**
Newly released emails from the US Department of Justice have unveiled disturbing insights into Jeffrey Epstein’s intentions regarding a potential investment in the iconic music label EMI Records. The correspondence suggests that Epstein’s associate, David Stern, hinted at the prospect that such an investment could provide access to women, a reference that has sparked significant outrage and concern.
Epstein’s Pursuit of EMI
In a series of emails dated around 2010, Stern, a London-based businessman with connections to British royalty, signalled to Epstein that the music industry was “related to P”, a term believed to be a crude reference to women. Epstein’s response indicated his interest in pursuing the investment opportunity, asking if he required assistance from Lord Mandelson, who at the time served as First Secretary of State and Business Secretary in the UK.
The unsettling terminology used in these emails, particularly the abbreviation “P”, which is thought to refer to a derogatory term for women, raises troubling questions about Epstein’s mindset and the motivations behind his business dealings. Stern, who had a history of close associations with figures like Prince Andrew, communicated various potential deals to Epstein, including a brief article regarding EMI’s financial difficulties in February 2010.
Connections and Implications
At the time of these discussions, Stern had been involved in various business ventures and had previously acted as an intermediary for Prince Andrew regarding financial matters. Notably, one email from Stern to Epstein remarked, “Troubled industry but related to P,” highlighting the troubling implications of their discussions.
Epstein’s correspondence also suggested a desire to involve Tommy Mottola, the former CEO of Sony Music, in any potential investment, indicating his intent to leverage established industry connections to further his aims. Mottola’s name appears frequently within the released documents, though it is important to note that inclusion in these emails does not imply wrongdoing on his part.
The Fallout and Future Prospects
Ultimately, Epstein’s plans to invest in EMI did not materialise, as Citigroup, the company’s main creditor, took control of the label during the financial turmoil that engulfed it. However, discussions surrounding EMI’s potential acquisition resurfaced in 2011 when Epstein’s associates expressed interest in forming a syndicate to bid for the company.
Stern’s ongoing interest in acquiring a record label was underscored in subsequent emails, where he stated, “EMI may now come up for sale. Could actually be of interest to Chinese if structured properly. Also, most certainly great asset to have for P!” Yet, despite these efforts, no deal was completed, and EMI was ultimately sold in parts in late 2012 to Universal Music and a consortium involving Sony.
Broader Context of Epstein’s Activities
The newly released emails also hint at Epstein’s broader interests in industries linked to fashion and modelling, raising further questions about how he might have exploited these sectors. French authorities have previously suggested that Epstein used connections in the fashion world to facilitate the trafficking of young women, which adds another layer of complexity to the narrative surrounding his business dealings.
Why it Matters
The revelations surrounding Epstein’s engagement with EMI Records not only highlight the disturbing lengths to which he went in his pursuit of power and control but also illuminate the broader implications for the music and fashion industries. These insights underline the necessity for vigilance and accountability within sectors that have historically been vulnerable to exploitation. As society grapples with the ramifications of Epstein’s actions, it is imperative that institutions foster environments free from predatory behaviour, ensuring that such abuses do not go unchecked.
