Veteran Epstein investigator and victims’ attorney Bradley Edwards has sharply criticized the Justice Department’s handling of the Epstein files release, arguing that selective disclosures, excessive redactions, and glaring omissions conceal far more than they expose about the late financier’s network.
Under the Epstein Files Transparency Act—signed by President Trump in November 2025—the DOJ was mandated to release all unclassified records by December 19. Initial batches included thousands of pages: photos, emails, flight logs, and investigative materials, some mentioning figures like former President Bill Clinton and Trump himself (with no new allegations of wrongdoing). Yet Edwards, who has represented over 200 survivors, points to critical absences, such as the 2007 draft indictment against Epstein and key prosecution memos that could illuminate non-prosecution decisions.
The releases have been marred by inconsistencies: heavy redactions shielding associates’ names beyond legal requirements, while inadvertently exposing some victims’ identities—prompting outrage and calls for better protections. Bipartisan lawmakers, including Reps. Ro Khanna (D-CA) and Thomas Massie (R-KY), accuse the DOJ of violating the law through over-redaction and delays.
The bombshell came on December 24 when the DOJ announced the “sudden” discovery of over one million additional documents from the FBI and Southern District of New York, claiming weeks more for review. Edwards and critics view this as suspicious, questioning how such a vast trove evaded prior “exhaustive” searches promised to Congress.
Edwards warns that the staggered, sanitized rollout erodes trust, potentially protecting powerful individuals while denying survivors full accountability. As threats of contempt against Attorney General Pam Bondi mount, this selective process leaves the public with fragments—revealing little new on co-conspirators while Epstein’s elite web remains largely obscured.
Leave a Reply