What is the status on Joe Biden sexual assault on his daughter
Executive summary
Two separate threads have been conflated in public discussion: a 2020 allegation by former Senate aide Tara Reade that Joe Biden sexually assaulted her in 1993, and later claims tied to a leaked diary belonging to Biden’s daughter Ashley that some outlets framed as evidence of abuse; neither thread produced criminal charges or independent corroboration that has changed the legal status of the claims [1] [2] [3]. Major news organizations investigated both stories and reported denials, limited corroboration, and contested sourcing rather than prosecutable findings [4] [5].
1. The Tara Reade allegation: allegation, responses and investigative findings
Tara Reade publicly alleged in 2020 that Joe Biden sexually assaulted her in 1993 while she was a Senate aide; Biden and his campaign denied the allegation when it emerged and Biden addressed it in a May 1, 2020 interview, saying women should be heard while denying the assault [1] [6]. News organizations including The New York Times, BBC and PBS examined the claim and reported that former Senate staffers did not recall the incident and that reporters found no corroboration or pattern of similar behavior by Biden, noting that Reade was the only woman to make an allegation of sexual assault rather than inappropriate touching [4] [5] [2]. Time and other outlets documented the public record and surrounding reporting, including Reade’s statements about earlier harassment complaints and the difficulty of corroboration after decades [1]. As of the reporting provided, there was no public criminal charge or government prosecution tied to Reade’s allegation [4] [2].
2. The Ashley Biden diary claims: provenance, publication and fact checks
A separate cluster of claims revolved around an alleged diary of Ashley Biden that surfaced in 2020 and was later controlled by conservative outlets; excerpts were published by The National File and portions were purchased or handled by Project Veritas, which conservative-aligned reporting and court records link to the document’s circulation [3]. Fact‑checking organizations like Snopes examined diary excerpts that referenced sexual trauma and contextualized them as part of a private journal of addiction and recovery; Snopes reported that the diary had been obtained under dubious circumstances and that context and provenance were contested [3]. Reporting later recorded law‑enforcement attention: an individual who stole and sold the diary pleaded guilty and was sentenced, and the FBI investigated people connected to the chain of custody, indicating criminality in how the journal was obtained or distributed rather than a legal finding about its content’s factual claims [7] [8].
3. Evidence, corroboration and the legal standard: where reporting stops
Across both narratives, mainstream outlets emphasize lack of corroboration and absence of charges: Reade’s allegation was treated as a serious claim with limited independent confirmation from contemporaneous witnesses, and no prosecutor brought a case; the Ashley diary materials were subject to chain‑of‑custody questions, sales to partisan outlets and criminal charges for theft, which complicates their evidentiary value [4] [3] [7]. Sources like The New York Times and PBS reported the factual posture clearly—an allegation denied by Biden and investigated by reporters, but not proven in court or corroborated to the extent that institutions pursued criminal action [4] [2].
4. Political context, motivations and contested agendas
Both stories unfolded amid intense political battles: Reade’s 2020 accusation arose during a presidential primary and general election cycle, attracting scrutiny about timing and motive from supporters and critics alike, while the Ashley diary’s public emergence involved partisan actors and organizations that had incentive to influence a campaign narrative; outlets reporting these dynamics flagged the partisan context as relevant to assessing credibility and sourcing [1] [3]. Reporting from fact‑checkers and independent newsrooms repeatedly noted partisan actors—Project Veritas and right‑leaning publishers among them—involved in the diary’s dissemination, which raises legitimate questions about agenda and verification [3] [8].
5. Bottom line on status
As established in contemporaneous reporting, there is a public allegation by Tara Reade that Joe Biden sexually assaulted her in 1993, which Biden denies and which mainstream reporting found lacked corroboration and did not lead to criminal charges; separately, diary excerpts attributed to Ashley Biden were circulated through partisan channels and became the subject of theft prosecutions and fact‑checking, but did not produce independent legal findings that confirm abuse by Joe Biden [1] [4] [3] [7]. Reporting limitations: available sources do not show any criminal conviction, ongoing public criminal prosecution of Joe Biden on these claims, nor definitive corroboration accepted by major investigative outlets [4] [2].