New Mexico suit targets Epstein trust payouts and survivor compensation terms

Suit cites trafficking and racketeering laws; executors deny knowingly aiding abuse

New Mexico’s civil lawsuit against Jeffrey Epstein’s estate executors puts the fortune Epstein left behind — and the terms on which his victims would be paid from it — at issue. Attorney General Raúl Torrez filed the case in the state on Wednesday under the federal Trafficking Victims Protection Act and the New Mexico Racketeering Act, accusing attorney Darren Indyke and accountant Richard Kahn, the sole executors of Epstein’s estate who control all of his wealth and possessions, of profiting from Epstein’s sex-trafficking ring. Torrez said the two longtime aides played a key role in concealing abuse at Epstein’s remote Zorro Ranch near the city of Santa Fe and that they continue to earn money while victims seek accountability. An accompanying image caption says, “Prosecutors say Epstein abused victims at his Zorro Ranch in New Mexico with the help of key aides.”

At a news conference, Torrez argued that Indyke and Kahn are blocking efforts by Epstein’s victims to seek compensation from his fortune, estimated at roughly $635m (£474m) at the time of his death.

“Those resources rightfully belong in the hands of survivors - there should be no distribution of Mr Epstein’s remaining assets to people like Mr Indyke and Mr Kahn for participation in what I think is one of the most horrific criminal enterprises in modern America,” he said.

The money runs through a trust Epstein created by revising his will to transfer all his wealth into a trust named after the year of his birth, which the lawyer and accountant would administer. In their role as executors, Indyke and Kahn agreed to fund compensation packages for survivors that included conditions that prevented survivors who accepted funds from taking further legal action against them personally. Other claims are still outstanding. As beneficiaries of the trust, the men could also be paid tens of millions of dollars each from whatever remains when the claims are settled.

Both men have denied any role in Epstein’s crimes. An attorney representing both Indyke and Kahn told the BBC that they “emphatically reject” the claims in the lawsuit. Their attorney Daniel Weiner said in a statement to the BBC that “they are confident that they will prevail on the claims asserted against them.”

“Both Mr Indyke and Mr Kahn reject as categorically false the allegations that they knowingly facilitated or assisted Mr Epstein in his sexual abuse or trafficking of women, or that they were aware of Mr Epstein’s actions while they provided legal or accounting services to him,” Weiner said. He added that the New Mexico prosecutor never asked to speak to either man “before filing this baseless lawsuit” and that they both have “cooperated with any and all investigations when asked to do so.”

In his remarks, Torrez alleged that Epstein’s crimes were “made possible by handlers, by lawyers, by accountants, by others who have yet to face real consequence.”

“Jeffrey Epstein did not operate alone, and his death does not end the pursuit of accountability for the people who helped make his crimes possible,” he said. “Those who allegedly enabled this exploitation should not be allowed to profit from it while survivors continue to live with its consequences,” he added.

Both men worked with Epstein for decades, and have previously testified to Congress that they were unaware of the crimes he committed alongside accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell.

BBC related coverage published 27 February reported that Epstein had named the two aides as co-executors in August 2019, just two days before he killed himself in jail while awaiting trial on child sex-trafficking charges, and that Epstein tried to buy a palace in Morocco days before his arrest in 2019. A related feature published 11 March was titled “Jeffrey Epstein had two key aides - why do they still control his money and secrets?” Other related BBC coverage reported that members of Parliament had called for an investigation after the Lutnick-Epstein whistleblower died and that the US House had voted to hold billionaire Epstein associate Leon Black in contempt; the respective headlines were “MPs call for investigation after Lutnick-Epstein whistleblower dies” and “US House votes to hold billionaire Epstein associate Leon Black in contempt”. A first-person related item was headed “Control, threats, disfiguring surgery: My life inside Jeffrey Epstein’s ‘cult’”.

The lawsuit is separate from the state’s ongoing criminal probe into Epstein, which was re-launched in February.

The civil suit follows New Mexico’s earlier records-preservation effort and directly contests Indyke’s sworn denial: a June 2026 report on the preservation effort said investigators had sent letters the month before to JPMorgan, Google and more than two dozen companies, with additional requests planned for records belonging to Indyke and Kahn; Indyke’s March 2026 House testimony recorded his statement that he had “no knowledge whatsoever” of Epstein’s abuse while it was occurring.