Who is Lisa Noelle Voldeng and what is her track record publishing sensitive investigations?
Executive summary
Lisa Noelle Voldeng is a Canadian Substack writer and entrepreneur best known for the reader‑supported newsletter "Outlaws of Chivalry" and a personal website that brands several ventures including Ultra‑Agent Industries, with public listings tying her to Vancouver Island, Canada [1] [2] [3]. Her most prominent recent act in public view is the November 2025 release on Substack of un‑redacted audio reportedly recorded in July 2025 of a woman identified as Sascha (Sasha) Riley alleging crimes linked to the Epstein network; those recordings and their accompanying claims have been widely shared but remain unverified by independent authorities or courts [4] [5] [6].
1. Background and public persona: Substack writer, branding entrepreneur
Voldeng presents herself as a creative entrepreneur and writer who runs a portfolio of projects — notably the Substack "Outlaws of Chivalry" and a site for Ultra‑Agent Industries — with an online persona that mixes literary flourish and advocacy language; her Substack bio and personal website convey a self‑styled mission to "protect" and "lead" and list her location as Vancouver Island [1] [2] [3]. Her Substack includes opinion pieces and cultural commentary, and the publication is explicitly reader‑supported, indicating a direct audience relationship rather than institutional newsroom affiliation [7].
2. The Sasha Riley audio release: claims, timing and method
On November 24, 2025, Voldeng posted material on Substack saying she had been "helping Sascha" and that Part 1 of her release included un‑redacted audio recordings of first‑hand accounts alleging child trafficking, torture, rape and murder; she says the interviews were recorded in a series of phone calls conducted between July 19 and July 24, 2025 and that she selectively contacted allies and authorities earlier in the process [4] [5] [8]. The tapes, published from her Substack account, named several high‑profile figures according to reporting, and Voldeng framed the publication as being done "in the public interest" while asserting ongoing investigations [4] [6] [5].
3. Media and verification response: caution and controversy
Mainstream and aggregator outlets that covered the story emphasized the unverified nature of the allegations and the lack of corroborating court records or independent confirmation, and public commentary from journalists and legal observers urged rigorous verification before treating the material as established fact [5] [6] [9] [10]. Coverage notes the viral spread of the audio across social platforms and the intense reputational stakes for named public figures, with multiple outlets explicitly warning readers not to conflate the Substack publication with proven legal findings [9] [5].
4. Track record publishing sensitive investigations: independent publisher, limited institutional provenance
Voldeng’s record of publishing sensitive material appears to be anchored to her independent Substack platform rather than to traditional investigative institutions; prior pieces from her newsletter show opinionated cultural critique and advocacy rather than multi‑source court‑style exposés [7] [1]. The recent release of allegedly un‑redacted testimony represents her most consequential and widely noticed publication to date, but publicly available reporting does not show a history of previous verified, long‑form investigative scoops vetted by major newsrooms or by law enforcement disclosures in the public record [7] [1]. That absence of a documented institutional track record is material: it shapes how other journalists, legal experts and platforms approach verification and republication decisions [10] [9].
5. Assessment and limits of available reporting
Taken together, the sources establish that Lisa Noelle Voldeng is an independent Canadian Substack author and entrepreneur who published highly sensitive and explosive audio alleging Epstein‑linked crimes in late 2025 from interviews she says she recorded in July 2025 [1] [2] [4] [5]. The public record assembled in mainstream summaries and aggregators stresses that those recordings and claims remain unverified and that many journalists and commentators are urging caution pending independent confirmation [5] [9] [10]. The reporting reviewed does not provide evidence of prior verified investigative journalism of this nature from Voldeng, nor does it supply independent verification of the Riley allegations; therefore definitive judgments about evidentiary validity lie beyond what these sources can confirm [7] [4] [5].