File 9 - Epstein's Flight Logs: Who Flew and How Often

3 million pages of evidence. Thousands of unsealed flight logs, Millions of data points, names, themes and timelines connected. You are listening to the Epstein Files, the world's first AI native investigation into the case that traditional journalism simply could not handle. Welcome back to the Epstein Files. Last time we walked through Les Wexner and tested what the records could actually prove without speculation.

Today, we are examining the flight logs and mapping what the documents show about actors, timeline decisions and institutional response. As always, every document and source we reference is available at Epstein Files fm. So the first record is pilot David Rogers handwritten flight logbook, documenting over 700 flights on Epstein's aircraft between 1995 and 20. And that time frame is critical. We're Talking about an 18 year span of data, a huge data set. It is.

So for our analysis, we need to be precise about the source material. We're primarily drawing from two compilations. First, the Book of Black, 1991, 2025 edition. And second, the Epstein flight logs unredacted, specifically volume 17. And it's important to understand these aren't all the same thing. Right? They're different types of records. We're comparing three layers of data. You have the pilot's handwritten log. That's Roger's notebook.

Then you have the official FAA manifests that were filed. And finally you have these later reconstructions, like in the Book of Black, which tried to piece it all together. So there's a forensic objective here. We're not just reading a list of names and dates. We're trying to find the space between those layers. The accountability gap, the accountability gap, the discrepancy between who was scheduled to fly on that aircraft, N908JE and who, according to the pilot's hand, actually boarded.

Precisely. A schedule is a plan. A pilot's log, however imperfect, is a contemporaneous receipt. The truth of the operation lives in the difference between the two. So let's establish that baseline. The anchor document is David Rogers handwritten flight logbook. And we need to be clear about what this thing physically is. It's not a polished report, not at all. It's a manual. It's a working document kept in the cockpit.

Its primary purpose, from an aviation standpoint, is tracking hours on the airframe and the engines for maintenance, schedules for safety and maintenance. Correct. The passenger list is, in a way secondary to the technical record keeping required by aviation law. But because it's handwritten in the moment, it's a much harder document to retroactively alter than, say, a digital filing. And it covers that period, from 1995 to 2013, over 700 flights documented a massive volume of data.

And you can see the wear and tear on the pages and the scans. This was a document that lived in the cockpit of that Boeing 727. So mechanically, David Rogers is there in the cockpit of N908JE or maybe one of the Gulf streams, depending on the date. And he's just jotting down the essentials. Date, departure, arrival, flight time, and the passengers. But that's where the variability comes in. It's not consistent, not at all. And this is why cross referencing is so crucial.

Sometimes he'll use full names, sometimes it's just initials. On other entries, he just writes something like one male, three females. Which is forensically useless on its own. Utterly. And that's where a source like the Book of Black Ocean Reconstruction becomes so important. That project took these sometimes vague or messy handwritten entries and started overlaying them with other data points. What kind of data? Open source intelligence.

News reports, paparazzi photos of people getting on or off a plane, other legal depositions, credit card receipts that place someone in a specific city on a specific day. They use that external data to try and verify who JD or three females might actually be. It triangulates the identity. It attempts to. It enriches the raw logbook data with context to resolve those ambiguities.

Okay, so when we perform that cross reference using the unredacted Volume 17 and the book of Black, a verified passenger list begins to emerge. And this is where we see the names that have drawn so much public attention. The high value passengers. Correct. Let's start with the Bill Clinton entries. This has been a source of intense public debate for years. It has. And the documents show a clear conflict.

If you look at the file specifically labeled Epstein flight logs, Clinton lied, you see the core of the discrepancy. The public statements versus the raw data. Exactly. The public narrative has always been one of minimal, limited interaction. A handful of flights for humanitarian work. But the log entries themselves, the raw data from Roger's hand show something different. They show a repeated pattern of travel. We're not talking about one or two flights.

