Epstein Files Released: Why Survivors Are Still Nervous
Survivors remain nervous as Epstein files release reveals heavy redactions, missing photos, and unanswered questions fueling outrage and conspiracy fears.
The release of thousands of pages of documents related to the abuses of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein has disappointed some who were eagerly awaiting the files.
The documents were released due to a congressional law that mandated the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to make public materials related to Epstein's crimes. However, some documents have been heavily redacted, and others have not been released publicly at all.
Lawmakers who pushed for the release of the documents have called the release incomplete and criticized the DOJ's efforts as disingenuous.
Some legal experts have also warned that withholding information could further fuel ongoing conspiracy theories.
But U.S. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said on Friday—the day the materials were released—that the department had identified more than 1,200 Epstein victims or their relatives and withheld material that could identify them.
The recently released information includes a photo of Epstein's close associate Ghislaine Maxwell outside Downing Street, a document claiming Epstein introduced a 14-year-old girl to then-U.S. President Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago, and several photos of former President Bill Clinton.
One of the missing files showed a stack of framed photos on a desk. The photos included Bill Clinton and one of a pope. An open drawer contained a photo of Trump, Epstein, and Maxwell.
Other missing files included photos of a room that appeared to contain a massage table and nude photographs and paintings.
It was unclear why the files were no longer available.
In a post on X on Saturday night, the DOJ wrote: "As we receive additional information, we will continue to review and redact photographs and other materials in accordance with the law, exercising extreme caution." Trump has consistently denied any wrongdoing in connection with Epstein, and Epstein's victims have not accused him of any crimes. Clinton has also never been accused of wrongdoing by Epstein's abuse survivors, and he has denied having any knowledge of his sexual offenses.
Other released photos show the interiors of Epstein's homes, his foreign travels, as well as celebrities including Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, Mick Jagger, Michael Jackson, Diana Ross, and Peter Mandelson.
The presence of a name or picture in the files does not indicate wrongdoing. Many of the individuals identified in the Epstein-related files or previous releases have denied any wrongdoing. However, many documents also contain extensive redactions.
The DOJ said it would comply with Congress's request to release the documents, subject to certain conditions.
These include redacting personally identifiable information about Epstein's victims, material depicting child sexual abuse, material depicting physical abuse, any records that "could jeopardize an active federal investigation," or any classified documents that must remain secret to protect "national defense or foreign policy."
The DOJ said it is "not redacting the names of any politicians," and added a statement attributed to Blanche, which said: "The only information being redacted from the documents is what is required by law – period.
"In accordance with the law and applicable statutes, we are not redacting the names of individuals or politicians unless they are victims."
Software Services
 |
Start your own gaming platform for just $3,000 |
"If you believe in conspiracy theories, this will only fuel the fire," he said. "I don't think anyone anticipated this many redactions." This certainly raises the question of how faithfully the DOJ is adhering to the law."
Mr. Day also noted that the Justice Department is required to inform Congress within 15 days of the files' release about what is being redacted.
"Until you know what's being redacted, you don't know what's being concealed," he said.
In a letter to the judges overseeing the Epstein and Maxwell cases, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Jay Clayton, stated: "Given the privacy interests of the victims, redacting the faces of women in photographs with Epstein is appropriate, even if not all the women are victims, because it is not feasible for the Department to identify every individual in the photographs."
Clayton further stated that "this approach to the photographs may be viewed by some as over-redacting" — but "the Department believes that, given the time constraints, it is better to err on the side of caution in redacting information to protect the victims."
Victims of Epstein's abuse are most disappointed by this release.
“We’re a little frustrated that they’re still dragging this out and distracting us with other things,” they said.
“Some victims are still nervous and skeptical about how they’re going to release the rest of the files. We’re very concerned that it’s going to be edited in the same way that this was today.”
Epstein victim Liz Stein told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that she felt the Department of Justice was “acting very brazenly” against the “Epstein Files Transparency Act,” the law requiring the release of all documents.
She said victims were very concerned about the possibility of “incomplete information being released piecemeal without any context.”
“We just want all the evidence of these crimes to come out.”
Baroness Helena Kennedy, a human rights lawyer and Labour Party member in the UK House of Lords, said she had been told the redactions in the documents were made to protect victims.
“Authorities are always concerned,” she told that “people shouldn’t be subjected to further humiliation in the public eye.”
She said many of Epstein’s victims seemed “very keen” to have this material released, but added that “if they knew exactly what was in it, they might not be so keen.”
Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna, who spearheaded the release of the files along with Republican Congressman Thomas Massie, said the release was “incomplete” and that he was considering options such as impeachment, contempt, or referrals for prosecution.
“Our law requires them to explain the redactions,” Khanna said. “Not a single explanation has been given.” Massie supported Khanna's statement and posted on social media that Attorney General Pam Bondi and other Justice Department officials could be prosecuted by future Justice Departments for failing to comply with document requests.
He said the release of the documents "violates both the spirit and the letter of the Epstein Files Transparency Act."
Following the release, the White House described the Trump administration as "the most transparent in history," and said it had "done more for victims than the Democrats."
In an interview with ABC News, Blanche was asked if all documents mentioning Trump in the so-called Epstein files would be released in the coming weeks. Blanche said, "If it's consistent with the law, yes." "So there's no attempt to hide anything because it has Donald J. Trump's name in it or anybody else's name, Bill Clinton's name, Reid Hoffman's name.
"There's no attempt to hide anything or not hide anything because of that."
He added, "We are not redacting the names of prominent men and women associated with Epstein."
Thank you for reading this content.
What's Your Reaction?
Like
0
Dislike
0
Love
0
Funny
0
Angry
0
Sad
0
Wow
0
