The former Florida attorney general, Pam Bondi, appeared before a Congressional committee on Tuesday as part of the ongoing investigation into the late financier Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking network. The closed-door session, which lasted over four hours, focused on Bondi’s role in declining to prosecute Epstein in 2014 when she held office. Separately, a cross-party group of British parliamentarians has formally requested access to all US-held evidence, citing the need to pursue potential co-conspirators who may have operated in the United Kingdom.
Bondi’s testimony is the latest development in a scandal that has triggered political reverberations on both sides of the Atlantic. Critics have accused her of leniency towards Epstein, noting that her office did not pursue a state-level case after federal prosecutors charged him with soliciting a minor. Bondi has maintained that the decision was based on legal advice and that evidence was insufficient. The committee is examining whether political connections, including links to former President Donald Trump, influenced the outcome.
Meanwhile, a letter signed by over 40 MPs from the Conservative, Labour, and Liberal Democrat parties was delivered to the US ambassador in London. It requests that all documents, witness statements, and recordings from the Epstein case be shared with British authorities. The lawmakers argue that the evidence could reveal crimes committed in the UK, including trafficking of minors and sexual assault. The Metropolitan Police have said they are reviewing their own files but have not yet opened a formal investigation.
The US Justice Department has not publicly responded to the request. Diplomatic sources indicate that any transfer of evidence would be subject to legal constraints and mutual assistance treaties. The Epstein case, which saw the financier die by suicide in federal custody in 2019, continues to generate scrutiny over the handling of sex crime investigations involving the wealthy and powerful.
Bondi’s testimony is expected to produce a transcript that may be released in redacted form. The committee chair said the hearing was necessary to “restore public confidence in the integrity of the justice system”. The outcome of the British lawmakers’ request remains uncertain, but the episode underscores the transnational dimension of a case that has tested institutional accountability.
