Jamie Dimon

James "Jamie" Dimon is an American banker who has been chief executive of JPMorgan Chase since December 31, 2005 and its chairman since December 31, 2006. He came to the bank as president and chief operating officer through its July 1, 2004 merger with Bank One Corporation, which he had run since March 2000, after senior posts at Citigroup, Salomon Smith Barney and Travelers Group under Sanford Weill. In a May 26, 2023 deposition in the Virgin Islands suit over the bank's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, Dimon testified that he did not recall knowing anything about Epstein until 2018 or 2019 and had never met him.¹²³

Citigroup, Bank One and the Merger

Dimon graduated from Tufts University and received an MBA from Harvard Business School. Before Bank One he held senior executive positions at Citigroup, its subsidiary Salomon Smith Barney, and its predecessor Travelers Group, and he testified that he had been president of Citigroup immediately before joining Bank One. He became Bank One's chairman and chief executive in March 2000.¹³

On January 14, 2004 JPMorgan Chase agreed to acquire Bank One. The New York Times reported that day that William B. Harrison Jr. would head the combined company, that Dimon would become president and chief operating officer, and that "he is to succeed Mr. Harrison as chief executive in 2006." The merger closed on July 1, 2004. Dimon became chief executive on December 31, 2005 and added the chairmanship a year later.²⁴ In his 2023 deposition he testified that he had discussed with Harrison "does a merger make sense, how would it work, what we call the social engineering around it," that the succession was part of a contract, and that he did not think it was known in March 2004 who would lead the combined company.³

Highbridge Capital

JPMorgan's files include a memorandum dated March 18, 2004, on JPMorgan Chase stationery, addressed to Dimon, Harrison and David Coulter from Jes Staley and others, titled "Overview of a potential partnership with and investment in Highbridge Capital Management." It stated: "Highbridge has approached JB, JPMC based on an existing relationship with the founders/owners, and with Jeffrey Epstein [a founding investor in Highbridge]." A June 16, 2004 email to Staley and David Brigstocke about pricing "discussed with Dimon et al" said Highbridge should "be encouraged to go ahead with the Dimon and Coulter lunch" and added: "We continue to be concerned about the role Jeffrey Epstein is or is not playing. One concern that we have is that Jeffrey has been educating Glenn & Henry about our structure and valuation thoughts."³⁴

Dimon testified that Staley, then running asset management, brought Highbridge Capital Management to the bank, that he himself "had ultimate approval of the transaction" and approved it, and that he did not know of any role Epstein played and did not know Epstein. Shown the March 2004 memorandum, he said he did not recall receiving it, suggested through counsel that it was a draft, and noted that he was still chairman and chief executive of Bank One at the time. Asked for any explanation of why Staley would write to him about Highbridge and Epstein in March 2004, he answered, "You got me."³ Senator Ron Wyden later asked JPMorgan to describe any payments to Epstein for services to the bank, "such as the reported $15 million paid by JPMC to Epstein related to the acquisition of Highbridge."⁵

Knowledge of the Epstein Relationship

Dimon testified, "I recall not hearing about Jeffrey Epstein until about 2018 or sometime in 2019 when the story blew wide open," and said that he "never met Jeff Epstein... never went to Jeff Epstein's house... never had a meal with Jeff Epstein," and that he was not told in 2008 of the internal review that left Epstein's relationship unchanged after his guilty plea. He said he did not discuss Epstein with the board from 2006 to 2011, did not know whether general counsel Stephen Cutler ever reported to the board about him, and did not speak with Staley about Epstein in 2011 or 2012. Asked whether Staley and Mary Erdoes had made the decision to retain Epstein, he said "they cannot make that decision alone" and that "the ultimate decider would have been the general counsel of the company."³

Other evidence in the case placed Dimon's name around the relationship. Staley admitted in discovery that in 2006 Dimon communicated with him about Epstein's arrest, and testified that on or about July 26, 2006 he spoke to Dimon about the indictment because Dimon was his boss and the case "was a very public event." An August 28, 2008 email from private banker Mary Casey counted Epstein's roughly 120 million dollars as a probable outflow "as I can't imagine it will stay (pending Dimon review)." In January 2008 Staley directed his assistant to arrange, through Dimon's office, a meeting for JPMorgan executives with Ehud Barak that Epstein had facilitated. In November 2013 Prince Andrew hosted Dimon for dinner and performances at Buckingham Palace.⁴ On July 17, 2008, while Epstein was in custody in Florida, Staley emailed him for advice on his own pay: "Jamie wants me to tell him how much I should make." Epstein advised him to ask for "a one million dollar increase to 25 million."⁶ Internal JPMorgan records quoted by the Senate Finance Committee state that decisions on Epstein were elevated to members of the Operating Committee who reported directly to Dimon.⁷

