Stewart Martin Oldfield
Snapshot
Full name: Stewart Martin Oldfield
Also identified as: Stewart M. Oldfield, Stew Oldfield
Profession: Private banker and financial services executive
Financial industry identifier: FINRA CRD 3167083
Relevant employer: Deutsche Bank
Epstein role: Relationship manager during the period preceding the bank’s 2019 account closures
Later businesses: Third Lake Partners, Third Lake Associates and disclosed outside advisory activities
Personal FBI interview: No publicly accessible interview report identifying Oldfield as the interviewee was located
Separate litigation: Plaintiff in a 2026 Delaware business dispute involving Ovid Ventures Group and Kenneth Jones
Review date: October 1, 2026
Key Takeaways
- Oldfield’s involvement was substantial and operational. Records place him in account management, trading coordination, compliance responses and the account exit process.
- His internal performance review treated rebuilding Epstein’s Southern Financial banking relationship as a commercial achievement.
- Compliance concerns included repeated cash withdrawals, payments to women, trust beneficiaries and explanations for large transfers.
- Deutsche Bank failed to communicate special monitoring conditions to the incoming relationship manager. That institutional failure limits what can fairly be attributed to Oldfield personally.
- Services continued during the prolonged exit, including reference letters and foreign currency requests.
- A September 2019 bank attorney proffer describes Oldfield’s contacts with Epstein. It is not an FBI interview of Oldfield.
- His later employment included businesses associated with another former banking client, Third Lake. Shared banking coverage does not establish a financial relationship between that client and Epstein.
- Outside Epstein, a separate ownership and valuation lawsuit deserves coverage. Oldfield brought the allegations in that case.
- The reviewed public record does not establish that Oldfield participated in sexual abuse, trafficking or a separate criminal enterprise.
Identity and Career Before Deutsche Bank
FINRA BrokerCheck identifies the relevant securities professional through CRD 3167083. His registration history includes J.P. Morgan from 1999 to 2002, Credit Suisse from 2002 to 2014, and Deutsche Bank Securities from November 2014 to July 2020. His latest reviewed report shows no current registration. FINRA
Credit Suisse structured product filings independently identify Stewart Oldfield as a structured products contact before his Deutsche Bank employment. These filings establish a professional background in investment products. They do not establish an Epstein relationship during that earlier employment. sec.gov
The 2014 hiring announcement described his arrival at Deutsche Asset and Wealth Management as a Director and Private Banker with more than sixteen years of experience. www.familywealthreport.com
Identity verification matters because searches also return an Australian financial journalist and other people named Stewart Oldfield. Their publications, employment histories and controversies should not be assigned to the American banker without independent corroboration.
How Epstein Became a Deutsche Bank Client
The September 2019 attorney proffer, EFTA01681984, describes Paul Morris bringing Epstein to Deutsche Bank in 2013 after previously working with him at JPMorgan. It records the bank’s awareness of Epstein’s earlier criminal history and discusses management approval and annual customer reviews.
Oldfield joined Deutsche Bank after the original onboarding. Responsibility for approving Epstein in 2013 should therefore be distinguished from Oldfield’s subsequent responsibility for servicing and expanding the relationship.
The New York Department of Financial Services consent order places the replacement of the original relationship manager by April 2016. It says the incoming manager possessed Epstein’s customer file and knew about the earlier reputational risk escalation, but was not informed of three special conditions imposed in 2015. dfs.ny.gov
The Senate Finance Committee staff report identifies that replacement manager as Oldfield. References to 2017 in later reporting should not erase the earlier regulatory chronology. finance.senate.gov
Direct Contact With Epstein and His Staff
EFTA01681984 is headed as a September 12, 2019 Deutsche Bank attorney proffer. Its handwritten notes identify Oldfield, using the spelling “Stuart,” as someone who took over the relationship in 2016.
The notes say he met Epstein twice at Epstein’s New York residence to discuss investment ideas. They also describe his principal contacts as members of Epstein’s financial and administrative staff, including Bella Klein, Richard Kahn and Lesley Groff.
