Have any FOIA requests related to Sascha/Sasha Riley produced released documents — where are those releases posted?
Executive summary
No reporting gathered for this brief shows a confirmed release of documents produced in response to FOIA requests that are explicitly tied to Sascha/Sasha (William) Riley; journalism and Substack threads state that CPS, FBI and military records are potentially obtainable via FOIA but do not document completed FOIA disclosures or post-publication locations for such releases [1] [2] [3].
1. What the public reporting actually says about FOIA and Riley
Multiple accounts circulating in mainstream outlets and long-form Substack pieces say that case files — child protective services reports, FBI investigative notes, and a military court-martial record tied to William Kyle Riley (WKR) or related actors — are “obtainable” via Freedom of Information Act requests, and authors urge systematic FOIA filing to test and corroborate the audio testimony that has gone viral [1] [2] [3] [4]. These pieces frame FOIA as the logical next step for verification but do not themselves report having received responsive FOIA productions; they call on journalists and researchers to file requests [2] [5].
2. Claims of suppressed material vs. evidence of actual FOIA releases
Several writers allege that “much of the evidence has been suppressed” while adding that “some” of it would be available to investigators or through FOIA, but the reporting frames suppression as a claim by publishers or interview subjects rather than as a conclusion based on produced FOIA materials [3] [4]. Investigative commentators and Substack authors assert that relevant records could corroborate or disprove Riley’s account — and they predict that DOJ or military FOIAs could be met with redactions or exemptions — yet none of the sources supply links to FOIA release repositories showing Riley-related records publicly posted [2] [5].
3. Context from the larger Epstein file releases
The Department of Justice did release large troves of Epstein-related documents under congressional pressure in late 2025 and early 2026, but reporting indicates those tranches were heavily redacted and that William “Sascha” Riley does not clearly appear as an identifiable figure in the unsealed Epstein documents covered by the press to date [6] [7]. Coverage notes broader gaps and redactions in the DOJ releases and quotes lawmakers who say important documents remain missing — a context that may explain why independent FOIA efforts are being advocated, but it is not evidence that FOIA requests tied to Riley have produced new, posted documents [6] [7].
4. What advocates and publishers are promising vs. what’s been delivered
Publishers of the viral audio — notably Lisa Noelle Voldeng — and supportive commentators promise mapping of incidents to “supporting evidence” and encourage FOIA and court-martial document requests as a follow-up, while also saying they have stored copies of some materials with allies and local police for safekeeping [4] [5]. Those promises amount to a call for transparency and a roadmap for research; the sources do not, however, point to a completed FOIA production posted on an official archive, newsroom repository, or FOIA reading room [4] [5].
5. Conclusion and reporting limits
Based on the assembled reporting, there is no documented instance in these sources of completed FOIA responses specifically tied to Sascha/Sasha (William) Riley being released and publicly posted; available coverage repeatedly suggests FOIA as the next step and notes that records may exist, but does not cite any public FOIA posting or repository containing Riley-named records [1] [2] [3] [6] [4]. This conclusion is limited to the sources provided; if government agencies or journalists have since posted responsive FOIA materials, those releases are not documented in the supplied reporting.