UT (Tax & Chancery) UT-2023-000064 - [2025] UKUT 00203 (TCC)

At the hearing, a dispute arose for the first time during Mr Smith’s opening submissions as to what was the final version of the Bowdoin College Talking Points.

Mr Smith contended that the final version was a document sent by Ms Da Silva at 16:41 New York time to Mr Doherty and was also sent by Ms Wiggins to Ms Da Silva for printing at 20:49 London time on the evening of 12 September, with a view to Mr Staley having one of the printed copies when he went to the College the following morning. Mr Smith submitted that it was that copy which Mr Staley took with him and from which he addressed the Trustees of the College.

The Authority contends that the final version was a later document which was sent by Ms Da Silva to Mr Doherty at 6:01 New York time on 13 September and which appears to have been printed at 5:58 on the same day. This version is identical to the version sent to Mr Hoyt at 6:57 New York time and which was described by Ms Da Silva in her covering email as “latest and greatest”. The implication to be drawn from this is that Ms Da Silva printed a version at 5:58, immediately sent it to Mr Doherty and then later sent the same version to Mr Hoyt.

Ms Wiggins was clear that the version referred to at [293] above was definitively the final version and that Ms Da Silva had forwarded her that version and told her that it was the final version.

We agree with the Authority that it would make no sense for Ms Da Silva to have unilaterally decided to print and send to Mr Doherty and Mr Hoyt a new version which was not being used on 13 September.

Notwithstanding Mr Smith’s submissions, Mr Staley himself in his cross-examination accepted that the version described at [293] above was the final version.

The question of which is the final version is of some significance because the version described at [293] contains a sentence which was not in the version which Mr Smith contended was in fact the final version. The sentence in question read: “That said, I had limited contact with him [Mr Epstein] post his conviction, which I will describe shortly.” As our findings on the nature of the relationship between Mr Epstein and Mr Staley demonstrate, that statement was inaccurate. That this statement was in fact included in the version which Mr Staley took with him in hard copy form to the College is corroborated by Ms Wiggins’ notes of the meeting at the College which recorded a question from one of the trustees specifically about “limited visits/dinner frequency post 2008”.

We therefore conclude that Ms Wiggins was correct in her evidence that the version described at [293] above was the final version of the Bowdoin College Talking Points. Mr Staley had a hard copy of that document which he used as his speaking notes at the College and which contained the sentence referred to at [297] above.