Unsealed DOJ files from the Virginia Giuffre lawsuit reveal that Everywhere VC founding partner Masha Bucher worked as Jeffrey Epstein's publicist between 2002 and 2005. Flight logs and emails from the Southern District of New York case show Epstein introduced the Russian-born Bucher to New York financiers including Les Wexner during that period.
Bucher, who founded Everywhere VC in 2017 with backing from Lightspeed, claims early investments in 22 unicorns. Her portfolio purportedly includes xAI (valued at $24 billion in May 2024), Brex, Rippling ($13.5 billion valuation), and Figma. The fund manages over $100 million across 50+ investments, per Crunchbase data.
The claims warrant scrutiny. Cap tables for many of these companies remain private, making verification difficult. Bucher states she wrote xAI's "first outside check," but the company hasn't confirmed early investor lists publicly.
Bucher responded on X that her role was "professional PR" before Epstein's criminal charges became public. She faces no abuse allegations. Stratechery's Ben Thompson calls the situation "guilt by association," noting some VCs argue Epstein had common presence in early 2000s New York tech-finance circles.
The pattern matters for enterprise tech leaders evaluating VC partnerships. Similar scrutiny hit LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman in 2019 over Epstein connections. With global VC funding at $285 billion in 2025's first half and 1,200+ unicorns worldwide (40% in APAC), understanding network provenance becomes relevant due diligence.
Everywhere VC targets APAC and European startups, with reported ties to companies like Perplexity AI. The firm's $100M+ AUM positions it as a mid-tier player in a crowded field.
No new DOJ filings emerged in the past week. This disclosure stems from 2024-2025 document releases in existing litigation. The story gained traction February 5 via Forbes and Techmeme, briefly trending on X as #EpsteinFiles.
The real question: How do CIOs and CTOs evaluate vendor backing when funding networks intersect with problematic histories? There's no clean answer, but the due diligence conversation just got more complex.