On January 30, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) released more than 3.5 million pages of documents, alongside 2,000 videos and 180,000 images, related to its investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
After years of public pressure, the DOJ released the files, presenting the move as a step toward transparency under the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Instead, survivors say the disclosure caused immediate harm.
While the files referenced powerful men long suspected of enabling or participating in Epstein’s abuse, no new charges were announced. What did happen was faster and more direct: survivors’ identities appeared unredacted, private information became searchable online, and victims faced harassment, threats, and renewed trauma.
Perpetrators named, accountability absent
For years, Epstein survivors have called for investigations into the men in positions of power who exploited or protected him. The latest document release appeared, on its surface, to move closer to that goal. But survivors say the disclosures once again failed to deliver accountability.
Danielle Bensky, a survivor who Epstein abused when she was a teenage ballerina, said she hoped the release would finally lead to consequences for those involved. Instead, her name and what she believed were confidential conversations were made public. Now public and fighting for justice, she said in an interview with NBC News:
I thought it was carelessness, and then I went to incompetence … And now it feels, it feels a bit deliberate. It feels like a bit of an attack on survivors.
The DOJ had previously assured survivors that their identities would be protected. But attorneys Brittany Henderson and Brad Edwards, who represent Epstein survivors, say the department failed to uphold that commitment—calling the release “the single most egregious violation of victim privacy in one day in United States history.”
Survivors paying the price every day since
In response, Henderson and Edwards filed an emergency request with federal judges. They urged them to order an immediate takedown of the files, appoint a special master to oversee redactions, and halt further releases until authorities guaranteed survivor protections.
Some survivors discovered that confidential statements given to FBI investigators appeared in the document dump. Others found deeply personal information—including banking details—publicly accessible.
One survivor, identified as Jane Doe 5 in court filings, said the disclosure forced her into the public eye and subjected her to harassment. She pleaded in the emergency request:
I am now being harassed by the media and others. This is devastating to my life … Please pull my name down immediately as every minute that these document with my name are up, it causes more harm to me.
Other survivors reported receiving death threats, “disgusting messages,” and sustained online abuse after the files went live. Sadly, Jane Doe 1 said she felt like the victim of a vendetta.
“technical or human error” unacceptable
In an update reported by The Guardian on Monday, the DOJ said it had taken down several thousand documents and media files. The department blamed the exposure on “technical or human error” and said they had revised its protocols.
But survivors’ lawyers argue the harm was not accidental—and not unforeseeable. In their emergency filing, they noted that the DOJ had possessed victims’ names for months and could have prevented the exposure with a basic name search before publication.
They also pointed to a troubling pattern. In November, a separate release by the House Oversight Committee exposed unredacted survivor names, prompting judges to demand stronger safeguards ahead of future disclosures. Despite those warnings, survivor identities were again made public in January.
On Monday, a section of the DOJ’s Epstein files website went offline. But for survivors whose names, statements, and personal details circulated publicly, the consequences remain. Highlighting, once again, how systems that fail to hold abusers accountable too often re-victimize those they claim to protect.
Freedom United is interested in hearing from our community and welcomes relevant, informed comments, advice, and insights that advance the conversation around our campaigns and advocacy. We value inclusivity and respect within our community. To be approved, your comments should be civil.