The release of about three million Jeffrey Epstein investigative files has failed to quell anger over US justice department officials’ handling of the disclosures, with advocates claiming potentially millions of documents are still being withheld.
The department was required to disclose all investigative files by December 19th under The Epstein Files Transparency Act (Efta). While the department did release some documents on that date, last week’s disclosure came nearly six weeks after this deadline.
US deputy attorney general Todd Blanche, who served as president Donald Trump’s criminal defence lawyer, told reporters last week that this disclosure marked “the end of a very comprehensive document identification and review process to ensure transparency to the American people and compliance with the act”.
“After submitting the final report to Congress as required under the act and publishing the written justifications for redactions in the federal register, the department’s obligations under the act will be completed,” Blanche said.
READ MORE
He also said that while the justice department had found “more than six million pages being identified as potentially responsive”, this was because “we erred on the side of over-collection of materials from various sources to best ensure maximum transparency”.
“The number of responsive pages is significantly smaller than the total number of pages initially collected,” Blanche said. “That’s why I mentioned a moment ago we’re releasing more than three million pages today and not the six million pages that we collected.”
The missed deadline and up to three million files that remain unreleased have prompted criticism and calls for further disclosure to answer how Epstein sexually abused girls with impunity for decades and landed a sweetheart plea deal about 20 years ago that allowed him to avoid federal prosecution.
“The government continues to avoid accountability and has argued that they are not responsible for Epstein’s abuse of hundreds of victims,” said Jennifer Plotkin of Merson Law, which represents more than 30 victims. “The release of the files proves the government failed the victims over and over again.”
Dr Ann Olivarius, a women’s rights attorney and founder of law firm McAllister Olivarius, said the disclosures have not lifted the veil on Epstein’s evasion of justice until his 2019 prosecution.
[ Newly released Jeffrey Epstein files: 10 key takeaways so farOpens in new window ]
Epstein pleaded guilty in 2008 to prostitution charges, including soliciting an underage girl. He was found dead in his prison cell in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex-trafficking charges. His death was ruled a suicide.
“We have plenty of files on Epstein’s depravity. What we are missing are the files on his immunity,” she said. “The question isn’t just ‘who was on [Epstein’s] plane?’ but ‘who made the phone call that stopped the 2007 investigation?’ A disclosure is not complete if it tells us something about the criminal but nothing about the shield.”
Top Democrats, meanwhile, have criticised the handling of these files as Blanche doubled down on the justice department’s work, telling ABC News on Sunday: “This review is over.”
“We are witnessing a full blown cover-up,” congressman Jamie Raskin, the Maryland Democrat, said on CNN’s State of the Union.
“They’ve said there are six million potentially responsive documents there. They’ve only released three million with more than 10,000 redactions. What about the other three million files?” said Raskin, who is the ranking member of the house judiciary committee. “We’re just getting the dribs and drabs of information coming out, the stuff that they want us to see.”
The US department of justice was contacted for a comment about the criticism. An official said in an email: “This is a tired narrative. Just because you wish something to be true, doesn’t mean it is. This Department produced more than 3.5 million pages in compliance with the law and has disclosed to the public and to Congress what items were not responsive, in accordance with the Act.”
The official also said, “I assume all members of Congress read the actual language before voting on it, but if not, our press release and letter to Congress clearly spells this out.” – Guardian
