Sascha Riley Williams claims about being abused by Trump
Executive summary
Sascha (or Sasha/Sascha) Riley has surfaced in a set of unedited audio recordings that allege he was trafficked and abused as a child and that prominent figures—including former President Donald Trump—were implicated in a broader Jeffrey Epstein-linked network; those recordings were published on Substack and spread widely on social media [1] [2]. Major outlets reporting the viral audio stress the allegations remain unverified, with no public court filings or independent investigations confirming the specific claims that Riley makes about Trump or other named officials [1] [3].
1. The core allegation: what Riley is reported to have said
The audio and accompanying summaries circulating online present Riley as saying he was adopted in 1977, abused from early childhood, trafficked between ages nine and thirteen into an alleged Epstein-associated network, and that he was willing to testify or take a polygraph about those experiences; the material as published names multiple political figures, including Donald Trump, Senator Lindsey Graham, and others [1] [4] [3] [5].
2. Where the recordings appeared and who released them
The unedited audio files were popularized on Substack by a poster identified in reporting as Lisa Noelle Voldeng, who published the tapes and a summary that the publisher said were released “in the public interest,” claiming copies had been shared with police and allies abroad and that Riley had been moved for safety—claims embedded in the Substack distribution that fueled the viral spread [1] [6].
3. Evidence cited publicly and what it does — and does not — prove
Publicly available evidence so far consists of the audio recordings themselves and the publisher’s assertions that law enforcement had been contacted and that the speaker is a decorated Iraq War veteran; outlets covering the tapes note the recordings have not been independently authenticated and that the names Riley mentions do not correspond to any public indictments or court records connected to these allegations as of reporting [5] [2] [3].
4. Verification status and official response (or lack thereof)
Multiple news reports explicitly state they could not verify the authenticity of the recordings or confirm that federal authorities had publicly received or acted on them; there are no mainstream reports of judicial charges tied to Riley’s claims naming Trump or others, and major outlets covering the files emphasize the difference between allegation and proven fact [1] [3] [5].
5. Public reaction, political framing, and misinformation risks
The clips have ignited intense social-media amplification and polarized readings—some users assert the testimony as conclusive proof of an Epstein-Trump criminal network while critics point to inconsistencies, the absence of corroborating records, and the possibility of fabricated or misattributed material; reporting flags both the serious nature of survivor testimony and the danger of amplifying unverified claims that target high-profile figures without corroboration [4] [7] [3].
6. What remains unknown and what to watch next
Key open questions remain: whether independent forensic authentication of the audio will be published, whether law-enforcement agencies will confirm receipt and any investigative steps, and whether Riley—or verified representatives—will provide testable proof or sworn testimony; current reporting documents the allegations and the Substack release but does not establish legal corroboration tying Trump to the abuses alleged [1] [6] [5].