Have law enforcement or prosecutors opened investigations related to Giuffre’s death and what are their findings?

1. What local police opened and publicly reported

Western Australia Police said Major Crime detectives were investigating Giuffre’s death after emergency services found her unresponsive at her Neergabby home, and officials told media that “early indications” pointed to a non‑suspicious death while the coroner would establish the official cause ^{[1] [2] [3]}. Those initial investigative steps—police attendance, a Major Crime team review and referral to the coroner—are the concrete law‑enforcement actions documented in multiple outlets and in contemporaneous statements ^{[1] [2]}.

2. Official findings to date: no public criminal case or contradictory forensic conclusion

Reporting so far records the police position that the death was not considered suspicious in the early stages and that the coroner would provide the formal determination, but no publicly released coroner’s finding or prosecution stemming from the death has been reported in the sources provided ^{[1] [3] [2]}. In short, the documented outcome is the initial non‑suspicious assessment and an ongoing investigative process pending coroner findings; there is no source here showing a subsequent criminal charge, arrest, or a published coroner’s verdict overturning that initial assessment ^{[1] [3]}.

3. Calls for further, broader investigation from family, lawyers and advocates

Giuffre’s family and attorneys publicly demanded additional examinations and transparency after her death, with family members urging subpoenas and full investigations and advocates saying the public deserves a complete, public inquiry into any outstanding evidence from the Epstein matter ^{[5] [4]}. Those appeals reflect distrust of incomplete disclosures and concern that documents and evidence tied to Epstein’s network could hold relevant information; the family also criticized the Justice Department’s release of files as retraumatizing and incomplete ^[5].

4. How the wider Epstein/Maxwell investigative landscape intersects but does not equate to a homicide inquiry

The Justice Department and other agencies have been releasing files and pursuing prosecutions and civil litigations tied to Jeffrey Epstein and associates—actions that have produced new documents, including emails that have reignited calls to investigate figures Giuffre accused—yet those broader probes are distinct from the coroner‑led inquiry into her death and, per available reporting, have not produced a separate criminal investigation into her passing itself ^{[6] [7] [8]}. For example, newly released emails spurred renewed demands to investigate Prince Andrew, but news outlets note that the Metropolitan Police previously reviewed and declined to open a full criminal probe into allegations about him in London ^{[8] [7]}.

5. Limits of reporting and what remains unanswered

The public record in the supplied sources confirms initial police action and family demands but does not include a later coroner’s ruling, any prosecutorial determination that Giuffre’s death was the result of foul play, or documentation of a reopened homicide investigation; the absence of such documents in these reports means definitive statements beyond what police publicly announced would exceed the available evidence ^{[1] [3]}. Readers should note the distinction between ongoing, high‑profile investigations into Epstein’s network—which continue to surface documents and prompt calls for accountability—and the narrower official process dealing with Giuffre’s death, which, according to the cited reporting, has remained classified by authorities as non‑suspicious pending coroner findings ^{[6] [2]}.