Attorneys representing survivors of Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking operation sharply criticized the federal government’s handling of newly released investigative files, accusing the Justice Department of exposing victims while shielding alleged perpetrators.
The comments followed the release of roughly three million pages of government-held documents related to Epstein and his longtime associate, Ghislaine Maxwell. Officials described the release as part of a transparency effort, but survivors’ advocates said it contained serious errors and inadequate protections.
“It is without question that a significant component of Epstein and Maxwell’s trafficking operation involved providing young women and girls to other wealthy and powerful individuals,” said Sigrid McCawley, a partner at a law firm representing multiple survivors. She said the practice gave Epstein and Maxwell leverage over influential figures who were allegedly implicated in the scheme.
McCawley said individuals named or referenced in the documents may deny involvement, but that denial does not alter how the trafficking network functioned.
The Justice Department said certain materials were withheld, including victims’ medical records, child sexual abuse imagery, personally identifying victim information, and records tied to ongoing investigations. However, survivors’ attorneys disputed those claims.
Attorney Brad Edwards said victims have been contacting his office after discovering their names were included in the release despite never having spoken publicly. “We’re getting constant calls from victims whose identities were exposed,” he said. “There are thousands of mistakes.”
Another victims’ attorney, Jennifer Freeman, described the release as chaotic and careless, accusing the department of “ham-fisted redactions” that failed to protect survivors while obscuring the identities of alleged abusers. She said the government missed a congressionally mandated deadline for the release and appeared to be attempting to close the matter without further accountability.
“We will not allow the federal government to simply dump millions of documents and walk away from one of the largest law enforcement failures in U.S. history,” Freeman said.
Attorney Spencer Kuvin cited survivor testimony that Epstein routinely trafficked girls to prominent individuals, often as favors intended to secure influence or benefits in return. He said the newly released records support what victims have long alleged.
A group of 20 Epstein survivors issued a joint statement condemning the document release, saying it exposed those who were harmed while continuing to protect powerful figures.
“As survivors, we should never be the ones named, scrutinized, and re-traumatized while Epstein’s enablers remain hidden,” the statement said. “That is outrageous.”
The criticism echoed claims made by Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year federal prison sentence following her 2021 conviction on sex trafficking charges. In court filings seeking to overturn her conviction, Maxwell argued that dozens of alleged accomplices reached confidential settlements and were never prosecuted. She claimed she was denied the opportunity to call them as witnesses.
In Congress, bipartisan lawmakers who sponsored the transparency law requiring the document release demanded access to unredacted files, arguing that lawmakers cannot properly oversee the Justice Department without reviewing the complete record.
Several Democratic lawmakers also accused Attorney General Pam Bondi of failing to comply with the law, arguing that only a fraction of the files have been released and that the department continues to withhold critical material.
In response, the Justice Department said it coordinated with victims and their attorneys and established a dedicated email address for survivors to report redaction errors so they can be corrected.
Epstein died by suicide in federal custody in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges.
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche acknowledged public frustration surrounding the release, saying expectations for full transparency may not be satisfied by the documents made public so far.