Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Did any other Epstein victims like Johanna Sjoberg mention Donald Trump in their depositions and when?
Executive summary
Available reporting shows at least one widely cited Epstein victim—Virginia Giuffre (formerly Roberts)—mentioned Donald Trump in a deposition by saying she had only heard he visited Epstein’s homes and did not see him participate in or witness abuse; other victims’ depositions mentioning Trump are not clearly reported in the provided documents [1] [2]. Recent releases of Epstein estate emails and congressional files renewed focus on whether Trump appears in victim testimony, while Republican and Democratic lawmakers sharply disagree about how to interpret materials [2] [3].
1. What the sources say about specific victims mentioning Trump
Virginia Giuffre’s 2016 deposition is reported to have said she did not believe Trump participated in or witnessed abuse at Epstein’s home and that she had only heard he had visited; that deposition is the clearest, named example in the coverage provided [1]. The Reuters and other briefings about newly released emails emphasize Epstein’s own references to Trump — for instance, a 2011 email calling Trump “that dog that hasn’t barked” and saying a victim “spent hours at my house with him” — but do not replace or expand on which other victims in sworn depositions mentioned Trump [2] [4].
2. Depositions versus Epstein’s estate emails — two different evidentiary buckets
Congressional releases include both victim statements (depositions, civil suits) and Epstein’s private emails; news outlets here repeatedly distinguish the two. The Reuters and BBC summaries focus on Epstein’s emails referencing Trump and a redacted victim name, whereas reporting on depositions centers on what individual victims like Giuffre said under oath in civil or criminal proceedings [2] [5]. That distinction matters legally and journalistically: a victim’s deposition and Epstein’s private messages are different forms of evidence with different contexts and limitations [2] [5].
3. Timing: When were these statements made or released?
Giuffre’s referenced 2016 deposition has been cited in recent coverage as part of the background to the new document releases; the media citations recount her 2016 statement that she did not see Trump at abuse incidents [1]. Epstein’s own emails that mention Trump date from as early as 2011 and 2018 in the excerpts reported — those emails were part of tens of thousands of files Democrats and Republicans have been parsing and selectively releasing in November 2025 [2] [5].
4. Where reporting is silent or inconclusive
Available sources do not mention other named Epstein victims explicitly saying Trump was involved in abuse in their depositions beyond Giuffre’s cited statement [1]. News pieces emphasize newly released emails from Epstein and political fights over disclosure, but they do not comprehensively catalog every victim deposition or assert that multiple victims testified about Trump in sworn statements [6] [4] [2].
5. Political context and competing interpretations
House Democrats released document tranches that include emails referencing Trump, framing the material as raising questions about his knowledge; Republicans counter that the released materials neither prove nor disprove Trump’s knowledge and accuse Democrats of politicizing victims’ evidence. The GOP pointed to depositions such as former Attorney General Bill Barr’s as evidence clearing Trump of wrongdoing in reporting cited by Fox News and other outlets; Democrats argue the full files are needed for clarity [3] [4] [2]. News outlets note Trump himself has called the disclosures a “hoax,” and he later urged Republicans to vote to release the files, underscoring intense political stakes in how these documents are presented [4] [7].
6. What reporters recommend for readers seeking clarity
Coverage in these sources suggests the only way to resolve questions about who mentioned Trump, when, and in what legal context is a full review of the underlying depositions and the Justice Department files that lawmakers are debating releasing; debates over selective release and redactions persist in the reporting [8] [4]. Readers should treat Epstein’s emails and victim depositions as separate records and be cautious about conflating an unsubstantiated phrase in a private email with sworn testimony.
Limitations: This analysis relies only on the provided set of stories. Available sources do not produce a comprehensive list of every victim deposition or every instance a victim mentioned Trump under oath beyond the examples cited above; a full answer would require examining the underlying deposition transcripts and the complete DOJ/Estate files referenced by Congress [1] [2].