[ad_1]
Jes Staley’s law firm has described “slanderous” allegations that he aided and abetted Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes as “baseless but serious”, soon after the previous executive was sued by JPMorgan Chase, his erstwhile employer.
Brendan Sullivan, who is symbolizing Staley, requested a federal decide in New York for extra time to evaluation tens of hundreds of files relating to the scenario, which was introduced following JPMorgan was sued by an alleged Epstein victim and the US Virgin Islands, where by the disgraced financier had a property. The lawyer also questioned for the situation versus Staley to be severed from the two in opposition to the US financial institution.
“The allegations towards him are slanderous, and the probable damages are astronomical,” Sullivan wrote, introducing that considering the fact that his customer was accused of aiding “one of the most infamous criminals in recent American history” the stakes “could barely be higher”.
The move by Staley to sever his scenario from JPMorgan’s is the most up-to-date salvo in a high-profile dispute around the bank’s choice to keep Epstein as a shopper for 15 many years, right before dropping him in 2013.
JPMorgan has known as the suits in opposition to it “meritless” and subsequently countersued Staley, who was at the bank for decades and for a interval managed the romance with Epstein. Its criticism alleged Staley withheld info about crimes he experienced witnessed at Epstein’s residences although remaining concerned in an interior critique of the late sexual intercourse offender’s account.
In a independent filing, a lawyer for the unnamed Epstein accuser echoed the request for the scenario in opposition to Staley to be separated, proclaiming it was brought by JPMorgan to “harass and intimidate” her and other folks by “seizing on [her] fear” of Staley, who she alleged had also abused her.
Staley would now have obtain to the victim’s “intimate communications,” the lawyer claimed, as very well as private medical records, and the outcome of the suit would be to “force Staley back into her life”.
In his rebuttal of the accusations from JPMorgan and the Epstein accuser, Staley’s law firm explained “disproving these fake and really-publicised allegations is of paramount importance to him”, introducing that “this court’s scheduling rulings have severely prejudiced [Staley’s] potential to do so”.
He requested the Oct demo day — which Jed Rakoff, the judge overseeing the circumstance, mentioned final month would acquire “an act of God” to shift — be rescheduled for March 2024.
In a assertion, JPMorgan said it built “no sense” to different Stalely’s situation from the other folks, to which he is “inextricably linked”.
“Jane Doe herself has immediately accused him of horrific sexual misconduct and, if true, he have to be held accountable,” it mentioned.
Legal professionals for Staley did not promptly return a ask for for remark.
Very last thirty day period, Rakoff declined to dismiss allegations that JPMorgan benefited from Epstein’s trafficking by disregarding inner warnings just after he was arrested for solicitation of a minor in Florida in 2006.
In its countersuit towards Staley, JPMorgan has questioned the court to make the former government liable for any damages that could be awarded against it, as well as to claw again tens of millions of pounds in his fork out.
Staley, who has denied wrongdoing, is established to be questioned less than oath by the bank’s lawyers afterwards this thirty day period.
Separately, lawyers for JPMorgan subpoenaed Confident Financial commitment Administration, formerly identified as BlueMountain Capital, where Staley labored right after leaving JPMorgan and just before turning into chief govt of British bank Barclays, according to a person common with the issue on Thursday.
The existence of the subpoena was initial reported by Bloomberg.
The 66-yr-outdated American joined BlueMountain as a controlling lover in 2013. He left BlueMountain much less than two many years later to become main executive of Barclays in 2015, but resigned immediately after six decades next a regulatory investigation in the United kingdom into the way he characterised his partnership with Epstein.
Certain Investment decision Administration did not promptly respond to a ask for for remark.
Extra reporting by Ortenca Aliaj and Antoine Gara in New York
[ad_2]
Supply url