Who is Lisa Noelle Voldeng and what is the provenance of the Substack post that published the Riley audio?
Executive summary
Lisa Noelle Voldeng is the Substack creator who published the six hours of audio attributed online to “Sascha (Sasha/Sascha) Riley,” and her post — a series of phone-interview recordings she says were made between July 19 and July 24, 2025 — is the immediate provenance of the viral Riley tapes circulating across social platforms [1] [2]. The material was released on Voldeng’s Substack as largely raw, unredacted audio and has been amplified by algorithmic distribution even as major outlets and verification-focused analysts stress that the extraordinary allegations remain unverified and require independent corroboration [1] [3].
1. Who is Lisa Noelle Voldeng: the publisher and her public profile
Voldeng is presented online as a popular Substack creator behind a newsletter called Outlaws of Chivalry and lists her location on her website as Vancouver Island, Canada, where her bio describes wide-ranging interests and work that “spans every sweep of civilization, and beyond” [4] [5] [1]. Multiple outlets and analysts characterise her as not presenting herself as a conventional journalist, which observers say matters for how the recordings were gathered and published [1].
2. The recordings’ immediate provenance: how the audio reached the public
The audio files were published from Voldeng’s Substack account, which she used to post what she describes as phone interviews she conducted with the man identified as Sascha Riley; several reports cite the interviews as having occurred between July 19 and July 24, 2025, and attribute the six hours of audio to that series [2] [1]. News outlets repeatedly point out that the Substack post is where the tapes were first made widely available online [4] [5].
3. What Voldeng says she did and who she told before publishing
In her Substack write-up, Voldeng says she “selectively contacted allies, church, police, and government officials in various countries, with a call to warn,” and she also asserts the FBI allegedly contacted Riley in the summer of 2025 and that he was moved out of the United States “to safety” — claims reported by outlets summarising her account [4] [5]. Those representations are part of Voldeng’s public narrative about how she handled the material prior to publication [4].
4. The content and the stakes: allegations, named figures, and circulation
The recordings attributed to Riley allege extreme abuse and name multiple high‑profile figures; reports list former President Donald Trump and several U.S. politicians among those accused in the audio, which has circulated widely across Threads, TikTok, Reddit, X and Substack [3] [5] [1]. That combination of sensational allegation and high-profile names is a primary reason the files have spread quickly and triggered intense public debate [3] [1].
5. Verification status and the “algorithm’s verification trap”
Verification specialists and investigative commentators have warned that the material lacks the kinds of corroboration responsible reporting requires — identity checks, audio authentication, records mapping, and independent corroboration — and have described how social platforms and algorithms can propel unverified material before it is properly vetted [1]. Multiple outlets emphasize that, as of reporting, the claims in the audio remain allegations, not confirmed crimes or court-recorded testimony [3].
6. Alternative views and limits of available reporting
Some independent researchers and writers compiling timelines and records say there are public records and leads that could potentially place the person Riley identifies within an Epstein-related orbit, but those efforts do not validate every claim made in the recordings and have not produced conclusive public proof as of the reporting cited [6] [7]. The sources cited here document the Substack publication and the interviews Voldeng says she conducted, but they do not establish the truth of the allegations in the audio; the reporting is explicit that verification remains outstanding [1] [3].
7. Motives, agendas and the media dynamic
The publication’s provenance — a nontraditional Substack creator releasing raw interview audio — sits at the intersection of survivor testimony, outsider publishing, and political consequence; observers note both the potential public-interest value of survivor accounts and the risks when unverified allegations involving public figures propagate through partisan and algorithmic networks, an environment where sensational material can serve political agendas or attention economies regardless of verification status [1] [3].