US Congress Says Epstein’s Crimes Could Have Been Prevented — What the New Report Found

November 11, 2026 Faizan Altaf

A major US congressional report has concluded that Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes could have been stopped years earlier — if federal investigators and prosecutors had done their jobs properly.

The report, released on 10 November 2026 by the Republican-led House Oversight Committee, says the US government failed Epstein’s survivors “for decades”. It blames a controversial 2007 deal that let Epstein avoid federal charges, banks that looked the other way, and prison staff who failed to watch him on the night he died.

The findings come after a 15-month investigation that included 19 transcribed interviews and depositions, documents from the Department of Justice and Epstein’s estate, and a detailed review of financial records. The committee also heard from some of the most powerful people in Epstein’s world, including former Attorney General William Barr, former prosecutor Alexander Acosta, Ghislaine Maxwell, Bill Gates, Leslie Wexner and Howard Lutnick.

But the report has already divided Washington. Democrats call it incomplete and partisan, and the Justice Department has pushed back against its conclusions. Here is what the report found, what it wants to happen next, and why it matters.

What is the Epstein report?

The report is called “A Review of the Federal Government’s Mishandling of the Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell Criminal Investigations”. It was written by the majority staff of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, chaired by Republican Representative James Comer of Kentucky.

Epstein was a wealthy financier who sexually abused young women and girls for years. He was first arrested in 2005. He died in a New York jail in August 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges. His associate, Ghislaine Maxwell, was later convicted and is serving a 20-year prison sentence.

The committee’s central conclusion is blunt: “The Committee finds that the crimes Epstein committed after 2005 could have been prevented — and justice served — if not for failures by federal investigators and prosecutors in South Florida and Washington, D.C.”

“Epstein operated with impunity, shielded and enabled by powerful connections and a justice system that repeatedly failed his victims,” Comer said when the report was released.

The 2007 deal that let Epstein walk free

The report’s most serious finding concerns a deal made in 2007. At that time, federal prosecutors in Florida were investigating Epstein. Instead of charging him in federal court, the US Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida signed a non-prosecution agreement — an NPA — with him.

Under the deal, federal prosecutors agreed not to prosecute Epstein in that district. In exchange, he pleaded guilty to lesser state charges. He was sentenced to 18 months in jail, served only 13 months, and was given extensive work-release privileges that let him leave jail during the day.

The report says Epstein continued to abuse women during those work-release hours.

It also says federal prosecutors failed to inform survivors about the deal before it was signed. That meant the women could not object, pursue civil claims in time, or publicly expose what had happened to them.

This is not the first time the 2007 deal has been criticised. The Justice Department’s own Office of Professional Responsibility reviewed the case in 2020 and concluded that victims were not informed of or consulted about the agreement. It found that Alexander Acosta, the US Attorney who approved the deal, exercised poor judgment — both in resolving the case this way and in failing to make sure victims were told about the state plea hearing.

The new report goes further. It says some of the failures reflected poor judgment by the prosecutor’s office, while others “appeared to be the result of Epstein’s pervasive influence and far-reaching connections, potentially including two attorneys employed by the office”.

The report also notes that prosecutors chose not to fully investigate allegations against Epstein in other states, even though the evidence pointed beyond Florida.

The night Epstein died

Epstein died on 10 August 2019 at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York, a federal jail, while he was awaiting trial.

The report says understaffing and “systemic dysfunction” at the jail contributed to officers on both shifts missing at least 12 rounds and three inmate counts on the night of his death. As a result, Epstein and other inmates went nearly eight hours without adequate supervision.

These findings match an earlier, independent investigation. The Justice Department’s Inspector General reported in 2023 that staff failed to carry out the required rounds and counts, that Epstein was left alone in his cell for hours, and that officers falsified records to make it look as if the checks had taken place.

The House report does not re-investigate the cause of Epstein’s death itself. But it presents the missed checks as part of a wider pattern: at every stage, the report argues, the system that was supposed to hold Epstein accountable failed to do so.

Banks looked the other way

The report also turns its attention to the financial system. It says US and foreign authorities, along with financial institutions, failed to act on clear signs of human trafficking and immigration fraud.

American Express is singled out by name. The report says company agents allowed Epstein to use fraudulent “decoy flights” and refundable or dummy travel bookings to move foreign women across borders and directly to his homes.

More broadly, the report says banks held substantial information about Epstein’s criminal history and repeatedly spotted transactions that raised serious compliance concerns. Yet they failed to act on those warnings — in some cases only reporting them years later, after Epstein’s arrest in 2019. The report links that delay to Epstein’s wealth, personal connections and influence.

The committee has asked the Treasury Department and the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) — the US agency that tracks suspicious money movements — to review whether banks are properly meeting their legal duty to report suspicious activity linked to trafficking and money laundering.

What the report wants to happen next

The report does not end with criticism. It makes a series of recommendations for the Justice Department, Congress and the Treasury:

New investigations into Epstein’s associates. The Justice Department should interview or re-interview key witnesses and pursue allegations against two prominent men named by Epstein’s longtime assistant Sarah Kellen. Kellen told the committee that former Miami Beach mayor Philip Levine and French celebrity hairstylist Frédéric Fekkai sexually assaulted her. Both men deny the allegations. The committee referred the claims to federal prosecutors in June.

