What are the exact dates and locations of each allegation Katie Johnson has made against Donald Trump?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Katie Johnson — the pseudonym used in a high‑profile 2016 civil filing — alleged that Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein sexually assaulted her when she was 13 in 1994, describing encounters at Epstein’s New York residence and on occasions in Florida; the complaint was filed in April 2016 and the federal case was dismissed in early May 2016 (with an amended filing later reported in October 2016), but key factual details and corroboration remain contested in reporting [1] [2] [3] [4] [5].
1. What dates did Johnson allege for the assaults?
The complaint identifies 1994 as the year of the alleged sex crimes and states the accuser was 13 at the time; reporting repeatedly cites “1994” rather than specific calendar dates within that year, and contemporary coverage and later summaries treat 1994 as the operative time frame for her allegations [2] [6] [7]. The publicly available court docket and news coverage do not record an exact day or month in 1994 for each alleged incident, so the allegation should be understood as tied to that year rather than to precise dated events in the sources reviewed [4] [2].
2. Which locations does she name in her allegations?
Johnson’s complaint alleges assaults took place at Jeffrey Epstein’s Manhattan residence — described in multiple outlets as Epstein’s New York City apartment — and also alleges sexual encounters in Florida on more than one occasion; Snopes and PBS summarize the suit as accusing Epstein of raping the girl and forcing her to have sex with Trump “in both New York and Florida” [2] [6]. The lawsuit’s text, as reported, specifically centers on Epstein’s New York residence in 1994 and references subsequent encounters in Florida, but public reporting does not provide street addresses beyond identifying Epstein’s Manhattan apartment [7] [6].
3. When and where was the suit filed and what procedural dates matter?
The anonymous complaint using the name Katie Johnson was filed in federal court in California in late April 2016 — CourtListener shows filings entered April 27, 2016, and media contemporaneous to the filing describe an April 2016 lawsuit filed in Riverside (or filed in California federal court) [4] [3] [7]. The federal docket records a termination entry in early May 2016 (May 2, 2016) with reasons the court cited for dismissal; Newsweek and Wikipedia also report the case was dismissed in May 2016 [4] [3] [1]. Several outlets reported an amended complaint was later filed or at least discussed in New York federal court in October 2016, though those later filing claims are sourced mainly to press coverage (Daily Mail) rather than an independently cited docket in the materials provided here [5].
4. What does reporting say about the identity, corroboration and credibility of the allegations?
Major contemporaneous and retrospective accounts note the plaintiff used a pseudonym and that the case was dropped amid questions about the plaintiff’s identity and threats she described; investigative pieces raise doubt about whether the person who spoke to reporters was the same person alleged in the court papers, and outlets like Snopes, the San Francisco Chronicle and others emphasize the lack of corroboration and the anonymous nature of the filing [6] [7] [2]. Some tabloid reporting asserted elements of fabrication; other outlets and fact‑checks underline that the complaint’s core allegations exist in filed court papers even as the plaintiff’s identity and the complaint’s factual basis remain disputed [5] [6] [7].
5. Bottom line and limits of the public record
The public record and reporting establish that the allegations are tied to the year 1994, that locations named in the complaints are Epstein’s New York City apartment and unspecified Florida locations, and that the civil suit using the name Katie Johnson was filed in April 2016 and dismissed in May 2016, with later press references to an October 2016 amended filing; beyond the year and these jurisdictional details, the sources provided do not supply specific calendar dates in 1994 or street addresses, and they document significant questions about the plaintiff’s identity and the complaint’s corroboration [2] [6] [4] [3] [5].