23 hours ago [Add as preferred on Google](https://www.google.com/preferences/source?q=bbc.com) Cayden McBride Cayden McBride says the Epstein files still matter - even if headlines have recently moved on After Cayden McBride finishes class in Rome, Georgia, the 19-year-old goes home, opens his laptop, and starts searching. For the past few months, he has been spending hours at a time combing through the Jeffrey Epstein files on the US Department of Justice (DOJ) website and following others online who are doing the same. Flight logs. Transcripts. Images. Videos. The material released by the DOJ has given new insight into the crimes of the late convicted sex offender and into his high-profile connections. McBride believes the Epstein files still matter, even if the headlines have moved on to the Iran war recently. "As a Christian, I don't believe anybody should endure what these women have been through," he says. "There is so much bad stuff in these files." McBride was a self-described "Trump guy" and "very anti-establishment". He said he would always defend the US president in the belief that Donald Trump's Make America Great Again (Maga) movement stood for exposing corruption. But the DOJ's delay in releasing all the files, and the perceived lack of accountability afterwards, has left him and many others disheartened with the movement, the president and especially with Pam Bondi, Trump's former attorney general. Bondi was removed from her post just last week, to be replaced, in the interim, by her deputy Todd Blanche. Trump has lauded Bondi for doing a "tremendous job" and Blanche denied reports that his predecessor's handling of the Epstein files had been a factor in her departure. But McBride hailed the changing of the guard, expressing hope that there could now be renewed focus on the Epstein issue. His wish was granted this week, from an unlikely quarter. The Epstein story came crashing back into the news when First Lady Melania Trump unexpectedly denied associating with him and [called for a congressional hearing](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3ex07l1qvpo) for his victims. It is unclear how much that will galvanise interest, but Bondi's removal has done little to quiet the discontent amongst Trump's supporters like McBride. He thinks she needed to go because she wasn't prosecuting "the people she needed to". He thinks there might be some "high-status arrests", but after that, other things like Iran, immigration raids and the midterms will, in his words, sweep the Epstein story under the rug. Maga fallout over Epstein ------------------------- Many Epstein conspiracy theorists have long counted themselves amongst Trump's most ardent supporters. They believe that Epstein's death in prison was not a suicide, as the FBI concluded, and for years have insinuated that the government was involved with some sort of cover-up, protecting powerful people whom they believe participated in his crimes. It's a belief that has been echoed by many of Trump's closest and former allies, such as Vice-President JD Vance, former Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene and Kash Patel, whom he tapped to lead the FBI. As long ago as 2021, Vance tweeted: "What possible interest would the US government have in keeping Epstein's clients secret?" During his 2024 campaign, Trump himself told Fox News he would "go a long way" towards releasing the Epstein files. But after returning to the White House, he changed his tone. That led to a very public fallout with Greene, who had been the representative in McBride's district, and some other members of the Republican Party. Trump later dropped his opposition to releasing the files after pushback from Epstein's victims and members of his own party, signing a law that compelled the DOJ to release thousands of files. DOJ officials say they have now released all of the files they can, other than certain items permitted to be exempt. But many Epstein conspiracy theorists don't buy it. In an interview with Vanity Fair last year - portions of which she later disputed - Chief of Staff Susie Wiles said that the Epstein files could cost the Republican Party some of its most important new voters - young men, who turned to Trump in 2024, particularly those who had been drawn to promises of accountability and reform. And while the vast majority of Republicans still back the president, there are signs that the Epstein fallout has chipped away at his diverse coalition of supporters, who range from middle-of-the-road business owners who want to lower taxes to very online young men. A poll conducted by the Economist/YouGov in February found [that 16% of voters who backed Trump](https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5742548-poll-trump-epstein-crimes/#:~:text=Both%20questions%20showed%20a%20party%2Dline%20split:%2091,up%20Epstein's%20crimes%2C%20compared%20with%2013%20percent) during the last election thought he was covering up Epstein's crimes. Of those who identify themselves as Maga, 11% thought the president was part of a cover-up. Trump has consistently denied any wrongdoing in relation to Epstein, but his own history with the disgraced financier continues to make headlines. The president appears to have been friends with Epstein for a number of years before falling out - in the early 2000s, according to Trump, two years before Epstein was first arrested. The US president is mentioned thousands of times in the files released by the DOJ, including in emails and correspondence sent by Epstein himself to others. House Oversight Committee Democrats/Reuters Trump and Epstein are known to have once kept a similar circle Mona Charen, a columnist and policy expert at the Bulwark, a publication supportive of conservative principles but critical of the Maga movement, agrees that conspiracy theories around Epstein have been especially hard for the president to shake off. "I have been one of those people who has always been very sceptical when people would say, 'well, this will hurt Trump, that will hurt Trump', and I would always say, 'dream on'. "He's quite untouchable, but on this one? The whole concept that Maga and Trumpism was going to be a breath of fresh air that was going to reveal things that had been hidden is gone." Bondi attracted particular criticism within the Maga movement for promising to release an alleged client list associated with Epstein, only for her department to later say that no such list existed. Epstein campaigners across the political spectrum have voiced their hopes that the change at the top of the DOJ could be a turning point in the Trump administration's handling of the Epstein saga. Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna, who co-authored the act that forced the DOJ files release, told BBC Newsnight last week that Republicans should make clear to the new attorney general that there could be "no confirmation \[of their position\] unless you commit to the release of the rest of the Epstein files". Watch: Next Attorney General must release remaining Epstein files, Ro Khanna tells BBC Newsnight Among Bondi's defenders on the Epstein issue are Mike Cernovich, a right-wing commentator. Cernovich was one of many online influencers who took part in a photo op at the Oval Office in February 2025, walking away with a binder labelled "The Epstein Files: Phase One". The binder turned out to contain nothing new and he along with others involved in the stunt were accused of betraying the movement. Reacting to Bondi's firing, Cernovich wrote in a post on X: "Bondi was trying to do something good but didn't know the back story. I blame those who claim 'there are no more Epstein files' after the binder incident. There were A LOT of them. And there's more unreleased." If anywhere is a test for how critical this issue is for Trump, it is the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), an annual political conference for right-leaning activists and politicians. For many who attended CPAC last month in Dallas, Texas, the Epstein files still mattered. Robert Agee said he felt let down by Trump: "When President Trump said 'are we still talking about the Epstein files?', that was the moment Maga died. That was when Maga took off its hat. He betrayed us. He ran on that." "I think people who still align with Maga are just sort of brainwashed at this point," he says. "There has to be a certain point when you realise this was not the man promised to us." McBride says some of his friends now question whether they will vote again. As for him, his decision is clear. "It won't stop me voting, but I am definitely not voting for anybody implicated by the Epstein files," he says. "Or anybody that is sponsored by President Trump." Watch: Epstein survivors share photos of themselves from the age when he abused them

