Nicole Junkermann
Snapshot
| Field | Summary |
|---|---|
| Identity | German-born investor, also known professionally as Nicole Brachetti Peretti |
| Business background | Infront Sports & Media, United in Sports, NJF Holdings and NJF Capital; technology and healthcare investments |
| Documented association | Courier records and flights in 2002; personal and business correspondence continuing into 2019 |
| Clearest shared investment | Reporty, later Carbyne, through investment structures associated with Ehud Barak |
| Recorded investment split | A February 2019 email describes an initial 1.5 million investment: 1 million from Epstein and 0.5 million from Junkermann; independent reporting identifies the currency as US dollars |
| Flights verified for this profile | Three distinct flight legs in 2002, including Paris to Birmingham and the return journey |
| Public response | In February 2026, Junkermann expressed regret and said Epstein had deceived and misled her |
| Important limits | A proposed advisory appointment is not a corporate directorship; contact records do not establish participation in abuse, intelligence work or access to NHS patient records |
The released correspondence places Nicole Junkermann in Jeffrey Epstein’s personal and investment network over many years. The record includes introductions, advice, planned meetings and a shared interest in the emergency communications company Reporty, subsequently called Carbyne. Their association continued after Epstein’s 2008 conviction.
Her February 2026 response, reported by The Telegraph and subsequently by PEOPLE, said she deeply regretted her conversations with him and felt “deceived and misled by him.” The sources examined for this profile establish a sustained relationship and specific business dealings. They do not establish that Junkermann participated in Epstein’s sexual offenses.
Business background
Infront’s September 2011 announcement identifies Junkermann as vice-chair of Infront Sports & Media’s board and the Junkermann Group as one of its selling shareholders. Bridgepoint agreed to acquire the company from the shareholder group, subject to regulatory approval. The official announcement did not disclose the price.
Contemporary German financial reporting traces the business to the acquisition of Kirch’s sports rights operations in 2002 with Robert Louis-Dreyfus. It reported that Junkermann held just under 40 percent and cited an approximately €550 million transaction estimate. That estimate should not be confused with an officially published purchase price, her personal proceeds or the company’s revenue.
Her 2018 Handelsblatt interview describes an earlier career involving the football gaming business Winamax and Neuf Cegetel. These activities preceded her later technology investment platform. Exact Winamax incorporation and disposal dates are less securely established in the sources reviewed here than the Infront transaction.
Luxembourg’s official legal publication, at printed pages 23085 to 23088, identifies her as sole shareholder of United in Sports Management S.à r.l. in a December 2013 liquidation act. It records that management company’s incorporation on 30 December 2005. This establishes a particular legal entity and her position in it; it is not an audited statement of the investment fund’s total assets or returns.
The Royal Academy’s 2023 appointment announcement dates NJF Holdings to 2012. NJF’s own website describes NJF Capital as its venture investment arm, alongside other investment activities. A brand’s founding year does not establish the incorporation date of every similarly named company.
Owkin’s January 2018 financing announcement names NJF Capital as a participant in an $11 million Series A and Junkermann as an existing director. The round’s total was not her individual investment. Owkin’s current people page also lists her among its directors. These sources document a healthcare technology role, but do not identify Epstein as an Owkin investor.
The earliest records and the three verified flights
The February 2002 courier invoice records a shipment from Epstein’s office to Junkermann on 18 February, delivered two days later. It establishes contact by that date. The invoice does not identify the contents or explain how they first met.
The handwritten flight logs provide a separate record of travel. Three distinct legs naming Junkermann were verified in the scanned pages used for this profile.
| Date | Recorded route | What the passenger entry establishes |
|---|---|---|
| 22 March 2002 | New York JFK to Palm Beach, PBI | Junkermann and Epstein are named in the log; page 8 |
| 31 August 2002 | Paris Le Bourget, LFPB, to Birmingham, EGBB | The passenger cell lists Epstein and Junkermann; page 13 |
| 2 September 2002 | Birmingham to Paris Le Bourget | The passenger cell again lists Epstein and Junkermann; page 13 |
The two European entries document a return journey. They do not establish the trip’s purpose. Other passengers appearing on different rows of the same page were on different flights. None of these three verified legs is a flight to the US Virgin Islands, and three is the number established from these entries, not a claim about every flight she ever took.
