Are there any public police reports or congressional records that corroborate details from Sascha Riley's audio testimony?
Executive summary
There are widespread reports that audio recordings attributed to Sascha (Sasha) Riley exist and that their publisher says copies were shared with police and “trusted allies,” but independent verification is lacking and mainstream outlets have not confirmed police reports or congressional action tied to the recordings [1] [2] [3]. Some social posts and the publisher allege contacts with law enforcement and Congress, yet the public record — as reported in the available sources — does not show authenticated police reports or formal congressional records corroborating the key factual details of Riley’s audio testimony [2] [4] [3].
1. What the viral material actually claims and who released it
Multiple outlets and the Substack publisher of the material say six unedited audio recordings totaling roughly six hours were released and circulated online, alleging trafficking linked to Jeffrey Epstein and naming prominent political figures, and the publisher asserts possession of those recordings [1] [3]. The recordings were posted on Substack and spread widely on social platforms, prompting intense online discussion and strong reactions from listeners and commentators [1] [2].
2. Publisher and advocates say police and other authorities were contacted, but those claims are not independently verified
The publisher and some supporters assert copies of Riley’s recordings were shared with police and “trusted allies” in several countries and that Riley contacted the FBI and filed local police reports, according to social posts and the publisher’s statements, but reporting available in these sources also repeatedly notes that no official agency has publicly confirmed receiving or verifying the material [1] [2] [4].
3. Congressional records: claims versus public record
The Substack publisher and allied posts reference “congressional contact documentation” and ask whether Riley’s testimony met congressional investigation criteria, yet the available reporting explicitly states that there has been “zero congressional investigation” and that no congressional committee has publicly corroborated or launched a probe tied to the audio as of the dates referenced in these sources [3] [2].
4. What mainstream reporting says — and does not say
Mainstream reporting in the supplied sources emphasizes that the recordings are unverified, that the allegations have not been authenticated by courts or law-enforcement agencies, and that there is no confirmation in public records that the allegations have been substantiated by official investigation [1] [2] [5]. Several pieces note the extraordinary nature of the allegations and the rapid spread of the audio, while flagging the absence of independent verification [2] [5].
5. Social and advocacy posts advance stronger claims that lack documentary public backing
Individual social-media posts and some advocates assert Riley “contacted the FBI, filed local police reports, and testified before the Oversight Committee,” but those claims appear in social posts and supporter commentary rather than in publicly available police logs or congressional records presented in the reporting supplied here [4]. The distinction between claim and verified public record is emphasized repeatedly by the reporting [2].
6. Why the public record remains thin — and what to watch for
Sources suggest the publisher and supporters argue evidence chains and international document storage exist and criticize institutional silence, while journalists point out that unverified testimony can spread rapidly without corroboration; the tension between publisher assertions and absence of confirmed agency action explains why a clear public record corroborating the audio’s details has not emerged in the cited reporting [3] [2]. The reporting also notes that tens of thousands of Epstein-era documents were released in other contexts, but it does not link those document releases to corroboration of Riley’s specific claims [5].
7. Bottom line: direct answer to whether public police reports or congressional records corroborate Riley’s audio
Based on the reporting provided, there are publisher and supporter claims that police and congressional contacts have been made, but there is no independently verified public police report or authenticated congressional record in these sources that corroborates the factual details of Sascha Riley’s audio testimony; the available accounts explicitly describe the allegations as unverified and note an absence of confirmed law-enforcement or congressional action in the public record [1] [2] [3].