Downward angle icon Downward angle icon. Elon Musk’s social media company X (formerly Twitter) is fighting a subpoena seeking records from Jeffrey Epstein’s own accuser. Marc Piasecki/Getty Images X (formerly Twitter) is fighting a subpoena in a lawsuit brought by two of Jeffrey Epstein’s accusers. One of them, Lina Or-Amen, wants records from her account available for discovery. X has refused, and the case is in disarray, lawyers told BI.
Elon Musk’s X Corp has disrupted the case between two Jeffrey Epstein defendants by refusing to serve a subpoena for months.
One of Epstein’s accusers in the case, Lina Or-Amen, has asked X Corp, the entity that took over Twitter after Elon Musk bought it, to provide her records of her account on the social media platform, which she no longer has access to.
But Company X refused. Its lawyers fired back with a lengthy, legalese-filled response that was difficult to understand and said they couldn’t provide any records.
“Company X will not produce any data in response to the subpoena,” said a letter sent by Company X’s lawyers earlier this year.
Mr. X’s challenge comes amid a messy lawsuit between Virginia Giuffre and Lina Or-Amen, two women who say they were sexually abused by Jeffrey Epstein.
Epstein created what prosecutors would later call a “pyramid scheme of abuse” to sexually abuse the girls. Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell arranged for the girls to bring their friends to Epstein to be raped, prosecutors said at Maxwell’s trial. Maxwell was later convicted of sexually prostituting the girls to Epstein and sexually abusing them herself. (Epstein himself died in prison in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges.)
Maxwell recruited Giuffre at Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club in Florida in 2000 and brought her to Epstein. Giuffre has accused O. Amen of sexually and physically abusing her in the early 2000s and of participating in the abuse. In 2021, O. Amen filed a lawsuit alleging that Giuffre defamed her with those allegations. Giuffre countersued, claiming O. Amen was Epstein’s “girlfriend.” In court documents and public statements, each side has accused the other of acting as one of Epstein’s recruiters rather than a true victim.
X is refusing the subpoena.
In court documents over the past nine months, lawyers for both Giuffre and Or Amen have repeatedly informed the judge overseeing the case in Manhattan federal court that they are proceeding with discovery “amicably,” exchanging documents and issuing subpoenas to third parties to obtain the evidence they need.
The only exception was social media company X.
Giuffre wanted to obtain records from Oh Amen’s account on X (formerly Twitter), where the two had been engaged in a public spat.
Oh Ameng’s lawyers agreed to provide the data, but Oh Ameng said one of his accounts had been suspended and he was unable to download the data from the second account.
Oh Amen’s lawyers served a subpoena on Company X, believing that the company would be less likely to object on privacy grounds than if the other side had served a subpoena — after all, Oh Amen was just asking for the contents of his own account.
“The account belongs to the party that sent the subpoena,” Alexander Dudelson, an attorney representing Oh Amen in the case, told Business Insider. “We’re not looking for third-party information.”
But X refused. In a Jan. 22 letter, the company’s lawyers wrote that, among other arguments, Oh Amen had access to X’s records and the company could question her. The gist of the subpoena was that Oh Amen could not access her data from her account.
Dudelson and Giuffre’s lawyers hired a digital forensic expert to help Oh Amen access his account information at X. When that was unsuccessful, the forensic expert helped draft a second, more specific subpoena that the company would be more likely to fulfill. He also prepared an affidavit explaining Oh Amen’s inability to access his account and download records.
X did not respond to the second subpoena and instead countered with a number of new objections. In a letter dated June 25, X’s lawyers wrote that the subpoena should be addressed to Oh Ameng, who had originally issued the subpoena.
“This is the most ridiculous objection,” Dudelson told Business Insider, “because we have provided them with forensic affidavits stating that we do not have access to these accounts.”
Virginia Roberts Giuffre and Lina Au. AP/Lina Au
Kathleen R. Thomas, an attorney representing Giuffre in the case, told Business Insider she was perplexed by how X has resisted the subpoena.
“It doesn’t make sense,” Thomas said. “Why can’t I get my information in this situation? The plaintiffs are doing the right thing.”
Dudelson said the X records are the last of the outstanding pieces of evidence needed before the parties can move forward with the case.
“If they comply, we will eventually be able to schedule a court date and resolve this issue,” he said. “This is actually what is preventing us from moving forward at this point.”
In a court filing on Wednesday, Thomas asked the judge to set up a conference to discuss filing a motion to compel X to comply with the subpoena, which could take more time.
Thomas told Business Insider that looking at Oh Amen’s X Records is important to understand the defamation allegations.
“If we only acknowledge one side of the dispute, it’s unfair to defendants,” she said. “How are defendants going to represent themselves in court if we don’t have access to all the communications?”
When Business Insider reached out to Company X for comment, they received an automated email response saying the company was “busy.”
“I don’t know why they’ve been so obstructive with the subpoena,” Thomas said. “It’s a mystery to me.”