Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem in Epstein Witness Records and a Survivor’s Civil Complaint
Snapshot
A survivor’s 2019 federal civil complaint and a separate set of handwritten Epstein interview notes both refer to a person called Sultan in Jeffrey Epstein’s circle. The complaint says that the survivor, identified in court as Priscilla Doe, heard Epstein speaking with the “Sultan of Dubai” and met him once. A February 2006 email by Epstein’s assistant uses that same description and explicitly identifies the person as Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem. Separately, EFTA00021076 records a witness referring to a “guy from Dubai, Sultan.” These are significant identification and investigative leads. The available records do not establish that the two witnesses were describing the same encounter.
The critical distinction is in Priscilla Doe’s filed complaint. She alleges that Epstein forced her to give massages to powerful friends and that some of those unnamed friends sexually abused her. She does not say that the “Sultan of Dubai” was one of those abusers. She does not name Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem as a defendant.
| Record | What it says | What remains unproved |
|---|---|---|
| Priscilla Doe complaint, case 1:19-cv-07772, paragraphs 100 to 102 | Doe says Epstein called the “Sultan of Dubai” a close friend. She heard them speak and met him once. | The complaint does not give his full name, the date or place of their meeting, or an allegation of abuse by him. |
| Same complaint, paragraph 107 | Doe alleges sexual abuse during massages by some unnamed powerful friends. | It does not identify those friends as bin Sulayem. |
| February 2006 Epstein assistant email, exhibit 285-13 | The assistant calls Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem the “Sultan of Dubai.” | This supports the likely identity behind the description but does not establish whom Doe met or who abused her. |
| EFTA00021076, page 16 | A handwritten interview note says “guy from Dubai, Sultan.” | The cited line does not give a surname or accuse him of an abusive act. |
| Other released Epstein records | Document correspondence about women, an island visit, a massage inquiry, spa arrangements, and a video reference. | These records alone do not establish sexual assault, trafficking, or knowledge of a particular crime by bin Sulayem. |
The 2019 Priscilla Doe Complaint
The filed pleading, Priscilla Doe v. Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn as representatives of the Estate of Jeffrey E. Epstein, was filed in the Southern District of New York on August 20, 2019, as case 1:19-cv-07772, document 1. It presents the plaintiff’s allegations, not judicial findings. Doe alleged that Epstein coerced and sexually abused her over several years beginning in 2006, including on Little Saint James. Paragraph 96 alleges that she was taken to the island more than 20 times between 2006 and 2012.
Paragraphs 100 to 102 of the complaint say Epstein invoked powerful friendships to keep Doe compliant. She alleged that he named Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, Prince Andrew, and the “Sultan of Dubai” among his close friends. She says she overheard Epstein talking with the latter and met him once. This is a first person account in a filed sexual abuse case that places a person bearing that description in contact with Epstein and the survivor. The filing gives no full name, meeting date, or description of his conduct toward her.
Paragraph 107 separately alleges that Epstein forced Doe to massage other powerful friends and that some of those friends sexually abused her by force. The complaint does not connect that allegation to the “Sultan of Dubai” by name or description. The fact that both statements occur in the same pleading does not supply the missing identification. Doe reported meeting the “Sultan of Dubai” and alleged abuse by some unidentified friends of Epstein. The filing does not say bin Sulayem abused her.
CBS News’ contemporary account also described Doe as having met the “sultan of Dubai.” The filed complaint is the primary source for what Doe actually alleged.
Who Did Epstein’s Staff Call the “Sultan of Dubai”?
Exhibit 285-13 in United States Virgin Islands v. JPMorgan Chase contains a February 8, 2006 email from an Epstein assistant to banker Jes Staley. The assistant says she contacted the “Sultan of Dubai” about a possible meeting, then gives his full name as Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem and lists his business titles. She adds that Epstein’s circle called him Sultan. A duplicate of the correspondence appears in exhibit 285-64 of that litigation.
