Survivors ‘nervous and skeptical’ over release of some Epstein documents

The release of thousands of pages of documents related to the sexual assaults of late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein has disappointed some who had been anxiously awaiting the documents.

The documents were released as a result of a congressional bill directing the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to release materials related to Epstein’s crimes. But some documents were revised multiple times, and others were not shared publicly at all.

Lawmakers who pushed for the release of the documents said their release was incomplete and called the Justice Department’s efforts disingenuous.

Some legal experts also warned that the broad revisions might only fuel ongoing conspiracy theories.

But Deputy U.S. Attorney 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 materials that could identify them.

The newly released information includes a photo of Epstein’s confidante Ghislaine Maxwell outside Downing Street, a document saying Epstein introduced a 14-year-old girl to US President Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago, and multiple photos of former President Bill Clinton.

Trump has always denied any wrongdoing with Epstein and has not been accused of any crimes by Epstein’s victims. Clinton has never been accused of wrongdoing by survivors of Epstein’s abuse and has denied knowledge of his sex crimes.

Other photos released show Epstein’s home interiors, his overseas travels and celebrities including Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, Mick Jagger, Michael Jackson, Diana Ross and Peter Mandelson.

The presence of a name or photo in a document does not indicate wrongdoing. Many of the people named in the documents or previously released documents related to Epstein have denied any wrongdoing.

But many of the documents were also heavily redacted.

The Justice Department said it would comply with congressional requests to release the documents, but with some stipulations.

It redacted personally identifiable information about Epstein’s victims, material describing child sexual abuse, material describing physical abuse, any records that “would jeopardize an ongoing federal investigation” or any classified document that must be kept secret to protect “national defense or foreign policy.”

In a post on

“In compliance with regulations and applicable laws, we will not redact the names of individuals or politicians unless they are victims.”

Criminal defense lawyer John Day told the BBC he was surprised by the amount of information that had been redacted.

“If you’re a conspiracy theorist, this just adds fuel to the fire,” he said. “I don’t think anyone expected there to be so many revisions. It certainly calls into question whether the Department of Justice is faithfully following the law.”

Mr. Day also noted that the Justice Department must provide Congress with a log of redactions within 15 days of the release of the document.

“Unless you know what was modified, you don’t know what was retained,” he said.

Jay Clayton, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, said in a letter to the judge overseeing the Epstein and Maxwell cases: “Lawyers with privacy interests for victims favor redacting the faces of the women in Epstein’s photos, even though not all of the women were victims, because it would be impossible for the department to identify everyone in the photos.”

Clayton added that “this approach to the photos may be viewed by some as overly edited,” but “the department believes that within the compressed time frame, edits should be erred to protect the victims.”

Survivors of Epstein’s abuse were among those most upset by the release.

Marina Lacerda, who was 14 when Epstein abused her, told the BBC that she and other survivors had long been waiting for the documents to be released.

“We’re a little disappointed that they’re still hanging around and distracting us with other things,” she said.

“Some survivors remain nervous and skeptical about how the remaining documents will be released. We are very concerned that it will still be redacted as it was today.”

Epstein survivor Liz Stein told BBC Radio 4’s Today program that she believed the Department of Justice had “really blatantly violated the Epstein Documents Transparency Act,” which requires the release of all documents.

She noted that survivors do worry about the possibility of “a slow rollout of incomplete information without any context.”

“We just want all the evidence of these crimes.”

Baroness Helena Kennedy, a Labor MP who is a human rights lawyer in the House of Lords, said she was told the changes to the document were to protect victims.

She told the BBC’s Today program that “the authorities are always worried” about “allowing people to be further maligned in the public mind”.

She said many of Epstein’s survivors seemed “very eager” for the material to come to light, but added that “if they knew exactly what was in it, they might not be so keen”.

Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna, who along with Republican Rep. Thomas Massie is responsible for releasing the documents, said the documents released were “incomplete,” adding that he was considering options such as impeachment, contempt of court or referral for prosecution.

“Our law requires them to explain what the revisions are,” Khanna said. “There is no single explanation.”

Massie echoed Khanna’s statement and posted on social media that Attorney General Pam Bondi and other Justice Department officials could be subject to future DOJ prosecution for not complying with document requests.

He said the release of the document was “grossly inconsistent with the spirit and letter of the law” of the Epstein Documents Transparency Act.

Following the announcement, the White House called the Trump administration “the most transparent in history,” adding that it had “done more for victims than Democrats have ever done before.”

Branch was asked in an interview with ABC News whether all of the documents in the so-called Epstein dossier that mention Trump will be released in the coming weeks.

“Assuming it complies with the law, yes,” Branch said. “So there was no effort to stop anything because there was Donald J. Trump’s name or anybody else’s name, Bill Clinton’s name, Reid Huffman’s name.

“So there’s no effort to stop it or not stop it.”

“We will not redact the names of celebrities associated with Epstein,” he added.