Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

The Epstein files release did nothing to clear up the scandal’s biggest question

Some questions will never be answered. But there’s one that DOJ officials really can clear up — if they want to.

US-Britain-crime-justice-Epstein-Maxwell-assault
US-Britain-crime-justice-Epstein-Maxwell-assault
Acting US Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Audrey Strauss, announces charges against Ghislaine Maxwell during a July 2, 2020, press conference in New York City.
Johannes Eisele/AFP via Getty Images
Andrew Prokop
Andrew Prokop is a senior politics correspondent at Vox, covering the White House, elections, and political scandals and investigations. He’s worked at Vox since the site’s launch in 2014, and before that, he worked as a research assistant at the New Yorker’s Washington, DC, bureau.

The Trump administration was legally required to release all documents related to federal investigations of Jeffrey Epstein by Friday, with only limited grounds for withholding documents and full explanations required for any redactions.

It did not do this. Or anything close to it.

The Justice Department released several thousand documents Friday, but top officials acknowledged that they had hundreds of thousands more that weren’t released yet, purportedly because they weren’t reviewed or ready. Most of the documents they did release were photos — either photos the FBI took of Epstein’s properties, or photos Epstein himself possessed. Of the investigative documents released, many were entirely redacted, covered in black boxes.

Some of the leading Republicans who’d pushed the administration for disclosure expressed disappointment in their compliance, with Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) saying the release “grossly fails to comply with both the spirit and the letter of the law.”

Unsurprisingly, these limited releases do nothing to clear up the swirling questions people had about the Epstein scandal.

And while some of those swirling questions amount to conspiracy theories that will never be definitively cleared up by any document release, there is one big question that could be answered to some extent by documents in the government’s possession.

Namely, did investigators believe there were other men involved in Epstein’s sex crimes, and if so, why didn’t they charge any of them?

The Justice Department has documents that would answer this question

Officials at the Justice Department have been very clear that they believe Epstein sexually abused at least hundreds of women or underage girls in the 1990s and 2000s.

But officials have been much less clear on a related question: whether Epstein trafficked certain of these women or girls to any of his prominent and influential friends.

Certain Epstein accusers — most notably, the late Virginia Roberts Giuffre — claimed that this is indeed what happened to them. Giuffre said publicly that Epstein groomed her to have sex with him and his influential friends in exchange for money, which she did for a few years. And Giuffre specifically named some of the men who she said participated, including the UK’s now-former Prince Andrew.

The FBI has been aware of Giuffre’s allegations since 2011. One of the documents in the new release describes some of officials’ conversations with Giuffre that year, in which she “indicated Epstein had instructed her to have sex with numerous associates in both the United States and overseas.”

It is primarily Giuffre’s claims that convinced many people that Epstein was not only abusing victims himself, but that he was also providing young women and underage girls to other men.

Yet no other men were ever charged with Epstein-related crimes. And the big question is: why not?

There are many possible explanations, ranging from the prosaic (evidentiary problems, statutes of limitation) to the nefarious (cover-up) to somewhere in between (questions about witness credibility). But surely, at some point, someone involved in the investigation wrote something down about this, assessing whether Giuffre’s claims appeared credible, whether other women made similar claims, and whether such claims merited further investigation — or not.

More broadly, investigators had to at some point grapple with whether they themselves thought the evidence suggested Epstein was supplying girls or young women to his friends.

Typically, such internal assessments would never see the light of day if they didn’t result in charges. But they should be somewhere in the Justice Department’s Epstein files. So will we ever see them, or not?

See More:

More in Politics

The Logoff
Trump’s DOJ wants to undo January 6 convictionsTrump’s DOJ wants to undo January 6 convictions
The Logoff

How the Trump administration is still trying to rewrite January 6 history.

By Cameron Peters
Politics
Donald Trump messed with the wrong popeDonald Trump messed with the wrong pope
Politics

Trump fought with Pope Francis before. He’s finding Pope Leo XIV to be a tougher foil.

By Christian Paz
Podcasts
A cautionary tale about tax cutsA cautionary tale about tax cuts
Podcast
Podcasts

California cut property taxes in the 1970s. It didn’t go so well.

By Miles Bryan and Noel King
Podcasts
Obama’s top Iran negotiator on Trump’s screwupsObama’s top Iran negotiator on Trump’s screwups
Podcast
Podcasts

Wendy Sherman helped Obama reach a deal with Iran. Here’s what she thinks Trump is doing wrong.

By Kelli Wessinger and Noel King
Politics
The Supreme Court could legalize moonshine, and ruin everything elseThe Supreme Court could legalize moonshine, and ruin everything else
Politics

McNutt v. DOJ could allow the justices to seize tremendous power over the US economy.

By Ian Millhiser
The Logoff
The new Hormuz blockade, briefly explainedThe new Hormuz blockade, briefly explained
The Logoff

Trump tries Iran’s playbook.

By Cameron Peters