This is stronger identification evidence than a match of first name and city. It establishes that Epstein’s staff used the precise description in Doe’s pleading for bin Sulayem in 2006, the year Doe says her association with Epstein began. It does not prove that Doe used the description for the same individual, that the proposed Staley meeting occurred, or that bin Sulayem knew of Doe’s alleged abuse. The identification is strongly supported by Epstein’s separate records, but Doe’s complaint does not confirm it by full name.
“Sultan” is his given name in these records. “Sultan of Dubai” in the assistant’s email is an informal description, not evidence that he held a ruling title.
A Separate Handwritten Witness Note: EFTA00021076
Page 16 of EFTA00021076 contains the handwritten phrase “guy from Dubai, Sultan.” The broader notes concern Epstein’s network and a witness’s experiences, including sensitive material about pressure, money, travel, and sexual contact. The page does not identify this Sultan by surname in the cited line or say there that he assaulted the witness. The relationship, if any, between this witness and Priscilla Doe cannot be established from the cited pages.
The first name and city, together with Epstein’s independently documented relationship with bin Sulayem, make him an important person to investigate in relation to the note. Handwritten notes are fragmentary. Their context requires the complete interview, its date, the interviewer’s account, and any follow up reports. The Justice Department’s Epstein Library cautions that handwriting and document formats can defeat electronic searches. A missing search result does not prove another relevant interview or complaint does not exist.
Evidence Appearances and Investigative Significance
| Evidence | Description | Limit |
|---|---|---|
| EFTA00021076 | Handwritten interview note includes “guy from Dubai, Sultan” on page 16. | No surname or explicit accusation against him in that line. |
| EFTA01853867 | Epstein discusses “girls” expected by a mutual contact in an email to Sultan Bin Sulayem. | Does not establish the women’s circumstances or abuse by bin Sulayem. |
| EFTA02571134 | Bin Sulayem thanks Epstein in June 2013 for time at his island. | Confirms a completed visit, not what occurred there. |
| EFTA02667329 | December 2016 transportation and accommodation planning for Sultan and companions. | Planning alone does not prove each companion arrived. |
| EFTA02334646 | Epstein staff asks when bin Sulayem wants a New York massage. | Does not identify a provider or establish an abusive encounter. |
| EFTA02648996 | Bin Sulayem seeks Rixos spa training for a woman associated with Epstein as a personal masseuse or assistant. | Her age, consent, working conditions, and experience are not determined by the email. |
| EFTA02654919 | Bin Sulayem arranges for an architect to discuss an island spa. | Does not prove construction or use of that facility. |
| EFTA02273951 | January 2019 travel planning mentions bin Sulayem. | A proposed plan is not a completed trip. |
| EFTA00005091 | A contact sheet bears an “LSJ xmas/Sultan” label. | The label needs image and date authentication before supporting a particular visit. |
Women, the Island, and Massage Arrangements
Reuters’ review of the correspondence reports that bin Sulayem discussed women with whom Epstein helped him connect. ABC News’ examination quotes a November 2013 message in which bin Sulayem described two women’s arrival and assessed their appearances. These are records of the men’s relationship and their discussion of women. They do not by themselves establish those women’s ages, consent, or whether a crime took place.
The June 2013 island email, EFTA02571134, directly corroborates at least one visit by bin Sulayem. EFTA02667329 documents later travel and lodging arrangements involving him and companions. These records matter when assessing opportunities for contact. A visitor’s presence does not establish participation in an assault.
The New York massage inquiry, EFTA02334646, deserves scrutiny because Epstein used massage arrangements in his abuse operation. It does not identify who provided the proposed massage or say what happened. EFTA02648996 records bin Sulayem facilitating training at Rixos for a woman linked to Epstein’s private spa. Turkish reporting that quotes hotel owner Fettah Tamince describes the arrangement as a favor requested by bin Sulayem. The emails and reporting are leads for obtaining hotel records and the accounts of the women involved. They do not establish coercion during the training.
