Documents released by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) suggest that Jeffrey Epstein was involved in funding a postgraduate place on a course accredited by the University of Glasgow in 2011, three years after he was convicted for procuring a child for prostitution and of soliciting a prostitute.
The records indicate that Epstein’s office funded the £500 deposit required to secure a place on the MLitt in Art, Style and Design, delivered in London by Christie’s Education and accredited by the University of Glasgow. They further show that the University issued a Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies (CAS) naming the Gilmorehill campus as the principal study location.
The partnership between the University of Glasgow and Christie’s Education ended in 2017.
The material forms part of a multimillion page document release published in January 2026 under the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Earlier reporting and a letter from the Department of Justice to federal judges in New York have noted significant inconsistencies in the redaction of personal information within the release.
In recent months, survivors of Epstein’s abuse and US lawmakers have described a broader pattern in which Epstein allegedly used offers of university admission and tuition support to establish influence and financial dependency.
In the documents reviewed by Hillhead Review, identifying information relating to one female applicant appears unredacted across multiple files. While this information is publicly accessible within the DOJ release, Hillhead Review has chosen to refer to her only as “the applicant.”
The applicant is listed as a Russian national in her mid twenties at the time of application. She had previously completed undergraduate study at Paris Dauphine University.
In recent months, survivors of Epstein’s abuse and US lawmakers have described a broader pattern in which Epstein allegedly used offers of university admission and tuition support to establish influence and financial dependency. Members of the US House judiciary committee have stated that Epstein repeatedly lured young women into his network by promising to help them gain admission into colleges and universities, in some cases arranging scholarships or paying tuition through associates.
Universities including New York University and Columbia University have confirmed that they are reviewing inquiries from congressional investigators regarding historical links to Epstein related funding.
The documents reviewed by Hillhead Review relate to a programme formally accredited by the University of Glasgow, which additionally was tasked with assigning the CAS for the applicant.
Early correspondence and network access
Emails in the release show communication between Epstein and the applicant beginning in May 2011 and continuing until at least March 2013. The correspondence is personal in tone and includes references to the two as ‘lovers’ and the applicant referring to Epstein as a “playboy”. The exchanges also contain explicit sexual language.
On 1 June 2011, Epstein invited the applicant to attend a private technology gathering scheduled for July 2011 at Spring Mountain Vineyard in Napa, California. The invitation email listed numerous prominent tech sector figures as invitees, including Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates. The applicant declined the invitation.
In subsequent exchanges discussing Istanbul and the Topkapi Palace, which the applicant had recently visited, she asked Epstein “what are the levels at Jeffrey’s harem?”. The reference appears within a broader discussion of the Ottoman harem at Topkapi, which the applicant was visiting.
In subsequent exchanges discussing Istanbul and the Topkapi Palace, which the applicant had recently visited, she asked Epstein “what are the levels at Jeffrey’s harem?”
In early September 2011, Epstein’s executive assistant, Lesley Groff, arranged and billed Aeroflot flights for the applicant between Paris and Moscow. The booking confirmation shows the cost of $900 dollars was charged to Epstein.
Interview with Christie’s Education in London
On 10 September 2011, the applicant forwarded to Epstein a detailed description of the interview format used by Christie’s Education passed on from the admissions officer. Further emails indicate that an interview with the course director took place in London on 12 September.
On 13 September, correspondence between the applicant and admissions staff confirmed that she had been offered a place on the Masters course. She forwarded confirmation of the offer to Epstein the same day.
Deposit payment and CAS from UofG
On 14 September 2011, the applicant emailed Groff stating that she had been offered a place and needed to pay a £500 deposit as soon as possible to secure it. She wrote that Epstein had asked her to contact Groff to organise a bank transfer.
Subsequent emails show Groff seeking confirmation from Epstein before proceeding, with reference to Christie’s Education Ltd account details. Hillhead Review has reviewed correspondence in which Epstein indicates agreement to pay the deposit.
The course dates within the CAS assigned by the University of Glasgow are recorded as 29 September 2011 to 28 September 2012, with annual fees of £20,500 and £500 paid to date. The recorded payment corresponds with the deposit discussed in the email exchange.
Visa sponsorship discussions
The documents show that the applicant encountered visa related difficulties, including meeting English language requirements. She later shared her TOEFL results, an academic English proficiency test, in correspondence with Epstein, which were then accepted by Christie´s.
On 28 September 2011, the Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies was recorded as assigned. Around this time, the applicant informed Epstein that she required a letter from a company confirming that her tuition fees and living expenses would be covered.
In an email thread beginning 30 September 2011, she requested a Letter of Confirmation of Scholarship from Epstein’s office. She specified that the letter could not come from an individual but instead had to be issued by an organisation and addressed to the UK Border Agency in Paris, confirming sponsorship of the applicant’s studies and living costs.
In follow up emails, Epstein questioned why the sponsorship could not come from a private person and requested the precise wording required for the visa application. The final email from Groff to Epstein concluded, “Just want to make sure I am not to be doing anything with this…”
The release does not include a final copy of the sponsorship letter. However, in a separate email dated 29 September to the course director, the applicant stated that she had “received the documents for the visa”. The material reviewed does not clarify what form those documents ultimately took.
´Delay´ of studies and last contact with Epstein
On 6 October 2011, the applicant informed Christie’s Education that she had “run out of time and would need to delay the programme”, expressing hope to begin during the next available cycle. In separate correspondence, Epstein responded approvingly.
The documents reviewed by Hillhead Review do not confirm whether the applicant ultimately commenced the programme at a later date.
Correspondence from 2012 and 2013 indicates continued contact between the applicant and Epstein, including references to meetings in Paris at Epstein’s residence.
The final contact Hillhead Review has been able to ascertain refers to a dinner involving Epstein, the applicant and Caroline Lang, a former Warner Bros executive and daughter of former French culture minister Jack Lang. Lang recently resigned from her position on the Syndicat des Producteurs Indépendants following the latest tranche of document releases.
A spokesperson from the University of Glasgow told the Hillhead Review: “We don’t comment on individual students”.
The University of Glasgow did not respond to questions regarding due diligence and safeguarding procedures in 2011.
A spokesperson from Christie’s Education told Hillhead Review that they did not comment on individuals.
Christie’s Education did not respond to questions regarding due diligence procedures regarding external sponsors, or whether an internal review will be conducted following the recent DOJ release.
Efforts were also made to contact the applicant. No responses had been received at the time of publication.
Leave a Reply