The story begins with a shadowy figure using the alias “Patrick Kessler,” who contacted high-profile lawyers claiming he had access to an encrypted archive of Epstein’s surveillance footage — including videos allegedly implicating powerful individuals. Kessler persuaded respected attorneys like David Boies and John Pottinger to engage with him, proposing schemes in which those incriminated would pay large private settlements (some proceeds earmarked for victims) to keep the footage hidden. The lawyers—even while representing Epstein’s accusers—were accused of attempting to profit by holding this “evidence” hostage. Over months of negotiations, The New York Times was brought in as a possible media outlet to pressure the men on the so-called “hot list.” But none of the promised videos ever materialized, and Kessler later claimed his servers were destroyed in a fire, forcing him to flee.

Critics argue that Boies’s deep involvement in the Kessler scheme blurred ethical lines: a lawyer advocating for victims who also appeared poised to monetize secret evidence placed him in a conflicted position. The Times, meanwhile, has been faulted for its handling of the story—reporting Kessler’s claims without sufficiently flagging how unverified they were, or how they played into an opportunistic playbook of legal maneuvering over actual justice. Some see the Kessler-Boies-Times saga as illustrative of how even institutions considered pillars of integrity can become complicit in obfuscation, leveraging sensational claims for influence rather than holding the powerful accountable.


to contact me:

[email protected]