Staley fights back after Barclays chair says his view has ‘changed’ in Epstein case

Unlock the Editor’s Digest without spending a dime

Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favorite tales on this weekly e-newsletter.

The previous Barclays chief Jes Staley got here out combating in his battle with UK authorities over his ties to the late intercourse offender Jeffrey Epstein, after the financial institution’s chair informed a London courtroom that his view of the pair’s relationship had modified.

In statements revealed on Monday, Staley, 68, accused regulators of “destroying” his popularity as he sought to overturn the ban and positive that the Monetary Conduct Authority had imposed on him for permitting Barclays to mislead the regulator in regards to the nature of his dealings with Epstein.

The case centres on two statements Barclays made in a letter in 2019 — which Staley accredited — that the chief government “didn’t have an in depth relationship” with Epstein and that his final contact with him was “properly earlier than” he had joined the UK financial institution in 2015.

The FCA, which imposed its ban in 2023, contends {that a} cache of emails between the 2 present that the statements in Barclays’ letter had been inaccurate.

Staley mentioned: “The FCA took essentially the most severe and drastic step that it might, ending my lengthy and distinguished profession in monetary providers and destroying my popularity with out first asking me for an evidence for any perceived discrepancy” between the letter and the emails.

“It has change into clear to me . . . that the [Prudential Regulation Authority] and the FCA prejudged the investigation,” he mentioned. “I take into account that the FCA’s case towards me lacks objectivity and doesn’t bear logical scrutiny.”

Staley took to the witness stand on Monday shortly after Barclays’ chair, Nigel Higgins, who informed the courtroom that the financial institution would have questioned Staley extra totally about his relationship with Epstein if it knew then what it is aware of now.

In his witness assertion, Higgins mentioned that in Staley’s time at Barclays: “I had understood that the connection between him and Mr Epstein was basically enterprise associated.”

Nevertheless, he added: “The knowledge of which I’m now conscious paints a distinct image in my thoughts as to the character of the connection.”

“Had my colleagues at Barclays and I been conscious of the entire info of which I’m now conscious, I’m positive that we might have questioned Mr Staley about that additional info in depth.

“At this distance, and with out the good thing about discussing this info with Mr Staley and different colleagues, I can’t be sure what we might have concluded.”

In a 2021 interview with regulators, Higgins had defined “affectionate” messages Staley despatched to Epstein as being “the best way he writes” to “a number of folks”, the courtroom heard on Monday.

Staley, in his witness assertion, defended his enterprise ties with Epstein, pointing to his connections with a protracted record of influential figures together with Invoice Clinton, Leon Black and Lawrence Summers and describing him as a “invaluable” contact to domesticate.

However he insisted it was a “skilled relationship” that “was predicated upon enterprise”, disputing the FCA’s characterisation of their connection as “shut”.

“We weren’t private associates,” he mentioned in his witness assertion.

Staley mentioned that so far as he might recall, his final assembly with Epstein was in April 2015, when he and his spouse visited Epstein’s island for a number of hours throughout a crusing vacation. The phrase within the letter “properly earlier than” referred to this, he mentioned.

Staley mentioned his final e mail trade was on 25 October 2015, and that his final telephone name was a number of days later, when he informed Epstein that there can be no additional communication.

Whereas the FCA has argued that contact continued thereafter through his daughter, Staley mentioned doesn’t settle for that this constituted contact. He mentioned he has “no recollection of getting had any dialogue with my daughter regarding this correspondence”.

Staley argues that it was flawed for the authority merely to match the content material of the emails between the 2 with Barclays’ letter to the FCA, whose actual goal was to not present an all-encompassing account of the pair’s relationship however merely to guarantee the FCA that neither Staley nor Barclays knew of or had been concerned in Epstein’s legal conduct.

“I’ve by no means tried to hide my relationship with Jeffrey Epstein,” Staley added. “If I had recognized it was to be discovered that he was a prolific intercourse offender, I might not have had a relationship with him in any respect.”

The case continues.