Lawyers for Jes Staley blast JPMorgan’s ‘absent’ claims over Jeffrey Epstein ties

Jes Staley’s legal professionals have attacked JPMorgan Chase’s try to make its former government answerable for hurt brought on by offering financial institution companies to the late intercourse offender Jeffrey Epstein, arguing the case was “fully absent” of concrete claims.

“That they had a number of months of discovery to look into Mr Staley’s emails . . . to deliver their greatest shot,” Staley’s lawyer Stephen Wohlgemuth informed a New York federal courtroom on Friday, in an try to get the case dismissed. “They must make the allegations . . . they must say what’s true and what’s not.”

JPMorgan sued Staley, who spent greater than 30 years on the financial institution, in March, alleging that he breached his fiduciary duties and acted in unhealthy religion by disguising his true relationship with Epstein, which allegedly included a number of visits to the disgraced financier’s properties and emails wherein pictures of younger girls had been exchanged.

The financial institution is looking for to make the 66-year-old answerable for any damages awarded in two circumstances introduced in opposition to JPMorgan final 12 months by an unnamed Epstein accuser and by the US Virgin Islands, the place Epstein had a house. These fits accuse JPMorgan of benefiting from human trafficking by conserving Epstein on as a consumer for 15 years, regardless of quite a few purple flags.

Staley, who was fired by JPMorgan in 2013, is himself accused by the Epstein sufferer of rape and of witnessing Epstein’s crimes — claims he has strongly denied. The financial institution has mentioned it first discovered about these claims previously few months.

Leonard Gail, a lawyer for JPMorgan, reiterated the financial institution’s competition that Epstein was retained as a result of “Staley vouched for [him] inside the financial institution” and that the previous government must be liable as a result of “all hurt or harm that the plaintiffs allege flows from [Epstein] being a consumer”.

Nevertheless, whereas JPMorgan was looking for to make Staley accountable for assurances he allegedly gave the financial institution about Epstein, it had did not state how and once they had been made, Wohlgemuth mentioned. The US Virgin Islands criticism in opposition to JPMorgan cites an inner assembly in January 2011 after which Staley was requested for his opinion on Epstein and allegedly vouched for him, however the financial institution had failed to substantiate whether or not this incident really occurred, he added.

“This alleged vouching . . . would have been made to JPMorgan workers,” Wohlgemuth mentioned. “What does the financial institution say? Was there vouching? What did Mr Staley really say . . . who did he say it to and why did they depend on it?,” he requested.

“That’s their burden, and so they haven’t even tried to fulfill it,” Wohlgemuth mentioned.

Decide Jed Rakoff mentioned he would rule on the movement to dismiss by the top of the month. Staley — who went on to turn into chief government of the UK financial institution Barclays, however resigned following an investigation into the best way he characterised his relationship with Epstein — is about to be deposed by JPMorgan’s legal professionals subsequent month.

Back To Top