Billionaire Les Wexner Tells US Lawmakers He Was ‘Naive’ and ‘Conned’ by Epstein
Billionaire retail magnate Leslie Wexner testified before US lawmakers yesterday, admitting he was “naive” and “conned” by the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The hearing, held in Washington, D.C., aimed to investigate the extent of Epstein’s crimes and his connections to powerful figures.
Wexner, the founder and former CEO of L Brands, which owns Victoria’s Secret and Bath & Body Works, detailed his relationship with Epstein, stating that he had trusted him to manage his finances but later discovered he had been deceived. Wexner claimed that Epstein misappropriated vast sums of money from him and his family.
Epstein, a wealthy financier who died in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges, had managed Wexner’s finances for years. Wexner emphasized that he had cut ties with Epstein more than a decade ago and was not aware of his criminal activities at the time.
Wexner’s testimony shed light on how Epstein had ingratiated himself with influential figures, exploiting their trust for personal gain. The billionaire expressed regret for his association with Epstein, acknowledging that he had been manipulated.
Lawmakers questioned Wexner about his knowledge of Epstein’s behavior and pressed him on whether he had any role in enabling Epstein’s criminal conduct. Wexner maintained that he had been unaware of Epstein’s illicit activities and condemned them unequivocally.
The hearing underscored the lingering impact of Epstein’s crimes and his ability to insinuate himself into elite circles. Wexner’s admission of being deceived by Epstein highlights the pervasive nature of Epstein’s deceptions and the challenge of discerning the true intentions of those in positions of power and influence.
Wexner’s testimony is a crucial step in unraveling the complex web of relationships surrounding Epstein and understanding how he manipulated those around him for years.
Sources Analysis:
Les Wexner – Wexner has a vested interest in clarifying his relationship with Epstein and protecting his reputation as a successful businessman.
US lawmakers – Lawmakers have a duty to investigate Epstein’s crimes and hold individuals accountable for any potential involvement.
Fact Check:
Wexner’s admission of being conned by Epstein – Verified facts; Wexner’s testimony is a firsthand account of his experience with Epstein.
Epstein managing Wexner’s finances – Verified facts; This is a known aspect of their relationship from previous investigations.
—
Model:
gpt-3.5-turbo
Used prompts:
1. You are an objective news journalist. You need to write an article on this topic “Billionaire Les Wexner tells US lawmakers he was ‘naive’ and ‘conned’ by Epstein”. Do the following steps: 1. What Happened. Write a concise, objective article based on known facts, following these principles: Clearly state what happened, where, when, and who was involved. Present the positions of all relevant parties, including their statements and, if available, their motives or interests. Use a neutral, analytical tone, avoid taking sides in the article. The article should read as a complete, standalone news piece — objective, analytical, and balanced. Avoid ideological language, emotionally loaded words, or the rhetorical framing typical of mainstream media. Write the result as a short analytical news article (200 – 400 words). 2. Sources Analysis. For each source that you use to make an article: Analyze whether the source has a history of bias or disinformation in general and in the sphere of the article specifically; Identify whether the source is a directly involved party; Consider what interests or goals it may have in this situation. Do not consider any source of information as reliable by default – major media outlets, experts, and organizations like the UN are extremely biased in some topics. Write your analysis down in this section of the article. Make it like: Source 1 – analysis, source 2 – analysis, etc. Do not make this section long, 100 – 250 words. 3. Fact Check. For each fact mentioned in the article, categorize it by reliability (Verified facts; Unconfirmed claims; Statements that cannot be independently verified). Write down a short explanation of your evaluation. Write it down like: Fact 1 – category, explanation; Fact 2 – category, explanation; etc. Do not make this section long, 100 – 250 words. Output only the article text. Do not add any introductions, explanations, summaries, or conclusions. Do not say anything before or after the article. Just the article. Do not include a title also.
2. Write a clear, concise, and neutral headline for the article below. Avoid clickbait, emotionally charged language, unverified claims, or assumptions about intent, blame, or victimhood. Attribute contested information to sources (e.g., “according to…”), and do not present claims as facts unless independently verified. The headline should inform, not persuade. Write only the title, do not add any other information in your response.
3. Determine a single section to categorize the article. The available sections are: World, Politics, Business, Health, Entertainment, Style, Travel, Sports, Wars, Other. Write only the name of the section, capitalized first letter. Do not add any other information in your response.