Some Epstein file redactions are being undone with hacks

People who examined documents released by the Justice Department in the Jeffrey Epstein case found that some file redactions could be undone by Photoshop techniques or by highlighting text to paste into a word processing file.

Unredacted text from the documents began circulating on social media on Monday evening. Exhibits in a Virgin Islands civil case against two executors of Epstein’s estate, Darren K Indyke and Richard D Kahn, include allegations that explain how Epstein and his associates facilitated the sexual abuse of children. The exhibit was part of the second amended complaint in the state case against Indyke and Kahn.

In Section 85, the redacted portion states: “Between September 2015 and June 2019, Indyke signed (FAC) for more than $400,000 in payments to young female models and actresses, including a former Russian model who received more than $380,000 in monthly payments that increased from $8,330 to $8,333 during the intervening period.”

Virgin Islands prosecutors settled a civil sex-trafficking lawsuit against Epstein’s estate, Indike and Kahn, in 2022 for $105 million, plus half of the proceeds from the sale of Little St. James, the island where Epstein lived and where many of his crimes took place. A Justice Department press release announcing the settlement did not admit liability.

Indyke, an attorney who represented Epstein for decades, has not been criminally charged by federal authorities. He was hired by Parlatore Law Group in 2022 before the Justice Department settled the Epstein case. That firm represents the Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, and previously represented Donald Trump in his defense against allegations stemming from the discovery of classified government documents stored at Trump’s Florida estate. Calls and emails seeking comment from Indyke and Parlatore Law Group have not yet been returned.

Trump has repeatedly denied any knowledge of or involvement in Epstein’s criminal activities and any wrongdoing.

Other sections further allege how Epstein’s enterprise covered up the crimes.

“Defendants also attempted to conceal their criminal sex trafficking and abuse, by paying large sums of money to accomplice-witnesses, their attorneys’ fees and litigation costs in litigation related to this conduct,” a redacted excerpt reads.

“Epstein also threatened the victims with harm and helped release damaging stories about them in order to damage their credibility when they tried to publicize their stories of trafficking and sexual abuse. Epstein also directed one or more Epstein Enterprises participant-witnesses to destroy evidence related to the defendants’ criminal traffic conduct and ongoing court proceedings related to sexual harassment.”

Redactions of Sections 184 through 192 of the document describe property taxes paid by companies incorporated by Epstein on assets not on those firms’ balance sheets.

“For example, Cypress’ balance sheet as of December 31, 2018 does not reflect any assets other than cash of $18,824. Furthermore, Cypress reported only $301 in expenses for the year ended December 31, 2018, even though it paid $106,394.60 in taxes,” read Santa 160 on November 16. redacted passage.

“Similarly, in 2017, Cypress reported only $29,736 in assets and $150 in expenses as cash, even though it paid $55,770.41 and $113,679.56 in Santa Fe property taxes in 2017.”

The Epstein File Transparency Act, signed into law last month, allows the Justice Department to “withhold certain information, such as personal information about victims and material that jeopardizes an active federal investigation.”

It was unclear how the property material complies with the redaction standard under the law. The Justice Department has yet to respond to inquiries.