DOJ Releases MORE Epstein Files

The DOJ’s massive Epstein files release has triggered viral claims about compromising photos of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor—but a thorough examination reveals these alleged “creepy photos” simply do not exist in the document dump.

Story Snapshot

No credible evidence supports claims of photos showing Andrew crouching over a woman in the DOJ’s January 30, 2026 Epstein files release
The DOJ released 3 million pages, 2,000 videos, and 180,000 images with all women except Ghislaine Maxwell redacted from visuals
Actual release contents include 2010 emails between Epstein and Andrew discussing dinners, not compromising photographs
Misinformation spreads rapidly on social media despite mainstream coverage finding no such images in the file dump

Viral Claims Contradict Actual File Contents

Social media posts and fringe reports claimed the DOJ’s latest Epstein files included photographs showing the former Prince Andrew in a compromising position with an unidentified woman. However, mainstream news outlets covering the January 30, 2026 release reported no such images. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche confirmed the release includes three million pages of documents, two thousand videos, and one hundred eighty thousand images, but emphasized that all women other than convicted accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell were redacted from the visuals to protect victim privacy. The disconnect between viral claims and verified reporting suggests the allegations stem from deliberate misinformation or misinterpretation of email exchanges rather than actual photographic evidence.

What the Files Actually Contain

The DOJ release under the Epstein Files Transparency Act concludes a comprehensive review of materials related to Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking network. The documents include FBI tips, email correspondence, flight logs, and grand jury transcripts from investigations spanning years. Among the disclosed emails are 2010 exchanges between Epstein and Andrew discussing dinner arrangements at Buckingham Palace, post-dating Epstein’s 2008 plea deal on prostitution charges involving a minor. These communications reveal the disgraced financier acting as a social connector for the former royal, but contain no visual evidence of wrongdoing. The heavy redactions protect ongoing investigations and victim identities, leaving six million total pages withheld from public view.

Andrew’s Epstein Ties Remain Document-Based

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s connections to Epstein are well-documented through flight logs, witness testimony, and his settled lawsuit with the late Virginia Giuffre, who accused him of sexual abuse before her suicide in 2025. The former prince denied all wrongdoing and was stripped of his royal titles and residence following the scandal. Prior file releases showed his presence on Epstein’s planes and at properties, but no criminal charges have resulted from any disclosure. The 2010 emails in the latest dump confirm Andrew maintained contact with Epstein after the financier’s conviction, celebrating his freedom through elite social gatherings. This pattern of documented association, rather than photographic evidence, forms the factual basis for scrutiny of Andrew’s judgment and character.

Transparency Demands Clash With Privacy Protections

Deputy AG Blanche acknowledged public demands for full disclosure while defending redactions that protect victims and active investigations. He emphasized that no powerful figure, including those connected to the Trump administration, received special shielding in the release process. The balance between transparency and privacy concerns conservative principles of justice—victims deserve protection while the public has legitimate interest in holding elites accountable. However, six million pages remain classified, fueling speculation that government officials are concealing damaging information about politically connected individuals. The DOJ’s assertion that the “thirst” for complete disclosure may never be satisfied raises questions about whether bureaucratic caution or genuine investigative needs justify withholding evidence. This tension between legitimate privacy concerns and potential government overreach demands continued vigilance from citizens who value transparency in public institutions.

Misinformation Exploits Public Distrust

The rapid spread of false claims about nonexistent photos demonstrates how easily misinformation fills information gaps when public trust erodes. Mainstream outlets verified the release contents through direct access to DOJ files, finding emails and redacted materials but no images matching viral descriptions. The fabricated narrative exploits justified skepticism about elite corruption and government transparency, turning legitimate concerns into vehicles for baseless accusations. Conservative Americans rightfully question institutional integrity after years of selective enforcement and political bias, but must distinguish between documented facts and viral fabrications. The actual Epstein files reveal troubling associations between powerful figures and a convicted sex offender, providing sufficient grounds for moral judgment without inventing photographic evidence. Discernment protects credibility when confronting genuine scandals involving elites who escaped accountability for decades.