Recent posts on social media have once again sparked claims that Leonardo DiCaprio is named in documents linked to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein — with some users escalating the narrative into sensational conspiracy theories, including allegations of cannibalism. However, publicly available court records and credible media reporting show no evidence to support these claims.
Millions of documents connected to Epstein-related investigations and civil litigation have been released in recent years. These records include emails, contact references and witness statements. Legal experts have consistently clarified that the appearance of a person’s name in such materials does not in itself indicate criminal wrongdoing, association with crimes, or knowledge of Epstein’s abuse.
DiCaprio’s name appears in limited correspondence cited in media reports. In a June 2009 email attributed to former UK minister Peter Mandelson, Epstein was reportedly asked whether international companies might seek DiCaprio’s endorsement.
A separate 2016 email exchange involving an account bearing the name Deepak Chopra referenced the possibility of arranging a dinner and asked whether DiCaprio “would want to have dinner,” with a response suggesting the actor could be approached if available.
Additional mentions stem from third-party anecdotes in which Epstein allegedly boasted about knowing high-profile personalities. However, there is no verified evidence confirming that DiCaprio had a personal relationship with Epstein or any knowledge of his criminal activities.
What the Epstein files actually show
Investigations and court filings contain references to numerous figures from politics, business and entertainment, largely because Epstein maintained a wide social network. Inclusion in emails, contact books or testimony reflects mention — not proof of misconduct.
Claims circulating online that link the Epstein documents to cannibalism allegations are not supported by court records, investigative findings or credible fact-checking reports. No official filings or mainstream investigations have produced evidence backing such assertions.