These are statements recorded during a bank attorney presentation. They are not Oldfield’s own sworn testimony, and the notes do not establish everything he observed or understood during those visits.
Rebuilding Southern Financial and Seeking Professional Advancement
EFTA01423853 contains Oldfield’s December 4, 2017 performance update to Andrew Gallivan, later forwarded in June 2018. He described Southern Financial as a particularly difficult relationship that had lost assets, trading access and nearly its entire banking relationship.
He credited his team with securing $50 million in deposits, restoring the trading agreement and bringing combined brokerage and deposit balances to approximately $150 million. He expected relationship revenue to double against the previous year.
The same message sought greater compensation and advancement to Managing Director. These figures describe his commercial assessment and aspirations, not independently audited results or proof that Epstein personally paid him a bonus. Epstein Files
EFTA01433921, an account planning record, identifies the relationship’s key personnel and discusses restored trading, anticipated revenue and additional banking business. It places Oldfield within an organized effort to develop the account. efta.threats.watch
The documented concern is the combination of commercial growth and known client risk. The records support examining whether business incentives affected scrutiny. They do not establish his private motives.
Account Structure and the Meaning of the Account Counts
EFTA01681865, Deutsche Bank’s September 2019 presentation, distinguishes 76 total accounts, 71 intentionally opened accounts, 42 capitalized accounts, 56 Epstein controlled accounts and 36 accounts that were both controlled and capitalized.
Those categories matter. Describing all 76 as funded accounts personally controlled by Epstein would misstate the presentation. epstein-data.com
EFTA01681984 likewise explains that the broader relationship included accounts Epstein brought to the bank that he did not necessarily control.
The banking relationship extended across personal, investment, trust, property, charitable and associated professional accounts. An account’s inclusion under the relationship should be distinguished from ownership, signing authority, beneficial control and evidence of unlawful use.
The Haze Trust Transfer and Repeated Compliance Follow Up
EFTA01414241 records repeated compliance questions about a $6,186,980.68 incoming transfer from HSBC Securities in Ireland in October 2016.
The chain initially became confused with separate outgoing transactions, including an art related transfer. Compliance personnel repeatedly clarified which payment required an explanation.
On December 20, Oldfield supplied a general account of the client’s wealth. On December 21, a colleague reported that he and Oldfield had spoken with the client and identified the incoming payment as a capital distribution from a King Street partnership. assets.getkino.com
The concern is the delay and the initial substitution of a general wealth explanation for a transaction specific answer. However, the chain eventually contains an answer. Claims that the question remained entirely unanswered omit that final exchange.
The available explanation is also different from independent verification of the transfer’s source and purpose.
Cash Withdrawals and the 2017 Compliance Meeting
EFTA01352796 is the cash activity meeting record cited by the Senate staff report in its discussion of compliance executives meeting with Oldfield about Darren Indyke’s repeated withdrawals. finance.senate.gov
DFS’s enforcement announcement identified more than $800,000 in suspicious cash withdrawals over approximately four years. It also identified payments to alleged co-conspirators, women’s tuition and living expenses, more than $7 million in apparent settlements and more than $6 million in other legal expenses. Department of Financial Services
These are patterns the regulator said required greater scrutiny. They do not mean every withdrawal or payment was criminal, or that every transaction occurred during Oldfield’s management.
His documented involvement in the compliance discussion nevertheless makes cash monitoring a central part of his individual record.
Payments to Women and the Tuition Explanation
The DFS consent order describes a May 2018 inquiry to the replacement relationship manager about payments to women with Eastern European surnames through a Russian bank.
An accountant characterized one payment as tuition for a friend. Oldfield explained that staff sometimes used whichever account had funds available for individual transfers. The regulator found no record of additional questions before clearance. dfs.ny.gov
The concern is the sufficiency of the explanation given Epstein’s known history. A recipient’s surname, nationality or bank location alone does not establish trafficking.
