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.
Were there disciplinary or criminal charges filed against MCC staff after Epstein's death?
Executive summary
Federal prosecutors in Manhattan indicted two Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) guards — Tova Noel and Michael Thomas — on charges of falsifying records and conspiracy to falsify records after Jeffrey Epstein’s August 2019 death; both were placed on leave and other administrative actions included temporary reassignment of the MCC warden [1] [2]. Official oversight reviews later described widespread staff failures and concluded Epstein’s death was a suicide, with the Department of Justice Office of Inspector General (OIG) finding negligence, misconduct and poor job performance by MCC staff [3] [4].
1. Criminal indictments: two guards charged for falsifying records
Federal prosecutors in Manhattan brought criminal charges in November 2019 against two MCC correctional officers, Tova Noel and Michael Thomas, alleging they conspired to falsify records and obstructed the functions of the MCC by signing false certifications that required inmate checks had been completed when — prosecutors say — they had not [1]. Reporting noted the indictment alleges the pair failed to complete mandated 30‑minute inmate counts in the Special Housing Unit and instead browsed the internet or fell asleep, and that they were placed on administrative leave after being charged [1].
2. Administrative discipline: leaves and reassignments at MCC
Immediately after Epstein’s death, the Bureau of Prisons placed at least two staffers on administrative leave and Attorney General William Barr ordered a temporary reassignment of the MCC warden, Lamine N’Diaye, while the FBI and the Justice Department inspector general investigated the circumstances of the death [2]. Media outlets at the time reported the warden’s reassignment and staff suspensions as initial administrative measures while criminal and internal probes were underway [5] [6].
3. Oversight findings: negligence, misconduct and poor job performance
The Department of Justice OIG’s later report and subsequent reporting concluded that a combination of negligence, misconduct and poor job performance by MCC staff enabled the conditions that led to Epstein’s death — for example, policies about cellmates and constant observation were not followed, and required checks were not completed [4] [3]. CBS News and other reporting summarized that the OIG concluded Epstein’s death was suicide and highlighted investigative findings about failures in recordkeeping and staff practices [3] [4].
4. Outcomes and sentences reported in later reporting
Coverage and later summaries indicate prosecutors pursued the case against the two guards; other reports describe plea or sentence outcomes in subsequent years, including community service combined with supervised release tied to admissions of falsifying records, and ongoing cooperation with investigators [7]. Prison Legal News summarized that in exchange for admitting falsifying records the guards were sentenced to community service and supervised release while assisting investigators [7].
5. Disagreements, unanswered questions and limits of public reporting
While criminal charges and administrative reassignments are well documented, some investigative reporting and later commentary raised questions about the thoroughness of interviews and evidence collection — for example, CBS News reported that some staffers, inmates and visitors were reportedly not interviewed and that footage and recordkeeping had gaps [3]. Available sources do not mention comprehensive public findings about disciplinary actions beyond leave, reassignment and the guards’ prosecutions, nor do they provide a single, fully detailed public accounting of every MCC staff disciplinary step beyond what the OIG and prosecutors disclosed [3] [4].
6. Competing framings in the public record
Government investigators and the OIG framed the matter as failures of staff performance and procedural breakdowns that led to a suicide determination [3] [4]. At the same time, the initial absence of clear answers and the high profile of Epstein’s network fueled conspiracy theories and sustained suspicion in some quarters; reporting noted public and political pressure and the involvement of congressional and executive actors in pressing for more files [8] [9]. The sources document both the formal investigative conclusions and the persistence of public skepticism, without endorsing either interpretation [3] [9].
7. What the records explicitly show and what they don’t
Explicitly documented in the cited reporting are the criminal indictment of Noel and Thomas for falsifying records [1], administrative leave for MCC staff and reassignment of the warden [2] [5], and OIG findings of staff negligence and misconduct that contributed to Epstein’s death, which was ruled a suicide [3] [4]. Available sources do not mention a complete list of every disciplinary measure taken campus‑wide at MCC beyond those items, nor do they show a single authoritative public record resolving every outstanding question raised by critics [3] [4].
If you want, I can pull direct quotes from the OIG report excerpts in the cited pieces or assemble a timeline from arrest to later prosecutorial dispositions using only these sources.