In the days since [Pam Bondi](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/pam-bondi)’s exit from [Donald Trump](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/donaldtrump)’s justice department, Jeffrey Epstein survivors and transparency advocates have been confronted by mixed messaging, prompting questions about whether a full accounting of his crimes would ever be revealed. Legal veterans told the Guardian that authorities’ decisions – such as Bondi’s failure to appear for a congressional subpoena about her handling of Epstein investigative files – portend poorly for accountability. Moreover, her replacement’s comments about the status of Epstein investigations has been perceived by some as an effort to acknowledge prior missteps without presenting definitive solutions. Bondi’s non-appearance at her scheduled congressional deposition did not come as a surprise. Trump’s Department of Justice, now helmed temporarily by his former criminal defense attorney Todd Blanche, had [told](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/03/pam-bondi-justice-department-epstein-files) the House oversight committee that Bondi would not appear for the 14 April hearing. Committee members said they were told this non-appearance was because Bondi “is no longer attorney general and was [subpoenaed](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/mar/17/pam-bondi-epstein-files-house-committee) in her capacity as attorney general”. A committee spokesperson [said](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/08/pam-bondi-house-hearing-epstein-files): “Since Pam Bondi is no longer attorney general, Chairman Comer will speak with Republican members and the Department of Justice about the status of the deposition subpoena and confer on next steps.” Comer also reportedly engaged in behind-the-scenes efforts to avoid Bondi’s deposition prior to her removal, [according to the New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/01/us/politics/bondi-epstein-files-doj-trump.html). Robert Garcia, the ranking Democrat on the committee, vowed that his colleagues would take action after Bondi failed to appear. “Pam Bondi is evading a lawful congressional subpoena by failing to appear before the oversight committee for a deposition about the Epstein files and the White House cover-up,” he said in a statement. “She must appear before the committee, and if she continues to ignore the law, Oversight Democrats will move forward with contempt proceedings immediately.” He [added](https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/news/press-releases/ranking-member-robert-garcia-statement-on-pam-bondi-failing-to-appear-for-deposition-before-oversight-committee): “We will fight until there is true accountability and justice.” Adding to the confusion is the committee’s insistence that Bondi will eventually appear. An oversight committee spokesperson said in a statement: “Ranking Member Garcia is a hypocrite. The Clintons defied lawful subpoenas for seven months, and he said nothing and never wrote a letter to the chairman. When the oversight committee moved to hold them in contempt of Congress, he voted no. Last week, the Department of Justice indicated that Pam Bondi would not appear for the 14 April deposition because she is no longer attorney general. We are working to reschedule the deposition. Ranking Member Garcia’s outrage is purely performative.” Whether this push for transparency and justice will yield anything in the way of actionable information remains ever unclear as the Epstein investigation remains mired in political logjams despite broad public support for accountability. Blanche’s recent comments have only added to the confusion, prompting questions about what’s next in the saga. Blanche claimed on Wednesday that the DoJ would back additional inquiries into Epstein, [saying](https://www.semafor.com/article/04/15/2026/jeffrey-epstein-controversy-ag-todd-blanche-supports-hearings) at the Semafor World Economy conference that he would support congressional hearings with victims. “We have said repeatedly from day one that if there’s any victim that wants to come forward and talk about what they know, whether it’s something that happened by Mr Epstein, who’s dead, or another individual or individuals, that’s what the FBI does,” he said. “I have never said we’re [moving on](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/feb/02/first-thing-todd-blanche-review-jeffrey-epstein-sex-trafficking-case-over),” insisted Blanche, who this summer interviewed Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell in a sit-down that was widely derided for questions that many felt were easy, except in relation to Trump’s political opponents. “There’s a lot of people in this country that correctly feel that we did not get closure with Jeffrey Epstein … I couldn’t agree with that more.” Two weeks prior to these comments, however, Blanche [downplayed](https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/5814657-jeffrey-epstein-files-todd-blanche/) controversy surrounding the DoJ’s handling of these files. While the Epstein Files Transparency Act (EFTA) mandated that the justice department release all investigative documents by 19 December, authorities repeatedly missed this deadline – and questions remain about whether documents purportedly withheld under lawful exemptions should actually be disclosed. Spencer Kuvin of Goldlaw, who has represented numerous Epstein victims, addressed Bondi’s absence and Blanche’s recent statements. “These developments only underscore how fragile accountability becomes when those in power blur the lines between advocacy and obligation,” Kuvin said. “If the court finds willful noncompliance, contempt isn’t just appropriate – it’s necessary to preserve the integrity of the process. “As for Mr Blanche, trust is earned through transparency and action, not titles or affiliations. Right now, for the victims, this feels less like progress and more like a standstill – justice delayed yet again, with too many questions and not enough answers.” Ann Olivarius, a longtime women’s rights attorney who founded the law firm McAllister Olivarius, said the Bondi subpoena “doesn’t evaporate because Pam Bondi was fired”. She added: “Bondi oversaw the handling (or mishandling) of these files and was the attorney general when survivors’ identifying details were exposed. She owes Congress her testimony, and she owes these women an explanation. If she refuses, contempt is entirely appropriate.” Olivarius also said: “There is no reason to believe that Todd Blanche will be in a substantial\[ly\] different position than Bondi – the role of AG is now akin to a courtier at a medieval court: whatever power he wields must be to please the king. Todd Blanche has sent contradictory signals at extraordinary speed, and it is starting to feel like intentional strategic ambiguity, speaking the language of transparency while engineering its limits.” Olivarius pointed to the politics surrounding Epstein in relation to Trump, who was among Epstein’s many rich and powerful associates. Trump said he and Epstein had a falling-out prior to Epstein’s conviction on state-level prostitution counts in Florida. The Epstein controversy has shadowed Trump’s presidency for more than a year. Trump vowed on the campaign trail that he would release the files – ramping uphis far-right fan base, who believe that Epstein was part of an elite global cabal that trafficked girls. Trump’s justice department backtracked on releasing files prior to the EFTA’s passage, however, prompting extensive criticism. A July DoJ [memo](https://www.justice.gov/opa/media/1407001/dl) claiming there was no client list and that there was no evidence “that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties” ultimately set the stage for congressional action. “I expect a defensive approach that follows what the law strictly requires, not what justice demands,” Olivarius said of DoJ’s future treatment of these files. “However, he \[Blanche\] will not be operating in a vacuum and congressional oversight will be critical. Bipartisan pressure is real and growing, and the House oversight committee’s plan to call co-conspirators to testify is significant here.” Neama Rahmani, founder of West Coast Trial Lawyers and a former federal prosecutor, said he did not expect much would change at the justice department under Blanche. “Blanche doesn’t look like he’s going to move the needle,” Rahmani said, noting that “he’s done a lot of talking for Bondi on this”. At this point, Rahmani said, lawmakers are likely the best bet in getting accountability – by using courts to enforce legal demands. “I think it’s really a job for Congress,” Rahmani said. “I really think the House oversight committee should file a lawsuit, get a district judge involved, have him or her review the documents in camera, outside the presence of the public, to see if what is being withheld on the basis of responsiveness or privilege is appropriate,” he said of files withheld. “That’s what a judge is there to do.” “We really need Congress to challenge the DoJ, and I just don’t see that happening yet.” Asked for comment about Blanche’s plans on future handling of the Epstein files, a justice department spokesperson said: “His comments speak for themselves.” Asked for comment, the White House said: “Just as President Trump has said, he’s been totally exonerated on anything relating to Epstein. And by releasing thousands of pages of documents, cooperating with the House oversight committee’s subpoena request, signing the Epstein Files Transparency Act, and calling for more investigations into Epstein’s Democrat friends, President Trump has done more for Epstein’s victims than anyone before him.” It added: “The DoJ has repeatedly been clear: they encourage any victims of [Jeffrey Epstein](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/jeffrey-epstein), who wish to speak, to contact the FBI and any survivor who has information on an abuser is encouraged to contact federal law enforcement.”