Butterfly Trust Beneficiaries and Proposed Expansion
EFTA01422782 records an October 2018 discussion about the Butterfly Trust’s investment controls and servicing arrangements. Oldfield was included in the correspondence. epstein-data.com
EFTA01426509 records Kimberly Hart seeking a December 2018 discussion with Oldfield about whether to maintain or expand the relationship. Her questions included what the beneficiaries did for Epstein and how the trust was controlled. epsteinexposed.com
These records show unresolved questions about beneficiaries and controls during renewed public scrutiny. A discussion of possible expansion is not evidence that expansion was ultimately approved.
The important questions are who benefited, who controlled payments, what explanations the bank obtained and whether those explanations were tested.
Hoffenberg and the Separate Financial Fraud Questions
EFTA01423573 concerns negative media and questions about Epstein’s connection to Steven Hoffenberg and Towers Financial. Searchable excerpts show requests for clarification about the connection, Epstein’s alleged consulting role and the litigation’s dismissal. Oldfield indicated that he would speak with the chief financial officer. Epstein Graph
This is an important financial misconduct lead beyond the sexual abuse allegations. It establishes that questions about Epstein’s earlier financial associations reached the banking team.
The complete source chain and supporting court materials remain necessary to determine what answers were received and how approval was resolved. The excerpts do not establish that Oldfield participated in the Towers Financial fraud, which preceded his Deutsche Bank employment by decades.
Weekly Trading Oversight
EFTA01420332 and related productions concern weekly reporting on Paul Barrett’s trading activity for the Epstein relationship. The record identifies Oldfield among the recipients. epstein-data
These reports support his continuing operational role in the account’s trading economics and internal coordination.
Multiple document identifiers can represent copies, forwards or overlapping versions of the same correspondence. Raw mention totals should not be presented as counts of unique transactions, meetings or misconduct.
The Decision to Exit and Continued Services
Reuters’ reconstruction of the exit describes a February 28, 2019 deadline, subsequent services and remaining balances. It reports a March 18 reference letter and April 9 requests involving $7,500 worth of euros sent by FedEx and a separate €50,000 collection. Nine accounts reportedly retained approximately $1.78 million on May 3. Reuters
The distinction between a termination decision and completed termination is essential. An orderly exit can require transfers and position closures, but the continuation of services raises questions about what the bank permitted after deciding to end the relationship.
Reference Letters and Requests to Omit Epstein’s Identity
EFTA01035269 records March 2019 discussion about obtaining documentation of assets for another institution. Richard Kahn told Epstein that Oldfield could not provide the proposed statement and discussed alternatives. Epstein wanted asset evidence without identifying information. yirah.fi
EFTA01372540, as described in a published document investigation, records Kahn asking Oldfield to confirm that Epstein’s name had not been disclosed to a banker. Oldfield reportedly replied that no names had been discussed. The underlying document requires direct inspection before extending that account further. epsteingate.org
These exchanges warrant examination because receiving banks needed meaningful information for their own customer checks. They do not, by themselves, establish false documents, unlawful concealment or a completed transfer.
Whether a reference accurately described account operations is also distinct from whether it adequately conveyed reputational concerns.
The Returned Statement Disposal Email
EFTA01420678 records a June 24, 2019 exchange with document management employee Lisa Ramos.
Ramos asked what to do with returned statements for an account associated with Karyna Shuliak. The listed statements covered July through November 2018. Oldfield authorized disposal with the reply, “Yes, please destroy.” Epstein Exposed
The email deserves inclusion because it concerns document handling shortly before Epstein’s arrest. Its scope is specific: returned statements sitting in the department’s files.
It does not establish deletion of electronic account records, destruction of the bank’s transaction history, violation of a preservation order or an attempt to obstruct investigators. Assessing those possibilities would require retention policies, preservation notices and evidence of what was actually destroyed.
Account Closures After Epstein’s Arrest
EFTA01426137 records urgent July 8, 2019 instructions from Hart to Oldfield and others to complete closures. The list includes zero balance deposit and brokerage accounts, plus two deposit accounts with residual balances of $21.72 and $12.05.
Oldfield forwarded the instructions to operations personnel. Replies describe pending closure status and requests for formal system closure. epstein-data.com
This establishes that closure administration continued after the arrest. It does not establish that every listed account remained economically active or contained substantial funds.
