Skip to main content
< All Topics
Print

Epstein Property Records, Entities, and Subpoena Scope: 1990 to 2019 Document Requests

Updated
ByEpsteinWiki
Views65

Snapshot

Record type: Congressional subpoena and attached document schedule
Issuing body: United States House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
Recipient: The Estate of Jeffrey Epstein, care of coexecutors Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn
Issue date: August 25, 2025
Production deadline: September 8, 2025 at 12:00 p.m.
Requested record period: Primarily January 1, 1990 through August 10, 2019
Primary source: Subpoena and Schedule to the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein
Evidence classification: Official congressional demand for records
Status: Verified primary record

This seven page subpoena sought a broad range of estate controlled records concerning Jeffrey Epstein’s properties, finances, aircraft, contacts, calendars, agreements, photographs, video, and named entities. The schedule covers eight identified properties and six entities. It also requests communications concerning people listed in a disclosure from Giuffre v. Maxwell and United States Presidents and Vice Presidents during the stated period.

The subpoena establishes what Congress demanded from the estate. It does not establish that every requested record existed, remained in the estate’s control, or was produced.

What Is This Record?

This record is a subpoena signed by House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer on August 25, 2025. It commanded the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein, through coexecutors Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn, to produce records at the Rayburn House Office Building by September 8, 2025.

The subpoena contains a sixteen item schedule followed by nineteen production instructions and five definitions. The schedule is much broader than a property request. It includes Epstein’s reported fiftieth birthday book, his last will, nondisclosure agreements, the 2007 federal nonprosecution agreement, any potential client list, call and visitor logs, contact books, flight logs, bank account information, financial records, calendars, property management materials, property photographs and video, communications concerning specified people, and records concerning specified entities.

For this page, the central evidence is found in Requests 13, 14, and 16. Request 13 seeks property maintenance, management, and service records. Request 14 seeks video and still photography taken at Epstein related properties. Request 16 seeks documents and communications referring or relating to six named entities.

Source and Provenance

The primary record is the official subpoena PDF published by the House Oversight Committee. The face of the subpoena identifies the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein as the recipient, names Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn as coexecutors, states the place and deadline for production, and bears an August 25, 2025 issue date.

On September 8, 2025, the committee published an official release stating that it had received records from the estate pursuant to the subpoena. The release linked to a public collection and said the committee had also obtained information about Epstein’s bank accounts. It did not state that every subpoena request had been fully satisfied.

Contemporaneous reporting independently described the scope. The Associated Press reported that the committee sought the birthday book, will, agreements with prosecutors, contact books, and financial records. The Washington Post reported that the demand also covered calendars, financial activity, property services, and security or CCTV footage from properties linked to Epstein.

This article does not treat HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_029585 as the subpoena. The Epstein Data page for HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_029585 identifies a one page email record dated January 15, 2019. It is a different record and cannot support the subpoena scope described here.

What the Record Contains

The full subpoena schedule

The sixteen requests seek:

  1. All entries in the reported leather bound book compiled by Ghislaine Maxwell for Epstein’s fiftieth birthday.
  2. Epstein’s last will and testament immediately preceding August 8, 2019.
  3. Nondisclosure agreements or similar documents executed by Epstein or his agents from January 1, 1990 through August 10, 2019.
  4. The September 24, 2007 nonprosecution agreement with the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida.
  5. Documents and communications referring or relating to that agreement.
  6. Any record that could reasonably be construed as a potential list of clients involved in sexual activity or sex trafficking facilitated by Epstein.
  7. Records concerning missed phone calls or missed visitors.
  8. Entries from Epstein’s address or contact books, including the reported Black Book.
  9. Arrival and departure logs for aircraft, including helicopters, owned, rented, leased, operated, or used by Epstein.
  10. Records sufficient to identify Epstein associated bank accounts and account numbers.
  11. Records documenting, describing, or depicting Epstein’s financial transactions or holdings, including cash, digital payments, and cryptocurrency.
  12. Epstein’s calendars in any format held by the estate.
  13. Manuals, instructions, communications, and other records concerning property maintenance, property management, or services performed at Epstein related properties.
  14. Video, including security and CCTV material, and still photographs taken at any Epstein related property.
  15. Documents and communications to, from, referring to, or relating to specified people.
  16. Documents and communications referring or relating to six named entities.

Properties named in Requests 13 and 14

Both property requests use the phrase “including but not limited to.” The eight listed locations therefore illustrate the scope without limiting it.

