Who Is Lesley Groff?
Lesley Groff was one of Jeffrey Epstein’s most senior and longest-serving personal assistants, working for him for approximately two decades across his properties in New York, Palm Beach, and elsewhere. Unlike some of Epstein’s other female associates, Groff was an older employee — a seasoned executive assistant who managed the complex logistics of Epstein’s personal and professional life.
Her role placed her at the center of Epstein’s scheduling, household management, and travel coordination, making her one of the people with the most comprehensive knowledge of Epstein’s activities, associates, and daily routines.
Named as Potential Co-Conspirator
In the 2007 memo generated during the federal investigation of Epstein in the Southern District of Florida, Groff was identified alongside Sarah Kellen, Nadia Marcinkova, and Ghislaine Maxwell as a potential co-conspirator. Court documents in civil litigation filed by victims referenced Groff in connection with scheduling and communications involving victims.
The specific nature of the allegations against Groff centered on her administrative functions — that she knowingly arranged appointments and managed logistics in ways that facilitated Epstein’s abuse. The extent of her direct knowledge of criminal activity, versus her role as a logistical facilitator, was disputed.
Immunity Under the 2008 NPA
Like the other named co-conspirators, Groff received immunity from federal prosecution under the 2008 non-prosecution agreement between Epstein’s attorneys and the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Miami. This immunity was granted without consultation with or notification of victims, which Judge Kenneth Marra later ruled violated the Crime Victims’ Rights Act.
Groff was deposed in civil proceedings filed by Epstein victims and invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination in response to numerous questions about her knowledge of and role in Epstein’s activities. Her invocation of the Fifth was consistent across depositions, preventing victims’ attorneys from obtaining direct testimony about what she knew and when.
Public and Legal Scrutiny
Following Epstein’s 2019 arrest on federal sex trafficking charges, Groff’s immunity and continued freedom became a point of public controversy. Victim advocates and legal observers argued that the grant of immunity to individuals who allegedly possessed detailed knowledge of ongoing criminal conduct represented one of the most serious failures of the 2008 deal.
Unlike Sarah Kellen, who was younger and whose personal biography had some parallels with trafficking victim profiles, Groff was characterized as a professional employee who made deliberate choices about the work she performed. This distinction fueled argument that she had less of a claim to sympathetic treatment than some of the other immunity recipients.
After Epstein
Groff remained employed by Epstein’s estate in some capacity after his 2008 conviction. After his 2019 arrest and subsequent death in federal custody, she faced renewed scrutiny but was not charged. She has maintained a private life and has not made public statements about her years working for Epstein.
Legacy
Groff’s case raises persistent questions about how criminal enterprises maintain operational continuity through ostensibly professional employees. The extent to which executive assistants who manage logistics for criminal activity bear legal responsibility remains contested. Her immunity, like that of the other co-conspirators, stands as one of the most criticized elements of the Epstein prosecution and continues to be cited by advocates pushing for closing loopholes in victim rights laws.