By Lina Irawan 
In a carefully worded statement submitted to the House Oversight Committee ahead of a highly anticipated interview conducted at his sprawling central Ohio estate, the 88-year-old retired founder of L Brands portrayed himself as a victim of elaborate deception. “I was naive, foolish, and gullible to put any trust in Jeffrey Epstein. He was a con man. And while I was conned, I have done nothing wrong and have nothing to hide,” Wexner declared, aiming to preemptively counter years of public scrutiny and renewed allegations following the recent unsealing of a trove of Epstein-related documents by the Justice Department.
The congressional subpoena compelling Wexner’s testimony underscored the persistent questions surrounding his decades-long association with Epstein, an association that provided Epstein with immense wealth, an aura of legitimacy, and access to elite circles. Democrats on the committee, notably Rep. Robert Garcia of California, have been particularly vocal in their pursuit of answers, arguing that Wexner’s financial support was instrumental in enabling Epstein’s criminal enterprise.
Wexner, a titan of American retail who built an empire from a single store, sought to reframe his public image during the testimony. He described himself to lawmakers as a philanthropist, community builder, and devoted grandfather who always strived “to live my life in an ethical manner in line with my moral compass.” He expressed an eagerness “to set the record straight” about his ties with Epstein, emphasizing that their relationship ended bitterly in 2007, after the Wexners discovered Epstein had been systematically stealing from them. This claim of betrayal is central to Wexner’s narrative of being a victim rather than an enabler.
For years, Wexner has found himself in the unenviable position of answering for his close association with one of the most reviled figures of the 21st century. His appearance before Congress was an attempt to dispel what he termed “outrageous untrue statements and hurtful rumor, innuendo, and speculation” that have shadowed him since Epstein’s initial arrest in 2007 and particularly after his re-arrest and subsequent death in 2019. However, the skepticism from lawmakers was palpable. Rep. Garcia, who participated in Wednesday’s interview, was forthright in his assessment, telling reporters gathered near the proceeding, “There is no single person that was more involved in providing Jeffrey Epstein with the financial support to commit his crimes than Les Wexner.” This stark contrast highlights the battle over narrative, with Wexner seeking absolution and critics demanding accountability.
One of the most disturbing allegations linking Wexner to Epstein’s crimes came from Virginia Giuffre, a prominent Epstein victim who claimed in court documents that Wexner was among the men Epstein trafficked her to. Wexner vehemently denied these accusations, testifying to his utter devotion to his wife of 33 years, Abigail. He asserted that he had never once been unfaithful “in any way, shape, or form. Never. Any suggestion to the contrary is absolutely and entirely false.” His firm denial, however, does little to assuage the deep mistrust and pain felt by victims and the public.
The sheer volume of mentions of Wexner’s name—over 1,000 times—in the recently released Epstein files has further fueled public interest and suspicion. While Wexner’s spokesperson rightly noted that the number of mentions does not imply guilt and is not unexpected given their long-running ties, it underscores the profound entanglement of their lives and finances. Wexner has never been charged with any crimes related to Epstein’s sex trafficking network, a point his defense consistently emphasizes.
A Most Loyal Friend: The Genesis of a Perilous Partnership
The fateful connection between Leslie Wexner and Jeffrey Epstein began around 1986, introduced through a mutual business associate. At the time, Wexner was at the zenith of his business prowess. The Ohio entrepreneur had transformed a single Limited store in Columbus into a retail behemoth, dominating 1980s shopping malls with a suite of highly successful brands: The Limited, Limited Express, Lane Bryant, and the burgeoning Victoria’s Secret. The empire would soon expand to include Bath & Body Works, Abercrombie & Fitch, Lerner, White Barn Candle Co., and Henri Bendel, making Wexner one of America’s wealthiest and most influential businessmen.
It was into this orbit of immense wealth and influence that Epstein, a then-rising financial adviser, skillfully inserted himself. Wexner recounted to lawmakers that it took several years for Epstein, whom he now labels a “master manipulator,” to fully gain his trust. By 1991, Wexner had granted Epstein power of attorney, ceding vast control over his personal and corporate finances. This unprecedented delegation allowed Epstein to make investments, execute business deals, purchase property, and play a significant role in Wexner’s ambitious development of New Albany, transforming a small rural city into a thriving, upscale Columbus suburb.
