Which specific documents in the DOJ Epstein release mention flights to Little St. James and who appears on those flight logs?
Executive summary
The Department of Justice’s recent mass release of Epstein-related material includes discrete flight-log documents — notably the flight logs assembled in the USA v. Maxwell release that are hosted on DocumentCloud and an unredacted PDF archive of Epstein flight logs — which show specific flights and named passengers tied to flights in Epstein’s aircraft; those logs include entries such as “Jeff Epstein” and separate passenger names like Katherina Kotzig [1] [2]. The broader DOJ archive also contains emails and other records (for example showing planned travel to Little St. James) that corroborate island-related travel but do not, in the publicly cited sources here, provide an unambiguous, exhaustive roster tying every prominent name to an island landing [3] [4].
1. Which DOJ documents explicitly mention flights to Little St. James
The items most directly identified in reporting as containing flight entries are the flight logs published as part of the USA v. Maxwell materials — available via DocumentCloud as a labeled collection of “Epstein flight logs” — and a separate unredacted PDF of Epstein flight logs archived online, both of which were cited by news outlets and researchers examining travel to Little St. James [1] [2]. The BBC and other outlets characterize the DOJ’s mass release as “millions of pages” that include flight logs, emails and images, and they specifically point to emails in the DOJ release that reference planned trips to Little St. James [3]. Local reporting summarizing the DOJ release likewise lists “flight logs” among the core contents posted by the department [4].
2. What those flight-log documents look like and how they were published
The flight-log artifacts are presented in the DOJ release as scanned logs and compilations with columns for dates, aircraft tail numbers, route details and passenger names; the unredacted PDF archive contains page images showing individual entries (for example a 1996 entry and passenger name fields) while DocumentCloud hosts a searchable compilation drawn from the DOJ materials [2] [1]. Public summaries emphasize that researchers validated and cross-checked those logs against other sources, and analysts have used the logs to map spikes in travel to Little St. James [5].
3. Who appears on those flight logs, according to the cited documents
The raw logs themselves — as made available in the DocumentCloud compilation and the unredacted PDF — include many passenger name entries; a concrete example visible in the unredacted PDF includes “Jeff Epstein” listed as operator/manifest and passenger entries such as Katherina Kotzig on specific flights [2] [1]. Journalistic reporting based on the DOJ release also highlights emails and schedules showing planned visitors — for example, BBC reporting cites DOJ emails showing Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and his family planning a 2012 visit to Little St. James [3]. Other media outlets summarize that the DOJ materials contain flight logs and related records that have been used to allege or to investigate the presence of various public figures, but those summaries do not uniformly show an indisputable, complete manifest linking all named public figures to island landings within the released pages cited here [4] [6].
4. What can and cannot be concluded from the released files cited here
The released flight logs and associated emails provide documentary evidence of flights operated by Epstein’s aircraft and passenger entries on particular flights [1] [2], and separate DOJ emails in the release document planning for visits to Little St. James [3]. However, the sources reviewed here caution against leaping from passenger-name entries to definitive claims about activities on the island or to a blanket “client list” interpretation: broader reporting and DOJ summaries note that contact lists and logs do not equate to proof of wrongdoing by everyone named, and some analysts frame parts of the material as directories or routine travel records rather than evidence of criminal conduct by every listed person [7] [6].
5. Competing narratives, agendas and the record’s limits
Advocates and journalists pushing for full transparency stress that the unredacted flight logs and the DOJ’s emails are essential to accountability and to corroborating survivor accounts [4] [3], while other voices — including DOJ memos and researchers cited in the public record — warn that the existence of names in logs has been misconstrued as a definitive “client list,” and that investigators stated they found no credible evidence of a centralized blackmail list in the files [7] [6]. Reporting reviewed for this piece does not provide a single, DOJ-issued manifest that names every individual alleged to have landed on Little St. James; the best-documented primary sources in the released corpus for flight details are the DocumentCloud flight-logs collection and the archived unredacted PDF [1] [2], supplemented by emails in the DOJ release that reference planned island travel [3].