Canadian officials can’t explain why Epstein was allowed to enter country after conviction for crimes that should have barred him
Brendan Rascius
Tue, February 3, 2026 at 7:35 PM UTC
4 min read
Add Yahoo as a preferred source to see more of our stories on Google.
Jeffrey Epstein appears to have visited Canada despite having been convicted of crimes that should have rendered him “inadmissible.”
Among the more than three million documents released by the Department of Justice last week are travel reservations for Epstein in Vancouver for March 17-20, 2014, the CBC reported. He apparently booked a massage at a local hotel and attended a conference during this period.
His apparent excursion to the Great White North came roughly six years after he pleaded guilty to several state charges in Florida — including soliciting a minor for prostitution — which resulted in an 18-month jail sentence. He was also required to register as a sex offender.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Epstein, who died in jail in 2019, had been deemed inadmissible to Canada since he had been convicted “of at least one offense that, if committed in Canada, would constitute an indictable offense under an Act of Parliament,” according to a 2018 letter from the country’s consulate in California.
The letter — included in the DOJ’s latest release of documents concerning Epstein — said the disgraced financier’s application for a temporary resident permit was rejected. The permit would have given him an exception to travel to the country in spite of his criminal record.
"After a careful and sympathetic review balancing all the factors, I have determined that there are insufficient grounds to merit the issuance of a permit in your case," the letter states.
Yet the convicted sex offender seems to have traveled across the border years earlier.
Advertisement
Advertisement
A Canadian customs clearance document dated March 20, 2014, indicates that Epstein passed through customs in Seattle after flying from Vancouver, according to the CBC, citing DOJ documents. The document appears to have disappeared from the DOJ’s website.
Epstein emailed an unknown individual two days earlier that he was attending a TED conference. The individual responded: “Jealous! I hear it's in Vancouver this year.” Epstein also received an email confirming a March 17 massage appointment at the city’s Four Seasons hotel.
When asked why Epstein was permitted to enter Canada in 2014, a Canada Border Services Agency spokesperson didn’t provide a direct answer.
“We cannot provide comment on specific cases as a person’s immigration and border information is considered personal information and is protected by the Privacy Act," Guillaume Bérubé, the agency’s acting director of media relations, told The Independent. “Admissibility of travellers is decided on a case-by-case basis and based on the information available at the time of entry.”
Advertisement
Advertisement
Bérubé added that, if a CBSA officer believes a foreign national is inadmissible, they may report them, allow them to leave the country or issue a temporary resident permit.
Epstein, who died in a New York jail while awaiting trial on fresh charges in 2019, was known to possess multiple passports — including a fake Austrian passport with his photo and a false name.
A former Canadian official said that, if the convicted sex offender indeed traveled north of the border, it would constitute a major oversight.
Chris Alexander, Canada's former minister of citizenship and immigration, told the CBC: “If he did come to Canada at that time, that was a very serious lapse in immigration enforcement. Our government’s position was very clearly that any persons (including U.S. citizens) with criminal records were inadmissible, and that these provisions of the law should be rigorously enforced.”
Even after his 2008 guilty plea, Epstein freely traveled to multiple countries, including the U.K. and France (he was arrested in 2019 shortly after returning from a trip to Paris). He also maintained business ties with major financial institutions — despite at least one company raising concerns about suspicious activity — and continued corresponding and meeting with countless high-profile figures.