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.
Fact check: What are the names of the women who have accused Donald Trump of misconduct?
Executive Summary
Multiple contemporary reports document that at least 27–28 women have publicly accused Donald Trump of sexual misconduct ranging from groping and unwanted kissing to rape, with allegations spanning from the 1970s through the 1990s and continuing into later disclosures. Recent reporting highlights former model Stacey Williams as a newly public accuser (alleging a 1993 groping involving Jeffrey Epstein), while earlier named complainants in the catalogue of allegations include E. Jean Carroll and Jessica Leeds; Trump and his campaign have consistently denied wrongdoing and framed many claims as politically motivated [1] [2].
1. Why the tally matters and what the reports claim about scale and timing
Contemporary summaries across outlets converge on a striking aggregate: roughly two dozen to nearly thirty women have leveled misconduct accusations against Trump, with public reporting citing counts of at least 27 and as many as 28 accusers. The allegations are described as originating across decades — principally the 1970s through the 1990s — and include a range of behaviors such as groping, unwanted kissing, entering dressing rooms without consent, and in some cases accusations of rape; sources frame this as a long-standing pattern rather than isolated incidents [1] [3]. The chronology matters because it shapes both public perception and legal implications, and recent additions to the list (notably in October 2024) have refreshed media attention and debate [2] [4].
2. Spotlight on Stacey Williams: a new, prominent allegation and its context
Recent reporting identifies Stacey Williams, a former model, as a public accuser who says Trump groped her in 1993 while Jeffrey Epstein allegedly watched. Williams’ disclosure was published in late October 2024, and her account was positioned by reporters as adding to a preexisting roster of accusers, bringing the publicly reported total to around 27 at the time of those publications. Trump’s campaign swiftly denied the allegation, calling it politically motivated. The Williams allegation is significant because it references Epstein — a figure tied to other high-profile sexual-abuse investigations — which reporters note can amplify scrutiny and credibility questions in public discourse [2].
3. Names repeatedly cited across reports and what’s verifiable from these sources
Across the provided analyses, a handful of names recur in coverage: E. Jean Carroll and Jessica Leeds are explicitly named alongside Stacey Williams. Carroll has pursued civil litigation in earlier, separately reported matters (not detailed here), and Leeds has publicly described an incident of unwanted contact. Reports also reference several former Miss USA contestants and a broader cohort of women who have publicly accused Trump of inappropriate behavior. The sources characterize the group as heterogeneous in background and the nature of allegations, stressing that many accusations involve non-consensual touching or invasions of privacy [1] [2].
4. How media outlets frame credibility, legal outcomes, and political context
Reporting treats credibility as contested, noting both corroborating and contradictory elements across accusations. Some accounts detail corroborative witnesses or contemporaneous patterns; others rest on the accusers’ testimony. Several articles emphasize legal actions taken in individual cases in the past, while also indicating that many allegations did not result in prosecutions, settlements, or civil judgments within the published accounts. Coverage from October 2024 frames new allegations as unfolding against a highly politicized backdrop, and notes that responses from Trump’s campaign consistently characterize claims as politically motivated, which shapes how readers interpret both motive and veracity [3] [4].
5. Divergent narratives: denials and claims of political motivation
Across the supplied material, the consistent counter-narrative is organized by Trump’s campaign and supporters: all accusations are portrayed as politically timed or strategically released. These denials aim to undermine public acceptance of the allegations and to reframe narratives around partisan attacks. Reporters present these denials alongside accusers’ accounts without adjudicating truth, while documenting the timing of statements and releases — for example, noting that several allegations or revelations were publicized in October 2024, a period of heightened political scrutiny [2] [4]. The interplay of accusation and denial is central to how sources present the story.
6. What remains unaddressed or omitted in the public summaries
The available summaries do not provide a complete, itemized roster of all 27–28 accusers by name in a single place; instead they highlight certain individuals while noting an aggregate count. The reports also leave gaps regarding legal outcomes for many accusations, the presence or absence of contemporaneous corroboration for each claim, and the standards used by outlets to verify older allegations. Additionally, sources differ in how they contextualize references to figures like Epstein — some emphasize potential corroborative implications, while others limit coverage to the accuser’s claim without independent corroboration [1] [5].
7. How to interpret the pattern: evidence, public perception, and next steps
Given the consistent reporting of a multi-decade series of allegations and the steady addition of public accusers, the dominant factual takeaway is that a substantial number of women have publicly accused Trump of sexual misconduct, with several named individuals and an evolving total in late October 2024. Future reporting should ideally provide comprehensive lists with citations, details of legal proceedings where applicable, and documentation of corroborating evidence to enable more definitive public assessment. For readers, distinguishing between documented legal findings and publicly reported allegations remains essential for informed judgment [1] [2].