Property records demanded

Request 13 is operational. It seeks manuals, instruction booklets, communications, and other records about maintenance, management, and services performed at properties Epstein owned, rented, operated, or used.

That wording can encompass household rules, staff procedures, maintenance records, vendor communications, property management instructions, service schedules, access practices, and similar material. Two records that illustrate this evidence category are the 2001 Palm Beach household manual email and the 2005 Palm Beach household manual. Their relevance to the category does not by itself prove that they were produced in response to this subpoena.

Request 14 is visual. It seeks all video, security footage, CCTV material, and still photography taken at any property Epstein owned, rented, operated, or used during the covered period. The wording is not limited to material showing criminal conduct. It reaches visual records based on where they were taken and their relationship to the identified properties.

Entities named in Request 16

Request 16 names the following entities:

The subpoena does not explain why each entity was selected. Independent entity mapping can provide context, but it must not be mistaken for a congressional finding. Heather Ashley’s receipt based Substack report, Epstein’s Financial Web, collects primary records concerning these and other Epstein related entities. Useful underlying records include EFTA01118590, EFTA01118648, EFTA00622252, EFTA00296142, EFTA01487238, and EFTA01648787.

Those records provide context for why entity level searches matter. For example, EFTA01118590 describes NES LLC in relation to the Nine East 71st Street Corporation and identifies LSJ LLC in relation to Little St. James. EFTA00296142 documents the name relationship between LSJ LLC and Nautilus Inc. Records gathered by Ashley also place New York Strategy Group within the administrative and financial network associated with Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn. These contextual records do not prove that the estate produced every responsive document requested in paragraph 16.

People covered by Request 15

Request 15 seeks documents and communications to, from, referring to, or relating to two groups. The first is the ninety two people defined in Virginia Giuffre’s Fourth Revised Disclosure under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 in Giuffre v. Maxwell. The second is every United States President and Vice President not otherwise listed, covering January 1, 1990 through August 10, 2019.

This is a search instruction. A person’s inclusion in a responsive record would not, without more, establish knowledge of or participation in Epstein’s crimes. Records may concern lawful, incidental, political, professional, social, or adversarial contact.

Production and preservation requirements

The schedule directs the estate to produce records in its possession, custody, or control, including records held by agents or representatives and records it had a legal right to obtain. It instructs the recipient not to destroy, modify, remove, transfer, or make responsive information inaccessible.

The committee preferred electronic production. It required electronic organization and indexing, sequential Bates numbering, identification of the request paragraph to which each record responded, and written certification after a diligent search. If the estate withheld a record, the schedule required a log stating the basis, document type, subject, date, author, addressee, and relationship between author and addressee. The subpoena was continuing, meaning newly located responsive records were to be produced after the return date.

Key Evidence Points

  • The subpoena is an official congressional demand dated August 25, 2025.
  • The recipient was the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein through coexecutors Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn.
  • The main date range was January 1, 1990 through Epstein’s death on August 10, 2019.
  • Requests 13 and 14 expressly name eight properties in New York, Florida, New Mexico, Ohio, Paris, and the United States Virgin Islands.
  • The words “including but not limited to” make the property scope broader than the eight addresses listed.
  • Request 13 covers property operations, maintenance, management, manuals, instructions, and services.
  • Request 14 covers video, security footage, CCTV material, and still photographs.
  • Request 16 names six foundations, companies, or limited liability entities.
  • Request 15 seeks communications concerning ninety two people from a Giuffre v. Maxwell disclosure and United States Presidents and Vice Presidents during the covered period.
  • The committee required unredacted production, indexing, Bates numbering, preservation, a withholding log, and a final certification.
  • The committee later confirmed receipt of records from the estate, but its public release did not establish complete compliance with all sixteen requests.

What the Record Does and Does Not Prove

What it proves

The subpoena proves that the House Oversight Committee formally demanded the listed categories of records from Epstein’s estate. It proves that the committee defined a wide property and entity scope, imposed preservation and production requirements, and set a September 8, 2025 deadline. The committee’s later release proves that the estate delivered at least some records pursuant to the subpoena.

What it does not prove

The subpoena does not prove that every requested document existed. It does not prove that the estate possessed every responsive record. It does not prove that the estate produced every responsive record. It does not prove that every named person communicated with Epstein, visited a property, used an aircraft, or participated in wrongdoing. It does not prove that every named entity was used for illegal activity.

