A purported suicide note written by Jeffrey Epstein, reportedly found by his former cellmate just days before the convicted sex offender died in a lower Manhattan jail cell, sits locked inside a sealed federal case file. The New York Times has now gone to court to pry it loose.
Nicholas Tartaglione, a convicted quadruple murderer who shared a cell with Epstein at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in the summer of 2019, told the Times he discovered the note after Epstein's first apparent suicide attempt in July of that year. ABC News reported that the note, written on yellow legal pad paper and tucked inside a book, is now sealed within Tartaglione's own criminal case file.
U.S. District Judge Kenneth Karas has ordered the parties to respond to the Times' unsealing petition by May 4. Federal prosecutors from the Southern District of New York, meanwhile, told ABC News sources familiar with the matter that they did not know of any suicide note written by Epstein. That gap, between what the government says it knows and what the documents in its own files appear to show, captures the persistent institutional failure that has defined the Epstein saga from the beginning.
On July 23, 2019, guards found Epstein in his cell. A Bureau of Prisons incident report described him "lying in the fetal position on the floor of his cell wearing a t-shirt and boxers. He was breathing heavily and was snoring.... His neck was red with no abrasions." The same report noted he was found "with a homemade noose fashioned around his neck."
Medical staff determined Epstein had "sustained a circular line of erythema at the base of the neck and friction marks on the front of neck." At first, the report said, Epstein alleged Tartaglione had tried to kill him, an allegation he did not repeat. He later said he could not recall what happened.
Epstein was placed on suicide watch. He was taken off it the very next day, July 24, though he remained under psychological evaluation. Less than three weeks later, on August 10, 2019, he was dead, found in his cell, his death ruled a suicide by hanging by the New York Medical Examiner's Office. The Justice Department concurred with that finding.
The speed with which Epstein was removed from suicide watch has long troubled observers. The broader Epstein files controversy has raised hard questions about how federal institutions handled evidence and custody decisions at every turn.
After the July 23 incident, Epstein underwent a suicide risk assessment. He denied any past or present suicidal thoughts. The assessment recorded him saying he "lives to have fun, to enjoy life, and to learn" and that his "future plans include fighting his case and going back to his normal life."
A staff psychologist at the Metropolitan Correctional Center documented Epstein's statements in even more detail:
"Mr. Epstein stated, 'I have no interest in killing myself.' He explained although his situation is 'not perfect' due to his being incarcerated, he noted he has 'lots to do for [his] legal case.' He described having a 'wonderful life,' to include interactions with 'interesting people and projects.' He said 'it would be crazy' to take his life. He furthered, 'I would not do that to myself.'"
Those words, recorded by a government psychologist, formed the basis for removing Epstein from suicide watch. Eighteen days later, he was dead. Whether the purported note, if authentic, contradicts those recorded statements is one of many reasons the sealed document matters.
Tartaglione first mentioned the note's existence on a podcast last year. He described its contents in rough terms during that appearance. ABC News quoted his account:
"It said something like 'FBI, you know, looked into me for months and found nothing.' Then he wrote, 'What do you want me to do? Cry about it?' And he was weird because he wrote a smiley face, and then he wrote 'time to say goodbye.'"
A two-page chronology document included in the Justice Department's recent disclosures of Epstein files references the note. That chart states: "Sometime between 7/23 and 7/27, NT found the note." It also says Tartaglione's lawyer, Bruce Barket, authenticated the note in January 2020, though it does not explain how.
The fact that a Justice Department document references a note that Southern District prosecutors say they know nothing about is, at minimum, a coordination failure. At worst, it suggests that information about Epstein's state of mind, potentially relevant to the circumstances of his death, has sat in a sealed file for nearly seven years while the public has been left with unanswered questions.
Barket, when reached by ABC News, declined to comment on the note's substance. He did, however, offer a careful statement that hints at the legal complexity surrounding his client's connection to Epstein:
"The entire Epstein affair, as it relates to Nick, is under seal, not just the supposed note, if there is one."
That phrasing, "if there is one", is notable from the lawyer the government's own chart says authenticated it. Congressional scrutiny of how officials handled Epstein-related evidence has only intensified; lawmakers have called officials before Congress to testify on the Epstein files and the decisions surrounding their release.
The New York Times filed its petition on the grounds that Tartaglione has already publicly discussed the alleged note and that the Justice Department's own Epstein file disclosures included the two-page chronology referencing it. In other words, the seal is protecting information that is already partly in the open, a common argument in press freedom cases involving sealed court records.
Judge Karas has set a May 4 deadline for responses. Whether the government fights the unsealing or concedes the point will say a great deal about how seriously the Justice Department takes transparency in the Epstein matter.
The broader pattern is familiar to anyone who has followed this case. The Justice Department's recent document disclosures have produced a steady stream of revelations, from newly surfaced emails showing a Democratic senator's son courting Epstein for investment to other disclosures that have raised uncomfortable questions about who in Washington knew what, and when.
Epstein's ability to avoid consequences was well established long before his 2019 arrest. In 2007, the U.S. attorney's office in Miami reached a controversial non-prosecution agreement with him. He served just 13 months of an 18-month sentence.
It was not until 2019 that Epstein was indicted on charges that he "sexually exploited and abused dozens of minor girls at his homes in Manhattan, New York, and Palm Beach, Florida, among other locations" and used cash payments to recruit a "vast network of underage victims," some as young as 14 years old. He owned two private islands in the Virgin Islands. He was a wealthy financier with connections that reached into the highest levels of politics and finance.
Other revelations from the Epstein files have only deepened the picture. A newly revealed email disclosed the existence of a secret Epstein child, adding yet another layer to a case that continues to produce surprises years after Epstein's death.
Tartaglione, for his part, denied attempting to harm Epstein. He was convicted in 2023 of quadruple murder and sentenced in 2024 to four consecutive terms of life imprisonment. His appeal is pending before the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Several questions remain open. No reporting indicates that ABC News independently viewed the purported note. The exact wording beyond Tartaglione's podcast summary is unknown. The method by which Barket allegedly authenticated the note in January 2020 has not been disclosed. And the disconnect between the Justice Department's own chronology, which references the note, and Southern District prosecutors who say they don't know about it has not been explained.
The continuing stream of Epstein-related disclosures has kept public pressure on institutions that have, for years, appeared more interested in managing the story than in telling the truth.
If the note is real, it was written by a man who told government psychologists he had no interest in dying, and who was dead less than three weeks later, in a federal facility that was supposed to keep him alive long enough to stand trial. If it is not real, the government's own files reference a fabrication that no one bothered to flag for seven years. Either way, the seal serves the institution, not the public.
