Testimony of Former Executive Assistant Lesley Groff Regarding the Jeffrey Epstein Enterprise
前執行助理 Lesley Groff 關於 Jeffrey Epstein 企業的證詞
Introduction
Lesley Groff, the long-term executive assistant to Jeffrey Epstein, provided closed-door testimony to the US House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on June 9, 2026.
Jeffrey Epstein 的長期執行助理 Lesley Groff 於 2026 年 6 月 9 日向美國眾議院監督及政府改革委員會提供了閉門證詞。
Main Body
The administrative centrality of Lesley Groff is evidenced by the Department of Justice's released records, wherein her name appears over 160,000 times. Employed from 2001 until 2019, Groff managed the financier's daily operations, including the coordination of travel, high-level appointments with global elites, and the scheduling of massages. While FBI documentation and survivor testimonies suggest these massages served as a facade for sexual abuse, Groff has consistently maintained a position of ignorance. Her legal representative, Michael Bachner, asserts that Epstein deliberately isolated Groff from his illicit activities to maintain a facade of legitimacy.
Lesley Groff 在行政上的核心地位，可從司法部公布的紀錄中得到證明，她的名字出現了超過 16 萬次。Groff 從 2001 年受僱至 2019 年，負責管理這位金融家的日常運作，包括協調行程、與全球權貴安排高層會面以及安排按摩時間。雖然 FBI 的文件與倖存者證詞指出，這些按摩是性侵的掩護，但 Groff 一直堅持對此不知情。她的法律代表 Michael Bachner 主張，Epstein 刻意將 Groff 隔離開於其非法活動之外，以維持合法性的假象。
During the committee proceedings, Groff provided information regarding the individuals operating within Epstein's orbit. Notably, she testified to having facilitated multiple, though infrequent, telephonic communications between Epstein and Donald Trump prior to the 2016 US presidential election. Despite her inclusion in internal FBI documents as a potential co-conspirator and her mention in various civil litigations—all of which were subsequently dismissed—Groff has never been charged with a criminal offense. The committee's inquiry is part of a broader effort to establish accountability, which includes the scheduled testimony of other associates and the concurrent efforts of the New Mexico Survivor's Truth Commission to document activities at the Zorro Ranch estate.
在委員會的程序期間，Groff 提供了關於 Epstein 社交圈內人士的資訊。值得注意的是，她證詞稱在 2016 年美國總統大選之前，她曾協助 Epstein 與 Donald Trump 進行過多次但並不頻繁的電話溝通。儘管她在 FBI 內部文件中被列為潛在共犯，且在多起民事訴訟中被提及——而所有這些訴訟隨後均被撤銷——Groff 從未被指控犯有刑事罪。委員會的調查是更廣泛追究責任努力的一部分，其中包括安排其他相關人士作證，以及新墨西哥州倖存者真相委員會同步記錄 Zorro Ranch 莊園活動的努力。
Conclusion
The current situation remains a point of contention between committee members who view Groff's testimony as compelling and those who find her claims of ignorance inconsistent with her professional proximity to Epstein.
目前的情況仍是爭議焦點，部分委員會成員認為 Groff 的證詞具有說服力，而另一部分成員則認為她聲稱不知情，與她在專業上與 Epstein 的親近程度不符。
Vocabulary Learning
The Architecture of 'Strategic Ambiguity' and Nominalization
To move from B2 to C2, a student must transition from describing actions to constructing systemic states. The provided text is a masterclass in Nominalization—the process of turning verbs (actions) into nouns (concepts) to create a detached, clinical, and authoritative tone.
◈ The 'State of Being' vs. The 'Act of Doing'
Contrast these two conceptualizations of the same fact:
- B2 approach: "Lesley Groff was central to the administration because the DOJ records show her name 160,000 times."
- C2 approach: "The administrative centrality of Lesley Groff is evidenced by..."
In the C2 version, the action (being central) is transformed into a noun phrase (administrative centrality). This shifts the focus from the person to the phenomenon. It allows the writer to treat a complex human relationship as a measurable data point.
◈ Lexical Precision: The 'Nuance of Distance'
Notice the use of "professional proximity" in the conclusion. A B2 student might say "she worked closely with him." However, "proximity" is a spatial and conceptual term that avoids implying a personal bond. It maintains a scholarly distance while hinting at a logical contradiction: how can one be proximate (physically and professionally close) yet ignorant (mentally distant) of the crimes?
◈ Syntactic Density and the 'Facade' Motif
Observe the repetition of the word "facade":
- *"...massages served as a facade for sexual abuse..."
- *"...to maintain a facade of legitimacy."
At a C2 level, we analyze the semantic resonance here. The author isn't just repeating a word; they are building a thematic layer. The first 'facade' is a functional mask (hiding a crime), while the second is a structural mask (hiding the nature of the enterprise).
C2 Mastery Key: Stop using adverbs to add intensity (e.g., very central). Instead, use precise nominalizations (e.g., centrality) and conceptual nouns (e.g., contention, accountability) to encapsulate entire arguments within a single noun phrase.