Which federal indictments have cited Jeffrey Epstein photos as evidence?

1. What the records say about photos in federal files

Federal searches turned up “more than 300 gigabytes of data and physical evidence,” and reporting from the FBI and Justice Department says that material includes images and videos of Epstein and his victims, including minors ^{[1] [2] [3]}. The Department also released an evidence list and other documents in February 2025, and congressional action has produced thousands of pages from the estate and DOJ holdings — some of which are photo- and video-related — though much remains redacted to protect victims and ongoing probes ^{[4] [5] [6]}.

2. What the sources do not show: indictments named to specific photos

Available reporting and releases confirm the existence of photo and video materials in DOJ/FBI holdings but do not identify particular federal indictments that expressly cite specific Epstein photos as evidence within charging papers available in the provided materials (available sources do not mention a list of indictments citing specific photos). The February DOJ release included an “evidence list,” but publicly posted summaries and news reports do not extract a catalogue tying named federal indictments to individual images ^{[4] [5]}.

3. How prosecutors normally use images in federal cases (context)

Investigative memos and the Justice Department’s disclosures indicate images and videos form part of the physical evidence reviewed in investigations and prosecutions; such material can be incorporated into case files, redacted exhibits, or sealed grand‑jury materials ^{[2] [3]}. News outlets report that some image and video files will not be made public because they depict victims or could jeopardize investigations, which explains why charging documents in public hands may not disclose or attach those photos ^{[2] [3]}.

4. Transparency efforts, sealed material, and legal limits

Congress passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act to force DOJ publication of unclassified Epstein-related materials, but the law permits withholding victim-identifying data and information that could jeopardize investigations ^{[7] [8]}. That statutory balance, plus routine court sealing of grand-jury exhibits and victim privacy protections, creates a plausible reason the public record does not currently show indictments listing specific photos even where investigators possess such images ^{[7] [8]}.

5. Competing narratives and political framing

Political actors and media outlets have used the release and non-release of Epstein materials in opposing narratives: some say the files expose elite wrongdoing; others call the release a partisan “narrative” or hoax. Reporting notes that DOJ memos found no evidence of a “client list” or of systematic blackmail of powerful people, a finding used by some outlets to push back against claims that the files contain smoking-gun proof implicating specific public figures ^{[2] [5] [9]}. These competing frames help explain why requests for specifics — such as which indictments cite photos — generate heated debate even when the documentary facts remain limited in public releases ^{[2] [9]}.

6. Bottom line and next steps for readers seeking specifics

The public record in the provided sources confirms the DOJ/FBI recovered large quantities of photographic and video evidence connected to Epstein ^{[1] [2] [3]}, and the DOJ has released an evidence list and other materials ^{[4] [5]}. However, available sources do not name individual federal indictments that explicitly cite particular Epstein photos in charging papers (available sources do not mention that). For definitive answers, readers should look for: (a) unsealed federal indictments or charging instruments that attach or cite exhibits; (b) court dockets where prosecutors list exhibits; or (c) a DOJ public filing or press release that explicitly links photo evidence to a named indictment — none of which appear in the documents and reporting provided here ^{[4] [5] [7]}.