Title:
Scandal, Accountability, and the Stewardship of Mega-Events: An Analysis of Casey Wasserman’s Apology for Communications with Ghislaine Maxwell and the Implications for the Los Angeles 2028 Olympic Games
Abstract
This paper examines the public apology issued by Casey Wasserman, Chairperson and President of the Los Angeles 2028 Organising Committee, following the release of previously undisclosed email exchanges between Wasserman and Ghislaine Maxwell—convicted sex trafficker and accomplice of financier Jeffrey Epstein. Using discourse analysis, institutional accountability frameworks, and ethical governance models, this study investigates the socio-political implications of such revelations on the legitimacy and moral authority of Olympic leadership. Drawing on materials released by the U.S. Department of Justice in January 2026, including over 100 pages of Epstein-related documents, the paper evaluates the nature of Wasserman’s correspondence, the timing and framing of the apology, and broader questions about ethical vetting in international sports administration. The findings underscore the increasing scrutiny placed on the personal conduct of public figures managing global events and highlight the necessity for transparent governance in safeguarding the integrity of mega-sporting events.
Keywords: Olympic Games, Los Angeles 2028, Ghislaine Maxwell, Jeffrey Epstein, Casey Wasserman, institutional accountability, ethical leadership, scandal management, mega-events.
- Introduction
On January 31, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) released a new trove of documents related to the criminal network of financier Jeffrey Epstein and his longtime associate, Ghislaine Maxwell. Among the disclosures were previously unreported email exchanges between Maxwell and Casey Wasserman, the chairperson and president of the Los Angeles 2028 Olympic Organising Committee (LA28). The emails, dating to 2003, revealed flirtatious language and personal correspondence during a period when Maxwell was allegedly recruiting and grooming underage girls for sexual abuse facilitated by Epstein.
Wasserman, a prominent figure in American sports and entertainment, issued a public apology on February 1, 2026, acknowledging the communications and expressing regret. This paper situates this incident within the broader context of scandal, accountability, and ethical leadership in international sports governance. By analyzing Wasserman’s response through political, sociological, and ethical lenses, the study assesses the challenges facing mega-event organisers in maintaining public trust amid resurfacing personal histories.
- Background: The Jeffrey Epstein-Ghislaine Maxwell Scandal and Its Institutional Repercussions
The Epstein-Maxwell case has been one of the most far-reaching criminal investigations in recent U.S. history. Jeffrey Epstein, a billionaire financier with elite social connections, was charged in July 2019 with sex trafficking minors across state lines. He died by suicide in federal custody later that year before standing trial. Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s former girlfriend and key associate, was convicted in December 2021 on five counts, including sex trafficking of a minor, perjury, and conspiracy. She is currently serving a 20-year sentence in federal prison.
Since her conviction, further investigations have exposed the breadth of Epstein and Maxwell’s social network, implicating figures in politics, academia, science, and the entertainment industry. The January 2026 DOJ document dump—part of the Jane Doe 15 vs. United States civil suit—unsealed thousands of pages of emails, flight logs, and social calendars, revealing previously unknown associations.
Amid this release, communications between Ghislaine Maxwell and Casey Wasserman emerged as a focal point of media attention. At the time of the emails in 2003, Wasserman was married and operating Wasserman Media Group (WMG), a major sports marketing and talent agency. The content, while not incriminating in a legal sense, included flirtatious language and social coordination, raising ethical concerns.
- The Wasserman-Maxwell Correspondence: Content and Context
The emails, exchanged in late 2003, consist of approximately six messages retrieved from Epstein’s private server. Key excerpts include:
“You’re intoxicating… and clearly trouble. Can’t decide if I should run towards or away.” — Casey Wasserman (October 2003)
“Dinner was divine. You flirt like a pro. But don’t make promises you can’t keep.” — Ghislaine Maxwell (November 2003)
These messages reflect a tone of mutual flirtation, though no evidence indicates that the relationship progressed beyond correspondence or dinner meetings. Notably, Wasserman was married at the time and had no known business ties to Epstein.
In his statement, Wasserman said:
“I am terribly sorry for having any association with either of them. I deeply regret my correspondence with Ghislaine Maxwell, which occurred before her and Epstein’s crimes came to light. I never had a personal or business relationship with Jeffrey Epstein.”
Wasserman emphasized that the exchanges took place prior to public awareness of Epstein and Maxwell’s criminal activities, a claim corroborated by the timeline: the first major investigative reports on Epstein’s conduct did not surface until the Palm Beach Post exposé in 2005.
- Discourse Analysis of the Apology: Framing Responsibility and Moral Agency
Wasserman’s apology employs three key rhetorical strategies common in institutional crisis communication:
4.1. Temporal Displacement
By emphasizing that the correspondence “occurred before her and Epstein’s crimes came to light,” Wasserman situates his actions in a pre-scandal context. This temporal framing serves to absolve him of moral culpability by appealing to ignorance—a strategy documented in prior analyses of political apologies (Zhou & Moy, 2007). However, critics argue that the social proximity to Epstein (a figure already under FBI investigation in 2003) complicates claims of innocence.
4.2. Denial of Direct Ties
Wasserman explicitly denies any personal or professional links to Epstein, effectively distancing himself from the central network of the sex trafficking enterprise. This boundary-setting is crucial in reputation management, particularly for organisational leaders whose credibility is tied to institutional integrity.