We're looking at specific documented entries where the former President is listed as a passenger on N908JE. The forensic issue here is the conflict between that limited interaction story and the documentary evidence of sustained logistical support. The file name itself. Clinton lied is obviously an accusation. Let's set that aside and just look at the data points. What do the logs actually show about his trouble? We see multiple international trips.

We see flights into Africa, which aligns with the Clinton foundation story, but we also see flights to Asia. We see multiple domestic flights within the United States, flights that don't seem to fit the humanitarian mission profile. It's difficult to connect them to that narrative. You see legs of journeys that appear to be social or personal. They are disconnected from any publicly announced humanitarian itinerary. The logs document the movement, but not the purpose.

The discrepancy is the nature of the travel itself. And beyond the routes, there's a technical anomaly in the logs regarding his security. This is perhaps the most significant forensic red flag in the Clinton entries. It's a major deviation from protocol. What is it? When a former president travels private or official, there is a Secret Service detail. The manifest, or in this case, the pilot's log should reflect that. You would expect to see entries for USS or Secret Service agents.

You would expect a security footprint. And in the Rogers logs, for many of these flights, that detail is either completely absent from the written record or it's significantly smaller than what standard protocol would require. So what does that mean? What are the possibilities? There are a few. One, the agents were flying commercially and meeting him at the destination, which seems logistically inefficient and unlikely for a protective detail.

Two, they were on the plane but Rogers was instructed not to log them, which would be a highly unusual breach of protocol. Or three, they simply weren't there. The security posture was intentionally reduced and we can't confirm which it is from the logs. We don't have the documentation to confirm which scenario is true. But the absence of that USSS designation in a handwritten logbook creates a significant data gap.

It documents a level of informality and privacy that is fundamentally inconsistent with the movement of a former head of state. The absence of evidence becomes evidence of an anomaly. Precisely. Let's move to Prince Andrew. The documentation here seems to be a level deeper than just the logs.

It is here we're referencing not just the flight logs, but also corroborating documents, specifically the PrinceAndrew email jpg, which is contained within the Ghislaine indictment and deposition file bundle. So you can overlay the two data sets? You can. And when you overlay the dates from those emails with the flight entries in the unredacted volume, you see the entire logistical chain. The emails show the planning and coordination. The log show the execution of the travel.

It validates the timeline beyond any doubt. And this is a critical distinction with Clinton. We have the logbook entries showing his presence with Andrew, we have the logs showing his presence, plus the communication trail planning that presence. Correct. The emails provide the intent. They discuss the logistics. The logs provide the proof of execution. He was on the aircraft on these specific dates, traveling to these specific locations. And the Ghislaine indictment files add another layer.

They do, because those files allege that during these exact time frames, when the prince was on the plane and at these locations, victims were also present. The flight logs therefore become a crucial piece of corroborating evidence. They physically place the prince in the same time and space as the accusers at the moments the alleged acts occurred. Moving down the list of frequent travelers, we see the name Jean Luc Brunel.

Brunel is a critical operational figure in this network, not just a passenger. His name appears consistently in both the unredacted logs and is further detailed in the Book of Black Reconstruction. He wasn't a guest in the same way a celebrity or politician was. No. His movements appear logistical. They often correlate directly with the transport of other passengers, specifically groups of young women. His presence on a flight seems to signal a specific operational purpose.

His professional background was in modeling. He ran a modeling agency. He was the head of MC2 Model Management. And the flight logs document a pattern. You see him frequently on the transatlantic route, primarily Paris to New York. Paris, Le Bourget to Teterboro. Yes, and he would often fly into Teterboro with a group listed generically in the log as females or with specific names that have since been matched to the profiles of aspiring models.

The logbook, in a way, is documenting the supply chain of personnel from Europe to the United States. And Ellen Dershowitz is also present in these logs. His presence is confirmed. You could reference the Dershowitz declaration from his own legal filings and then cross reference that with his appearances in the flight manifests contained in the file. Epstein's full flight logs unredacted. So the logs confirm he was on the aircraft.