It’s been a big week for the Trump Justice Department, beginning with the arraignment of an alleged would-be presidential assassin on Monday. Just one day after charges were brought against Cole Tomas Allen, who prosecutors say attempted to assassinate President Donald Trump at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, the DOJ pivoted to a new target: Former FBI Director James Comey, who is facing a second set of [incredibly flimsy federal charges](https://www.vox.com/the-logoff-newsletter-trump/487279/james-comey-indictment-seashells-threat-trump-blanche-revenge) — this time, for allegedly threatening the president with a message written in seashells. It’s a lot to keep track of, and overseeing it all is acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, formerly Trump’s personal lawyer. Blanche, the deputy attorney general, got the top job on a temporary basis after his boss, Attorney General Pam Bondi, was fired earlier in the month; now, he’s auditioning for the real thing. CNN’s chief legal affairs correspondent Paula Reid told _Today, Explained_ co-host Noel King earlier this week that the job is Blanche’s to lose. She explains how he got here, how he’s doing so far, and how Trump administration insiders and the MAGA movement feel about him as a potential attorney general. Below is an excerpt of their conversation, edited for length and clarity. There’s much more in the full episode, so listen to [_Today, Explained_](https://www.vox.com/today-explained-podcast) wherever you get podcasts, including [Apple Podcasts](https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/today-explained/id1346207297), [Pandora](https://pandora.com/podcast/today-explained/PC:140), and [Spotify](https://open.spotify.com/show/3pXx5SXzXwJxnf4A5pWN2A). **Has \[Blanche\] done anything that has surprised you?** Todd Blanche has actually, I think, really met the moment perfectly, especially in the larger context of my reporting on his audition for attorney general. \[The Correspondents’ Dinner shooting\] is the first thing that has happened to the Blanche Justice Department as opposed to being something they’ve done or what we’ve seen throughout the Trump Justice Department, which has been a lot of self-inflicted controversies: the handling of the Epstein files, the controversial firings, decisions they’ve made around cases and trying to charge people. That’s all self-inflicted. But when you’re the attorney general, you’re going to deal with a Boston Marathon bombing or a San Bernardino shooting. This is not quite of that level, but it is certainly a massive event that they have to respond to. That is a real test for the attorney general, and so far it’s been a textbook response from him. He did the Sunday shows. He took questions. And then we heard from him again after Monday’s arraignment. **Pam Bondi, of course, was fired earlier this month. Tell me about how Todd Blanche ended up in this job.** He started out as a federal prosecutor at the Southern District of New York for a long time. Then he went into white-collar practice, and then he joined the Trump legal team around 2023 when Trump was in the middle of those four major legal cases. Todd worked on the two federal cases brought by Jack Smith, and he also represented \[Trump\] in New York on the hush money case. But what really distinguished Todd Blanche is that Trump lawyers come and go. I’ve probably talked to 40 of them over the past decade, right? Todd flourished. Yes, his client was convicted in New York, but he kept him out of jail, and ultimately their legal strategy on the federal cases resulted in Trump never facing trial on either one of those. In Trump’s eyes, Todd Blanche is the guy who kept him out of jail. **What has he been up to since he ended up in the acting role?** He’s been a busy bee. In my reporting, I talked to over a dozen high-level people inside DOJ. Some people I know don’t particularly care for Todd as a person. There was a general consensus, though, this is his job to lose, but in order to keep it, he’s going to have to deliver on weaponization for the president. That means Trump wants his political adversaries to be prosecuted, and that is something that they have not been able to do yet. Judges and grand juries have to sign off on this. They’ve largely been reluctant, and so they’re getting tripped up by the checks in the system. But he’s made it clear this is what he wants. So ultimately, in order to get this job and to keep it, he needs to bring a case against the political adversary. **Does MAGA like Todd Blanche?** The two knocks on Todd Blanche are that “he’s not MAGA enough” and that he doesn’t get the Trump DOJ away from the “original sin” of how they’ve handled the Epstein files. I have talked to officials inside the administration, including at least one White House official who said, yeah, we feel that Todd is not MAGA enough. He doesn’t do enough for the base. But even those people who in past stories have been pretty tough on Todd said, “When it comes to being the acting attorney general, he’s done the job. We’re not opposed to him having this job.” When it comes to the Epstein files, one administration official told me that that is the original sin of the Trump Justice Department. And by that, they mean Pam Bondi’s repeated bungling of the rollout of those files, promising there was new information — those binders that she handed out that really had just a rehash of things that were already in the public domain, her saying that she had the client list on her desk when really there’s no client list. Eventually, they just had Todd take over the messaging. He was also the one who went down and met with Ghislaine Maxwell. He was the one who oversaw the release of the documents. He has been front and center on this. So when he becomes the acting attorney general, the concern from some administration officials is, well, putting him in charge isn’t going to get us past our biggest embarrassment, which is Epstein. But I don’t think in Trump’s eyes that’s going to be disqualifying. **Is this job his if he wants it? Are there any other serious contenders?** My sources say this job is Todd’s to lose. Now, even if you get it, every Trump attorney general has been fired, replaced, or resigned. So we’ll see. But there are certainly other people nipping at Todd’s heels. But there are also some people in the wings. One is the US Attorney \[for the District of Columbia\] Jeanine Pirro. It was funny — the night of the dinner and the shooting, Todd was at the White House. He did the press conference with the president, said there will be charges, there’ll be a gun charge, maybe a law enforcement-related charge. Thirty, 45 minutes later, Pirro did a press conference, and man, she was yelling the specific statutes into that microphone. It felt a little like one-upsmanship — maybe it was just her enthusiasm, and I’m reading something into it, but her name has certainly been mentioned. We have two and a half more years. There’s probably time for everyone to be attorney general if Todd can’t or won’t stay in the job for two and a half years. It’s a tough job under any administration. But this one really brings some unique challenges. See More: * [Podcasts](https://www.vox.com/podcasts) * [Politics](https://www.vox.com/politics) * [Today, Explained podcast](https://www.vox.com/today-explained-podcast)

[](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2026/may/06/jeffrey-epstein-leon-black#img-1) Illustration: Guardian Design/Patrick T. Fallon/Bloomberg via Getty Images Lawyers for Leon Black, the billionaire investor who has been accused in a civil lawsuit of raping a teenage girl inside [Jeffrey Epstein](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/jeffrey-epstein)’s New York townhouse in 2002, reached out to a powerful federal judge in 2024 to raise doubts about the alleged victim’s claims, a Guardian investigation has found. The move set off a months-long court proceeding, which was conducted outside public view and led the US district judge Jed Rakoff to reverse a $2.5m award that had been granted to the alleged victim in a separate Epstein-related class action lawsuit, according to court records. She was later given a much smaller settlement in the class action case. Jane Doe, as she is known in court filings, has claimed she was [trafficked by Epstein](https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/jeffrey-epstein-charged-manhattan-federal-court-sex-trafficking-minors) and raped by Black when she was a teenager more than two decades ago. The Guardian’s investigation is revealing new details about the private communications in Black’s legal campaign, which undermined Doe in her civil lawsuit against the Wall Street billionaire. In a recent court order, Doe faced a significant setback when Jessica Clarke – the federal judge presiding over her civil lawsuit against Black – [sanctioned Doe and her former lawyer for “serious, sanctionable misconduct in this case”. Judge Clarke said Doe’s former lawyer](https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-judge-sanctions-leon-black-rape-accuser-lawyer-2026-04-24/) had “repeatedly lied to the court and opposing counsel”, and directed her client to destroy a social media account. Doe was sanctioned for having “falsified” some sonogram images that appeared in personal journals, which were submitted to the court as evidence of her abuse by Epstein. However, it was not a complete victory for Black, as the judge also ruled that the high-stakes lawsuit could proceed. Black, the [74-year-old former Apollo Global Management CEO](https://airmail.news/issues/2023-8-5/the-158-million-question), paid [Epstein $170m](https://airmail.news/issues/2023-8-19/the-158-million-question-part-ii), according to an [investigation by the Senate finance committee](https://www.finance.senate.gov/ranking-members-news/wyden-releases-new-information-on-financing-of-jeffrey-epsteins-operations-by-billionaire-leon-black-seeks-documents-from-trump-administration), which he says was for tax and estate planning. Black has denied allegations that he raped or ever met Doe, who is now 40 years old. He has never been charged with any crimes in connection to Epstein or otherwise. The Epstein scandal has prompted questions about why the accused sex trafficker’s elite circle of friends and associates has not faced greater scrutiny. That may change. Black is due to testify before the House oversight committee on 26 June, according to a person familiar with the matter, as part of the committee’s investigation into, among other things, [Epstein’s sex-trafficking rings](https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/03.3.2026-Leon-Black-TI-Request.pdf). He is also facing questions from the [Democratic senator Ron Wyden](https://airmail.news/issues/2025-12-13/the-158-170-million-question-part-iii), [who claimed in a recent letter to Black](https://www.finance.