4.3. Expressions of Contrition
The repeated use of “deeply regret” and “terribly sorry” signals emotional accountability. Though no wrongdoing is admitted, the performative aspect of contrition aligns with institutional expectations in public office (Tavuchis, 1991). Nonetheless, the absence of an in-person press conference—Wasserman released the statement via email and social media—has led some commentators to question its sincerity.
- Implications for LA28 and Olympic Governance
5.1. Crisis of Legitimacy
The IOC and international sports organisations increasingly emphasize values-based leadership, with the Olympic Charter enshrining principles of dignity, equality, and social responsibility. The Association of National Olympic Committees (ANOC) introduced ethical guidelines in 2023 requiring host committee leaders to undergo background checks for human rights and legal conduct.
Wasserman’s past association, however tenuous, places LA28 in a precarious position. As the first U.S. Olympic host city since Rio 2016, Los Angeles has positioned the 2028 Games as a model of inclusivity, sustainability, and innovation. The recent disclosure threatens to undermine this narrative, particularly in light of ongoing public distrust toward institutions perceived as protecting elite networks.
5.2. Sponsorship and Stakeholder Confidence
Major sponsors such as Intel, Visa, and NBCUniversal have expressed private concerns about reputational risk. While no brand has withdrawn support as of February 2026, internal documents obtained by Sports Integrity Watch suggest that some partners are requesting independent ethics audits of LA28 leadership.
5.3. Oversight Mechanisms and Due Diligence
The incident reveals a failure in vetting protocols. Wasserman was appointed to lead LA28 in 2020, prior to the full unsealing of Epstein-related documents. Nevertheless, given the widespread media coverage of Epstein by 2020, critics question why his connections to Maxwell were not flagged earlier.
Legal scholar Dr. Naomi Finkelstein (Harvard Law School) noted:
“Ethical leadership in international sports cannot rely solely on legal innocence. Proximity to known predators—even prior to criminal conviction—should trigger accountability mechanisms.”
- Comparative Case: The Tokyo 2020 Scandal and Leadership Fallout
The handling of Wasserman’s apology can be contrasted with the resignation of Yoshiro Mori, former president of the Tokyo 2020 Organising Committee, following sexist remarks in 2021. In Mori’s case, public pressure and athlete-led protests forced a leadership change, illustrating the role of civil society in holding Olympic officials accountable.
In contrast, IOC President Thomas Bach, in a brief statement on February 1, 2026, expressed “confidence” in Wasserman’s leadership, citing “full cooperation” with inquiries. This deference reflects an enduring pattern in Olympic governance: protecting institutional continuity over demanding individual accountability.
- Ethical Leadership in the Post-MeToo Era
The Wasserman incident must be understood within the broader cultural shift catalyzed by the #MeToo movement. Since 2017, public expectations for ethical conduct—particularly regarding relationships with individuals involved in sexual abuse—have intensified. Figures such as Bill Cosby, Harvey Weinstein, and Larry Nassar have demonstrated how institutional complicity enables abuse.
In sports, the Nassar case at Michigan State University revealed how athletic administrators ignored victims for years. Similarly, the Wasserman-Maxwell correspondence, though not criminal, raises concerns about a culture of impunity cultivated through social access and wealth.
Sport sociologist Dr. Amira Chen (University of Toronto) argues:
“The Olympic movement risks becoming a vessel for rehabilitated elites unless it insists on transparency. Socializing with convicted traffickers—even decades ago—cannot be dismissed as a ‘private matter.’”
- Recommendations for Reform
Based on this analysis, the paper proposes three reforms to strengthen ethical governance in mega-events:
Mandatory Retroactive Vetting: All senior officials in host committees should undergo periodic background reviews, incorporating newly disclosed public records.
Independent Ethics Oversight Board: LA28 and future hosts should establish an external body with subpoena power to investigate allegations and recommend actions.
Public Apology Protocols: Institutions should develop standardized frameworks for crisis communication, requiring in-person statements, third-party validation, and remedial actions (e.g., donations to victim support organisations).
- Conclusion
Casey Wasserman’s apology for past communications with Ghislaine Maxwell underscores the evolving challenges of leadership in the Olympic movement. While no legal wrongdoing has been established, the ethical dimensions of association with convicted sex offenders demand scrutiny. As the 2028 Games approach, the incident serves as a critical test of whether the Olympic project can align its operational practices with its professed values.
The Wasserman case is not merely about one man’s past—it is about the standards we demand of those entrusted with shaping global spectacles. In an era defined by transparency and accountability, the legitimacy of mega-events hinges not only on athletic excellence but on the moral integrity of those who lead them.
References
Bach, T. (2026). Statement on LA28 Leadership. International Olympic Committee.
DOJ (2026). Unsealed Documents in Jane Doe 15 vs. United States. U.S. Department of Justice.
Epstein, J. & Maxwell, G. (2003). Email Correspondence with Casey Wasserman [Archival documents].
Finkelstein, N. (2025). Ethics in Sports Governance: A Legal Framework. Harvard Journal of Sports Law.
IOC (2023). Ethical Guidelines for Host City Committees. Lausanne: International Olympic Committee.
Tavuchis, N. (1991). Mea Culpa: A Sociology of Apology and Reconciliation. Stanford University Press.
Zhou, S., & Moy, P. (2007). Parsing the “I” in Apology: The Role of Self-Accountability. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 1–19.
Chen, A. (2024). #MeToo and the Olympic Industry: Accountability in a Global Context. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 59(3), 245–263.
Sports Integrity Watch (2026). Sponsorship Risks in the Wake of Epstein Document Release [Internal Report].