The physical movement of Alan Dershowitz via n908 Jeff is a documented fact in these records. The context and purpose of those flights are the subject of the various legal filings, but his presence on board is not in dispute according to these documents. It seems like a good point to clarify the methodology of verification here. How certain can we be when we're dealing with, you know, messy handwriting or just initials? That goes back to the forensic difference between a manifest and a log.

A manifest is an official, typed, filed declaration of who is supposed to be on board. The plan. The plan. A log is the Pilot's personal handwritten note. It's the reality. To bridge that gap, the Book of Black reconstruction uses that OSINT methodology we mentioned. Open source intelligence. It's about cross referencing. So an example, the pilot rates B. Clinton, or maybe just BC Right. On its own, that's ambiguous.

But if the OSINT researchers can find a news article with a photograph of Bill Clinton getting off a private jet at that specific airport on that exact day, then the entry is verified. They're matching the pilot's Note against recovered PDFs, timeline overlays, public records. It's a process of triangulation. The Book of Black isn't just a copy of the logs. It's a verified index. It's an enriched data set that takes the raw data and applies external context to solve the puzzles within it.

Let's pivot from the who to the where. The logistics of movement. We need to map the shuttle system that these logs reveal. Looking at the JE flight logs Excel data, a pattern becomes apparent very quickly. When you plot the coordinates from those 700 plus flights, a very clear geometric shape emerges. It's a rigid repeating loop. We call it the Golden Triangle of Epstein's Logistics. And that triangle connects which three points? It starts in New York, specifically Teterboro Airport DB.

From there it goes down to Palm Beach International PBI. And the third point is Cyril E. King Airport in St. Thomas Stt in the US Virgin Islands, New York to Palm beach to St. Thomas over and over again. That triangle is the main artery of the entire operation. The aircraft moves people and resources from the financial hub in New York to the social hub and residence in Palm beach, and then to the private offshore location in the Virgin Islands. It's not random travel. It's a shuttle.

It is absolutely a shuttle service. The frequency and consistency of this specific triangular route is the operational heartbeat. It's routine. Why Teterboro? For listeners who don't know, why not a major airport like JFK or LaGuardia? Discretion and efficiency. Teterboro is the primary hub for private and corporate aviation in the New York metropolitan area.

It allows for rapid access to Manhattan without the congestion, the security lines and the public visibility of a major commercial airport. For an operation that prized privacy and ran on a high frequency schedule, Teterboro was the only logical choice. But the operation wasn't confined to that triangle. There are significant international vectors that break out of that pattern. We need to examine the Paris route. The Paris connection is critical.

When you correlate the dates of the Paris flights with the passenger manifests you almost always see the name Jean Luc Brunel. The modeling agent. Yes. And this is where we see the logistical necessity. If you reference the source file titled Haitian Child Trafficking Scheme, and we have to be very precise here we are citing the allegations contained within that file, not stating the misproven fact. That document alleges that Paris served as a primary scouting and recruitment location.

And the flight logs show the mechanism for that alleged recruitment. Blogs show the transport. The aircraft N9OJE is documented moving between Titterborough and Paris Le Bourget Airport. And a pattern emerges. The plane often returns to the US with a different and often larger passenger count than when it left. It would leave with a small crew, maybe Epstein, and it would return with Epstein, Brunel and additional passengers, often young women.

The Book of Black Cross references these movements with the scouting allegations. The aircraft was the physical mechanism of transfer. It was the bridge from Europe to the us. Are there other anomalies, flights that don't fit the Golden Triangle or the Paris vector? There are. When you analyze the full dataset, you find flights to what the Book of Black categorizes in its Global Red Flag archive. These are irregular jurisdictions. What makes a jurisdiction Red flag?

These are airports and locations that don't fit the typical profile of a business trip or a luxury vacation. They are often in countries known for specific banking secrecy laws, financial opacity, or a lack of extradition treaties with the United States. Can you give an example? Without naming a specific country, we see flights into known tax havens or offshore financial centers. Now, the flight log itself doesn't show a bank transfer. It can't. It just shows the plane was there.

