'Gross negligence' or something else? DOJ Epstein files release faces fresh scrutiny after investigation spots unexplained gaps and redactions

The US Justice Department’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files is facing renewed scrutiny after a CBS News investigation identified references to classified material and gaps in document numbering that may point to records missing from the public release. The findings raise questions about the completeness of the disclosure process and come just a week before the November 3 US midterms, where US President Donald Trump's party faces the challenge of retaining control of the US House of Representatives. Furthermore, it comes on the heels of a report by the House Judiciary Committee Democrats, which lays out what they call "the case against Donald Trump emerging in the Epstein Files and DOJ's desperate efforts to cover it up". The report calls for an independent special counsel to investigate the president, Attorney General Todd Blanche's alleged conflicts of interest, and the Justice Department's reluctance to share evidence with state and foreign law enforcement.

Attorney General Todd Blanche has previously said the DOJ was not withholding Epstein records on national security grounds. Yet documents reviewed by CBS News indicate that the Office of the Deputy Attorney General received material labelled as classified in March 2025. An email from the FBI’s National Security Classification Operations Unit also referred to three documents that “remain classified”. Their contents and the reasons for their classification remain unclear.

Document numbers reveal gaps

According to the DOJ, it collected approximately six million pages related to Epstein. However, the so-called Epstein file dump, till date, consists of only around three million files. In January, the department confirmed that after reviewing the material for duplication, legal privilege and relevance, its total production under the Epstein Files Transparency Act had reached nearly 3.5 million pages.

CBS analysed the numbering systems attached to the released records, including Bates numbers used to organise documents in legal proceedings. Its review found gaps in sequences associated with financial records, bank documents and emails.

One example involved a collection of roughly 4,500 images of checks linked to Epstein’s accounts. The analysis identified 66 apparently missing check images. CBS also found gaps in an earlier numbering sequence covering emails involving Epstein, his associates, assistant Lesley Groff and convicted associate Ghislaine Maxwell.

However, gaps in numbering do not, by themselves, establish why records were removed. Some email exchanges may have been excluded as duplicates during processing, while mistakes are another possible explanation.

DOJ faces questions over withheld material

The department has maintained that material not released falls into categories including duplicate records, privileged documents and material unrelated to Epstein or the cases covered by the law. Its public explanation also cites legal restrictions designed to protect victims and other sensitive information. However, notably, a shameful debacle the DOJ had to face earlier this year included the release of nude photos of victims, including minors, even as all instances of US President Donald Trump's face were removed from the Epstein files dump.

Former US attorney Barbara McQuade questioned the apparent gaps in financial records, telling CBS that such records were not a permissible category for removal under the law. "It's the reason you have Bates numbers, so you notice something like that," she said.

Journalist Katie Phang has separately sued the DOJ, seeking further disclosures and an explanation of redactions and removals. She is also asking the court to appoint a special master to review the files. The DOJ, as per the report, is appealing rulings made in Phang's favour.

"If it wasn't intentional, then was it gross negligence? Were you just lazy? If it was intentional, then I think there's [expletive] there that they don't want people to see," Phang told CBS News. "My speculation runs an entire spectrum of reaction — but at the end of the day it just makes the DOJ look bad," Phang told CBS.

Mistakes or malicious errors? When DOJ accepted removing photos of Trump ally

The DOJ has acknowledged errors in its handling of the files, including the removal and subsequent restoration of a photograph of Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick visiting Epstein’s island in 2012. Notably, the image contradicted Lutnick's claim about his contact with the paedophile.

For now, the central question remains whether the unexplained gaps reflect duplication, processing errors or records that should have been disclosed but were hidden from the public.