More questions for Epstein’s assistant. The report says the Justice Department should further question Lesley Groff, another longtime Epstein assistant, about what she knew and whether she helped his crimes. Groff told investigators she had never suspected Epstein of sexually abusing women and girls. The Republican investigators described that testimony as “not credible”.

Protection for survivors. Congress should pass the Survivor’s Voice Protection Act (H.R. 10389), a bill introduced by Chairman Comer. It would stop survivors of sexual abuse from being silenced by non-disclosure agreements (NDAs), and would require trusted adults to report suspected grooming to the police. The bill would also define grooming in federal law for the first time. The report says Epstein and powerful people around him used NDAs to silence survivors and hide criminal activity.

Access to records. Survivors should be given unredacted access to their own files and records held by the government.

Tougher rules on plea deals. Non-prosecution agreements should face rigorous scrutiny, the report says, so they serve the interests of justice rather than “enable and empower criminals”. Prosecutors’ offices should also enforce their conflict-of-interest rules more strictly.

Better handling of the Epstein files. The report criticises the Justice Department’s handling of document releases after the Epstein Files Transparency Act was passed in 2025. It says the department failed to communicate properly about the releases and failed to protect survivors — poor redactions exposed survivors’ private personal information.

The political fight over the report

The report was written by the Republican majority on the committee, and Democrats have rejected its conclusions.

Robert Garcia, the committee’s top Democrat, dismissed the findings as the product of an incomplete investigation. He pointed out that the committee held no public hearings, and he accused the Justice Department of illegally withholding more than 2.5 million pages of documents.

The Justice Department has also pushed back against the report, although it has not accepted the committee’s account of events.

The report itself addresses one of the most politically charged questions: whether President Donald Trump was involved in Epstein’s crimes. Trump was friends with Epstein for years but has denied any knowledge of his crimes. The report says the committee found no evidence implicating Trump, and that every witness examined said that, to their knowledge, Trump was not involved in any crimes committed by Epstein and Maxwell. The Republican investigators accused Democrats of trying to politicise the inquiry by focusing on Trump.

Democrats, who won control of Congress in last week’s midterm elections, have promised to keep investigating Epstein’s network when they take up their new powers in January. That means this report is unlikely to be the last word on the Epstein case.

Why this report matters

The Epstein case has haunted American politics for years, not only because of the crimes themselves, but because of the questions it raises about power and justice. How did a man under federal investigation in 2005 keep abusing women for another 14 years? Why did banks, prosecutors and prison officials all fail to stop him?

This report offers the fullest congressional answer so far: a chain of failures, starting with a secret plea deal in Florida, running through banks that ignored warning signs, and ending in a jail cell where nobody was watching.

For the survivors, the report’s value may lie less in its politics than in its recommendations — new investigations, access to their own records, and a law to stop NDAs from silencing them.

Whether those recommendations are acted on will now depend on the Justice Department, on Congress, and on the Democrats who take control in January. The report itself says the failures of the past “must not be repeated”. The test will be whether anything actually changes.

Frequently asked questions

What did the Epstein report conclude?

That Epstein’s crimes after 2005 could have been prevented if federal investigators and prosecutors in Florida and Washington had acted properly, instead of signing a 2007 deal that let him avoid federal charges.

What was the 2007 non-prosecution agreement?

A deal in which federal prosecutors in Florida agreed not to charge Epstein federally. He pleaded guilty to lesser state charges, served 13 months of an 18-month sentence, and got extensive work-release privileges. Survivors were not told about the deal beforehand.

Who is the report asking the Justice Department to investigate?

Two men named by Epstein’s former assistant Sarah Kellen — former Miami Beach mayor Philip Levine and celebrity hairstylist Frédéric Fekkai, who both deny the allegations — and Epstein’s assistant Lesley Groff, whose testimony investigators called not credible.

What did the report say about Donald Trump?

That the committee found no evidence implicating Trump in Epstein’s crimes, and that every witness said Trump was not involved in them, to their knowledge.

Why are Democrats unhappy with the report?

They say the investigation was incomplete, held no public hearings, and that the Justice Department is still withholding more than 2.5 million pages of documents. They have vowed to continue the investigation when they take control of Congress in January.

What happened to Ghislaine Maxwell?

Maxwell, Epstein’s associate, was convicted of sex trafficking and is serving a 20-year prison sentence.

Conclusion

The House Oversight Committee’s report paints a picture of a justice system that failed at almost every turn. A plea deal in 2007 let Epstein escape federal prosecution. Banks ignored the signs of trafficking. Prison officers missed their checks on the night he died. And when the Epstein files were finally released, survivors’ private information was exposed.

The report’s recommendations — new investigations, stronger rules on plea deals, protection for survivors who speak out — now sit with the Justice Department and Congress. Whether they are carried out will decide whether this report becomes a turning point, or just another document in a case that has already produced too many of them.

For the survivors, who waited decades for accountability, the report’s central message is the one that matters most: their abuse could have been stopped, and it was not. What happens next is now up to the institutions that failed them.

Sources

This article is for general information and education only. It is not legal or financial advice.

Findivoza