All recent Prime Ministers, since at least Bob Hawke, have shown up the newly released batch of Epstein files and in this article I’ll explain the likely reason why as it has caused huge confusion.

Former Prime Ministers Paul Keating and Kevin Rudd both show up being named in direct emails to and from Jeffrey Epstein so being in the files was always going to happen.

Paul Keating’s name shows up via his daughter Katherine Keating who had a friendship with Epstein and Kevin Rudd’s name shows up mainly because of his role at the International Peace Institute which took donations from Epstein.

But former Prime Ministers Bob Hawke, John Howard, Julia Gillard, Tony Abbott, Malcolm Turnbull and Scott Morrison seem to have never had anything to do with Epstein and they are in the files because of a person named Jacqueline Pearce, who I am told lives in Adelaide.

Bob Hawke, John Howard, Julia Gillard, Tony Abbott, Malcolm Turnbull and Scott Morrison are in numerous documents which are mostly news articles that seem to have been compiled by Jacqueline Pearce as well as some documents she wrote as per below. (Click here to see an example document) (Click here to see another example document)

Below is the first page of 15-page document, that has Jacqueline Pearce’s name of it. (Click here to see the full document)

Nothing I have seen shows any evidence to support anything said in the below document. As you can see the list also has Mark Latham who was federal leader of the Labor Party but never Prime Minister.

I woke up Saturday morning (31/1/26) with media reporting 3 million new Epstein files had been published and I spent most of the morning sifting through some of the files. I came across the above document and published the first page on social media as per the below screenshot. (Click here to see on “X”)

I thought Jeffrey Epstein had been keeping files on Australian politicians which other media such as Channel 10 have also reported.

But after publishing the above post on social media some people contacted me and told me Jacqueline Pearce is from Adelaide in South Australia and has a history of blaming politicians and others for her problems.

Then someone posted the below comment, in response to my above social media post, which seemed very plausible.

WHY IS THIS IN EPSTEINS FILE DUMP?

Why Jacqueline Pearce’s docs ended up in the Epstein files release (Data Set 9)? Breaking it down into key points for your X post/thread:

•  Public Tip Submission: Likely a tip sent to FBI hotlines/portals during Epstein probes (2019-2021+). Her claims of “sexual targeting,” fraud, police abuse, and a “black market sex site” involving Aussie pols/gangs may have been submitted as paralleling Epstein’s elite abuse network.

•  Broad Act Scope: Epstein Files Transparency Act mandates declassifying ALL responsive records—even unverified/international ones. This includes random tips, emails, memes from global tipsters, explaining why 2019-2020 Aussie complaints got mixed in.

•  No Relevance Vetting: DOJ stresses inclusion ≠ credibility or Epstein link. Docs are raw/redacted for privacy to meet the law. Social media hype (e.g., FB posts on “Aussie PMs in Epstein files”) amplifies it, but it’s a fringe item in 3.5M+ pages. (Click here to see the full comment on “X”)

The bottom line is there are quite a few documents, about 10 to 15, sent by Jacqueline Pearce to the “FBI hotlines/portals during Epstein probes (2019-2021+)” that have ended up being released as part of the Epstein files.

And as with most documents in the Epstein files there are numerous duplicates of Jacqueline Pearce’s files.

So, you will find Australia’s former Prime Ministers showing up dozens of times in duplicated news reports in the Epstein files.

Whether Jacqueline Pearce filed the documents with the FBI or someone else did who knows.

To my knowledge previous releases of Epstein files have only contained documents obtained from Jeffrey Epstein, his associates such as Ghislaine Maxwell and court cases.

I also expected the latest Epstein files to contain only files the FBI recovered from Jeffrey Epstein’s computers and houses and maybe his associated court cases and that is why I published the above document on social media thinking it was one of Epstein’s documents.

Having unrelated documents, people sent to the FBI from around the world that Epstein likely never even saw, in the Epstein files just blurs the issue which is probably what someone is trying to do.

But I left my post on social media, as per above, because how the unrelated documents got into the Epstein files and why they were released in the Epstein files is now part of the story.

I thought it was important to write this article as some people are making claims about how many times former Prime Ministers are in the Epstein files, implying it means something, when it means nothing if it is just newspaper articles.

And there are many people wondering why other unrelated documents and photos are in the Epstein files.

The Epstein files have already started to destroy reputations and careers and will destroy many more over the next few weeks, months and years as media sift through the latest Epstein files release. And remember, there are still 3 million more files that at some stage will likely be released.

If you are bored with the Epstein files stories, don’t be, the fallout has just started and it will just keep on getting bigger and the Australian connection will grow as well.

Admin: Ten weeks ago, I launched a campaign with a simple goal: find 200 new monthly supporters so I can keep doing this work as a fully independent journalist, running this website and the YouTube channel without corporate backing or paywalls.

Since then, 115 wonderful people have stepped up and become monthly supporters. That’s huge, thank you!

We’re now at 85 to go.

If you’ve been enjoying the work and aren’t yet supporting monthly, I’d be incredibly grateful if you’d consider joining them. Here’s the situation:

Like most independent journalists, I’m basically a one-person small business. Right now a lot of us are feeling the squeeze, just like many small businesses and households are. To stay afloat and keep bringing you the reporting I do, I need roughly 200 more people chipping in whatever they can comfortably afford each month.

Anything from $3 to $100 (or whatever works for your budget) makes a real difference. There’s no lock-in, you can cancel or adjust anytime.

If that feels doable for you right now, you can see all the options on the donations page by clicking here.

Your support, whether it’s a monthly donation, a one-time donation, or just sharing the work, is what keeps independent voices like this one alive.

Please use Facebook, “X”, email and the other buttons below and help promote this article.

Kangaroo Court of Australia is independent media and is 100% crowdfunded by readers like yourself so please support on the links below. Click on the PayPal button below to donate or for other donation options click here to go to the Donations page.

Thank you for your support.

For the KCA t-shirt shop click here.

For the Fugitive Clothing t-shirt shop click here

Join the free email subscription below and you will be notified immediately I publish new articles which is normally twice a week.