The extent of Epstein’s access and control was extraordinary for a financial adviser. In a 2003 interview with Vanity Fair, Wexner had effusively praised Epstein, describing him as having “excellent judgment and unusually high standards” and being “always a most loyal friend.” This past admiration now stands in stark contrast to his current condemnation, illustrating the profound shift in his perception – or perhaps, his public narrative.
Wexner maintained that despite their close financial relationship, he did not circulate in Epstein’s social circle. He claimed to have only heard accounts of Epstein’s encounters with other wealthy and powerful individuals, acknowledging that Epstein “carefully used his acquaintance with important individuals to curate an aura of legitimacy.” Wexner even minimized his exposure to Epstein’s infamous private island, Little Saint James, asserting he visited only once for a few hours with his wife and young children while they were cruising on their boat.
Rep. Garcia, however, remained unconvinced by Wexner’s attempts to distance himself. “It is interesting that Mr. Wexner has already begun to clarify in his mind that somehow he and Mr. Epstein weren’t even friends,” Garcia remarked to reporters. “We should be very clear that the two were very close, per reporting. They spent a lot of time together.” This divergence underscores the difficulty Wexner faces in reshaping the public perception of a relationship that was, for years, widely considered to be one of profound intimacy and mutual benefit.
Epstein’s Cryptic Notes and the “Gang Stuff” Allegation
The newly released documents include unsettling glimpses into Epstein’s private thoughts about Wexner. In rough notes to himself, Epstein wrote: “never ever, did anything without informing les” and chillingly, “I would never give him up.” Another document, an apparent draft letter addressed to Wexner, contained even more explosive claims, stating that the two “had ‘gang stuff’ for over 15 years” and were mutually indebted to each other—Wexner having helped make Epstein rich, and Epstein, in turn, helping make Wexner richer.
Wexner’s spokesperson, Tom Davies, swiftly dismissed these documents, asserting that Wexner never received the alleged letter. Davies characterized the contents as fitting “a pattern of untrue, outlandish, and delusional statements made by Epstein in desperate attempts to perpetuate his lies and justify his misconduct.” While Wexner’s team frames these as the desperate fabrications of a cornered criminal, critics argue they offer a disturbing insight into Epstein’s perception of their relationship, suggesting a level of complicity or shared knowledge far beyond what Wexner admits.
Wexner reiterated to the congressional representatives that Epstein “lived a double life,” presenting himself to his wealthy clients as a financial guru with stable girlfriends while “most carefully and fully” hiding his misdeeds with underage girls. “He knew that I never would have tolerated his horrible behavior. Not any of it,” Wexner stated, painting a picture of a master deceiver who expertly compartmentalized his illicit activities from his legitimate professional dealings.
Exploiting a Sexy Brand: Victoria’s Secret and the Shadow of Abuse
Perhaps one of the most damaging aspects of the Epstein-Wexner connection involves allegations that Epstein exploited his ties to Victoria’s Secret to lure and manipulate young women. Several accusers have claimed Epstein touted his association with Wexner and suggested he could help them secure modeling jobs for the Victoria’s Secret catalog.
One aspiring actor and model recounted to the FBI that Epstein claimed to be “best friends with the longtime Victoria’s Secret owner” and told her she would need to learn to be comfortable in her underwear and not be a prude, according to recently released grand jury testimony. Another woman reported Epstein to the police in 1997 after he groped her during what she believed was a modeling interview for the Victoria’s Secret catalog. These accounts paint a chilling picture of how Epstein allegedly leveraged the aspirational and often sexualized brand image of Victoria’s Secret to gain the trust of vulnerable young women.
Following Epstein’s 2019 arrest, Wexner’s lawyers informed investigators that the businessman had heard a rumor that Epstein might be presenting himself as connected to Victoria’s Secret. When Wexner reportedly confronted Epstein about it, Epstein denied doing so, according to a recently disclosed memorandum summarizing the probe. Wexner did not directly address this specific issue in his statement Wednesday, but he repeatedly lamented being deceived by Epstein, whom he now unequivocally calls “an abuser, a crook, and a liar.” The controversy ultimately contributed to the significant decline in Victoria’s Secret’s brand reputation, which L Brands eventually sold off in 2020, in one of Wexner’s final acts as chair, marking the end of an era for both the brand and its founder.