In a CNN interview on April 7, 2023, asked whether the bank should have acted more quickly after Epstein's 2008 plea, Dimon said, "Hindsight is a fabulous gift." Asked whether the Virgin Islands' allegations had merit, he said the bank had "some of the best lawyers in the world, compliance, out of the DOJ, out of SEC important divisions who review all of these things and make decisions at the time based on what they know, as best as they know." Cutler, the general counsel in those years, had previously run the enforcement division of the Securities and Exchange Commission.⁴⁸

During the deposition, JPMorgan general counsel Stacey Friedman interjected when Dimon asked counsel when the bank had bought Highbridge, and Linda Singer of Motley Rice, examining Dimon for the Virgin Islands, objected on the record to "counsel coaching the witness on answers," which she said "has happened a number of times." Dimon testified that when the New York Times prepared a 2019 story about a "brawl" between Erdoes and compliance over keeping Epstein, he "put it in the jurisdiction of my general counsel."³ JPMorgan settled the Doe class action for 290 million dollars and the Virgin Islands suit for 75 million dollars in 2023 without admitting wrongdoing.⁹

Project Jeep and "Top of the House"

On July 22, 2019, after The New York Times published "Jeffrey Epstein's Deep Ties to Top Wall Street Figures," JPMorgan's Global Head of Financial Crimes Compliance, Peter Neilson, wrote to two chief compliance officers that "Top of house requested that we expand our analysis to related parties and put together slides," and that "There is a highbridge angle and one dating back to Bear." The resulting internal review, Project Jeep, produced a 22-page summary of Epstein's emails with Staley and others by October 2019. In a June 7, 2023 motion to recall Dimon for further questioning, the Virgin Islands' lawyers argued that Project Jeep "may have been ordered by Dimon himself," citing a separate 2008 email stating that "JPM requires top of the house ok for clients who are convicted felons. (ie PCS Legal to Asset Mgt Legal to Cutler to Jaime Daimnon [sic])," and noted that the summary confirmed "more than four pages of Epstein referrals to JPMorgan," including Andrew Farkas, Boris Nikolic, Bill Gates and Peter Mandelson, while Dimon had testified, "We did not need introductions to anybody."¹⁰

JPMorgan's lawyers at WilmerHale replied on June 9, 2023 that Dimon had testified he did not recognize the name "Project Jeep" and had told the bank's general counsel after Epstein's arrest and death to "do everything" to establish the facts, that the author of the July 2019 email had confirmed "top of house" referred to general counsel Stacey Friedman and not to Dimon, and that a follow-up sent eight minutes after the 2008 email showed its "top of the house" meant general counsel Cutler. They added that the summary was absent from Dimon's custodial files and that he had been examined at his deposition on the alleged referrals, including Nikolic, Gates, Mandelson, Leon Black and Ehud Barak.¹¹ In August 2023 Judge Jed Rakoff declined to compel production of all Project Jeep materials.¹²

The Wyden Letters

On September 24, 2025 Wyden wrote to Dimon that newly reported internal emails, one describing a 2008 retention decision as "pending Dimon review" and another saying Cutler was reviewing Epstein documents "for Jamie," contradicted his sworn testimony. The letter posed 31 questions, including whether Dimon had been involved in Epstein decisions between 2007 and 2010, whether Staley had told him of Epstein's 2008 plea and been told to take it to Cutler, and why the bank waited until 2019 to file suspicious activity reports on Epstein.⁵ JPMorgan replied on October 10, 2025 that "over a million pages of documents" produced in discovery "none established Mr. Dimon's knowledge of Epstein prior to 2019," that Dimon "testified truthfully," that the reported emails were "cherry-picked snippets of emails where he was neither the sender nor recipient," and that the only person claiming otherwise was Staley, whom a UK tribunal had found "lacked credibility." It declined to discuss any suspicious-activity filings, citing Bank Secrecy Act confidentiality.¹³

Wyden's August 4, 2026 report stated that JPMorgan had filed seven suspicious activity reports on Epstein totaling about 4.3 million dollars between 2002 and 2016 and then, in August and September 2019, reports covering more than 5,000 wires worth about 1.28 billion dollars.⁷ On June 24, 2026 the board's compensation committee approved 20 million dollar retention awards for Erdoes and chief operating officer Jennifer Piepszak, and 30 million dollar awards for two newly named co-presidents, as part of what the filing called the board's "ongoing succession planning."¹⁴