What specific terms did the USVI consent judgment include regarding the co-executors Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn?
Executive summary
The U.S. Virgin Islands’ consent judgment with the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein required a cash payment of $105 million and imposed measures directing the estate to wind down operations in the territory once payments cleared, with quarterly accounting and remittances already reported to the Virgin Islands treasury [1] [2]. The settlement also obligates the estate and its co-executors, Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn, to pay the Virgin Islands half of the proceeds from the sale of Little St. James and places an independent administrator over the victims’ compensation program [1] [2].
1. The headline money term: $105 million cash payment
The consent judgment’s most prominent numeric term was a $105 million cash payment by Epstein’s estate to the Government of the U.S. Virgin Islands, a figure disclosed in reporting summarizing the settlement [1], and which the Attorney General’s public materials framed as part of the estate’s obligation under the consent judgment [2].
2. Asset-sharing: half of Little St. James sale proceeds to the USVI
Beyond the fixed cash payment, the settlement explicitly requires the estate and its co-executors, Indyke and Kahn, to transfer half of the proceeds from the sale of Little St. James to the Virgin Islands government, making future asset dispositions a continuing source of recovery under the judgment [1].
3. Operational constraints and winding down of USVI activities
The consent judgment also imposed operational constraints: the estate was required to “wind down” its remaining activities in the U.S. Virgin Islands once payments cleared, and the Attorney General’s office summarized that the estate must wind down operations and provide periodic accounting, with a quarterly filing showing more than $117 million remitted to the Virgin Islands treasury by February 2023 [2].
4. Victims’ compensation administration and oversight
As part of the post-settlement structure, an independent administrator for the Epstein Victims’ Compensation Program—Jordana Feldman, who had prior experience administering the Sept. 11 Victim Compensation Fund—was appointed to help manage restitution and claims under the fund established in consultation with the USVI government [2].
5. Co‑executors’ legal posture: defendants added, denials recorded
The U.S. Virgin Islands had earlier amended its complaint to add Indyke and Kahn as defendants, alleging involvement tied to Epstein’s operations in the territory [3]; following the settlement announcement, the estate and co-executors released a statement denying all allegations while saying the estate intended to meet settlement obligations and wind down USVI activities consistent with co-executors’ fiduciary duties [1].
6. Procedural context and what reporting does not resolve
Court dockets and filings show Indyke and Kahn were litigated against in multiple federal lawsuits where plaintiffs sued them in their capacities as co-executors [4] [5] [6], and the Virgin Islands litigation culminated in the consent judgment summarized in the Attorney General’s materials [2]. Public records and press summaries supply the settlement’s core terms—cash payment, split of Little St. James proceeds, wind-down requirement, independent administrator appointment, and accounting remittances—but the publicly reported summaries do not provide the full text of the consent judgment in the cited materials here, so finer points such as release language, detailed timing of payments, escrow mechanics, or any covenants not publicly excerpted cannot be confirmed from the sources provided [2] [1].