The Pioneer’s Epstein Files Special Report Used Uncredited Material and Mischaracterised an 'Indian Girl' Without Basis
Concerns relating to journalistic attribution and factual inaccuracy arise from a “Special Report” published on February 16, 2026, by The Pioneer, titled “Indian girl was victim of Epstein, files reveal.” The report cites emails from the recently released Jeffrey Epstein files but does not acknowledge the unearthing of each of the cited documents by another journalist, nor does it adequately distinguish between documented facts and inferred claims.
The report cites a set of emails from the recently released Jeffrey Epstein files, part of a disclosure involving more than three million emails made public by the United States Department of Justice. However, all the specific emails referenced in The Pioneer’s report had already been unearthed a day earlier on X (formerly Twitter) by Saket Suman, editor of IndianRepublic.in, who independently unearthed and contextualised those documents after days of forensic examination of the files.
| Image Source: Tanmoyofc on X |
The report adds no new documents, disclosures, or independent verification beyond what had already been unearthed by Saket Suman but presents the material as a proprietary “Special Report.”
Jide Zeitlin telling Hard-deep's friend Jeff that Fake News existed in India before the term was coined! pic.twitter.com/scAAJtrTmQ
— Saket Suman (@writesaket) February 15, 2026
Beyond questions of attribution, the report contains a significant factual and ethical lapse.
The meeting that did not happen @DILIPtheCHERIAN pic.twitter.com/boEUUsYSQD
— Saket Suman (@writesaket) February 15, 2026
The headline and narrative repeatedly describe an “Indian girl” as a victim of Epstein, based on an email referring to an “individual located in India.” The email, as quoted in full, does not state nationality, age, or citizenship.
Capital goes into mix of classic, safe and quirky funds (from Blackstone Real Estate to Zuckerberg's Indian dude..) - simple stuff only... pic.twitter.com/RMPdWrKs7Q
— Saket Suman (@writesaket) February 15, 2026
“Located in India” could plausibly refer to a foreign national residing temporarily in India, or an Indian adult woman. Elevating this wording into the definitive claim of an “Indian girl” introduces assumptions not supported by the document itself.
Haven't seen @drharshvardhan around for a bit but this one did take place I guess with @BillGates. Didn't it @MoHFW_INDIA? Who's setting the agenda? pic.twitter.com/LeaU6mGyfL
— Saket Suman (@writesaket) February 15, 2026
In cases involving sexual exploitation, age and identity are material facts. Responsible journalism demands restraint, precision, and transparency, particularly when documents are heavily redacted and sourced from posthumous investigative files. Where information is incomplete, the obligation is to highlight uncertainty and, where necessary, seek further clarification from authorities, not to supply conjecture through headlines.
And lastly regarding the individual located in India. If you can get me her address and contact information; I will coordinate with our colleagues at the embassy there. pic.twitter.com/mZ6DasgZTE
— Saket Suman (@writesaket) February 15, 2026
The Epstein files represent a vast, sensitive archive whose public release places an added burden on journalists to distinguish discovery from duplication, and verification from amplification. When large tranches of documents come to light, journalistic value lies in original sourcing, careful contextualisation, and scrupulous attribution, and surely not in repackaging another reporter’s labour while introducing factual distortions.
I forgot to tell you there was an old Indian man next to me on the plane who was drinking too much, he kept touching and talking to me and telling me how amazing I was. He fell asleep and when he woke up he put his arms around me and told me he loved me.... pic.twitter.com/xxTPoNqTIQ
— Saket Suman (@writesaket) February 15, 2026
At a moment when public trust in media is under sustained pressure, the episode raises broader questions about professional standards, credit ethics, and the responsibility of legacy institutions when reporting on sensitive global disclosures. Attribution is a core principle of journalistic integrity.