker and Epstein exchange. Those facts support continuity, but they are not a substitute for unredacted native metadata for EFTA01620824.

Rendering limitations: The export obscures participant names and sometimes renders timestamps imperfectly. Extracted text contains obvious optical recognition errors such as replacing letters with numbers or reading pm as pin. Any quotation, timestamp, or message direction should therefore be checked against the page image.

Attachment limitations: The export displays images and filenames but not the original full resolution attachments, embedded metadata, acquisition dates, institutional identifiers, or consent records. Visual interpretation cannot establish the patient, exact procedure, facility, or date of image acquisition.

Scientific limitations: Several statements are exploratory, colloquial, or speculative. The exchange does not provide citations, methods, data, or peer review sufficient to validate claims about time perception, depression, anesthesia, psychedelics, plant senses, or autonomic mechanisms.

Chain of custody limitations: The public PDF is a government produced rendering. This article did not inspect the original device, Apple database, or forensic image. The visible record should be treated as strong documentary evidence of the rendered exchange, not as a complete forensic extraction.

Survivor Safety and Privacy Review

The record does not name an Epstein survivor or describe sexual abuse. It does, however, raise a separate privacy concern because it displays images that appear to originate in patient care. Even without visible names, unusual anatomy, procedure timing, facility information, or original file metadata can sometimes enable reidentification.

EpsteinWiki should describe the images without republishing them at full resolution unless a specific evidentiary need outweighs the privacy risk. Captions should avoid guessing the patient’s sex, diagnosis, age, identity, outcome, or consent status. The visible telephone number should remain omitted.

The participant attribution should also be stated carefully. Walker is a public figure in reporting about the Epstein files, but this particular PDF does not print her name. The article therefore distinguishes direct content from contextual identification and does not claim that every statement in the thread is medically correct.

Why This Record Matters

The record helps document the ordinary texture and duration of Epstein’s post conviction relationships. The exchange is not merely a contact entry. It shows a person sharing professional concerns, private creative work, travel plans, urgent surgical obligations, and speculative ideas over a period of weeks with a counterparty attributed to Epstein.

That familiarity matters even though the pages do not document abuse or a financial transaction. Epstein’s network operated through repeated access, intellectual conversation, introductions, advice, and private communications as well as through formal business. EFTA01620824 is evidence of that sustained access.

The record also matters because it includes medically derived images. Their presence raises questions about how clinical material moved into personal communications and creative projects. The PDF does not answer whether the images were properly deidentified or shared with consent, so the appropriate conclusion is a documented privacy question, not an accusation of a specific violation.

Finally, the exchange is useful for attribution. Its Seattle references, neurosurgical vocabulary, research themes, and continuity with nearby files align with the independently reported identification of Walker. The evidentiary strength comes from the combination of details, not from any single message.

Fact Check

Claim	Verdict	Basis
EFTA01620824 is an eight page iMessage export	Verified	PDF metadata, header, and consecutive page stamps.
The visible conversation runs from August 13 through August 28, 2018	Verified	Dates printed in the record.
The medical participant shared angiographic or neurovascular images	Verified	Images and accompanying descriptions appear on several pages.
The medical participant was working in Seattle and performing surgery	Supported by the participant’s own statements	The sender gives Seattle time and repeatedly refers to imminent surgery. No independent operating room record is included.
The participants were Melanie Walker and Jeffrey Epstein	Strongly supported, not directly named here	Longer thread attribution reported by WIRED and stated by congressional investigators, combined with occupational and location details.
Epstein traveled to Seattle, Denver, or the participant’s hospital	Unsupported	No travel record, location confirmation, or in person meeting appears.
A telephone call occurred	Unsupported	The exchange contains a request and a number, not proof of a completed call.
The patient images were shared with consent	Unknown	No consent or institutional documentation appears.
The discussion proves a scientific theory of time perception	False as an evidentiary characterization	The messages are speculative and do not present a study.
The record proves criminal conduct by Walker	Unsupported	The pages document communication and image sharing but do not establish a crime.

Evidence Appearances

Page stamp	Date	Evidence type	Most relevant appearance
EFTA01620824	August 13	Website description and contact	Private angiography and brain art site organized into three themes.
EFTA01620825	August 16	Medical image and travel	Motion artifact explanation, image attachment, art collection, Denver travel.
EFTA01620826	August 17 and 21	Vascular image	Innominate artery description and positive reply.
EFTA01620827	August 21 and 25	Surgical art and vessel comparison	Praise for altered imagery and a normal versus abnormal vessel comparison.
EFTA01620828	August 26 and 28	Call request, telephone contact, scientific discussion	Imminent surgery, Seattle time, telephone number, beginning of time perception discussion.
EFTA01620829	August 28	Scientific discussion	Autonomic system, basal ganglia, heart, cerebellum, retina, sleep, anesthesia, depression, and psychedelics.
EFTA01620830	August 28	Scientific discussion	Sensory bandwidth, light, gravity, and a proposed shared biological metronome.
EFTA01620831	August 28	Plants and surgery	Plant senses, decision making, and departure for surgery involving a cavernous carotid fistula.

Questions for Further Research

Can an unredacted native message database or authenticated forensic report directly confirm both participant identities for EFTA01620824?
Does the original database show whether the proposed August 26 call was completed?
What was the unpublished art site, and did any public version preserve creation dates or provenance for the images?
Were the medical images fully deidentified, covered by patient consent, or approved for educational or artistic use?
What Denver teaching and learning event occurred during the August 16 weekend, and does an agenda independently identify the medical participant?
Do travel, calendar, or telephone records place Epstein anywhere relevant to this exchange, or was the contact entirely remote?
Are the original attachments available elsewhere in the production, and do they contain metadata that can be reviewed without exposing patient information?
How does this August exchange connect to the earlier and later Walker and Epstein messages concerning plants, research, conferences, Bill Gates, and professional introductions?
Did any institution review the use of clinical images in the participant’s private art collection?
Are there duplicate exports of the same messages that preserve clearer timestamps, delivery states, or participant labels?

Related EpsteinWiki Pages

Jeffrey Epstein
Melanie Walker
Bill Gates
Boris Nikolic
EFTA01620806
EFTA01620819
EFTA01620833
EFTA01620841
EFTA01620847
EFTA01620851
Epstein Files Transparency Act
United States Department of Justice Epstein Library

Source List

EFTA01620824 Download

Tags:

Communication Records