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/senator_wyden_letter_to_leon_black_redacted.pdf) that the Epstein files released by the Department of Justice “remove any lingering doubt” as to whether Black was “connected to women in Epstein’s network” and alleged that “powerful associates in the US and abroad were surveilling and paying off women on \[Black’s\] behalf”. Black’s attorney, Susan Estrich, called Wyden’s assertions “outrageous and false” in an emailed statement, and characterized the senator’s comments as a “politically motivated attack”. The Guardian’s investigation, based on access to extensive court records, many of which are still under seal but are due to be unsealed soon, reveals how Black and his legal team’s private pleas to a federal judge led to a legal battle involving extensive written submissions and multiple hearings in a case in which he was not a party. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2026/may/06/jeffrey-epstein-leon-black#img-2) Jed Rakoff, a US district judge for the southern district of New York, was nominated to the bench by Bill Clinton in 1995. Photograph: The Washington Post/Getty Images It included an extraordinary personal appeal from Black to Judge Rakoff, a well-known and respected jurist based in the southern district of [New York](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/new-york). The written message, which was obtained by the Guardian, portrayed Black as a victim, invoking the death of Black’s father, disputing Doe’s credibility and citing the damage the allegations have done to Black’s reputation. It was submitted by the billionaire’s lawyers days before Rakoff denied the $2.5m award that Doe was due to receive in the Epstein-related class action lawsuit. In another twist, Black’s legal effort was bolstered by a high-profile lawyer who is publicly heralded as an advocate for Epstein’s victims. All these communications occurred outside public view. In an exclusive statement to the Guardian in which Doe described her feelings about what has transpired, she said: “We are often taught that the justice system is there to protect victims and correct wrongs. My experience has shown me that it is far more complicated than that. Justice is not always blind. It is often shaped by power, access, and who is able to withstand the process. I am still here. And I am not done.” [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2026/may/06/jeffrey-epstein-leon-black#img-3) Leon Black was chair and CEO of Apollo Global Management until he stepped down in March 2021, in the wake of revelations he had paid tens of millions of dollars to Epstein. Photograph: Bloomberg/Getty Images Jane Doe takes Leon Black to court ---------------------------------- In July 2023, Jane Doe alleged in a legal complaint filed against Leon Black in the southern district of New York that [Jeffrey Epstein](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/jeffrey-epstein) introduced her to Black at Epstein’s townhouse in late spring of 2002. She was 16 years old. Black, who is worth an estimated $14bn, was the chair and chief executive officer of Apollo Global Management, a private equity firm he co-founded and led [until he stepped down](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/mar/22/leon-black-quits-apollo-jeffrey-epstein-ties-inquiry) in March 2021, in the wake of revelations he had paid tens of millions of dollars to Epstein. Black has said the payments were for legitimate financial advice and that he was “completely unaware” of misconduct by Epstein, who in emails released earlier this year by the Department of Justice sometimes referred to Black as [“Mr Big”](https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%2010/EFTA01751488.pdf). Apollo announced in January 2021 that an [internal review by the Dechert LLP](https://www.apollo.com/insights-news/pressreleases/2021/01/apollo-global-management-announces-conclusion-and-release-of-independent-review-211549270) law firm, which Apollo’s board commissioned to investigate Black’s “previous professional relationship” with Epstein, found Black’s payments to Epstein were for “bona fide” financial services. The report found there was “no evidence” that Black was involved in Epstein’s criminal activities. That review has since faced scrutiny, however, including by Senator Wyden, who claimed his staff uncovered evidence that money paid by Black to Epstein “[was used to finance Epstein’s sex-trafficking operations](https://www.finance.senate.gov/ranking-members-news/wyden-releases-new-information-on-financing-of-jeffrey-epsteins-operations-by-billionaire-leon-black-seeks-documents-from-trump-administration)”. Black’s lawyer called Wyden’s “attack” on the Dechert report “completely baseless”. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2026/may/06/jeffrey-epstein-leon-black#img-4) Senate Democrats hold a news conference on the release of the Epstein files in Washington DC on 16 December 2025. From left: Dick Durbin, Ron Wyden, Chuck Schumer and Amy Klobuchar. Photograph: Bloomberg/Getty Images In her legal complaint, Doe alleged that Epstein told her that Black was his “special friend” and that because she was Epstein’s “special girl”, he had chosen her to give Black the same kind of “massage treatment” that she gave to him. Doe understood, according to her legal complaint, this meant that she was expected to strip naked and have sex. But when Doe and Black went up to a third-floor massage room, she alleged in her complaint, Black threw her down on the massage table and then abused her vaginally and anally with sex toys. He then bit her vagina, she alleged, causing bleeding and extreme pain. Reflexively, the complaint says, Doe kicked him. In response, the complaint alleges, he became enraged, then raped her. Doe alleged in her complaint that the internal abrasions she suffered from the alleged attack that day continued to cause her pain more than 20 years later. The complaint describes Doe as having autism. While she has an above-average IQ, the complaint alleges, her neurodivergence makes her “extremely trusting”. In a subsequent amended complaint filed by Doe’s then lawyer, Jeanne Christensen, claims about the alleged assault by Black remained substantially the same. Some key details about how Doe said she met [Ghislaine Maxwell](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ghislaine-maxwell) and was trafficked by both Maxwell and Epstein changed significantly, according to a later court order. The Guardian has not independently verified any of Doe’s claims. Black’s attorneys have said Doe’s allegations are “entirely fabricated”. Black’s lawyers have also [previously called for Wigdor, the law firm that represented Doe until last year, to be legally sanctioned](https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/leon-black-seeks-sanctions-against-law-firm-pressing-rape-claims-2022-12-16/) for relying on “false allegations and made-up stories” in other cases. When Doe had filed the suit against Black, Wigdor had already filed two other lawsuits against Black on behalf of women who also alleged he raped them. One was a lawsuit by [Guzel Ganieva](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jan/22/new-york-leon-black-court-case-scandal), a Russian model and former mistress [whose claim was dismissed](https://nypost.com/2025/01/16/business/billionaire-leon-black-defeats-defamation-claim-by-guzel-ganieva/) because she had previously signed a non-disclosure agreement, for which she had been paid $9.5m by Black. The other lawsuit, filed by a woman named Cheri Pierson, who alleged that Black had raped her at Epstein’s townhouse, was “discontinued with prejudice and without costs to any party as against the other”. Black has said he never met Pierson. Black’s lawyers have said the [allegations by both women had no merit](https://www.reuters.com/legal/apollo-co-founder-leon-black-wins-dismissal-rape-accusers-lawsuit-2023-05-24/). [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2026/may/06/jeffrey-epstein-leon-black#img-5) Jeffrey Epstein’s townhouse in Manhattan. Photograph: Erik Pendzich/Rex/Shutterstock Even as she pursued a civil lawsuit against Black, Doe was involved in another legal case in the southern district of New York – this one connected to the crimes Epstein was accused of before his 2019 suicide. In 2022, a class of Epstein victims sued JPMorgan Chase, alleging that the bank had violated anti-sex-trafficking laws because of its participation and “intentional involvement” in Epstein’s sex-trafficking operation. The victims were represented by Bradley Edwards, the Florida plaintiffs’ lawyer who has represented hundreds of Epstein victims and is famous for helping to expose the 2008 “sweetheart” non-prosecution agreement that shielded Epstein for years. The JPMorgan class action lawsuit, which was overseen by Judge Rakoff, settled for $290m dollars in June 2023 without an admission of liability, though JPMorgan said it regretted its association with Epstein. It included a fund for Epstein abuse survivors, to compensate them for physical and emotional injuries. A claims administrator was appointed to oversee the fund. Edwards’ firm, Edwards Henderson, together with co-counsel Boies Schiller, [were paid $87m](https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/65894178/doe-1-v-jp-morgan-chase-co/?page=3#:~:text=The%20Court%20awards%20Boies%20Schiller%20Flexner%20LLP,rate%20as%20that%20earned%20on%20the%20Qualified) for their work representing Epstein victims in the JPMorgan class action lawsuit. In late October 2023, Doe was interviewed by the claims administrator in the JPMorgan case. She later found out she was being allocated $2.5m. It was a moment of elation for Doe, her adoptive mother told the Guardian, because it was the first time she felt that her trauma was being recognized. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2026/may/06/jeffrey-epstein-leon-black#img-6) The JPMorgan Chase global headquarters building in New York. Photograph: Bloomberg/Getty Images Judge Rakoff approved the claims administrator’s proposed allocations on 5 January 2024, including the allocation for Doe. But he said he intended to exercise an “oversight role” to ensure the allocation of class funds was “fair and reasonable”. The oversight role would be _ex parte_, he said, meaning that each side of any conflict could make their case to the judge, without the other side being aware of it. It was unusual for Rakoff. The judge, who [has been called a “true judicial maverick”](https://davidlat.substack.com/p/judge-jed-rakoff-sdny-scotus-supreme-court-podcast-interview), has spoken publicly about the importance of transparency in the justice system. “Everything needs to be public,” the judge told the New York Times in 2009. “… The legitimacy of the courts comes from the fact that they reason openly, on the record, based on facts.” In January 2024, within days of Doe finding out about her $2.5m allocation, her Wigdor lawyer, who was participating in a mediation with Black’s counsel involving another client’s case, disclosed that Doe had been allocated a major award in the JPMorgan settlement, according to a chronology of events described in a 2026 court order. What happened next would later be characterized by Doe’s then lawyer as a violation of confidentiality. Black’s counsel, Susan Estrich, contacted Judge Rakoff on Black’s behalf. In a 21 February 2024 private and undocketed letter to Rakoff, Estrich claimed that Doe was perpetrating “serious fraud” on the court and was not a real Epstein victim, according to a court order that subsequently described Estrich’s letter. According to someone familiar with the matter, Estrich – who was not representing a party in the JPMorgan case – acknowledged in the letter that reaching out to Judge Rakoff was “unorthodox”. Estrich declined to comment on questions by the Guardian about this exchange. In the letter, Estrich asked Rakoff to open an inquiry into Doe and the allocation, according to a person familiar with the matter, and said she had “reason to believe” that the court-appointed class counsel – Brad Edwards and other lawyers – “would have directly relevant information to bear on the issues”. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2026/may/06/jeffrey-epstein-leon-black#img-7) Susan Estrich, Leon Black’s lawyer, contacted Judge Rakoff in February 2024, claiming Jane Doe was perpetrating ‘serious fraud’. Photograph: Variety/Penske Media/Getty Images Estrich’s letter succeeded: Rakoff and Edwards, representing class counsel, agreed to take a “closer look” at Doe’s claim, court records show. Legal experts consulted by the Guardian said an intervention, such as the one made by Estrich on Black’s behalf, raised questions, because such outside legal interventions in a proceeding are quite limited. “Somebody who has an interest in a piece of litigation may not intervene in some other dispute of a party against whom he is opposed just because he would like to do them damage in that case. That’s not how the system works. You litigate your own cases,” said Sam Issacharoff, a professor of constitutional law at New York University, who is a leading scholar on class action lawsuits. In theory, if a lawyer for a defendant who is accused of rape writes to a judge in a class action, in which that alleged victim has been given a claim, it could even be seen as a way of “harassing them and calling their testimony into disrepute”, he added. “It’s not allowed if it’s malintentioned, and the line between what’s allowed and what’s malintentioned is a very difficult one.” The Guardian reached out to Judge Rakoff for comment. His law clerk said in an emailed statement: “It is a matter of record that the great majority of Epstein-related proceedings before Judge Rakoff have been sealed at the express request of the various counsel for Epstein’s victims in order to protect the victims’ identifying information, and that all parties have at all times consented to this sealing. Beyond this, Judge Rakoff is prohibited by law from responding to your questions, as they relate, directly or indirectly, to an ongoing proceeding before Judge Clarke.” A call from attorney Brad Edwards --------------------------------- On 2 August 2023, this reporter – preparing to publish an article in another publication – reached out to Leon Black’s spokesperson, Whit Clay, with a list of questions about financial and sexual allegations related to Black’s ties to Epstein. The email included one question about the lawsuit that Doe had filed against Black a week earlier. Two days later, Black’s team emailed a response, including a statement from Estrich, Black’s lawyer, about Doe’s case, predicting it would be “promptly dismissed”. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2026/may/06/jeffrey-epstein-leon-black#img-8) Lawyers David Boies, left, and Brad Edwards speak to the press after a bail hearing in Jeffrey Epstein’s sex-trafficking case, on 15 July 2019 in New York City. Photograph: Johannes Eisele/AFP/Getty Images Later that same morning, this reporter got an unexpected call on her mobile phone from a number she did not recognize. The caller introduced himself as Brad Edwards, class counsel in the Epstein victims’ lawsuit against JPMorgan, which had settled for $290m one month earlier. As class counsel, Edwards said he had been in touch with the entire class of victims and had access to hundreds of thousands of documents. When a particular case gets too much attention, he said, according to a contemporaneous record of the call, people would call up with stories about being victims of Epstein and he would have to sift through and figure out if they were true. “Not one piece of \[Doe’s\] story could ever be corroborated and a lot of what she says just definitely could not have ever happened,” Edwards said. He said he knew Doe was alleging she had met Black through Epstein. “So, in order for the Leon part to be true, the trafficking to Jeffrey Epstein would have to be true,” Edwards said. He said “the timeline” of Doe’s claims “can’t make sense for many reasons”, but when pressed for details he said he could not say more, because it could “expose other clients”. After making these comments, Edwards said he wanted his remarks to be “off the record”, meaning they should not be published. But according to principles widely followed by journalists, a reporter and source must agree information is “off the record” before the information is shared, not after. This reporter had not agreed that comments Edwards made about Doe were “off the record”. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2026/may/06/jeffrey-epstein-leon-black#img-9) Leon Black at the 2010 Milken Institute global conference in Los Angeles, California. Photograph: Bloomberg/Getty Images Edwards, it would later emerge, appeared to have had other dealings with Black’s lawyers months before that phone call. The [New York Times reported](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/21/business/leon-black-settlement-jeffrey-epstein-claims.html) in 2023 that Edwards, in his capacity as an attorney for Epstein victims, attended a multi-day mediation between Black’s counsel and lawyers representing the US Virgin Islands, which concluded with Black agreeing to pay a $62.5m settlement to the US Virgin Islands in January 2023 in order for Black to be “released from any potential claims” related to local authorities’ investigation of Epstein’s sex trafficking in the territory. The New York Times noted at the time that the settlement – which had come to light in response to a public records request by the newspaper – showed the extent to which Black, once a Wall Street titan, had gone to limit scrutiny of his “decades-long social and business ties” to Epstein. Edwards declined to comment at the time and Black said the settlement was meant to resolve any potential claims that had arisen out of the “unintended consequences” of payments he had made to Epstein for “legitimate financial advisory services”. ‘I could not believe this was happening’ ---------------------------------------- Six months after Edwards’ surprise call to this reporter, a court order in Doe’s lawsuit against Black would later show, Edwards and his colleague Brittany Henderson sent a sealed letter to Judge Rakoff as part of the inquiry that had been launched into Doe’s claims. The 26 February 2024 letter described Doe’s account as “inconsistent” and said there were doubts she was a “veritable victim of Epstein and his associates”. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2026/may/06/jeffrey-epstein-leon-black#img-10) Attorney Brittany Henderson speaks at a news conference with alleged victims of Jeffrey Epstein outside the US Capitol on 3 September 2025. Photograph: Andrew Harnik/Getty Images Days later, on 1 March 2024, the then lawyer for Doe, Jeanne Christensen of Wigdor, sent her own letter to Judge Rakoff, criticizing the intervention by Black’s lawyers in the JPMorgan case and accusing “class counsel” – Edwards and Henderson – of acting improperly, according to a later court order describing the chronology of events. Christensen also disclosed a new potential bombshell: Doe had kept journals from ages 16 to 19 that, the lawyer alleged, documented her abuse. The journals had been kept in a storage unit belonging to Doe’s adoptive family, she claimed. The journals were school notebooks; there was one for each year from ages 16 to 19, beginning on her birthday, and each had a similar format. They had a scrapbook-like feel in that they contained magazine clippings and sonograms from her pregnancies, according to court filings. The text of her journals was written in gel pen in a simple two-line zigzag code meant to disguise a first-hand account of the violence allegedly perpetrated on her by Black, Epstein, Maxwell and others, according to court records. One entry states: “ … Mr Black is so important for some reason over my health. There is going to be hell to pay. I ruined their trip and I am dramatic when that fat fuck bit me! He threw me on the floor and blood all over Jeffreys carpet and I am the issue?” Another entry contains a typed copy of Sylvia Plath’s poem Stopped Dead. Several lines are underlined, including “fatso, millionaire”. The name Leon Black is handwritten next to the title, arranged in a coded pattern. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2026/may/06/jeffrey-epstein-leon-black#img-11) Sylvia Plath’s poem Stopped Dead. Photograph: US Department of Justice Excerpts of the journals are included in Doe’s amended lawsuit and were released by the Department of Justice as part of the Epstein files earlier this year. In a statement to the Guardian, Black’s lawyer said the Guardian was ignoring the “outlandish nature” of claims in Doe’s journals, such as “that she had been trafficked by Epstein to 50 different men”, including powerful politicians. On 15 March 2024, less than a month after Rakoff received Estrich’s _ex parte_ letter, he convened the first hearing in the Jane Doe inquiry. At the hearing, for which Rakoff sealed the courtroom, Doe was put on the stand and cross-examined by Edwards. “I can’t discuss the substance of what she was asked,” said Doe’s adoptive mother, who was present at the 15 March hearing and was speaking publicly about it for the first time. But Edwards’ questioning, she told the Guardian, “was surreal. I could not believe this was happening.” “He questioned my daughter in a way that was aggressive and invasive. I was shocked by his tone, especially because he was there as class counsel, which meant that he should have been safeguarding her as a claimant rather than subjecting her to a hostile interrogation like you’d expect in a criminal proceeding,” she said. Edwards did not respond to the Guardian’s questions about his cross-examination of Doe. Black’s lawyers were barred from attending the hearing, despite their objections. A court order filed publicly in April 2026 by Judge Clarke, who is presiding over Doe’s case against Black, disclosed some details about the private proceedings. It described Doe’s 15 March testimony before Rakoff as being “at times, far-fetched”. Among her claims, Doe had described how she had been the victim of an “impregnation game”, and forced to carry out pregnancies from men who sexually abused her. In a court order, Doe is described as having testified that Epstein fathered four of her five children, though Doe’s lawyer later said in court that Doe was only sharing what Epstein “told her, not a representation of the truth”. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2026/may/06/jeffrey-epstein-leon-black#img-12) Jessica Clarke, a US district judge for the southern district of New York, was nominated to the bench by Joe Biden in 2023. Photograph: Elizabeth Frantz/Reuters A 2019 article by the [New York Times described how Epstein told scientists and businessmen](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/31/business/jeffrey-epstein-eugenics.html) “about his ambitions to use his New Mexico ranch as a base where women would be inseminated with his sperm and would give birth to his babies”. Judge Rakoff, the court order said, considered Doe’s journals “to be central” in determining Doe’s credibility. Rakoff appointed an expert to assess the ink dating on Doe’s journals. The results were inconclusive. Rakoff convened another hearing on 8 July, this time by Zoom, without either Doe’s lawyer or Edwards present. These conditions had been agreed to by both parties, the judge presiding over Doe’s lawsuit against Black later wrote in a court order. Among other topics Rakoff asked Doe about was her relationship with Maxwell, and the frequency with which she was allegedly trafficked to Epstein while she was in high school. “Just so the claimant understands,” Rakoff said, according to an excerpt from the hearing’s transcript, which is cited in a separate legal order, “all of us, I feel, have a great deal of sympathy for you. You’ve had a very harsh life and our hearts go out to you.” The Doe inquiry culminated on 19 July 2024 with an extraordinary letter to Judge Rakoff from both Estrich and fellow Black attorney Michael Carlinsky, who is co-managing partner of the law firm Quinn Emanuel. The letter, which was obtained by the Guardian, contained within it a personal, emotional appeal from Black to Rakoff. Black’s lawyers stated in the letter that they were aware that Rakoff intended to issue his ruling in the Doe matter by 31 July. Estrich and Carlinsky said they had learned from a colleague at the Paul, Weiss law firm, which has also represented Black, that Rakoff had “raised the question” about whether Black might reach a settlement with Doe. It is not clear to which Paul, Weiss colleague the lawyers were referring. Brad Karp, the one-time chair of Paul, Weiss, was a known associate of Judge Rakoff. The two [reportedly had dinner on a somewhat regular basis, according to a 2017 book](https://wallstreetonparade.com/2023/08/judge-jed-rakoff-has-regularly-dined-in-the-past-with-the-chairman-of-the-law-firm-that-just-got-a-big-win-in-his-court-in-the-jpmorgan-sex-trafficking-case/#:~:text=Eisinger%20writes%20this:,%2C%20the%20Leopard%2C%20Telepan.%E2%80%9D). Karp resigned from the chairmanship of Paul, Weiss in February, in the wake of revelations of his personal dealings with Epstein. Karp did not respond to the Guardian’s request for comment. Black had no interest in settling with Doe, the two lawyers, Estrich and Carlinsky, wrote. They then shared an impassioned appeal from Black that they said the financier had asked them to convey to the judge. Both lawyers declined to comment on the 19 July letter. “The idea of settling with Jane Doe, Douglas Wigdor and the Wigdor firm is repellent to every core value I hold dear,” Black stated. “From childhood, my father, a former rabbi, taught me the importance of _Shem Tov_ \[Hebrew for ‘A Good Name’\],” he wrote. Doe’s lawyers at the Wigdor firm, Black said, had “disregarded the truth and behaved in what I believe to be profoundly unethical ways”. “Not since my father’s death 49 years ago have I felt such pain and seen such hurt inflicted on those I love … I cannot settle with Jane Doe and the Wigdor firm, not only because of the damage their lies have caused, but more importantly, because I don’t know how I could look my children and grandchildren in the eyes and teach them the importance of _Shem Tov_.” Invoking his father’s death in a letter to Rakoff was a striking choice. Black’s father, Eli Black, had been a socially prominent New Yorker and the CEO of a global company, the Chiquita banana importer United Brands. But on 3 February 1975, Eli Black killed himself by jumping out of the window of his 44th-floor office in the Pan Am Building on Park Avenue. After his death, it was revealed that he had authorized a $2.5m bribe to the president of Honduras in a bid to get lower export taxes on bananas. When United Brands was ultimately charged with criminal conspiracy on account of the scheme, Eli Black was, according to the New York Times, [posthumously named as a co‐conspirator](https://www.nytimes.com/1978/07/20/archives/guilty-plea-in-foreign-bribe-case-united-brands-fined-15000-in-plot.html). [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2026/may/06/jeffrey-epstein-leon-black#img-13) The 4 February 1975 New York Times article reporting the death of Eli M Black, Leon Black’s father. Photograph: The New York Times While Black did not share any details of his father’s death and its aftermath in his appeal to Rakoff, he did not need to; the rising star federal prosecutor who charged United Brands was none other than a young Jed Rakoff. Judge Rakoff declined to comment on questions about the personal message. As with other documents he received during the Doe inquiry, Rakoff did not enter the letter containing Black’s personal appeal into the JPMorgan class action’s publicly accessible docket. Lawyers and legal experts the Guardian spoke to said they found Rakoff’s decision to make his oversight role _ex parte_ to be unusual. One thing that sets class action cases apart from other cases is the “level of transparency” required, said Chris Seeger, a class action lawyer who was co-lead counsel on a class action lawsuit against the NFL. “Everything you do is out in the open, that’s the whole idea … No side deals. No secrets,” Seeger said. Rakoff ruled to rescind Doe’s $2.5m JPMorgan allocation in its entirety on 31 July 2024, less than two weeks after receiving Black’s personal appeal. He also withdrew Doe from the US Virgin Islands (USVI) Mental Health Fund for Epstein survivors, a class of which she was now officially no longer a member. For Doe, it was a crushing blow, her adoptive mother told the Guardian. As Doe would recount nearly one year later in a sealed court declaration in her claim against Black, Black’s letter to Rakoff “was accepted without notice to me and was apparently considered prior to a final ruling, despite raising emotionally laden arguments about \[Black’s\] character and suffering. Meanwhile, I was never permitted to submit a narrative, impact statement, or rebuttal.” She also had “serious concerns about inappropriate influence and access”, saying she had “no equivalent means” of communicating with the court. “That Defendant’s team had such access underscores the systemic imbalance that plagued these proceedings,” she wrote. Judge Rakoff declined to comment. The sealed declaration, which was seen by the Guardian, also hit back against some of the claims Doe said were made by Brad Edwards. Doe claimed, for example, that Edwards had asserted that no other victims had recognized Doe, even though – Doe claimed – he had only consulted two individuals. Doe said Edwards had also dismissed “physical evidence” that supported her “connection to Epstein”, including photographs from Martha’s Vineyard, by stating Epstein had not been to Martha’s Vineyard. In fact, Doe said, there is evidence Epstein spent time on the island, which has subsequently been reported by [ITV News](https://www.itv.com/news/2026-03-13/itv-news-uncovers-first-photo-of-andrew-mandelson-and-epstein-together) and [the New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/16/magazine/jeffrey-epstein-money-scams-investigation.html). Edwards did not respond to the Guardian’s questions about Doe’s claims. Doe pushed back, too, against claims that have been submitted to the court about her by an investigator working for Black’s legal team, such as the claim that she had a “personality disorder”, not autism, and that her biological family said that Doe had a “history of making up alternate realities”. Doe’s own records, a person familiar with the matter said, show she was legally adopted as an adult in the state of Virginia for “good cause”. Medical documentation, which the source said was submitted to the court, confirmed her autism diagnosis and post-traumatic stress disorder stemming from long-term sexual abuse. The medical record also states Doe has no history of personality disorder or psychosis, the source said. Doe was urged by her attorneys to appeal Rakoff’s decision to rescind her $2.5m award, according to a sealed declaration she later filed. But on 21 August 2024, just three weeks after Rakoff rescinded Doe’s allocation, Rakoff signed off on a stipulation – between Doe and the JPMorgan settlement fund for Epstein survivors – granting Doe a $200,000 settlement, according to a court filing seen by the Guardian. This made her eligible – once again – to participate in the USVI Mental Health Fund. Judge Rakoff did not respond to the Guardian’s questions about the August 2024 settlement stipulation. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2026/may/06/jeffrey-epstein-leon-black#img-14) Douglas Wigdor, founding partner of the Wigdor law firm, which represented Jane Doe until last year. Photograph: John Lamparski/Getty Images Last month, on 23 April, Judge Clarke, who is presiding over Doe’s lawsuit against Black, issued a 76-page ruling in response to Black’s motion for the case against him to be dismissed. Doe’s former lawyer, Jeanne Christensen of Wigdor, and Doe had “engaged in serious, sanctionable misconduct”, Clarke found. Christensen had “lied repeatedly to the court and to opposing counsel” about what was happening in the JPMorgan Doe inquiry and had also “directed” Doe to “destroy a relevant social media account” that Doe had used to “communicate publicly about her experiences as a purported Epstein victim”. Clarke also wrote that Doe had “falsified” three sonogram images, out of a total of 11, that had been included in Doe’s journals. Wigdor withdrew as counsel for Doe days after disavowing three of the sonograms. Doe is now representing herself in the proceeding. Estrich, Black’s attorney, said in a statement to the Guardian: “The only thing that matters is that a federal judge found as a matter of fact that Jeanne Christensen, the Wigdor law firm and Jane Doe lied … They are being punished by the federal court. Nothing they say has any credibility. They are liars and should be completely ignored.” While the order was widely seen in press reports as a serious rebuke of Doe and her legal team, Judge Clarke said the misconduct “need not doom” Doe’s case. The case will proceed. Christensen, the attorney at Wigdor, did not respond to the Guardian’s questions. Douglas Wigdor, the law firm’s founding partner, said in a press statement in response to the order: “While we are upset about the sanction, we are pleased that our former client will get her day in court.” In a letter submitted to Judge Clarke this week that referenced the sanctions, lawyers for Wigdor and Christensen asked for permission to file under seal a motion for reconsideration. Wigdor also [recently filed a separate lawsuit](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/mar/03/leon-black-lawsuit-epstein) against Black, claiming he has deployed “multiple frivolous and malicious lawsuits” as retaliation for representing accusers. His lawyers rejected the claims. In her statement to the Guardian, Doe said she began her case as an effort to seek accountability, but she believes her lawsuit has “become something much broader”. “It has become about what happens when a system meant to provide justice instead becomes another source of harm. I have faced retaliation, misrepresentations, public scrutiny, and repeated efforts to undermine my credibility. I have been left to navigate this process alone, with limited time, limited resources, and overwhelming personal cost,” she wrote. “There were moments when I did not know if I could continue. But I made a promise to myself that I would not stop.”

A federal judge unsealed an alleged suicide note written by [Jeffrey Epstein](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/jeffrey-epstein) on Wednesday, the first time the document has been made public. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/06/jeffrey-epstein-alleged-suicide-note#img-2) The alleged Epstein suicide note. Photograph: United States district judge, southern district of New York Epstein’s cellmate at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in [New York](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/new-york) City, Nicholas Tartaglione, said he found the note after Epstein unsuccessfully attempted suicide in July 2019, weeks before he was eventually found dead in his jail cell. “They investigated me for months — FOUND NOTHING!!!” reads the note. “It is a treat to be able to choose one’s time to say goodbye. Watcha want me to do — Bust out cryin!! NO FUN – NOT WORTH IT!!” The note does not include a signature. The Guardian has not verified whether the letter was written by Epstein. The justice department did not immediately return the Guardian’s request for comment. The note was unsealed after the New York Times [published](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/30/us/jeffrey-epstein-suicide-note-sealed.html) a story last week detailing the note’s existence and petitioned the court in White Plains, New York, to release it. Tartaglione, a former police officer, has been serving life in prison for a quadruple murder conviction, which he is appealing. He discovered Epstein unresponsive in their cell, after which the disgraced financier told prison officials he had been attacked by Tartaglione, according to federal [records](https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%208/EFTA00018224.pdf). In the weeks preceding his death, Epstein [maintained](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/nov/23/jeffrey-epstein-death-documents-jail-records) that he was not suicidal. After the alleged note came into Tartaglione’s possession, he passed it along to his legal team as a possible defense against future assault allegations from Epstein, according to the Times. The lawyers then enlisted “handwriting experts” to authenticate the note’s author. The apparent suicide note had been sealed as a part of Tartaglione’s appeal case, due to attorney-client privilege. The New York City medical examiner ruled Epstein’s death a suicide in 2019. Still, Epstein’s close ties to the powerful and wealthy continue to spawn conspiracy theories about the circumstances of his death. * _In the US, [Rainn](https://www.rainn.org/) offers support for survivors of sexual abuse or assault on [800-656-4673](tel:8006564673). In the UK, the National Association for People Abused in Childhood ([Napac](https://napac.org.uk/)) offers support for adult survivors on [0808 801 0331](tel:08088010331). In Australia, support is available at 1-800-RESPECT, or other places listed [here](https://au.reachout.com/articles/sexual-assault-support)._ _Victoria Bekiempis contributed reporting_

45 minutes ago [Add as preferred on Google](https://www.google.com/preferences/source?q=bbc.com) Getty Images _Warning: this story contains content which some readers might find distressing_ A US judge has ordered the release of a document purported to be a suicide note written by convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein a month before his death. A copy of the handwritten note unsealed on Wednesday mentions a months-long investigation that "found nothing", and says "it is a treat to be able to choose one's time to say goodbye". Epstein's former cellmate claims he found the note tucked into a book after Epstein tried to kill himself in July 2019. Epstein was found dead in his cell a month later. The BBC has not verified that the note was written by Epstein, and US authorities have not commented. His death, which was ruled a suicide by authorities, came as he awaited a sex-trafficking trial. The purported note was placed under seal as part of criminal proceedings involving the former cellmate, Nicholas Tartaglione, who was being held in the cell at the time while awaiting trial for four murders. Tartaglione is a former police officer convicted of quadruple murder who was at one point accused by Epstein of attacking him, which he denied. He first mentioned the note's existence last year on a podcast. A scan of the note in the court document unsealed on Tuesday shows a handwritten sentence saying, "They investigated me for month - FOUND NOTHING!!!", and mentioned years-old charges. "It is a treat to be able to choose one's time to say goodbye," the note says. "Watcha want me to do - Bust out cryin!!" it continues. "NO FUN - NOT WORTH IT." The note amounts to only seven lines of text, leaving uncertainty over its purported meaning. ![Reuters A handwritten note on lined paper bears the following words in black ink - "They investigated me for month - FOUND NOTHING!!! So 15 year old charges [unclear word]. It is a treat to be able to choose ones time to say goodbye. Watcha want me to do - Bust out cryin!! NO FUN - NOT WORTH IT!!"](https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/480/cpsprodpb/964e/live/4de5d020-4a03-11f1-b55d-0f258dce1735.jpg.webp)Reuters The US Department of Justice (DOJ) did not immediately respond to the BBC's request for comment. A DOJ spokesperson previously told NBC News in a statement that the department had not seen the note. They highlighted the DOJ's "exhaustive effort" in collecting and publicly releasing millions of other Epstein-related files in recent months. The note was accompanied by a May 2021 letter submitted to the court by John A Wieder, a former lawyer for Tartaglione. The lawyer described the note as "the original document" that federal Judge Kenneth M Karas ordered be provided to the court at that time. The New York Times had petitioned the judge in White Plains, New York, to unseal the note, arguing there was no need to keep it secret. The newspaper was also seeking other documents that the judge did not rule on. Federal prosecutors have also pushed for the note to be released, saying that there was no longer a compelling interest in keeping it under seal and that Tartaglione's public statements about the note "constitute a waiver of the need for continued sealing". In his order unsealing the note on Wednesday, Judge Karas concluded that the note "is subject to the presumption of public access". "The Court comfortably concludes that public access to the Note promotes 'a measure of accountability' as well as ensures that the public will 'have confidence in the administration of justice,'" Karas wrote. He added that the court agrees that Tartaglione's repeated public discussion of the note's contents "constitutes waiver of the attorney-client privilege as to the document" and that sealing is not justified on that basis. Security failures at the prison on the night of Epstein's death were identified in a federal report and there has been a constant stream of speculation about how he died.

