Did the Epstein report reference cannibalism
Executive summary
The latest Department of Justice releases of Epstein-related documents have produced emails and unverified allegations that some media outlets and social-media users interpret as referencing ritualistic abuse and even cannibalism, but the official DOJ repository and major reporting present those materials as unverified claims rather than established facts [1] [2]. In short: elements in the files have been linked by commentators to cannibalism claims, but the documents themselves and mainstream coverage do not corroborate cannibalism as an established fact [1] [3].
1. What the newly released files actually contain, according to mainstream reporting
The DOJ’s recent upload to its Epstein repository included millions of pages and emails that reiterate a wide range of allegations and leads, and mainstream outlets emphasize that many entries are unverified, redacted or presented as possible lines of inquiry rather than proven conduct [1]. CBS News’ live coverage framed the release as an expansion of the record — memos, emails and allegations including potential charges that had been considered — and explicitly noted credibility concerns and redactions rather than presenting sensational claims as confirmed [1].
2. Where the cannibalism thread originated in public discussion
The cannibalism angle resurfaced because social-media posts and several news sites connected a 2009 outburst by Gabriela Rico Jiménez — who accused unnamed “global elite” of cannibalism before disappearing — to items in the newly posted Epstein materials, including an email excerpt referencing a “torture video” that circulated in the release [2] [3]. Times Now and Hindustan Times reported that references in the January 2026 release, including an unsealed email allegedly from an Epstein account saying “I loved the torture video,” reignited public interest in Jiménez’s old allegations [2] [3].
3. How some outlets and aggregator sites are presenting the material
A number of outlets and blogs have amplified graphic interpretations of the materials, with at least one site asserting the files include allegations of “child dismemberment and consumption of human organs and feces” tied to Epstein-associated parties [4]. Those reports are circulating widely and feeding conspiratorial narratives, but they often rely on selective quotes, social-media reposting and headlines that treat allegations as fact rather than highlighting the files’ unverified status [4] [2].
4. What reputable sources explicitly caution about verification and context
Reporting from established news organizations accompanying the DOJ release stresses that many claims in the documents are uncorroborated, that victims’ credibility was discussed by prosecutors at the time, and that names and allegations remain redacted or unattributed in the public datasets [1]. Times Now and Hindustan Times acknowledge the revived interest in Jiménez’s 2009 accusation but do not claim the DOJ has authenticated her allegations or that the department labeled cannibalism a proven part of Epstein’s network [2] [3].
5. Bottom line and limits of available reporting
The released Epstein files contain emails and allegations that have been interpreted by some outlets and social-media users as referencing extreme ritualistic abuse, which has in turn renewed attention to Gabriela Rico Jiménez’s 2009 cannibalism claims [2] [3] [4]. However, mainstream coverage of the DOJ release consistently frames these items as unverified material within a larger trove and does not present cannibalism as a documented conclusion of the files; the public record available in the cited reporting does not prove cannibalism occurred nor that the DOJ validated those specific claims [1]. Reporting is limited to what the released documents and quoted emails show; where the sources do not independently verify allegations, this analysis does not either.