Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Have victims or witnesses alleged contact between Bill Richardson and Jeffrey Epstein?
Executive summary
Depositions and unsealed court files in the long-running Epstein litigation include testimony from Virginia Giuffre alleging she was directed to have sex with former New Mexico governor Bill Richardson; Richardson has denied ever meeting Giuffre and was never charged [1] [2]. Multiple outlets that reported on the released documents — including BBC, PBS, TIME, The Hill and local US stations — note the allegation in Giuffre’s testimony but also emphasize that Richardson denied the claim and faced no criminal charges arising from it [2] [1] [3] [4] [5].
1. What the depositions say: a named allegation in Giuffre’s testimony
Court records unsealed in connection with litigation around Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell include deposition testimony in which Virginia Giuffre says she was pressured or instructed to have sex with a list of powerful men and specifically names Bill Richardson among them [1] [4]. Coverage of the document dumps cites Giuffre’s statement that she was “instructed” to go to figures including Richardson, Prince Andrew, George Mitchell and others [3] [1].
2. Richardson’s response and legal status
Reporting makes clear Richardson has denied the allegation. In previous media accounts he said he never met Giuffre and called the claim “completely false,” and none of the media or court records released at that time showed he was charged or prosecuted in connection with Epstein’s crimes [4] [2]. BBC notes explicitly that “he was not charged with any crime” in the documents released [2].
3. How major outlets framed the files — names included, but few new factual revelations
News outlets covering the files—TIME, PBS, BBC, The Hill and others—noted that the unsealed records name many high‑profile figures, including Richardson, but also stressed the documents “unveil no major new allegations” beyond prior public reporting and that the records often reflect allegations, not proven facts [3] [2]. TIME and PBS both pointed out Richardson was mentioned in the materials and that earlier denials existed [3] [1].
4. Local and regional coverage added context about depositions and public reaction
Local reporting (for example KOAT in New Mexico and Fox29) combed through unsealed depositions and presented the allegation’s local significance given Richardson’s former governorship, while also noting the legal context — that these are civil‑case depositions and not criminal convictions [5] [6]. Those pieces repeat that depositions were among the documents made public by the courts [5].
5. What the evidence in these sources does and does not show
Available sources show: (a) a sworn deposition by Giuffre includes an allegation naming Richardson as someone she says she was sent to [1] [4]; (b) Richardson denied the allegation [4]; and (c) none of the reporting says Richardson was charged in connection with those allegations [2]. Available sources do not mention any law‑enforcement indictment or conviction of Richardson related to Epstein in the provided reporting [2] [4].
6. Differing perspectives and how to weigh them
The reporting presents two competing perspectives: Giuffre’s allegation in court depositions and Richardson’s categorical denial [4] [1]. Journalistic accounts note the documents name many figures but often stop short of treating allegations as established fact, and several outlets emphasize the documents added names rather than producing new corroborative evidence in public view [3] [2]. Readers should note that civil‑case depositions can contain contested statements that were part of litigation tactics, settlements or testimony given under cross‑examination, and that the sources here do not report independent criminal findings against Richardson [3] [2].
7. Why this matters now: public records and ongoing transparency efforts
Congressional and media efforts to release more Epstein‑related files continued into 2025, reflecting a broader push to make travel logs, calendars and other records public; those releases are the context in which names like Richardson reappear in headlines [7] [8]. Proponents of transparency argue full release could clarify associations; others warn unredacted material can mix allegation with evidence, complicating public judgment [7] [9].
8. Bottom line for readers
Documents made public in the Epstein litigation include sworn allegations by Virginia Giuffre that she was directed to have sex with Bill Richardson; Richardson denies the claim and was not criminally charged in the materials reported so far [1] [4] [2]. The unsealed records name many powerful people but, according to multiple outlets, do not by themselves constitute proof of criminal conduct — they present allegations that remain disputed in the public record [3] [2].