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.
How has ownership of Little St James changed since Epstein's death in 2019?
Executive summary
After Jeffrey Epstein’s death in August 2019, Little St. James remained part of his estate and was placed on the market; in May 2023 billionaire investor Stephen Deckoff closed on both Little St. James and neighboring Great St. James for about $60 million, ending several years in legal limbo and sparking plans to convert the islands into a resort [1] [2] [3]. Prior to that sale the islands were publicly listed for $125 million as estate assets intended to help pay claims and settle lawsuits tied to Epstein’s alleged crimes [4] [5].
1. From private refuge to estate asset — what happened immediately after Epstein’s death
When Epstein died in August 2019 he left the islands as part of his estate; federal agents had already investigated Little St. James in 2019, and the property then became entangled in civil suits and government interest rather than reverting to a private, single-person owner [6] [4]. Reporting shows Epstein’s companies and estate lawyers explicitly signaled that proceeds from any sale would be used to resolve outstanding lawsuits tied to his criminal cases [4] [5].
2. Public listing and the estate’s stated plan to sell
In 2022 lawyers for Epstein’s estate publicly listed Little St. James and Great St. James together for as much as $125 million, with Daniel Weiner of Hughes Hubbard & Reed saying part of the intent was to use sale proceeds to satisfy lawsuits and estate costs [4]. Coverage in Fortune and the BBC confirmed the listing and noted the estate’s rationale: monetizing assets that had been frozen or in limbo since 2019 to help satisfy creditors and claimants [5] [4].
3. Legal and financial limbo — why the islands didn’t transfer immediately
Available reporting describes a period of “limbo” after 2019: permits, liens and pending legal claims complicated development and sale efforts, and public scrutiny over the islands’ role in Epstein’s alleged abuses made any transaction politically and legally sensitive [7] [3]. The U.S. Virgin Islands and other parties scrutinized financial ties and tax incentives connected to Epstein’s holdings, adding further complexity to disposal of the properties [8] [7].
4. The 2023 buyer: Stephen Deckoff and the $60 million close
Multiple outlets reported that billionaire investor Stephen Deckoff — described as having ties to the U.S. Virgin Islands — purchased both Little St. James and Great St. James in May 2023 for roughly $60 million, a price significantly below the earlier $125 million asking figure [1] [2] [3]. Coverage frames the sale as “closing another chapter” of Epstein’s estate and as the end of the islands’ immediate status as estate assets held for potential claimants [1] [2].
5. Buyer plans and the contested symbolism of redevelopment
Deckoff’s stated plan, as reported, is to develop the two islands into a luxury resort or “world-class destination,” a proposal covered in local and national reporting that highlights tension between creating economic opportunity and the islands’ traumatic reputation as sites tied to alleged abuse [3] [9]. Some reports present redevelopment as a way to move beyond the islands’ past; others note community sensitivity, legal claims and the ethical questions of profiting from properties associated with abuse [9] [3].
6. What the sources agree on — and what they don’t say
Sources consistently agree: Epstein owned Little St. James until his death in 2019; the islands were listed for sale and later sold to Stephen Deckoff in 2023 for around $60 million; the estate intended sale proceeds to address lawsuits [6] [4] [1] [2]. Available sources do not mention specific post-sale zoning approvals, final development permits issued to Deckoff, or detailed plans with timelines for construction beyond broad statements of intent [3] [9]. If you want confirmation of current construction permits or community consultations, those details are not found in the provided reporting.
7. Wider context and competing perspectives
Journalistic accounts emphasize two competing frames: one casts the sale as practical estate resolution and potential local economic development (jobs, tourism), while another raises ethical concerns about transforming a site tied to alleged trafficking into a commercial resort and whether justice for victims is served by the financial outcome [4] [5] [3]. Some outlets stress the price gap between the 2022 listing and the 2023 sale as evidence of market realities or the islands’ reputational discount; others emphasize the estate’s legal obligations to creditors and victims [4] [1] [5].
If you’d like, I can compile a timeline of key public filings, listings and reporting between 2019 and the 2023 sale based on these sources, or look for coverage of local reactions and permitting updates beyond what’s cited here.