Steve Bannon, the far-right ally of President Donald Trump, may have devised a legal tactic to help late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein hide information.
Business Insider reporter Jacob Shamsian crafted a BlueSky thread about his recent report on the "obscure legal tactic" Epstein may have used to hide some of the information that could have been harmful to a court defense.
Recently released communications show a discussion between Epstein and Bannon about a Kovel agreement.
Bannon revealed that he has 15 hours of footage speaking with Epstein. While Congress debated demanding the Justice Department release information, there was never a congressional subpoena for Bannon to hand over his 15 hours of videos.
Conversations with an attorney are protected by attorney-client privilege. Communications between taxpayers and their accountants don't get the same protections.
However, as law firm Eisner Gorin explained in a blog post, "this limitation can be effectively overcome through the use of a Kovel agreement. This unique mechanism extends attorney-client privilege to communications with accountants when an attorney employs them to assist in providing legal advice, offering much-needed relief to taxpayers facing IRS scrutiny and providing them with a profound sense of reassurance in a challenging situation."
In his BlueSky thread, Shamsian noted, the Kovel agreement "can also be used by public relations professionals. If Steve Bannon was making a promotional 'documentary' for Jeffrey Epstein, that would explain" why none of that footage has been released publicly.
"The existence of a Kovel agreement would explain something odd that Jeffrey Epstein's brother, Mark, told me years ago," Shamsian continued. "He said Bannon claimed the footage was protected by attorney-client confidentiality — even though Bannon isn't a lawyer."
His report said that Bannon told Mark Epstein in a meeting after his brother's death than even he couldn't see the documentary footage. Bannon called it "witness preparation" and said it was protected under attorney-client confidentiality.
"He said he had 16 hours of tapes," Shamsian recalled Mark Epstein telling him. "He said they were in his vault and they were protected under attorney-client privilege. I don't how, because he's not an attorney. But anyhow, that's what he told me."
The text messages released show that Bannon suggested a "narrative of redemption" that could help save Epstein while he was facing a civil lawsuit and criminal investigation.
"Here is what I think will work legally," Epstein told Bannon in April 2019, the report said. "I pay direct costs of filming. As Darren is the contractor for legal service prep . It gets paid by Darren. He has final control as it is his work product."
Bannon's goal would be "to humanize the monster," wrote Epstein.
Bannon and Epstein's lawyer, Darren Indyke, could pay for the videos Bannon might shoot. Then, Epstein and Indyke would have "final control" over the project. Bannon would score the profits after it was ultimately produced.
"I have no interest whatsoever in making money here," Epstein claimed. "Zero . You deserve whatever it brings. As it is our cost, no return on it."
Bannon told a fan at a political conference in July he would begin releasing the "documentary" in five parts "early next year."
Legal ethics Professor Bruce Green, who teaches at Fordham Law School, told Shamsian that he wasn't certain it would be that helpful for Epstein.
"Half the time or more, when the client hires a PR person and uses the lawyer to try to create a Kovel theory, it doesn't work," Green told Insider. "Because the court looks at it and says, 'This isn't really designed to assist the lawyer — it's designed to assist the client.'"
