| For
Enabling
Epstein
Deutsche Bank
to Pay $75M
Blood Money
Boies Says,
JPMC Next?
By Matthew
Russell Lee, Patreon Maxwell
book
SDNY COURTHOUSE,
May 17 –
J.P. Morgan
Chase and
Deutsche Bank
were sued for
their enabling
of Jeffrey
Epstein, in
lawsuits filed
on
Thanksgiving
2022 in the
U.S. District
Court for the
Southern
District of
New York,
where Inner
City Press
found them in
the docket.
Late on May
17, 2023,
plaintiffs' lawyer
David Boies
selectively
announced a $75
million
settlement
with Deutsche
Bank. Nothing
was filed in
the docket.
But the
pressure on
JPM Chase, and
its CEO
Dimon, grew.
More
including
class analysis
on Substack here
On May
15, U.S. Virgin
Islands in its
lawsuit
against JPM
Chase told
SDNY Judge Jed
S. Rakoff they
have been
unable to
serve Elon
Musk a
subpoena
asking, among
other things,
whether
Epstein
referred him
to Chase.
Musk returned
fire:
"This is
idiotic on so
many
levels:
1. That cretin
never advised
me on anything
whatsoever.
2. The notion
that I would
need or listen
to financial
advice from a
dumb crook is
absurd.
3. JPM let
Tesla down ten
years ago,
despite having
Tesla’s global
commercial
banking
business,
which we then
withdrew. I
have never
forgiven them." And
there is a
case in
SDNY,
including
Chase's London
Branch, that
Inner City
Press is also
covering. Watch
this site.
The separate
lawsuits
allege that
"without
exorbitantly
large amounts
of cash,
Epstein's
operations
could not run,
as newly
recruited
victims were
each paid
hundreds of
dollars in
cash
immediately
after Epstein
sexually
abused them,
as hush
money."
The
JPM Chase
complaint is
on Patreon, here.
On March
20, 2023 Judge
Jed S.
Rakoff in a
bottom line
order
dismissed some
but not
all claims,
in the Epstein-related
cases against
JPMC and Deutsche
Bank.
Inner
City Press put
the order on
its
DocumentCloud
here.
On
April 28, a
motion seeking
class certification
of
Epstein-related
claims against
JPMC was
filed; filing
on Patreon here.
On May 8, the
US Virgin
Islands filed
with Judge
Rakoff to
strike JPM
Chase's equitable
defenses,
including tis
"fault-shifting"
defense, arguing
that "it is well
established within
the Second
Circuit and
elsewhere that
government
plaintiffs suing to
vindicate
public rights
are not subject to equitable
defenses that
may be invoked
against
private plaintiffs."
Full filing on
Patreon here.
***
Your
support means a lot. As little as $5 a month
helps keep us going and grants you access to
exclusive bonus material on our Patreon
page. Click
here to become a patron.
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA
Mail: Box 20047, Dag
Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017
Reporter's mobile (and weekends):
718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner City Press are
listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2023 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com
|
,
