Prosecutors have moved far too slowly
Illustration: The Economist / Getty Images
Listen to this story
Your browser does not support the <audio> element.
N O WONDER THAT the life and mysterious death of Jeffrey Epstein fuel a nihilistic and conspiratorial view that all the elites are rotten. In what is supposed to be a meritocracy too many of the best and the brightest turn out to be motivated by flattery, vanity, cupidity, cruelty and lechery. An unknown number of powerful men (and some women) trafficked and abused a much larger number of vulnerable women and girls. Those victims urgently need justice.
Epstein, a financier, fixer, rapist and paedophile, died in a Manhattan prison cell in 2019. Under popular and congressional pressure, the Department of Justice (D o J) released over 3m pages of documents on January 30th—too many for anyone to have read. This week volunteer software engineers converted them into a format that could be analysed. The Economist has examined this archive.
Epstein appears to have been careful about mixing his prolific sexual abuse with his broad network of influence-peddling. We scored each of the 1.4m emails by how relevant it was to his crimes. Around 1,500 threads belong to the most severe category—where, for instance, a correspondent made light of abusing Epstein’s “littlest girl”.
Nearly 60% of the emails were to people Epstein paid to make his life easier. Some handled the bureaucratic complications from his record as a sex offender. Others scrubbed the web of references to his plea bargain over child prostitution and soliciting in 2008. Because of this concealment, a number of Epstein’s social contacts who today protest that they did not grasp the extent of his crimes may be telling the truth.
The rest of the emails depict an astonishing network of influence- and favour-trading. Of the messages to his 500 main correspondents, excluding his own staff and business partners, almost 20% involve financiers; 10% scientists or doctors; 8% media, entertainment and public relations; and 6% each lawyers, politicians, academics and businesspeople. Although some of his contacts were from countries like Britain and Norway, the vast majority were American.
In the worst cases, some members of those networks appear to be implicated in sex trafficking. Others, such as the physicist Lawrence Krauss, may not be criminals, but deserve opprobrium for their moral failure. Still others, like the commerce secretary Howard Lutnick, have lied about relatively minor dealings with Epstein—even if no more damning evidence turns up, they should answer for their dishonesty. Some, such as the author J.K. Rowling, have been pilloried despite the evidence being that the contact was one-sided and came from him.
The files tend to mash these different categories together. That is partly because when Epstein makes allegations it is hard to know if he is lying. It is also because the D o J ’s haphazard redactions have shielded criminal abusers, revealed those who briefly came into Epstein’s orbit and too often exposed the identity of victims.
Redactions are essential to protect innocent victims. But blacked out faces and names of women and girls inadvertently exacerbate how these vast files, detailing the routine abuse of over 1,000 victims, tend to make the story all about the men. Female bodies are turned into objects in what is a tragic echo of Epstein’s own abuses.
The duty to those women and girls is to bring their abusers to justice without delay. It is reprehensible—and, indeed, hard to understand—why the D o J has made so little progress filing charges over the past seven years. The delay is as baffling as the leniency of Epstein’s original plea bargain 18 years ago. ■
논증 분석
유형: diagnosis
핵심 주장
Jeffrey Epstein 파일 공개는 수많은 피해자들이 7년이 넘도록 정의를 실현받지 못하고 있으며, Department of Justice의 기소 지연과 부실한 편집 처리가 이 비극을 악화시키고 있음을 보여준다.
논리구조
- 전제: Jeffrey Epstein의 삶과 의문스러운 죽음은 엘리트 계층 전체가 부패했다는 허무주의적·음모론적 시각을 부추기며, 실제로 다수의 권력자들이 취약한 여성과 소녀들을 학대하고 인신매매에 가담했다.
- 논거: Department of Justice가 2026년 1월 30일 300만 페이지 이상의 문서를 공개했으며, The Economist가 이를 분석한 결과 140만 건의 이메일 중 약 1,500개 스레드가 범죄와 가장 직접적으로 연관된 최고 위험 카테고리에 속하는 것으로 나타났다.
- 진단: Epstein은 광범위한 영향력 네트워크와 성범죄를 의도적으로 분리 운영했으며, 이메일의 60%는 성범죄자 기록 관련 행정 처리, 2008년 아동 성매수 합의 관련 인터넷 기록 삭제 등 그의 범죄를 은폐하는 데 고용된 인물들과의 교신이었다.
- 논거: 나머지 이메일들은 금융인(약 20%), 과학자·의사(10%), 미디어·엔터테인먼트(8%), 변호사·정치인·학자·기업인(각 6%) 등 광범위한 영향력 거래 네트워크를 보여주며, 대부분이 미국인이다.
- 진단: 관련자들의 죄질은 다양한 스펙트럼을 형성한다: 인신매매에 직접 가담한 자, Lawrence Krauss처럼 범죄자는 아니지만 도덕적 실패로 비난받아야 할 자, Howard Lutnick처럼 사소한 관계에 대해 거짓말한 자, J.K. Rowling처럼 일방적 접촉 피해자임에도 부당하게 비난받는 자가 공존한다.
- 진단: Department of Justice의 무작위적 편집 처리는 실제 범죄적 학대자를 보호하면서도 Epstein의 네트워크에 잠깐 스친 인물을 노출시키고, 1,000명 이상의 피해자 신원을 지나치게 자주 공개하는 역설적 결과를 낳았다.
- 진단: 피해자 얼굴과 이름을 검게 지운 편집 방식은 의도치 않게 방대한 파일의 초점을 가해 남성들에게 맞추고, 여성의 몸을 객체화함으로써 Epstein 자신의 학대를 비극적으로 반복하는 효과를 낳는다.
- 반론: 일부 사회적 접촉자들은 Epstein 범죄의 전모를 몰랐다고 주장하는데, 범죄 은폐 작업의 존재를 감안하면 이 주장이 사실일 수도 있다.
- 결론: Department of Justice가 지난 7년간 기소에 거의 진전을 보이지 못한 것은 18년 전 Epstein의 관대한 합의만큼이나 비난받아야 하며, 피해 여성과 소녀들을 위해 학대자들을 지체 없이 기소해야 한다.
결론
Epstein 파일이 드러낸 진짜 스캔들은 엘리트 네트워크의 부패만이 아니라, Department of Justice가 7년 동안 피해자들에게 정의를 제공하지 못한 제도적 실패다.
Subscribers to The Economist can sign up to our Opinion newsletter, which brings together the best of our leaders, columns, guest essays and reader correspondence.