What the public Yahoo emails add
The public Yahoo archive contains earlier correspondence than the widely discussed post-conviction email record. Its provenance is different from the Justice Department’s EFTA releases. Drop Site News described receiving the Yahoo cache through Distributed Denial of Secrets and working with Jmail to release reviewed messages while protecting victims’ identities and excluding inappropriate material.
A June 2006 thread preserves Epstein’s account of reviewing Junkermann’s private placement memorandum, discussing it with her and her partner, and passing it to an investment lawyer. A reply signed “Nic” addresses the disagreement and expresses a wish to preserve their friendship. It is evidence that business advice and personal familiarity were already intertwined in the archived correspondence. It does not independently establish the lawyer’s identity, the deal’s completion or the truth of every claim Epstein made about his assistance.
A July 2006 message shows Sarah Kellen forwarding a message bearing the Junkermann name and United in Sports affiliation. Epstein replied that he was back in New York. A February 2008 message has Epstein asking Lesley Groff to send Junkermann a ScienceDaily article. These are communication records, not proof that a meeting occurred or that the requested forwarding was completed.
The surname search returned three Yahoo threads when checked on 4 October 2026. That is a result from the public index at a particular time. It is not a deduplicated count of all correspondence, a search of unreleased material or a claim that other spellings and records contain nothing further.
Contact after the 2008 conviction
The Justice Department’s review records Epstein’s 30 June 2008 guilty pleas to Florida charges of felony solicitation of prostitution and procuring a minor for prostitution. He began serving his custodial sentence that day. The correspondence below places Junkermann’s continued contact after that public conviction.
An undated prison-address distribution list includes Junkermann among the people Epstein’s office intended to send his correspondence instructions. Her entry is marked as completed. The list shows office action; it does not prove that she wrote to him or visited him in custody.
The 30 May 2009 exchange goes further by recording direct discussion of a visit while Epstein was serving his sentence. Junkermann asked whether coming after 22 July would be more convenient. Epstein replied that she could come sooner, with an exception for the following week. The messages document a proposal, not a completed visit or a prison visitor log.
Epstein’s April 2009 introduction to David Stern described Junkermann as his “very good friend/old girlfriend” and promoted her sports fund and Chinese business interests. The relationship description is Epstein’s own characterization. The reply proposed a Munich lunch on 22 April; the exchange alone does not establish that the lunch happened.
The October 2009 Leon Black introduction records Epstein saying he had spoken to Black, who would offer Junkermann lunch or dinner and assistance. Later messages in the chain concern business negotiations. This is a concrete example of Epstein presenting access to a financier as something he could arrange, while the record falls short of confirming the proposed meal.
Ghislaine Maxwell and the contact record
The September 2009 Maxwell exchange is preserved in HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022245. Maxwell told Epstein that a friend of his, whom she thought lived in Paris and ran a fund, had been at a conference. Epstein supplied Junkermann’s name, and Maxwell confirmed the identification. The exchange establishes that Maxwell discussed encountering her. It supplies no evidence that Junkermann held a role in Maxwell’s trafficking operation.
The electronic address-card record is an Apple Address Book vCard printout naming Nicole Junkermann. It should not be relabeled as an entry in the separately circulated paper “little black book.” This profile verified the electronic record and does not rely on an unverified paper-book claim.
Introductions recommendations and a proposed role
The Infront sale correspondence shows Junkermann updating Epstein in September 2011 and receiving his congratulations. A later closing discussion concerns regulatory timing and her board position. These records show that he followed the transaction. They do not establish that he financed, negotiated or structured the Infront sale.
The 23 February 2013 proposal is more explicit about the role Epstein wanted her to play. He suggested working with or for him, organizing prominent contacts, investing alongside him and restructuring household staff. She replied that they should discuss it. The same email invited her to join part of a planned meeting with Bill Gates. Neither formal employment nor attendance at that meeting is established by the exchange.
