Which celebrities appear in flight logs for Jeffrey Epstein’s private planes?

1. What the flight logs are and how they’ve been used

The “flight logs” are handwritten and printed passenger manifests for Epstein’s private aircraft and other transport that have been entered into evidence in lawsuits and trials and released by government offices; they cover decades of trips and have been subpoenaed, litigated and published in phases ^{[4] [5]}. Media outlets and court filings have relied on those logs to identify people Epstein transported or hosted, but the logs themselves are records of names and travel entries, often using initials, first names, shorthand or entries like “one female,” which complicates interpretation ^{[4] [6]}.

2. Which celebrities appear in the logs — the commonly reported names

Multiple outlets reporting on the document releases list overlapping celebrity names. Recent releases and prior unsealed records have included Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, Prince Andrew, Naomi Campbell, Kevin Spacey, Chris Tucker, Michael Jackson (in some contact lists), Alan Dershowitz, Larry Summers and others ^{[2] [1] [7] [8]}. Summaries and earlier litigation have also flagged names such as Itzhak Perlman, Woody Allen, and a range of models, entertainers and financiers across different pages of the logs ^{[4] [3]}.

3. What appearing in the logs does — and does not — prove

Appearance in a flight log establishes that a person’s name or identifier was recorded as a passenger on a particular trip, but “a mere appearance in a flight log does not imply complicity,” as reporting and commentators have emphasized ^[9]. The logs do not, by themselves, show the purpose of travel, who else was present at destinations, or any criminal conduct. Investigators and courts have used the logs as one piece of contextual evidence rather than standalone proof ^{[4] [5]}.

4. Disputes, denials and caveats tied to specific names

Some high‑profile figures named in the logs have provided explanations or denials in different contexts. For example, reporting notes that Bill Clinton flew on Epstein’s planes multiple times according to records, while Clinton’s spokesperson has said he had not been to Epstein’s private island and had not spoken to Epstein in over a decade in certain statements ^[7]. Alan Dershowitz is repeatedly listed in logs and has strongly denied allegations of sex with minors despite appearing frequently in the records ^[3]. Media coverage also documents that entries can be ambiguous and sometimes recorded as initials or generic descriptors, which defenders point to when contesting implication ^[4].

5. How journalists and courts have treated the data

Courts, defense teams and journalists have stressed the need for corroboration beyond logs: the Maxwell trial added flight logs to the record but testimony revealed how entries were made and sometimes vague—pilots would occasionally write “one female” if a name wasn’t provided ^[4]. News outlets publishing the Department of Justice’s document release have noted the files include flight logs alongside a redacted contact book and a masseuse list, and that the newly released materials largely reproduce items that had surfaced in prior litigation while providing additional context ^{[5] [2]}.

6. Where reporting diverges and what remains unclear

Different outlets present overlapping but not identical name lists—some reports emphasize a cluster of political figures, others list entertainers or business people—reflecting which documents they focused on and how redactions or shorthand were interpreted ^{[10] [2] [11]}. Available sources do not mention a comprehensive, universally agreed final list that explains each person’s travel purpose, so discrepancies between lists and claims of who went where remain a feature of coverage ^{[12] [8]}.

7. How to read these records responsibly

Treat the logs as probative but not dispositive: they map networks and movements and have been useful to investigators, but names in a log require corroboration before drawing conclusions about wrongdoing ^{[4] [3]}. Journalists and courts continue to cross‑check travel dates, witness testimony and contemporaneous records to develop fuller context around any passenger’s presence ^{[4] [5]}.

If you’d like, I can compile the specific names that individual news outlets listed in their published summaries and note where the same name appears across multiple sources so you can see which associations are most consistently reported ^{[1] [2] [3]}.