The phrase “potential list of clients” describes a category the committee asked the estate to search for. It is not a committee finding that such a list existed. Likewise, a request for security video does not prove that footage was recorded, preserved, or responsive to a criminal allegation.

Important unresolved questions include which custodians were searched, which records were no longer available, what was withheld, which request paragraphs were fully satisfied, whether the required certification was completed, and whether the public collection represents the complete production received by majority and minority staff.

People and Entities Appearing in the Record

Jeffrey Epstein

Epstein is the subject of the document requests. The schedule defines the scope through property ownership or use, financial activity, aircraft use, communications, agreements, calendars, and estate controlled records. Epstein died on August 10, 2019.

Darren Indyke

The subpoena names Indyke as a coexecutor of the estate and directs production to him in that capacity. His appearance in the subpoena is an administrative and legal fact. It does not, by itself, establish criminal conduct. See EpsteinWiki’s profile of Darren Indyke.

Richard Kahn

The subpoena names Kahn as a coexecutor of the estate and directs production to him in that capacity. His appearance likewise reflects his estate role and does not, by itself, establish criminal conduct.

Ghislaine Maxwell

Request 1 identifies Maxwell as the person reported to have compiled the leather bound book for Epstein’s fiftieth birthday. The subpoena also refers to the Giuffre v. Maxwell civil litigation when defining the people covered by Request 15.

Virginia Giuffre

Request 15 cites Giuffre’s Fourth Revised Disclosure in the federal civil case. The subpoena misspells her surname as “Guiffre.” This article uses the correct spelling except when discussing the error in the source.

House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

The committee issued the subpoena as part of a congressional investigation. Its September 8, 2025 release confirmed receipt of records from the estate.

C.O.U.Q. Foundation

The foundation is one of six entities named in Request 16. The subpoena asks for records referring or relating to it but makes no finding about its activities.

NES LLC

NES LLC is named in Request 16. Separate financial and entity records connect it to the corporate structure associated with the Manhattan townhouse. See EFTA01118590 and Ashley’s entity research.

New York Strategy Group

New York Strategy Group is named in Request 16. Separate records include it in administrative and financial materials involving Indyke and Kahn. See EFTA00622252, EFTA00582930, and EFTA01487238.

JEGE LLC and JEGE Inc.

The subpoena lists JEGE LLC and JEGE Inc. separately. Researchers should preserve that distinction. Separate records associate the names with aviation related holdings or administration, but the subpoena itself does not define either entity or allege illegal conduct by either one.

LSJ LLC

LSJ LLC is named in Request 16. Separate records associate it with Little St. James. EFTA00296142 is relevant to the later name relationship between LSJ LLC and Nautilus Inc. The subpoena uses the older LSJ LLC name without explaining that history.

Timeline Significance

January 1, 1990: Opening date used for most categories in the subpoena.
September 24, 2007: Date of the federal nonprosecution agreement specifically requested in paragraphs 4 and 5.
August 8, 2019: Date immediately before which the subpoena seeks Epstein’s last will and testament.
August 10, 2019: Epstein dies in federal custody. This is the closing date for most requested categories.
August 25, 2025: Chairman James Comer signs the subpoena to the estate.
September 2, 2025: Deadline for an explanation if full compliance by the return date would not be possible.
September 8, 2025: Production deadline. The committee announces that it received and released records provided by the estate.
After September 8, 2025: The continuing instruction requires later production of responsive records located or discovered after the deadline.

The timeline matters because the title’s 1990 to 2019 range describes the period of records demanded. It is not the date of the subpoena and not proof that the committee received a continuous record for every year.

Related Evidence

Important Evidence Files

These files serve different evidentiary functions. The House PDF proves the request. The committee release proves receipt of some material. The EFTA records provide context for entities and properties. None of the contextual EFTA records should be presented as the subpoena itself.

Reliability and Limitations

The subpoena has high reliability for the fact that Congress issued the demand and for the exact categories requested. It is an official primary source published by the issuing committee.

Its reliability is narrower for conclusions about the underlying conduct. A subpoena schedule reflects investigative scope, not adjudicated fact. It can be drafted broadly and can include categories for which no responsive material exists. The presence of a person, property, or entity in the schedule does not establish guilt, knowledge, or participation.