The June 2014 nomination email records Boris Nikolic telling Junkermann and Epstein that he had submitted her nomination for the World Economic Forum’s Young Global Leaders program. She thanked them. Epstein’s July 2014 exchange with Lawrence Summers then shows him circulating a proposed recommendation; Summers asked for a biography so he could prepare a letter in his own voice.
The recommendation circulated on 25 July, accompanied by a request for its destination. A 30 July message reported that Klaus Schwab’s office had received Summers’s recommendation and that the Young Global Leaders Committee would handle it. These records document a nomination and a delivered recommendation. Forbes subsequently reported that she was not admitted to the program.
The December 2014 schedule lists Junkermann as an intended participant in an Epstein meeting with Andrew McCormack and James Fitzgerald of Valar Ventures. It documents planned access to another investment network. A calendar entry does not prove attendance, investment or an agreement with Valar.
The December 2018 Kuhn introduction shows Epstein introducing her to China specialist Robert Lawrence Kuhn, calling her a friend of 20 years. That is his description of the relationship’s duration, not independent documentation of a 1998 meeting. Her subsequent exchange with Kuhn proposed an in-person discussion in New York. In January 2019, Epstein also responded to material she forwarded about a Chinese business dispute with detailed questions on corporate ownership, arbitration and financial records. The correspondence establishes that she consulted him; it does not validate allegations against the other parties or the valuations discussed.
Reporty Carbyne and Ehud Barak
Carbyne’s corporate description identifies the business as an emergency communications platform. Under its earlier name, Reporty, it developed technology for emergency call handling, including information such as location and video. The public significance of the Epstein connection is that his money and relationships entered a company serving public safety agencies. That fact does not establish covert access to callers’ data or an intelligence operation.
The December 2014 diligence exchange shows Junkermann evaluating Reporty in detail. Her questions addressed patents, the location technology, privacy and data protection, customer adoption, the burden on emergency responders, government procurement and the equity proposed for a $1.5 million investment. Darren Indyke and Epstein relayed the questions to Barak. Asking whether a company complies with privacy requirements is not evidence that it failed to comply.
Barak’s 11 February 2016 message, addressed to Epstein and Junkermann, forwarded company information and said that neither Amir Elichai nor Pinchas Buchris was fully aware of their partnership with him. This is direct evidence of what Barak told the two investors about the arrangement’s visibility. It cannot by itself settle what those other individuals actually knew.
Her August 2017 governance questions concerned a signed board resolution, fundraising and a proposed European subsidiary. They show access to business information and active questioning, without proving that she attended a board meeting or held a director’s seat.
The October 2017 Reporty email proposed introducing Barak to Len Blavatnik as a potential investor and David Cameron as a possible UK business adviser. Junkermann also raised growth and customer-metric concerns ahead of a proposed financing round. The email does not establish that either proposed introduction or investment happened. EpsteinWiki’s Len Blavatnik profile supplies related context.
Barak’s June 2018 reply to questions from her side discussed the new financing valuation and the warrant deadline, proposing that they discuss the warrants with Epstein. This is continuing investment coordination among the three, well after the original approach.
The 18 February 2019 investment email contains Junkermann’s own statement that the initial Carbyne investment totalled 1.5 million, comprising 1 million from Epstein and 0.5 million from her. Forbes’s February 2026 investigation identifies those figures as US dollars and describes the Barak-arranged investment vehicle. The email’s subsequent calculations concern fees, carried interest and possible outcomes. They are not evidence of realized proceeds.
