Missing Epstein Records Raise Fresh Questions Over Justice Department Disclosure, Including Files Linked to Trump Allegation

A sweeping cache of records made public by the U.S. Justice Department as part of its review of investigations into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein appears to omit significant documents connected to a woman who accused Donald Trump of sexual assault, according to an examination by The New York Times.

The absent materials involve FBI memoranda summarizing interviews conducted after the woman came forward in 2019, shortly after Epstein’s arrest. She alleged that both Epstein and Trump assaulted her decades earlier when she was a minor.

Interview Summaries Listed — But Not Released

An index included in the public release shows that the FBI conducted four interviews related to the woman’s claims and prepared written summaries of each.

However, only one of those summaries — detailing her allegations against Epstein — was disclosed. The remaining three summaries are not part of the publicly available files.

In addition, the index indicates that investigators’ original interview notes were preserved in the case file.

Yet those notes were also not released, despite the department having published similar documentation for other witnesses and alleged victims in the Epstein investigation.

The Justice Department has not provided a detailed explanation for the omissions.

In statements to The New York Times, officials said documents may have been withheld because they were privileged, duplicative, or potentially tied to an ongoing federal inquiry.

They did not directly clarify why the memoranda concerning the woman’s allegations were excluded.

Broader Context of the Document Release

The extensive disclosure was mandated under legislation signed last year by President Trump following bipartisan pressure in Congress to make Epstein-related materials public.

Officials previously described the release as encompassing all documents submitted to the FBI by members of the public.

At the time, the department acknowledged that some records included “sensationalist and unfounded” claims about prominent individuals, including the president.

Trump has consistently denied any wrongdoing connected to Epstein. A White House spokesperson reiterated this week that Trump had been “fully cleared” of any involvement tied to the financier.

Still, the absence of specific interview summaries has fueled renewed scrutiny of how the Justice Department handled the redactions and disclosures.

Legal Boundaries on Withholding Information

The statute governing the document release permits redactions in limited circumstances — such as protecting the identities of victims, shielding graphic content involving abuse, or safeguarding ongoing investigations.

However, it explicitly bars officials from withholding materials solely to prevent embarrassment or reputational damage to public figures.

Lawmakers and some survivors of Epstein’s abuse have criticized the rollout of the files.

They argue that certain victims’ identifying details were insufficiently redacted, including nude photographs of young women, while portions of records referencing allegations against other prominent men were heavily obscured or withheld.

Details of the Woman’s Account

The woman first contacted authorities in July 2019, days after Epstein’s arrest on federal sex-trafficking charges.

According to one FBI interview summary that was released, she stated that as a teenager in the 1980s, she was lured under the pretense of babysitting at a property on Hilton Head Island, South Carolina.

Instead, she alleged she encountered Epstein alone, who supplied her with alcohol and drugs before repeatedly assaulting her.

In a later 2025 memorandum included in the public release, officials documented her claim that Epstein had introduced her to Trump, and that she alleged Trump assaulted her in the mid-1980s when she was between 13 and 15 years old.

The documents do not contain any formal assessment by investigators regarding the credibility of her accusations.

The woman told agents she did not realize Epstein’s full identity until 2019, when a friend sent her a photograph that she said allowed her to recognize him as her alleged attacker.

According to the released memo, the image was a widely circulated photograph of Epstein and Trump together. She permitted agents to photograph the image on her phone but requested that Trump’s image be cropped out.

Her attorney explained that she feared retaliation if additional well-known individuals were implicated.

Gaps in the Public Record

A review of pagination and serial numbers within the released documents suggests that more than 50 pages related to her allegations may be missing.

The absence of these records was previously reported by journalist Roger Sollenberger and by NPR.

Representative Robert Garcia of California, the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, stated that he reviewed unredacted Epstein materials at the Justice Department and found that interview summaries concerning the woman’s allegations were absent there as well.

He noted that these materials have also not been provided to the Oversight Committee, which issued a subpoena last year seeking all investigative records tied to Epstein.

Garcia said the department has not offered a satisfactory explanation and indicated that Democratic lawmakers intend to pursue a separate inquiry into the missing documents.

Subsequent Legal Proceedings

The woman later joined a civil lawsuit against Epstein’s estate in 2019 but withdrew her claim. Public court filings do not specify whether she received any settlement.

Records from 2021 indicate that she was deemed ineligible for compensation from a victims’ compensation fund established for Epstein survivors, though no reason was provided.

Continuing Controversy

The partial disclosure of Epstein-related files has once again placed the Justice Department under intense scrutiny.

While officials maintain that redactions were legally justified, unanswered questions about missing interview summaries — particularly those involving allegations against a sitting president — are likely to keep the matter at the forefront of congressional and public debate.

(This article originally appeared in The New York Times.)

#JeffreyEpstein #DonaldTrump #JusticeDepartment #EpsteinFiles #CongressionalOversight #USPolitics #FederalInvestigation #BreakingNews