The source also contains apparent clerical errors. Request 7 ends its missed call and visitor log period on August 19, 2019, nine days after Epstein’s death, while the other principal requests end on August 10. The property list spells Zorro Ranch as “Zoro Ranch” and Stanley as “Stanly.” Request 15 spells Giuffre as “Guiffre” and refers to Request 10(a), although the relevant subdivision appears within Request 15. These errors do not erase the broad intent, but they matter when quoting or indexing the document.

The official September 8 release confirms a production, but it does not supply a public request by request completeness statement. Public access, committee possession, estate possession, and original record existence are separate questions.

Survivor Safety and Privacy Review

This article describes categories of records without republishing private contact information, account numbers, intimate images, or identifying information about survivors. Property photographs and household records can contain sensitive material even when they are part of an official production.

Any future publication of responsive records should protect survivor identities and avoid unnecessary intimate detail. Redaction should focus on safety and privacy, not on shielding public officials or other powerful people from legitimate scrutiny. A name in an address book, calendar, flight log, or communication is evidence of inclusion in that record only. It is not proof of criminal conduct.

The committee demanded unredacted records for its review. That demand does not mean every unredacted record should be published to the general public. Congressional access and public dissemination require different privacy judgments.

Why This Record Matters

The subpoena provides a map of the categories Congress considered important to reconstructing Epstein’s operations. It links physical properties to management systems, visual evidence, financial structures, aviation records, contact networks, and legal agreements.

Its entity request is especially important because property use and financial control do not always appear under an individual’s name. Corporate records can identify title holders, operating companies, payment channels, administrators, and relationships between assets. The inclusion of NES LLC, LSJ LLC, two JEGE entities, New York Strategy Group, and the C.O.U.Q. Foundation shows that the committee did not limit its inquiry to real estate deeds or personal correspondence.

The record also provides a necessary boundary for responsible reporting. It supports statements about what Congress sought. It does not support claims that every category was found or that every named person or entity committed wrongdoing. Keeping that distinction visible makes the article more accurate and more useful to survivors, researchers, journalists, and legal readers.

Fact Check

Claim: HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_029585 is the source document for this subpoena scope.
Finding: False. HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_029585 is a one page January 15, 2019 email record. The correct primary source is the August 25, 2025 House subpoena and schedule.

Claim: The subpoena covers records from 1990 through 2019.
Finding: True with qualification. Most requests use January 1, 1990 through August 10, 2019. Request 7 says August 19, 2019, which appears to be a clerical error.

Claim: The subpoena is limited to eight properties.
Finding: False. Requests 13 and 14 say “including but not limited to” before listing eight properties.

Claim: The subpoena requested all property security and CCTV footage that the estate controlled.
Finding: Substantially true. Request 14 seeks all video, including security and CCTV material, and still photography taken at any property owned, rented, operated, or used by Epstein during the covered period.

Claim: The subpoena proves such footage existed and was produced.
Finding: False. A request does not prove existence, preservation, possession, or production.

Claim: The subpoena names six entities.
Finding: True. They are C.O.U.Q. Foundation, NES LLC, New York Strategy Group, JEGE LLC, JEGE Inc., and LSJ LLC.

Claim: Naming a person or entity in the subpoena is an accusation of criminal conduct.
Finding: False. The schedule defines investigative search categories. It does not adjudicate wrongdoing.

Claim: The estate produced records by September 8, 2025.
Finding: True in part. The committee confirmed receiving records pursuant to the subpoena. The public release did not prove that every request was completely satisfied.

Related EpsteinWiki Pages

Source List

  1. United States House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Subpoena and Schedule to the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein, August 25, 2025
  2. United States House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Records Provided by the Epstein Estate, September 8, 2025
  3. Associated Press, House Committee Subpoenas Epstein’s Estate for Documents, August 25, 2025
  4. The Washington Post, House Oversight Subpoenas Epstein Estate, August 25, 2025
  5. Heather Ashley, Epstein’s Financial Web: An Extensive Report
  6. Epstein Data, HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_029585
  7. Epstein Data, EFTA01118590
  8. Epstein Data, EFTA01118648
  9. Epstein Data, EFTA00622252
  10. Epstein Data, EFTA00582930
  11. Epstein Data, EFTA00296142
  12. Epstein Data, EFTA01487238
  13. Epstein Data, EFTA01648787
Posted
ByEpsteinWiki
Tags:
Previous EFTA00506228: Little Saint James Property Assessment and Renovation Plan
Next EpsteinVR JMail 3D Property Reconstructions
Table of Contents