The March 2019 warrant correspondence describes SUM (E.B.) Limited Partnership’s proposed purchase of additional Carbyne preferred shares.
| Figure in the March 2019 correspondence | What it refers to | What it does not establish |
|---|---|---|
| $3.5 million | Aggregate warrant exercise price | The full lifetime investment of every participant |
| Approximately 13 percent to 26.33 percent | Proposed change in SUM’s fully diluted Carbyne holding | Junkermann’s personal direct ownership percentage |
| $2.4 million and $1.2 million | Contributions including expenses assigned to Southern Trust and Montilla respectively | Independently verified bank receipts for both contributions |
| 66.67 percent and 33.33 percent | Allocation within the described partnership exercise arrangement | Direct ownership of those percentages of Carbyne |
The same correspondence reports a $2.4 million Southern Trust transfer, while Junkermann’s side was arranging signatures and payment. Her CFO said Montilla had become NJF Capital Corp in June 2018 and requested an amended agreement. Bank confirmations and the referenced name-change certificate were not independently reviewed.
Advisory board and directorship are different claims
Barak’s 11 February 2016 email, copied to CEO Amir Elichai, invited Junkermann to join a Reporty advisory board once it was established. The expected establishment date was still in the future. An invitation to an advisory body does not itself appoint a corporate director.
CTech’s 2019 reporting described Junkermann as having joined the company’s board in 2017. Forbes later reported that Carbyne’s website had listed her as a director until 2020, but Elichai denied that she had ever been a board member and attributed the listing to a marketing error. The disagreement remains important: investor, prospective adviser and director are distinct positions.
Her spokesperson told Forbes that she invested because she was impressed by Elichai and remained proud of the company’s success. Elichai said that she, Barak and Epstein’s estate no longer held stakes. The article did not establish the date or financial terms of Junkermann’s exit.
Axon’s SEC filing records its acquisition of the remaining 89.3 percent of Carbyne on 18 February 2026, following its earlier investment. That later transaction does not establish what any former investor received. Claims that Epstein’s estate or Junkermann realized a particular profit require their actual disposal and distribution records.
Health technology and the NHS
The Department of Health and Social Care announcement names Junkermann as a member of the Healthtech Advisory Board at its first meeting on 19 November 2018. Chaired by Ben Goldacre, the body was intended to advise and challenge health technology policy and report to the health secretary.
The department’s September 2026 parliamentary answer states that the board met four times and had ceased meeting by November 2019. Asked about appointment checks relating to Junkermann, it said it held no records of declarations of interest, conflict checks, due diligence, security screening or beneficial-interest checks for any board member.
That answer identifies a records and accountability gap. It does not say that no checks ever occurred. Membership of this advisory board also does not establish a position on the NHS Digital board, procurement authority, access to identifiable patient records or transfer of health data to Epstein, Carbyne or an intelligence service. Those stronger claims require separate evidence.
Continued contact in 2019 and her later response
The 5 March 2019 email records Junkermann’s reaction to a New York Times link Epstein had sent the previous evening. She hoped the attention would pass and called it “bad timing on the whole Me too.” The date on the document is 2019. This message establishes her response to that coverage, but cannot establish what she knew about every allegation or offense.
Her February 2026 statement, reported in the UK and summarized by t-online, expressed regret and horror at Epstein’s conduct. It did not specify when she came to understand what she called his true nature. The earlier correspondence remains relevant to evaluating the duration and character of their association alongside that later explanation.
Companies House records show that her Royal Marsden Cancer Charity directorship ran from 14 December 2023 to 9 February 2026. The charity confirmed to PEOPLE that it accepted her resignation amid continuing media attention. Her spokesperson said she remained supportive of the charity’s work.
The February 2026 reporting also records the end of her Lancaster University Visiting Professor in Practice role, which had been announced in September 2025. The departures were institutional consequences of the disclosures, not criminal findings.
The German reporting dispute
Legal Tribune Online’s report describes the Frankfurt Regional Court’s 16 March 2026 decision rejecting Junkermann’s request for an interim injunction against reporting by several Axel Springer publications, case 2-03 O 74/26. Her lawyers argued that identifying her and publishing private correspondence infringed her personality rights. The court found the challenged reporting permissible, taking account of the public interest and her public activities and statements.
LTO reported that the decision was not final and could be challenged. No subsequent appellate disposition was verified for this profile. The proceeding concerned publication and privacy rights. It was not a criminal case against Junkermann and did not adjudicate whether she participated in Epstein’s offenses.