A Relationship Unravels: Timelines and Financial Discrepancies
The precise timeline of the severing of the Wexner-Epstein relationship has been a point of contention. Wexner did not publicly reveal the end of their professional ties until after Epstein’s arrest on federal sex trafficking charges in July 2019. In a Wexner Foundation letter that August, he stated the relationship ended in 2007. However, the Justice Department’s newly released records indicate that the two were in contact even after that date, complicating Wexner’s narrative of a clean break.
For instance, Wexner sent an email to Epstein on June 26, 2008, shortly after Epstein’s controversial plea deal was announced, which required him to serve 18 months in a Florida jail on a state charge of soliciting prostitution from a minor, effectively allowing him to avoid federal prosecution. He ultimately served 13 months. In the email, Wexner wrote: “Abigail told me the result … all I can say is I feel sorry. You violated your own number 1 rule … always be careful.” Epstein’s terse reply: “no excuse.” This exchange raises questions about the nature of their ongoing communication and whether Wexner’s "sorry" reflected empathy for Epstein’s victims or for Epstein’s predicament in getting caught.
Wexner’s spokesperson, Tom Davies, clarified that the 2007 date Wexner cited in 2019 specifically referred to the termination of Epstein as his financial adviser, the revocation of his power of attorney, and the removal of Epstein’s name from Wexner’s bank accounts. This distinction attempts to reconcile the conflicting timelines, suggesting an administrative separation in 2007, followed by residual, albeit limited, personal contact.
Central to the unraveling of their relationship were allegations of financial malfeasance. In his 2019 letter, Wexner stated that Epstein had “misappropriated ‘vast sums’” of his and his family’s fortune while overseeing his finances. An investigative memo from the latest document release sheds more light, indicating that Wexner’s attorneys told investigators in 2008 that Epstein had repaid him $100 million. In Wednesday’s statement, Wexner vaguely stated that Epstein returned “a substantial amount” of the undisclosed total, leaving the exact figures and the full scope of the alleged theft ambiguous.
Rep. Garcia, however, offered a more specific and alarming figure. He informed reporters that congressional investigators have identified more than $1 billion that was “either transferred, provided in stocks or given directly” by Wexner to Epstein – an astonishing sum, much of which Wexner “appears to be unaware” of. This massive financial transfer, whether through direct gifts, investments, or outright theft, underscores the extraordinary financial leverage Epstein held and the vast resources that potentially fueled his illicit activities. The sheer scale of the money involved raises profound questions about oversight, accountability, and the ease with which a wealthy individual’s fortune can be exploited.
Continuing Fallout for Wexner: A Stained Legacy
Despite Wexner’s earnest denials and expressions of regret, the fallout from his association with Epstein continues to mount, casting a long shadow over his philanthropic legacy and public standing. On Wednesday, Wexner testified that he had never seen Epstein with any young girls and acknowledged the “unfathomable” pain Epstein inflicted, even as new discoveries in the Epstein files have placed renewed pressure on him.
One survivor, Maria Farmer, whose claims have long been central to the Epstein narrative, found vindication in a redacted FBI report contained within the document release. This report, she asserts, confirms her longstanding claim that she filed one of the earliest complaints against Epstein while she was under his employ in 1996, working on an art project at the Wexners’ estate. Farmer’s story highlights the potential proximity of Epstein’s alleged abuses to Wexner’s properties and inner circle, further complicating Wexner’s claims of ignorance.
Meanwhile, Wexner’s name has become a focal point of another major scandal closer to home. Survivors of a sweeping sexual abuse scandal at the Ohio State University are citing Wexner’s association with Epstein in their efforts to have his name removed from a campus football complex and from the prestigious Wexner Medical Center. This demand reflects a broader societal discomfort with honoring individuals whose legacies are intertwined with such morally reprehensible figures, regardless of direct culpability. The calls for de-naming facilities underscore the lasting reputational damage and the profound moral reckoning that Wexner and institutions associated with him now face.
Les Wexner’s congressional testimony represents a pivotal moment in his long struggle to reclaim his narrative and safeguard his legacy. While he vehemently denied any knowledge of Epstein’s horrific crimes and presented himself as a victim of a master manipulator, the extensive financial ties, the conflicting timelines, and the persistent skepticism from lawmakers and victims ensure that the questions surrounding his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein will continue to reverberate, leaving an indelible stain on the once-unblemished reputation of a retail visionary. The public, and indeed history, will ultimately weigh Wexner’s claims against the overwhelming evidence of Epstein’s depravity and the profound resources he commanded, much of it derived from his association with the retail magnate.