New Mexico AG Sues Epstein’s Attorney and Accountant Over Alleged Concealment
New Mexico’s attorney general has moved the legal spotlight from Jeffrey Epstein to two of the people closest to him: longtime attorney Darren Indyke and accountant Richard Kahn.
The civil lawsuit filed by Attorney General Raúl Torrez alleges that Indyke and Kahn helped finance, facilitate, and conceal Epstein’s sex-trafficking operations, including abuse at Epstein’s Zorro Ranch in New Mexico. Those are allegations, not findings of liability. But the filing puts Epstein’s alleged support system—not just Epstein himself—at the center of the case.
Epstein’s longtime advisers face direct claims
Torrez sued Indyke and Kahn in their individual capacities and as co-executors of Epstein’s estate.
The complaint also names Epstein’s estate and the 1953 Trust, the entity reported to hold estate assets. According to reporting on the filing, the state alleges the two advisers helped hide information about Epstein’s trafficking operation and assisted a broader criminal project.
That focus matters. The case is not framed solely around what Epstein did. It alleges that trusted legal and financial advisers played a role in enabling and concealing the operation around him.
The immediate fight is over estate money
The lawsuit carries a near-term financial objective: Torrez is seeking to stop Indyke and Kahn from receiving payments from Epstein’s estate while the litigation proceeds.
That request makes the case more than a retrospective accountability effort. It creates an immediate dispute over compensation, estate control, and whether people accused of supporting Epstein’s conduct should continue to be paid from assets tied to him.
A court decision on that request could be the first concrete measure of how much leverage the state gains before the underlying allegations are resolved.
The case targets the alleged operating machinery
CBS News and The Guardian describe Indyke and Kahn as two of Epstein’s closest, longtime confidants. The Guardian reported that the lawsuit alleges associates received generous salaries in exchange for furthering Epstein’s criminal project.
The allegation points to a specific theory of responsibility: serious misconduct can depend on an operating layer of financial management, administrative control, and information handling.
That theory now needs evidence. The key issue is whether court filings can connect particular actions by Indyke and Kahn to the alleged financing or concealment of trafficking activity, rather than establish only their proximity to Epstein.
The response-and-record test
Three developments will determine the strength and consequences of the lawsuit:
- Evidence introduced in court that details how the alleged support or concealment occurred. - Responses from Indyke, Kahn, or their representatives contesting the claims. - A ruling on whether estate payments should be restricted during the case.
For now, the durable development is clear: New Mexico has brought Epstein’s two longtime advisers into direct civil litigation and is attempting to cut off estate payments while it pursues the case.