 A suicide note purportedly written by Jeffrey Epstein in prison has been publicly released, nearly seven years after Epstein's former cellmate said he found it. District Judge Kenneth Karas unsealed the one-page note Wednesday in response to a legal petition from the _New York Times_, which [reported on its existence](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/30/us/jeffrey-epstein-suicide-note-sealed.html?partner=slack&smid=sl-share) last week. NPR has not independently verified the authenticity of the note. The five sentences on a sheet of lined paper read in part: "It is a treat to be able to choose one's time to say goodbye. Watcha want me to do — Bust out cryin!! NO FUN — NOT WORTH IT!!" Nicholas Tartaglione has said he discovered the note while sharing a cell with Epstein at the now-closed [Metropolitan Correctional Center](https://www.npr.org/2021/08/26/1031541974/u-s-closing-jail-jeffrey-epstein-metropolitan-correctional-center). The two overlapped for about two weeks in July 2019 — shortly after Epstein's arrest on federal sex trafficking charges — as they awaited their respective sentences, according to documents released by the Justice Department. Their cohabitation ended after Epstein was found unconscious in his cell with [marks on his neck](https://www.npr.org/2020/01/09/795004811/video-outside-cell-during-jeffrey-epsteins-first-suicide-attempt-no-longer-exist), in a suspected suicide attempt outlined in a 2023 Department of Justice [Office of Inspector General report](https://oig.justice.gov/sites/default/files/reports/23-085.pdf). According to the report, Epstein [initially claimed](https://oig.justice.gov/sites/default/files/reports/23-085.pdf) that Tartaglione had assaulted him, which Tartaglione denied. Epstein changed his tune while on suicide watch in the following days, telling prison staff that he had no memory of the incident. Epstein died by suicide in a different cell less than a month later. Tartaglione told writer and influencer Jessica Reed Kraus in a [July 2025 podcast interview](https://jessicareedkraus.substack.com/p/epsteins-cellmate-yes-he-killed-himself) that he was in the cell when Epstein allegedly tried to hang himself the first time, and "woke up and saved him by performing CPR." He said he discovered Epstein's note in one of his books after that incident.  "When I got back into the cell, I opened up my book to read and there it was," said Tartaglione, a former officer in the Briarcliff Manor Police Department in Westchester County, N.Y., [convicted of quadruple homicide](https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/former-police-officer-sentenced-four-consecutive-life-sentences-2016-quadruple-murder). Bruce Barket, one of Tartaglione's lawyers at the time, told NPR in a phone interview that he agrees with Tartaglione's public characterization of finding the note and giving it to his lawyers, but could not elaborate due to attorney-client privilege. The note had been in Tartaglione's files since then. Barket said the note was relevant evidence in Tartaglione's case, because federal prosecutors had initially sought the death penalty against him and "his conduct in jail matters a lot in front of a jury." The note, if verified, would lend credibility to Tartaglione's claims that he not only didn't hurt his cellmate, but tried to help him. "Ultimately, my goal here was to do whatever I could, obviously within the confines of the law and ethics, to protect my client and to advance his interests," Barket said. "And that's what we did." Barket said he believes the note to be genuine but did not officially authenticate it, contradicting [the timeline](https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%208/EFTA00018224.pdf) of events the Justice Department released among the millions of "Epstein files" documents earlier this year. The timeline, whose origins are unclear, said Barket had authenticated the note as of January 2020. But he calls that claim "a bit overstated." "We didn't ever authenticate it \[with\] any real handwriting analysis or something like that," Barket said. "The surrounding circumstances of how we came into possession of it, \[Tartaglione's\] account, and looking at a [similar writing](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-handwritten-note-found-in-jeffrey-epstein-jail-cell-60-minutes-2020-01-05/) that was found in the cell after he actually killed himself led us to be comfortable with the fact that Epstein had written it." The Department of Justice told NPR over email on Thursday that the note has not yet been authenticated, adding, "this is the first time DOJ is seeing it as well." Its lawyers did not object to its release in a two-page court filing in which they wrote that the government has no "knowledge as to the accuracy of the factual narrative" in Tartaglione's 2025 podcast interview. "Specifically, the Government is not aware of any compelling interest in maintaining under seal matters as to which Tartaglione has made voluntary public statements, given that sealing was for Tartaglione's benefit in the first instance," they wrote. "By contrast, there appears to be a strong public interest in the circumstances surrounding Epstein's death as described in the unsealing motion." Tartaglione was ultimately [sentenced in 2024](https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/former-police-officer-sentenced-four-consecutive-life-sentences-2016-quadruple-murder) to four consecutive life sentences, which he is appealing. Much of the case remains sealed, though the _Times_ has also asked for three other court documents to be released alongside the purported suicide note, according to the judge's order. In Wednesday's ruling, Judge Kenneth Karas of the Southern District of New York gave all parties — including Tartaglione's lawyers and the Department of Justice — one week to propose redactions to those filings. Barket said the documents could answer more questions about the note, like why it wasn't released sooner. Epstein's life, crimes and death continue to [fuel conspiracy theories](https://www.npr.org/2022/09/08/1121525125/heres-why-conspiracy-theories-about-jeffrey-epstein-keep-flourishing), as well as political fallout for those with ties to the disgraced financier. The House Oversight Committee is interviewing high-level officials as part of its probe into Epstein and the federal government's handling of the Epstein investigation. It heard most recently from [Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick](https://www.npr.org/2026/05/06/nx-s1-5814081/howard-lutnick-epstein-files-house-oversight-committee) (who appears in the files and was Epstein's neighbor in Manhattan) on Wednesday. The release of the files indicated that Lutnick was in contact with Epstein long after he said he had cut ties with him, though Lutnick maintains he "barely had any relationship with him" and has "nothing to hide." Former Attorney General Pam Bondi, who was [ousted in April](https://www.npr.org/2026/04/02/g-s1-115077/trump-bondi-attorney-general-departure) after facing criticism over her handling of the Epstein files, is scheduled to speak to the committee later this month. _If you or someone you know may be considering suicide or is in crisis, call or text 9-8-8 to reach the_ [_Suicide & Crisis Lifeline_](https://988lifeline.org/)_._