The distinction between funded activity, pending closure and a system flag should be preserved when describing the delayed exit.
Was Oldfield Interviewed by the FBI?
EFTA01681984 is the clearest located investigative meeting record discussing Oldfield. It is a bank attorney proffer dated September 12, 2019.
It identifies him as a person of interest and summarizes his account responsibility and contacts with Epstein. It does not identify him as the person being interviewed, establish his attendance or reproduce his own answers.
EFTA01681865 is the associated bank presentation. Financial documents released in an FBI or DOJ collection should not automatically be described as FBI interviews.
The Senate report also discusses a withheld Paul Morris civil deposition from survivor litigation. That is a different person and a different type of proceeding. finance.senate.gov
No publicly accessible FD 302 or equivalent interview report identifying Oldfield as the interviewee was located in this review. An interview could be unreleased, redacted or indexed differently. Its existence remains unverified.
Deutsche Bank’s Discharge of Oldfield
BrokerCheck records a July 2, 2020 discharge for alleged insufficient account or transaction diligence involving a client he managed. The disclosure does not identify the client or establish an adjudicated finding. FINRA
Its timing is relevant to the wider banking controversy. Naming Epstein as the client in that disclosure would go beyond its public wording.
Regulatory and Survivor Proceedings
DFS’s July 2020 announcement imposed a $150 million penalty covering Epstein and two separate correspondent banking matters, Danske Estonia and FBME. The entire penalty should not be attributed solely to Epstein, and those other matters should not be attributed personally to Oldfield without evidence of involvement. Department of Financial Services
The federal court’s May 2023 opinion allowed important survivor claims against Deutsche Bank to proceed. The court was evaluating the sufficiency of allegations, rather than deciding liability after trial. Document 75 (S.D.N.Y. 2023) :: Justia
The subsequent settlement received final approval on October 20, 2023 for $75 million. Oldfield was not an individual defendant in that bank case, and the settlement did not adjudicate his personal liability. reuters.com
Congressional Scrutiny
The Senate Finance Committee staff report names Oldfield among thirteen bankers whose roles it identifies for further scrutiny. It discusses failures to report and investigate Epstein related financial activity.
A congressional staff assessment and recommendation for investigation are distinct from a charge, regulatory sanction or judgment against an individual. finance.senate.gov
Third Lake and the Move From Banker to Executive
EFTA01433478 identifies Oldfield as the banker for Third Lake Capital, a family office managing Ronald Wanek family capital. It says Paul Morris brought the relationship to Deutsche Bank in October 2014. Epstein Exposed
EFTA01423853 also describes Oldfield rebuilding Third Lake’s banking business after deposits had left, opening 37 new accounts and developing relationships with its investment leadership and family members. Epstein Files
Reporting on his later employment places him in executive roles at Third Lake businesses and reports his departure from Third Lake Associates at the end of April 2026. The reason was unclear. The report also records Ashley Furniture’s denial that the company or its owners had business, financial or personal dealings with Epstein. moneycontrol.com
Moving from servicing a client to working within related businesses is relevant career history. Shared account lists or a shared relationship manager do not demonstrate shared ownership, commingled money or participation in Epstein’s activities.
Third Lake Associates’ Public Financial Filing
Third Lake Associates’ 2025 SEC financial statement contains Oldfield’s affirmation as chief executive officer.
It describes a business sourcing debt, private placements and financing transactions, wholly owned by Third Lake Holdings. It records FINRA approval in January 2024 and says the business does not hold customer funds or securities.
RSM issued an opinion that the financial statement fairly presented the company’s position. That opinion covered the financial statement and did not constitute an audit opinion on internal controls. The filing provides no identified finding of fraud against Oldfield. sec.gov
The Separate Ovid Ventures Business Lawsuit
The Delaware case record identifies Stewart Oldfield v. Ovid Ventures Group, LLC, formerly Third Lake Executives, LLC, and Kenneth Jones, case 2026-0482. Oldfield is the plaintiff. docketalarm.com
Westlaw’s April 2026 coverage describes allegations that improper accounting reduced his member buyout value by approximately half. The complete complaint was not accessible in this review, so those allegations should remain attributed to the coverage. today.westlaw.com
An April 29 court order confirms the parties and grants admission of an attorney representing Oldfield. It is a procedural order, not a ruling on the accounting allegations. docketalarm.com
The lawsuit is the clearest located dispute outside Epstein. Its proximity to his reported April departure raises a chronology question, but no reviewed source establishes that the dispute caused the departure.
