Newly unsealed documents reveal that a close advisor to Prince Andrew pitched Jeffrey Epstein on investing in electric vehicle startups, including Lucid Motors, during the same period Epstein was under investigation for sex trafficking. The connection adds another layer to the tangled relationships between Epstein’s financial network and legitimate tech ventures—and raises fresh questions about how Silicon Valley’s capital flows intersected with one of history’s most notorious criminals.
Key Points
- Amanda Thirsk, Prince Andrew’s former private secretary, pitched Epstein on EV investments including Lucid Motors (LCID) in 2016, according to court documents.
- There’s no evidence Epstein invested in Lucid, and the company has stated it has “no relationship” with Epstein’s estate or affiliated entities.
- The documents reveal Epstein was actively seeking tech investments during his final years, potentially providing a reputation-laundering function.
- Lucid shares fell 3.8% following the news before recovering, trading at $3.45 with a $6.8B market cap.
What Did the Documents Actually Reveal?
The court filings, part of ongoing civil litigation related to Epstein’s estate, include email exchanges between Thirsk and Epstein’s money managers from 2016. In one email, Thirsk describes an “exceptional opportunity” in electric vehicles and specifically mentions “a Tesla competitor backed by [redacted] Saudi money”—a description that matches Lucid Motors, which received $1 billion from Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund in 2018.
“We have no evidence that any investment occurred,” emphasized attorney David Boies, who represents some Epstein accusers, in a press call. “But these documents show how Epstein used the promise of access to royalty and legitimate tech ventures to maintain relationships even while under criminal scrutiny.” The timing is significant: by 2016, Epstein had already served time for prior convictions and was under active federal investigation for additional crimes.
How Did Lucid Motors Respond?
Lucid issued a forceful denial within hours of the document release. “Lucid Motors has had no relationship, investment, or any business dealings with Jeffrey Epstein, his estate, or any entities associated with him,” the company stated. The company’s investor relations team followed up with additional context: Lucid’s 2016-2017 fundraising involved institutional investors including Tesla (TSLA) and Venrock before the Saudi PIF investment.
LCID shares initially dropped 3.8% on the news but have since stabilized. Analysts noted the selling appeared to be retail-driven anxiety rather than institutional concern. “This is guilt by association of association,” said Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities. “Someone pitched Epstein on a deal that never happened. That’s unfortunate, but it doesn’t change Lucid’s fundamentals.”
Why Does This Matter Beyond the Scandal?
The Epstein documents illuminate a broader pattern: how tech investing served as a reputation-laundering mechanism for controversial figures. Epstein cultivated relationships with Silicon Valley executives, including meetings with Sheryl Sandberg and documented contact with Tesla’s Elon Musk (who has denied any meaningful relationship). The EV pitch reveals he was positioned as an investor even while legally radioactive.
For VCs and founders, the episode underscores due diligence requirements. “Know your investor” has become as important as “know your customer,” noted a16z partner Connie Chan in a recent podcast discussion. The SEC has increasingly scrutinized beneficial ownership disclosures, and reputational risk from problematic investors can affect everything from public listings to acquisition negotiations.
Stocks Mentioned
- Lucid Group (LCID) – $3.45, down $0.08 (-2.3%), market cap $6.8B. EV manufacturer, no proven connection to Epstein despite document mentions.
- Tesla (TSLA) – $875.40, market cap $2.8T. Early Lucid investor in 2016 before Saudi funding.
- Rivian (RIVN) – $18.25, up $0.42 (+2.4%), market cap $19B. Competitor EV maker, benefits if Lucid faces reputational headwinds.
What This Means For You
- For Lucid shareholders: The stock dip appears unconnected to fundamentals. No Epstein money entered the company, and due diligence should focus on production targets and cash runway, not association claims.
- For startup founders: Document your investor due diligence process. If problematic associations surface later, showing you conducted reasonable background checks provides legal and reputational protection.
- For VCs: Enhanced background checks on co-investors and referral sources have become standard practice post-Epstein. The reputational cost of association can exceed the financial benefit of the capital.
- For the broader tech industry: The Epstein connection map continues to expand. Expect continued document releases as civil litigation proceeds, potentially implicating additional tech figures.
