Which Epstein accusers named Donald Trump in affidavits or depositions and what specifics did they allege?

1. What the newly released Epstein emails actually say about Trump

Congressional releases and media reporting center on emails written by Jeffrey Epstein—most recently a tranche of thousands of pages—where Epstein wrote that Trump “spent hours at my house” with a named-but-redacted victim and in other notes asserted that Trump “knew about the girls” ^{[1] [2]}. News organizations that parsed the Oversight Committee release reported Epstein’s own characterizations and boasts about Trump, not contemporaneous sworn testimony from accusers in which they assert conduct by Trump himself ^{[5] [6]}.

2. Which accusers appear in those documents — and what they are quoted as saying

Reporting shows Virginia Giuffre’s name appears in some of the released material and in prior public litigation; Republicans on the Oversight Committee argued Democrats redacted her name and highlighted her public statements that she did not witness wrongdoing by Trump ^{[7] [8]}. Media outlets note Giuffre alleged recruitment and abuse by Epstein and Maxwell in civil suits and interviews, but coverage also records that Giuffre, publicly and in a memoir, described Trump as friendly and did not accuse him of sexual misconduct in the same way she accused others ^{[8] [9]}. Available sources do not present a contemporaneous affidavit from Giuffre asserting sexual abuse by Trump in the newly released emails ^[1].

3. The separate Jane Doe civil complaints and depositions cited online

There exist online copies of a federal complaint and affidavits alleging that “Jane Doe” was abused at parties attended by Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein and claiming Trump’s sexual assault of a minor; those documents have circulated on sites such as Scribd and in archived court PDFs ^{[4] [3]}. News organizations and fact-checkers treat those filings as separate civil allegations; they are not the same as the Oversight Committee’s newly released Epstein emails and their authenticity, context, and procedural posture have been debated in media coverage ^[3].

4. What mainstream outlets say about evidence and limits of the records

Major outlets and committee statements stress that Epstein’s emails are his own claims and gossip—useful for context but not proof of criminal conduct by third parties. The New York Times, Reuters and others note that Epstein’s notes raise questions but do not themselves constitute evidence that Trump participated in Epstein’s trafficking operation; multiple sources underscore Trump’s denials and the absence, as yet, of official prosecutorial findings tying Trump to Epstein’s crimes ^{[2] [10]}.

5. Competing narratives and political framing around the documents

Republicans accused Democrats of cherry-picking and redacting to craft a narrative damaging to Trump; Democrats and victim advocates say the files may reveal why Epstein avoided meaningful prosecution and whom he knew ^{[7] [11]}. The White House has called selective briefings or leaks “fake” while unnamed officials have not disputed that Trump’s name appears in some documents ^[12]. Journalistic coverage highlights both the potential for revelation and the real possibility of political weaponization of fragmentary material ^{[13] [14]}.

6. What the records do not resolve — and what to look for next

Available sources do not show sworn affidavits from Epstein accusers in the newly released Oversight emails that directly and unambiguously accuse Donald Trump of specific criminal acts; instead, the public record so far contains Epstein’s messages about Trump, civil complaints that allege other things, and extensive redactions and legal caveats ^{[1] [3] [15]}. The Justice Department’s mandated release of broader files could include depositions or grand-jury material that would change that picture, but current reporting emphasizes statutory exceptions and redactions could withhold investigatory materials ^{[15] [14]}.

Limitations: this analysis relies only on the documents and media reports compiled by congressional releases and the outlets above; available sources do not mention sworn depositions from Epstein accusers that directly name Trump within the newly released Oversight Committee emails ^{[1] [2]}. Where outlets disagree about interpretation, I note both strands: Epstein’s emails intimate knowledge or contact (reported by Democrats and multiple media outlets) while Republicans and the White House stress lack of proof and selective redaction ^{[1] [7]}.