It shows the plane was there. But when you correlate a flight to a specific Caribbean banking center with activity in the Epstein assets file shortly after, it suggests the aircraft was being used to facilitate the financial maintenance of the network, not just the social and operational aspects. It moved the principles to where the money was. So let's talk about frequency. We tend to focus on the famous names, the celebrities, the politicians. But who was actually on this plane the most?

Who was practically living on N908 je? If you strip out the high profile names and run the numbers on the operational staff, the data tells a very different story. Okay. Based on the Ghislaine indictment and deposition documents cross referenced with the logs themselves, Ghislaine Maxwell is statistically the most frequent passenger on that aircraft, aside from Jeffrey Epstein himself. She's on the plane more than anyone else. She's the constant. She is the operational manager.

Yeah. And this forces you to reframe what the aircraft was. It wasn't just a luxury transport vehicle. It was a mobile office. It was a mobile command center. And the frequency of her travel and that of key assistants like Sarah Kellen, that establishes the management structure. It maps the command structure perfectly. They are flying the golden triangle constantly back and forth, Teterboro to Palm Beach, Palm beach to St Thomas, St Thomas back to Teterboro.

They were on the ground at each location for short periods. Managing staff, overseeing the properties, coordinating guests. The aircraft is what made a multi jurisdictional operation controllable by a very small corps team. It wasn't a leisure craft for them. It was their office at 40,000ft. Precisely. What about the pilots? David Rogers, Larry Vasoski, Their names are on every one of these logs. They are the silent observers.

We can reference the Epstein case documents, case 18, 28, 68, and of course, pilot David Rogers handwritten flight logbook. These two men flew this network around the world for decades. And the consistency of the crew is itself a data point. It tells you about the stability of the operation. This was not a chaotic fly by night setup with high staff turnover. These pilots were retained, they were well paid. They were kept on the roster for years and years.

Their continued presence speaks to a stable, long term and professional organization. The logbooks are in essence their testimony to that stability. In all those hundreds of entries, did Rogers or Vasalski ever note anything unusual? Is there a remarks column in the logbook? There is, but the remarks are almost exclusively technical. Things like fuel stop, maintenance check, ferry flight, nothing about the passengers, nothing.

But the shoebonality of their entries, when contrasted with the extraordinary nature of the passengers they were carrying, is the anomaly. They normalized this. They treated a flight carrying a former President of the United States with the exact same clerical detachment as a flight carrying a group of unnamed young women from Paris. It was just another leg, another entry in the logbook. Business as usual. This brings us to the disputed entries.

This is where the public record becomes very, very muddy. And we need to be extremely precise with what the documents show. Let's begin with the files regarding Donald Trump. For this, we have to look at several documents in concert. First, the transcript of Donald Trump's deposition. Second, the file Epstein's full flight logs, unredacted. The description provided with that file in the archive is explicit. It says in parentheses, no, Trump is not on the list.

And that refers specifically to the island list. Correct? The flights to St Thomas, that is the specific context of that note, however, we have to be clear. His name does appear in other records. He's in the black book. He is in the contact book. Yes, and his name appears in lawsuits, most notably Jane Doe versus Trump and Epstein 2016. But our focus here is on the flight logs for N9OJE. The logs themselves show a specific and limited pattern of interaction concentrated in the 1990s.

What kind of flights? They're almost exclusively mainland US flights. The pattern is typically Palm beach to New York or New York to Palm Beach, PVI to tb. So the key distinction is geography. The logs document his presence on the aircraft on the US Mainland shuttle, but not on the leg to the Virgin Islands. That is what the documentary evidence in the flight logs shows. We do not have a logbook entry from David Rogers placing him on the flight from Palm beach to St. Thomas.

