Are there public records databases to search for sworn declarations by Katie Johnson?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Public records and court filings show a 2016 federal lawsuit filed under the pseudonym “Katie Johnson” accusing Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein; that complaint and related filings are available in archived dockets and document repositories (see archived complaint text and Plainsite docket) [1] [2]. Independent reporting and later postings describe a video affidavit released in 2025 by journalist Zev Shalev and note the plaintiff used a pseudonym and withdrew the case before trial [3] [4].
1. What public records exist and where reporters found them
Federal court filings from 2016 containing a complaint by a plaintiff using the name “Katie Johnson” are accessible in public-document archives: a full-text copy of the complaint and related lawsuit text is hosted on Archive.org and shows the allegations and defendants named [1]. Commercial docket-aggregation sites and document-download services such as Plainsite have copies or links to the docket for “Katie Johnson v. Donald J. Trump et al” [2]. These constitute primary public-court records reporters have cited when discussing the matter [1] [2].
2. How to search official public records yourself
Official searches normally begin at court electronic filing systems (PACER for federal cases) and county/state court portals for local filings; reporting and archived copies indicate this was a federal-filed complaint in 2016, so a PACER search for case numbers or the parties named is appropriate [1]. Secondary repositories and archive sites (Archive.org, document-hosting services, docket aggregators such as Plainsite) already mirror some of those filings and are cited in coverage [1] [2].
3. The pseudonym issue: records vs. identity
Multiple sources emphasize the plaintiff used a pseudonym; mainstream summaries and later commentary note “Katie Johnson” was not the woman’s real name in court papers and that she was also referred to as “Jane Doe” in coverage [5] [3]. That pseudonym limits public access to a verified legal name and complicates straightforward “people-search” approaches using standard public-record aggregators, which return thousands of unrelated Katie Johnson profiles [6] [7].
4. Commercial background-search sites: reach and limits
Numerous commercial people-search services list hundreds to thousands of “Katie Johnson” records (Radaris reports 6,522 profiles, LocatePeople and others show dozens in single states), but those databases conflate many distinct individuals and are not substitutes for targeted court-document searches; they will not reliably find a pseudonymous litigant or a sealed identity [6] [7] [8]. Use of these services can produce misleading results because of name collisions and record aggregation practices [6] [8].
5. Video affidavit and later public attention
In 2025, reporting and commentary surfaced a video described as a “video affidavit” released by journalist Zev Shalev; articles and posts note that the video features a woman using the name “Katie Johnson” and that the case was withdrawn before trial [3] [4]. Coverage explicitly cautions that the woman’s identity remains undisclosed in public records and that her claims were not adjudicated in court [3].
6. What available sources do not mention
Available sources do not mention a confirmed, publicly filed real name for the person who used the pseudonym “Katie Johnson” (not found in current reporting). They do not provide court rulings that adjudicated the factual claims in the complaint — reporting notes the case was withdrawn before trial [3] [5]. Available sources do not provide law-enforcement investigative files or sealed records accessible in public databases (not found in current reporting).
7. Conflicting narratives and how to weigh them
News outlets and independent bloggers frame the materials differently: mainstream summaries (e.g., PBS recap) treat the filings as one of several allegations against Trump and note procedural history (filed, refiled, dropped) [5]; independent commentators and aggregators emphasize the resurfaced video/doxxing angle and press-release-style distribution by individuals like Zev Shalev [3] [4]. That divergence reflects differing editorial aims — institutional outlets focus on verified court history, while independent sites amplify newly released media and advocacy framing [3] [4] [5].
8. Practical next steps for researchers
Start with federal PACER searches by party names and the 2016 time window; consult archived mirrors such as Archive.org or docket aggregators to retrieve copies already hosted [1] [2]. Expect pseudonym-related limits: locating a non‑public legal identity will require sealed-record motions or authoritative reporting, neither of which appear in the cited sources (not found in current reporting). Use commercial databases only to supplement, not substitute, official docket research because they bundle many unrelated people under the same name [6] [7].
Limitations: this briefing relies solely on the cited sources and cannot confirm anything beyond what those documents and articles report [1] [3].