Other Disclosed Business Activities
BrokerCheck’s outside activity disclosures list:
| Business | Disclosed activity |
|---|---|
| Third Lake Partners | Investment strategy executive |
| Epicenter Corp/Walacor | Technology adviser from September 2020 |
| Coldstream Capital Advisors LLC | Founder from August 2020, described as inactive |
| Anchor Capital Growth Fund II | Advisory board member from May 2025 |
| Windham Mountain | Ski instructor from December 2021 |
These disclosures identify further research subjects. They do not establish wrongdoing or connections to Epstein. FINRA
Leon Black and Other Wealth Management Relationships
EFTA01419747 documents banking work involving Leon Black’s Elysium family office and Brad Wechsler. It describes prospective lending and investment business and identifies Oldfield as the private banker.
The briefing also describes Black referring Epstein as an adviser. That overlap warrants inclusion because the bank’s pursuit of wealthy clients and Epstein’s advisory relationships intersected. Epstein Files
A briefing about proposed business does not prove that every proposed loan, meeting or transaction occurred. It also does not establish that Oldfield knew about every payment or arrangement between Black and Epstein.
Evidence Appearances
| Record | Subject | Review status |
|---|---|---|
| EFTA01681984 | September 2019 attorney proffer, Oldfield contacts and account categories | Handwritten pages reviewed |
| EFTA01681865 | Bank presentation and account classifications | Presentation reviewed |
| EFTA01423853 | Performance update, relationship rebuilding and promotion request | Extracted correspondence reviewed |
| EFTA01433921 | Southern Financial account planning | Extracted record reviewed |
| EFTA01414241 | Haze Trust transfer inquiry | Full chain reviewed |
| EFTA01352796 | Cash withdrawal meeting | Discussed through Senate report |
| EFTA01422782 | Butterfly Trust controls | Indexed correspondence reviewed |
| EFTA01426509 | Maintain or expand relationship discussion | Extracted correspondence reviewed |
| EFTA01423573 | Hoffenberg and negative media questions | Searchable excerpts, full chain outstanding |
| EFTA01420332 | Weekly trading reporting | Indexed record and related analysis |
| EFTA01035269 | Asset documentation and identity omission | Extracted correspondence reviewed |
| EFTA01372540 | Request not to disclose Epstein’s name | Secondary description, original outstanding |
| EFTA01420678 | Returned statement disposal | Extracted correspondence reviewed |
| EFTA01426137 | Urgent July 2019 closures | Full chain reviewed |
| EFTA01433478 | Third Lake account planning | Extracted record reviewed |
| EFTA01419747 | Elysium and Leon Black briefing | Extracted record reviewed |
Legal Status and Research Limits
No criminal charge against Oldfield, personal trafficking judgment or verified separate regulatory finding of misconduct was identified in the reviewed material.
The public record supports scrutiny of his banking decisions. It does not support treating every employer, client or disclosed activity as suspicious by association.
This is an expanded public record review, not a certification that every relevant document has been released or examined. Redactions, duplicated productions, inaccessible filings and missing interview records limit completeness.
Open Questions
- Was Oldfield personally interviewed by the FBI, prosecutors or regulators, and is any interview record public?
- What transaction documentation supported compliance clearances beyond client supplied explanations?
- What answers resolved the Hoffenberg inquiry and Butterfly beneficiary questions?
- What approvals governed reference letters, cash services and deadline extensions during the exit?
- Did returned statement disposal comply with retention rules and any preservation notices?
- Which client was involved in his 2020 discharge disclosure?
- What do the complete Ovid complaint, response and subsequent orders establish?
- What explains his April 2026 departure, and what was the status of his other roles afterward?