Did other high-profile figures testify in Epstein's original case?

1. What the 2008 grand‑jury records actually contain — mostly law enforcement and victim statements

When Florida grand‑jury testimony from the 2008 case was made public, reporters found that the transcripts centered on victims’ accounts, law‑enforcement witness interviews and evidence summaries rather than sworn testimony from famous third parties; PBS and other reporting emphasized the testimony concerned activity “ranging from grossly unacceptable to rape” and that the released materials track law‑enforcement evidence used in the investigation ^{[1] [2]}. A later Justice Department filing and court discussions underscored that federal grand juries that later indicted Epstein and Maxwell “did not hear directly from any of the alleged victims,” meaning much of the grand‑jury record focuses on investigative witnesses rather than a roster of celebrity witnesses ^[3].

2. No evidence in the released records that celebrities testified in the original Florida grand jury

Available grand‑jury releases and news accounts do not list public figures testifying in the 2008 Florida grand‑jury proceedings; reporting around the releases highlighted victim testimony, detectives and prosecutors rather than contemporaneous sworn statements from high‑profile associates ^{[2] [1]}. If you are looking for a document showing, for example, presidents, royals or media celebrities took the stand in 2008, available sources do not mention such testimony in the original grand‑jury files ^{[1] [2]}.

3. High‑profile names appear elsewhere — flight logs, emails, later interviews, congressional probes

High‑profile names appear in related materials released later: flight logs, email caches and congressional interview transcripts. For instance, flight manifests and newly released emails have placed public figures in Epstein’s orbit and congressional investigators publicly released interviews such as the closed‑door transcript of Alex Acosta, who was later subpoenaed about his role in approving the 2008 non‑prosecution agreement ^{[5] [4] [6]}. Those disclosures create association and investigatory interest but are distinct from the question of who testified in the 2008 grand jury ^{[4] [6]}.

4. Congressional and oversight testimony came post‑2008 and involved senior officials

Oversight and committee actions years later produced testimony and transcripts involving senior officials tied to the NPA decision; for example, the House Oversight Committee publicly released an interview transcript of former U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta as part of inquiries into how the 2008 deal was handled ^[4]. Those interviews are accountability and oversight actions, not grand‑jury proceedings in 2008, and they clarify prosecutorial choices rather than documenting sworn grand‑jury testimony from social or political elites ^{[4] [7]}.

5. Where reporting diverges — victims’ public testimony vs. grand‑jury secrecy

Media outlets and victim advocates have emphasized different parts of the record: some coverage centers on victims’ accounts and how prosecutors handled the case (the Miami Herald‑driven revival that led to later indictments), while other reporting stresses that the grand‑jury and federal indictments did not call alleged victims directly in certain proceedings, per DOJ filings ^{[1] [3]}. Those differences matter: one narrative highlights victims’ testimony and evidence; another points to procedural gaps and the limits of what grand juries recorded publicly ^{[1] [3]}.

6. Limitations and what remains unclear in public records

Publicly available reporting and released documents show law‑enforcement witnesses, prosecutors and victim statements in the 2008 records, but they do not catalog every person ever interviewed or every sealed item—so absence of a celebrity’s name in the released materials is not definitive proof they were never interviewed in any form ^{[2] [3]}. Available sources do not mention a list of famous figures who testified in the original Florida grand jury; they instead document later scrutiny, congressional interviews, flight logs and email caches that put influential people in Epstein’s network ^{[5] [6] [4]}.

7. Bottom line for your question

Based on released grand‑jury transcripts and contemporaneous reporting, the 2008 proceedings featured victims, detectives and prosecutors as principal witnesses; available sources do not show other high‑profile public figures giving grand‑jury testimony in that original Florida case, although later disclosures and oversight interviews involved prominent names and officials connected to the NPA and Epstein’s network ^{[2] [1] [4]}.