Evidence limits and disputed claims
| Claim or category | Supported conclusion | Limit |
|---|---|---|
| Long personal association | Flights, correspondence and business exchanges document repeated contact over many years | Frequency of database mentions is not a measure of criminal involvement |
| Carbyne investment | Contemporary correspondence describes shared investment and later warrant financing | Emails and reported allocations are not a complete bank or capitalization audit |
| Carbyne board role | An advisory invitation exists; historical reporting and a website identified a director role | The CEO disputes a corporate board appointment |
| January 2019 island claim | The document names Junkermann among contacts to notify | The reply concerns Epstein’s Paris dates, not proof of her island attendance |
| Health data access | Membership of a short-lived government advisory body is documented | Patient-data access and intelligence use are not established |
| Intelligence or trafficking role | Business links to Epstein and Barak are documented | No record reviewed here establishes recruitment of victims or tasking by an intelligence service |
The January 2019 planning thread is particularly easy to misread. Its inherited subject refers to another party’s proposed island trip, but the reply asks whether the listed contacts should be told that Epstein would be in Paris from 22 to 31 January. Junkermann’s name therefore cannot responsibly be turned into a confirmed island visit or a reliable island invitation. The distinction also matters when reading EpsteinWiki’s Steve Bannon coverage.
The wider intelligence debate should remain separate from the evidence about this individual. Barak’s government background, a company’s security applications and a shared investor network do not by themselves establish that Junkermann worked for Mossad or another service. A demonstrated intelligence relationship would require evidence of direction, tasking, payments or comparable operational records.
Timeline
| Date | Documented development | Source |
|---|---|---|
| 18 February 2002 | Epstein’s office sends a courier shipment to Junkermann | EFTA01315280, page 4 |
| March to September 2002 | Three flight legs name her, including the Birmingham return journey | Log page 8 and page 13 |
| June 2006 | Yahoo thread records Epstein’s account of reviewing her investment memorandum | Public Yahoo thread |
| April to May 2009 | Stern introduction and discussion of visiting Epstein during his sentence | EFTA00748642 and EFTA01828170 |
| September to October 2009 | Maxwell discusses encountering her; Epstein relays Black’s meeting offer | House record and EFTA02435071 |
| September 2011 | Infront announces the Bridgepoint sale; she discusses closing with Epstein | Infront announcement and EFTA01809343 |
| February 2013 | Epstein proposes a role working with or for him | EFTA02720599 |
| June to July 2014 | YGL nomination and Summers recommendation proceed | EFTA02584923 and EFTA02101337 |
| December 2014 | Reporty investment questions are circulated | EFTA01002368 |
| February 2016 | Barak discusses the partnership’s visibility and a future advisory board | EFTA02704699 and EFTA02474299 |
| October 2017 | Junkermann proposes Blavatnik and Cameron introductions for Reporty | EFTA02580695 |
| November 2018 | She joins the government Healthtech Advisory Board | DHSC announcement |
| December 2018 to March 2019 | China advice, Carbyne financing and continued correspondence | EFTA02611645, EFTA01030134 and EFTA02634615 |
| February 2026 | Regret statement and departure from Royal Marsden and Lancaster roles reported | PEOPLE and t-online |
| 16 March 2026 | Frankfurt court rejects the interim injunction request concerning Springer reporting | LTO |
| 7 September 2026 | DHSC says the advisory board had ceased meeting by November 2019 and holds no appointment-check records | Parliamentary answer |
Reporting and source coverage
Heather Ashley’s July 2026 investigation provides a substantial document trail for Reporty and Carbyne, including diligence, investment structure and warrants. Butterfly Bureau’s September 2026 report connects that history with later emergency communications technology and cites overlapping sources. These are useful research contributions; overlapping citations should not be counted as independent confirmation of every claim.
R. Howard Stone’s document research supplies additional identifiers and corrections. Its combined Junkermann and MC2 title does not establish that she worked for MC2 or recruited models. This profile uses records rather than a report title or an automated relationship label to determine what can be said about her.
