Which specific Epstein file pages reference events or people in Monterrey, Mexico in August 2009?

1. The central claim and what the DOJ files actually contain

Several news outlets note that the January 2026 tranche of Epstein-related documents includes disturbing witness statements and allegations about parties and ritualistic abuse, with at least one reference in reporting to a “yacht party” and graphic accusations of dismemberment and consumption of human remains, but those materials are described as unproven allegations, redacted witness statements and investigative notes rather than court-proven findings ^{[4] [3]}; importantly, multiple accounts emphasize that the released files do not explicitly mention the Monterrey Fiesta Inn or Gabriela Rico Jiménez by name ^{[1] [2]}.

2. The resurfaced Monterrey video and how reporters connected it to the files

The viral footage of Gabriela Rico Jiménez — filmed outside the Fiesta Inn in Monterrey on August 3, 2009, in which she shouted allegations of cannibalism after attending an “elite” private modeling event — has been widely cited by outlets revisiting the episode as public interest in the Epstein documents rose, and many pieces chronicle the video’s content and her subsequent disappearance from public view ^{[5] [6] [7]}; these outlets report that social-media sleuths and some journalists drew parallels between Jiménez’s claims and the disturbing allegations in the new DOJ release, but that linkage is presented as speculative rather than documented in the files themselves ^{[6] [1]}.

3. Conflicting signals in secondary reports — alleged echoes, not citations

A handful of reports assert that some FBI or witness reports in the Epstein material contain descriptions that echo Jiménez’s claims — references to eating from intestines or ritualistic abuse at parties — yet the same reporting also cautions these echoes are not the same as direct references to the 2009 Monterrey incident and that names and locations are often redacted or absent in the released pages ^{[8] [4] [9]}; in short, the documents may contain similar-sounding allegations but do not provide a clearly attributable page that ties those allegations to Monterrey in August 2009 ^{[4] [8]}.

4. How major outlets and the DOJ frame the evidentiary limits

Multiple outlets explicitly note the gap between sensational social-media narratives and the contents of the Epstein files: reporting underscores that the DOJ release consists largely of raw investigative materials that include unverified allegations and that the files “do not explicitly name Jiménez or mention the Monterrey party,” a caveat repeated across coverage and consistent with public statements about the documents’ limitations ^{[2] [1] [3]}.

5. Competing interpretations, incentives and the resulting ambiguity

The renewed attention to Jiménez’s 2009 outburst has generated two competing impulses in coverage: some publishers and online communities emphasize apparent thematic parallels between the files and the Monterrey video to suggest a larger pattern, while others — and the DOJ release itself — warn against conflating unverified, redacted investigative notes with concrete proof that specific pages record events or people in Monterrey in August 2009; this divergence reflects incentives for traffic and viral storytelling on one side and cautious legal/journalistic restraint on the other ^{[7] [1] [3]}.

Conclusion: direct answer to the question

Based on the reporting available, there are no identified, specific Epstein file pages that explicitly reference Monterrey, Mexico or the Fiesta Inn incident of August 2009 involving Gabriela Rico Jiménez; the released materials include disturbing, sometimes overlapping allegations about elite gatherings, but journalists and the DOJ indicate the files do not name Jiménez or the Monterrey party directly ^{[2] [1] [4]}.