Epstein Invested in Blockstream via MIT Fund, Invited Founders to Island

The financial connection originated during Blockstream’s 2014 seed-round investor roadshow, where the company was introduced to Joi Ito. According to Adam Back’s statement on X, Epstein was presented at the time as a limited partner in Ito’s fund, which subsequently invested a minority stake in Blockstream. This placed Epstein indirectly into the cap table of a foundational Bitcoin technology company, alongside notable venture capital firms like Khosla Ventures, Horizons Ventures, AXA Strategic Ventures, and Digital Currency Group, Grayscale’s parent company.

Back emphasized that the link was brief and indirect. “A few months later, Ito’s fund divested its Blockstream shares due to a potential conflict of interest, and other concerns,” he wrote, asserting that “Blockstream has no direct nor indirect financial connection with Jeffrey Epstein, or his estate.” This rapid divestment underscores the sensitivity and reputational risk such an association carried, even years before Epstein’s crimes became fully public. The episode highlights the opaque nature of early-stage venture capital and how high-profile, controversial figures could gain access to promising startups through intermediary funds.

Beyond the financial transaction, the released correspondence reveals a more personal dimension. Email exchanges beginning in April 2014 show Epstein directly contacting Blockstream co-founder Austin Hill, providing a phone number and discussing plans. Hill alluded to a missed meeting in New York and noted that “Fri/Saturday on the island are still possible,” referencing Epstein’s private island, Little Saint James. In a separate email to early Bitcoin developer Amir Taaki days later, Epstein stated he’d just had “Andy Back” on his island that weekend.

Little Saint James, located in the U.S. Virgin Islands, has since been identified in court filings and victim testimony as a controlled environment where Epstein trafficked and sexually abused underage girls. The invitations to Back and Hill, which Back’s statement did not address as to whether they were accepted, place the Bitcoin figures in proximity to the epicenter of Epstein’s criminal enterprise during the same period as the investment. Further emails from July 2014 show Hill and Epstein’s staff coordinating—ultimately unsuccessfully—for Epstein to attend a comedy show in Montreal with the “Blockstream crew,” indicating an ongoing casual correspondence.

The DOJ files cement Epstein’s role as an early-stage financier in the crypto sector. Beyond Blockstream, the documents reveal Epstein was an early investor in Coinbase. In 2014, he invested $3 million in the exchange when it was valued at $400 million, later selling half his stake to Blockchain Capital in 2018 for $15 million—a significant return on an investment in a company now valued over $47 billion.

The conduit for the Blockstream investment, Joi Ito, and his MIT Media Lab fund, represent a recurring node in Epstein’s network. Ito admitted in a 2019 letter that he met Epstein in 2013 while fundraising for MIT and accepted his money, though he claimed ignorance of Epstein’s crimes. He vowed to raise an equivalent amount for nonprofits supporting trafficking survivors. The scandal led to the resignation of two high-profile MIT employees. The E14 Fund, an independent non-profit Ito ran for Media Lab graduates, was the vehicle through which Epstein’s capital reached Blockstream, demonstrating how Epstein leveraged academic-affiliated funds to gain access to cutting-edge technology startups.

The released emails also include a November 2014 exchange where Italian venture capitalist Vincenzo Iozzo asked Epstein his opinion of Adam Back. Epstein’s two-word reply—”like him”—suggests he held the cryptographer in favorable regard, though there is no public indication Iozzo invested. For the Bitcoin and broader crypto industry, these revelations present a stark reminder of the sector’s early, often unvetted funding sources and the enduring challenge of reconciling technological innovation with the ethical shadows of its financial backing.