We must separate the flight record from the contact record. Okay, let's return to the Clinton discrepancy. We touched on the security detail, but let's re examine that specific file. Epstein, flight logs. Clinton lied. Why does a file with that title even exist in the archive? What is the core forensic issue it's trying to highlight? It exists to isolate and highlight the forensic gap. We discussed the conflict between Secret Service details and private manifests. It's the protocol issue.

It's a fundamental protocol issue. The logs show Clinton as a passenger, but they consistently fail to show the corresponding security footprint. That would be standard operating procedure for a Secret Service detail protecting a former president. So the question remains, was he flying with a reduced detail, or was the detail present but unlogged for some reason? And the logs can't answer that. The gap is the story. The logs document a deviation from expected norms.

It suggests a level of privacy and informality that directly contradicts the rigorous protocols typically surrounding a former head of state's travel. The file exists to flag that specific unresolved anomaly in the official record. Now, there's the intelligence question. The Book of Black has a very provocative subtitle. Intelligence Nodes and Suppressed Intelligence Threads. This is where we need to be extremely careful. We must adhere to operational rule six.

Here we can only report what is explicitly in the documents. The Book of Black, as an OSINT compilation, alleges connections to figures like Ehud Barak and Israeli intelligence contractors. It lists those names from the flight logs. Burak's name is in the logs. His name is in the logs. That is a documented fact. However, the flight laws themselves do not contain a column for agency affiliation. You can't see Mossad written next to a passenger's name.

You cannot, and that is the crucial distinction. We must classify the intelligence framing as unproven in the flight logs. The Book of Black makes that connection, that inference based on the external careers and known associations of the passengers. Barak was a former Prime Minister of Israel, a significant military figure. So the OSINT compilation draws an inference. It does, but the log itself is neutral. It simply proves presence. The log proves Ehud Barak flew on the plane.

It does not and cannot prove why he flew on the plane or in what capacity. Any conclusion about that is an inference derived from other sources in the archive, but it is not a fact stated in the primary source document we are examining today, which is the logbook. So the documents show the movement of the plane, but the fundamental question is, do they always prove the movement of the passenger? And that is the absolute limit of this record.

This is where we have to discuss the phenomenon of ghost flights. What is a ghost flight? These are instances in the logbook where the plane is documented as moving from one airport to another, but the passenger manifest column is either explicitly marked empty or is just left blank. So the plane flies from, say, Teterboro to Palm beach, but the log says no one is on board. Correct. We're referencing the file JE Flightlogs Anon, which is a cleaned Excel format of the data.

And in that data, you see these legs. Now, it could be a simple ferry flight, just moving the empty aircraft into position for the next pickup. That's a normal aviation procedure. But we cannot verify that from the log alone. We can't know for certain if passengers were on board and were simply not recorded for whatever reason. The log documents the plane's movement, but the human cargo on those specific legs remains a black box. And there's a geographical limit as well.

We have to make the Peto island distinction, as it's commonly known. This is a crucial physical geographical fact that is often misunderstood. The flight logs for the Boeing 727N908JE end at Cyril E. King Airport on St. Thomas USVI. The jet lands at the main airport. It has to a 727 cannot land on Little St. James. It's a physical impossibility. The Runway is too short. So the transit from the airport on St Thomas to the private island, Little St James, required a second leg of the journey.

It required a helicopter or a boat. And this is the great accountability gap in the travel records. We have hundreds of detailed logs for the jet. We have significantly fewer records for the helicopter transfers and the boat transfers. So you can use the jet logs to track a person to the airport in St. Thomas. You can get them to the neighborhood. But proving they took that next step that they crossed the two miles of water to the residence on Little St. James.

That requires a different set of logs, helicopter logs, boat manifests. And those are far more scarce in the public document releases. We're referencing Little St. James pictures and Epstein flight logs released in use of smacks unknown for this geographical context. The jet logs get you to the front door of the region, but they don't put you inside the house. Okay, this brings us to what is potentially new material for many listeners. Documented record cluster six.

This is from the 2025 document release. We're analyzing a very specific file bundle here. Darj Jeffrey Epstein files released 2025, sir.