Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What documents or testimony have linked Leslie Wexner to Jeffrey Epstein's activities before Epstein's 2019 arrest?
Executive summary
Publicly available documents and testimony before Jeffrey Epstein’s 2019 arrest connected Leslie (Les) Wexner to Epstein primarily through civil-case filings, unsealed deposition excerpts and contemporaneous reporting. Key items include Virginia Giuffre’s allegations and related unsealed court records (which name Wexner and include a 2016 deposition referenced in reporting) [1], deposition material and other documents released in batches in 2024 that reference Wexner [2], and contemporaneous press and investigative profiles describing Wexner as Epstein’s longtime client, employer of Epstein as a money manager and trustee roles that linked the two publicly [3] [4] [5].
1. Civil litigation and unsealed deposition excerpts: the Giuffre files
A major source tying Wexner to Epstein before 2019 comes from Virginia Giuffre’s civil suit and the court records later unsealed: ARTnews summarized that unsealed documents include a 2016 deposition in which Giuffre was questioned about claims that Epstein trafficked her to prominent figures, and that Wexner’s name appears among those cited [1]. These files were part of litigation that settled in 2017 and whose documents were ordered unsealed, producing new allegations and renewed scrutiny of Wexner’s relationship with Epstein [1].
2. Depositions and other witnesses referenced in released document troves
Local reporting on additional document releases in early 2024 noted further references to Wexner in troves of material tied to Epstein litigation. The Columbus Dispatch reported a 2010 deposition of Nadia Marcinkova (an Epstein associate) in which she repeatedly invoked the Fifth Amendment when asked about Wexner, and the dispatch framed these notes as additional references found within the released batches [2]. Those releases reiterated that names appearing in the documents were not criminal charges but part of civil discovery and testimony [2].
3. Longstanding public portrayal: money manager, trustee, social ties
Multiple outlets had already described Wexner as Epstein’s most prominent client and as someone who gave Epstein broad authority over his personal finances. Vanity Fair’s reporting detailed decades-long business ties and social proximity — including Epstein’s role as a money manager and involvement with Wexner’s foundation and social circle — framing those ties as central to Epstein’s rise in elite networks [3]. The Times of Israel and CNN contemporaneously reported that Wexner described Epstein as his personal money manager and a trustee of his foundation, and that Wexner said Epstein had wide latitude to act on his behalf [4] [5].
4. Documentary and investigative framing: culture and unanswered questions
Documentary coverage and investigative pieces have portrayed a “murky” relationship that raised questions about what Wexner knew and when. A docuseries and press pieces highlighted Epstein’s access to Wexner’s social and institutional platforms — for example, Epstein’s position with the Wexner Foundation and alleged use of Victoria’s Secret recruitment pretenses — and noted Wexner’s denials of knowledge about criminal activity [6] [3]. Those programs pushed for accountability and transparency but rely on a mix of reporting, deposition excerpts and survivor testimony rather than criminal indictments of Wexner [6] [3].
5. Newer releases and tangible artifacts: birthday book pages and committee disclosures
Recent committee releases and reporting in 2025 brought forward material such as a 2003 “birthday book” compiled for Epstein’s 50th birthday that the House Oversight Committee and press allege contains a note and drawing that appears to bear Wexner’s signature and an image that appears to show Wexner with Epstein [7]. News outlets reported the committee posted pages that include an apparent handwritten note attributed to “Leslie/Les” and a photo framed by investigators as evidence of social closeness; Wexner’s office declined comment in that reporting [7].
6. What the records do not prove — limitations and competing claims
Available sources do not assert that document citations or deposition mentions equate to criminal culpability; multiple pieces underline that names appearing in civil discovery are not synonymous with charges [2]. Wexner and his representatives have publicly condemned Epstein’s behavior, said ties were severed years earlier, and said some funds were returned — statements captured on Wexner’s foundation page and in reporting [8] [5]. Investigative outlets present competing inferences: some survivors and reporters argue the tie requires further accountability [9] [6], while formal legal proceedings had not charged Wexner as of these reports [2].
7. Bottom line for readers and next steps for scrutiny
The strongest, document-based links before 2019 are civil-file revelations: Giuffre’s allegations and related deposition excerpts, other deposition references in released troves, and longstanding reporting that Epstein managed Wexner’s finances and sat in his social orbit [1] [2] [3]. That record raises significant questions but, according to the cited reporting, does not equate to criminal charges against Wexner. Future clarity depends on continued release and forensic review of discovery documents, congressional disclosures and corroborating testimony [7] [2].