Which Harvard researchers besides Martin Nowak and George Church had documented ties or meetings with Jeffrey Epstein?
Executive summary
The public record shows that beyond Martin Nowak and George Church, multiple Harvard-affiliated scholars had documented contacts with Jeffrey Epstein—ranging from calendar-listed lunches and emailed exchanges to introductions and donations channeled through Epstein’s network [1] [2] [3]. Reporting and released DOJ files name Noam Chomsky, Stephen Kosslyn, Lisa Randall and Lawrence Krauss among academics with ties or meetings tied to Epstein; other researchers appear as meeting attendees or as former students connected through Nowak [4] [5] [3] [6] [1].
1. Noam Chomsky: present at a Harvard meeting with Epstein and Nowak
Documents and contemporaneous reporting show Jeffrey Epstein met in March 2015 in a Harvard office with Martin Nowak and linguist Noam Chomsky among other unidentified academics, a meeting reported by The Harvard Crimson citing the Wall Street Journal, establishing a direct documented interaction between Chomsky and Epstein on Harvard premises [4].
2. Stephen Kosslyn: Harvard psychology chair who helped bring Epstein into the university orbit
Harvard’s own report and subsequent coverage identify Stephen Kosslyn—then chair of the psychology department—as having vouched for Epstein and played a role in awarding him a visiting fellow position in 2005, a decision the university review questioned as a lapse given Epstein’s lack of traditional academic credentials [7] [2]. George Church later said he met Epstein possibly through Brockman or Kosslyn, tying Kosslyn to introductions that brought Epstein into faculty circles [5].
3. Lisa Randall: named in analyses of the DOJ files as a connected Harvard scientist
Scientific American’s analysis of the DOJ and other released documents lists Lisa Randall among former Scientific American board members who had connections with Epstein; Randall is identified as a Harvard physicist appearing in those document sets, which indicates some documented contact or correspondence in the material reviewed by the outlet [3] [8].
4. Lawrence Krauss: cited in early reporting as part of Harvard-linked contacts
Multiple pieces tracking Epstein’s academic network flagged Lawrence Krauss in connection with Epstein; Undark and Scientific American included Krauss among scientists who had some form of contact or association appearing in the released files and reporting on the scandal [6] [3]. Those outlets present Krauss as part of the broader group of prominent scientists with documented ties in the DOJ and media records.
5. Other attendees and students tied into Harvard networks: James Clement and Corina Tarnita
Calendar entries and DOJ documents list James Clement—an independent biomedical researcher—as attending dinners and meetings that included Epstein, George Church and Martin Nowak, showing him present at Harvard-area gatherings where Epstein participated [1]. Corina Tarnita, now at Princeton but a former graduate student under Nowak at Harvard, regularly corresponded with Epstein between 2009 and 2012 and maintained contact often mediated through Nowak, according to reporting based on the newly released files [9] [10].
6. Scope, caveats and institutional framing from Harvard’s report
Harvard’s official review emphasized that most direct gift funds before 2008 were routed to Nowak and that Epstein continued to try to interest other donors on behalf of Harvard scientists after his conviction; the university report documented Epstein’s role in introductions and named that faculty members received funding from donors Epstein introduced, while also stating no gifts came from Epstein to Harvard after 2008 [2]. The report and media analyses make clear that the spectrum of “ties” ranges from social meetings and email exchanges to donor introductions and indirect funding, and different sources emphasize different parts of that spectrum [2] [3].
7. What the sources do—and do not—establish
The DOJ document releases and journalistic reviews reliably document meetings, calendar entries, emails and donor introductions implicating Chomsky, Kosslyn, Randall, Krauss, Clement and Tarnita in Epstein-related records; multiple outlets explicitly situate those contacts as distinct from the concentrated funding that principally benefited Nowak and Church [1] [2] [3]. If a named individual’s precise role—whether social acquaintance, correspondent, or recipient of donor-introduced funds—is not spelled out in these sources, that ambiguity is reflected in the reporting and cannot be resolved without further documentary evidence [2] [3].