The island spa correspondence, EFTA02654919, records an architect referral by bin Sulayem. It does not establish the resulting structure or its use. Together, these records show access to Epstein’s properties and assistance with massage related arrangements. Any claim of criminal participation requires further evidence.
The 2009 “Torture Video” Reference
Associated Press’ report on the released exchange explains that Epstein wrote in April 2009 that he loved a “torture video.” Members of Congress and Justice Department correspondence subsequently associated the redacted recipient with bin Sulayem. The video itself, its content, origin, participants, and sender have not been established by that email. Without further authentication, the message cannot show that the video depicted sexual violence or that bin Sulayem committed an assault.
Public Complaint Search and Current Status
The 2019 Priscilla Doe filing is a sexual abuse complaint that mentions a person likely identifiable as bin Sulayem through a separate Epstein record. It is not an allegation that he sexually abused Doe. The EFTA00021076 witness note is another potentially relevant first person record, but its line naming Sultan is not a specific assault accusation.
A separate complaint to the United Kingdom Charity Commission concerned the Earthshot Prize’s relationship with DP World. It concerned donor due diligence, not a survivor’s sexual assault allegation against bin Sulayem.
Searches through September 27, 2026, using English, Arabic, Turkish, and French name variants and terms for rape, assault, harassment, victim, plaintiff, and complaint did not verify a publicly accessible filing or first person statement that expressly accuses Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem of committing sexual abuse. This is a finding about material located in a public search, not a certification that no report exists. Private police reports, sealed cases, inaccessible archives, other names, and poorly indexed handwritten documents remain outside that conclusion. Al Jazeera’s account of the congressional review notes that being named in released files does not itself imply wrongdoing. No criminal charge against bin Sulayem in connection with Epstein was identified in the public record reviewed for this article.
Questions for Investigators
- Can Priscilla Doe or her counsel identify by full name the person she met and specify when and where the meeting occurred?
- Can Doe identify the friends she alleges assaulted her during massages, while protecting her private information?
- Who wrote EFTA00021076, when was the interview conducted, and are there recordings or follow up reports that expand its Sultan reference?
- Does the EFTA00021076 witness describe the same person or an encounter distinct from Doe’s?
- What travel, household, appointment, photograph, or communications records corroborate the reported meetings?
- Who provided the New York massage proposed in EFTA02334646, and did the appointment occur?
- What were the terms and actual events of the Rixos training and island spa project, according to the women and staff involved?
- What is the provenance and content of the video mentioned in April 2009?
These leads should be preserved with exact document identifiers, dates, paragraph numbers, and source PDFs. Investigators can test identities and conduct with evidence unavailable to a public website. EpsteinWiki’s bin Sulayem profile and Little Saint James page provide related context.
Sources
- Priscilla Doe v. Epstein Estate, case 1:19-cv-07772, document 1, filed August 20, 2019, particularly paragraphs 96 and 100 to 107.
- USVI v. JPMorgan Chase, exhibit 285-13, February 8, 2006 email identifying the “Sultan of Dubai” as Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem.
- EFTA00021076, handwritten witness interview notes, page 16.
- EFTA01853867, email concerning women.
- EFTA02571134, June 2013 island visit message.
- EFTA02667329, December 2016 island travel arrangements.
- EFTA02334646, New York massage inquiry.
- EFTA02648996, Rixos spa training correspondence.
- EFTA02654919, island spa design correspondence.
- EFTA02273951, January 2019 travel planning.
- EFTA00005091, Little Saint James photographic contact sheet.
- Reuters, Epstein’s Middle East relationships and bin Sulayem correspondence.
- ABC News, review of bin Sulayem messages in the Epstein records.
- Associated Press, released emails and the video reference.
- CBS News, contemporary report on Priscilla Doe’s lawsuit.
- 12punto, Turkish reporting on Rixos owner Fettah Tamince.
- Al Jazeera, congressional review and redactions.
- ITV News, Earthshot Prize charity complaint.