The review combined selected EFTA documents, original flight-log scans, the public Yahoo index, corporate and government records, and English and German reporting. It did not audit every file or all videos and social posts. Duplicate email chains, proposed meetings, business publicity and later denials have been kept distinct. No newly solicited response was obtained; the responses quoted or paraphrased above are attributed to the outlets that obtained them.
Questions the public record still leaves open
- How did Junkermann and Epstein first meet, and what were the purposes of their 2002 journeys and early courier exchanges?
- What final contracts and capitalization records would resolve her precise position in the Reporty investment structures and the disputed board role?
- When and on what terms did she dispose of her Carbyne interest, and what proceeds, if any, did she receive?
- Which proposed introductions and meetings were completed, and did the 2013 work proposal lead to any formal engagement?
- What explains the absence of retained appointment-check records for the Healthtech Advisory Board, and what checks, if any, were performed elsewhere?
- When did she learn the extent of Epstein’s conduct, and how does that chronology relate to the correspondence and her 2026 statement?
Sources
Primary records and public archives
- EFTA01315280: February 2002 courier invoice, relevant document page 4.
- Flight-log page 8 and page 13: original handwritten scans of the three cited 2002 legs.
- June 2006 Yahoo thread, July 2006 thread and February 2008 thread: public Jmail records carrying Drop Site verification labels.
- EFTA00306074, EFTA01828170, EFTA00748642 and EFTA02435071: prison-era contact, visit discussion and introductions.
- HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022245 and EFTA00528250: Maxwell exchange and electronic address card.
- EFTA01809343, EFTA01857199 and EFTA02720599: Infront correspondence and the 2013 work proposal.
- EFTA02584923, EFTA00993471, EFTA02101530 and EFTA02101337: YGL nomination, drafting and recommendation receipt.
- EFTA00357379: planned December 2014 Valar meeting.
- EFTA01002368, EFTA02704699 and EFTA02474299: Reporty diligence, partnership discussion and advisory invitation.
- EFTA01038557, EFTA02580695 and EFTA01013264: governance, proposed introductions and investment oversight.
- EFTA01030134 and EFTA02634615: investment split and March 2019 warrant correspondence.
- EFTA02611645, EFTA01013299 and EFTA01009648: Kuhn introduction and China business advice.
- EFTA02273951 and EFTA02631233: Paris notification and the March 2019 response to press coverage.
Corporate and government sources
- DOJ review of the 2006 to 2008 investigation, released November 2020; Infront acquisition announcement, 1 September 2011; Luxembourg Mémorial C 481, 21 February 2014.
- Royal Academy appointment announcement, 8 August 2023; NJF Holdings.
- Owkin financing announcement, release dated 16 January 2018; Owkin directors.
- DHSC board announcement, 19 November 2018; parliamentary answer, 7 September 2026.
- Companies House appointments: Royal Marsden service dates; LA FAMIGLIA NJF GP record: the Nicole Junkermann Brachetti Peretti name.
- Axon SEC quarterly filing: Carbyne acquisition on 18 February 2026; current Carbyne product description.
Reporting and responses
- FINANCE, 5 September 2011; Handelsblatt interview, 27 November 2018.
- CTech and Calcalist, 18 July 2019, updated 30 August; Forbes investigation, Thomas Brewster, 10 February 2026.
- PEOPLE, syndicated by Yahoo News, Simon Perry, 16 February 2026; t-online response report, Lars Wienand, 18 February 2026.
- Legal Tribune Online, Felix W. Zimmermann, 18 March 2026, reporting case 2-03 O 74/26.
- Drop Site’s public-release explanation, 10 December 2025; Heather Ashley’s Carbyne investigation, 28 July 2026; Butterfly Bureau, 30 September 2026; R. Howard Stone’s research, including February 2026 corrections.
EFTA links above point to individual document viewers on the independent epstein-data mirror. The mirror’s generated analyses were used as discovery aids, not substitutes for the underlying records. Research checked 4 October 2026.