Where can the raw audio recordings attributed to Sascha Riley be accessed, and who posted them publicly?
Executive summary
The raw audio recordings attributed to Sascha (Sasha) Riley were published publicly on a Substack newsletter by Canadian writer Lisa Noelle Voldeng, who says she interviewed Riley and released six unedited audio files; copies, she claims, were also given to police and “trusted allies” in multiple countries [1] [2] [3]. Since that Substack release the recordings have been widely reposted across social platforms such as Threads and other social networks, but none of the allegations in those files have been independently verified by courts or major news organizations [3] [4] [5].
1. How the recordings first appeared: the Substack release and its author
The earliest public distribution reported in the coverage attributes the audio’s release to a Substack account owned by Lisa Noelle Voldeng, who states she conducted a series of phone interviews with Riley in July 2025 and published the recordings on her newsletter as part of a post about the testimony [1] [2] [6]. Multiple outlets identify Voldeng as the person who “leaked” or posted the files and describe her as a Canadian Substack creator behind the newsletter Outlaws of Chivalry, with a stated location on Vancouver Island [2] [1].
2. Where the raw audio can be accessed now: Substack and social reposts
The primary source for the unedited audio files is the Substack posts made public by Voldeng, and reporting notes that the files have since proliferated through social platforms—explicitly Threads and “other networks”—where clips and full files circulate beyond the initial Substack host [3] [4] [6]. Journalists and observers tracking the spread describe six audio recordings that the publisher says remain in her custody, while copies have been distributed to law enforcement or allies in several countries, according to Voldeng’s account [3] [7].
3. What the publisher claims about custody, distribution and law enforcement contact
Voldeng’s public statements accompanying the files assert that the audio is unedited, that she retains the master copies, and that she selectively shared duplicates with police and “trusted allies” internationally; at least one report repeats the claim that the FBI contacted Riley and that Riley was moved out of the United States “to safety,” as recounted by the publisher [3] [1] [2]. Those claims are presented in reporting as assertions by the Substack publisher rather than independently confirmed facts, and multiple outlets emphasize that no official investigation has publicly verified receipt or authenticity of the recordings [7] [5].
4. The limits of what the reporting establishes: verification and context
Every major account collected here stresses the recordings’ unverified status: names invoked in the testimony do not correspond to indictments or established findings in Epstein-related prosecutions, and investigative or judicial confirmation is absent as of these reports [4] [7] [5]. Media outlets note the recordings’ virality and the seriousness of allegations while cautioning that the material exists “solely within the recordings” for now and that mainstream confirmation is lacking [5] [3]. Reporting also documents the social-media amplification—including threads by individual users and reposts—making the Substack post the origin point for broad public circulation [8] [4].
5. Bottom line and what follows next
The raw audio files attributed to Sascha Riley can be accessed in the Substack posts published by Lisa Noelle Voldeng and in the many social reposts that followed; Voldeng is the public party identified as having posted the recordings and asserting custody and selective distribution to authorities [1] [3] [2]. The central open question—whether the audio’s contents are corroborated by independent evidence or official investigation—remains unresolved in the sources cited, which repeatedly frame the recordings as unverified and circulating largely through Substack and social networks [7] [5].