Beatrice Keul, a Swiss former beauty pageant contestant, told congressional staff that President Donald Trump raped her at New York’s Plaza Hotel in November 1993, according to a report released October 26 by House Judiciary Committee Democrats. The White House denies the allegation.
The report provides a more detailed account of an incident Keul had previously described publicly as sexual assault. The new development is the publication of her expanded account, rather than a newly announced criminal charge or court finding.
White House spokeswoman Lauren Bis said, “None of these allegations are true,” in a statement reported by several news organizations. PEOPLE reported that Trump has not been charged with a crime in connection with Keul’s allegations.
What Beatrice Keul told congressional staff
The Democratic staff report says Keul was 24 and working as a model and financial services professional when she attended the American Dream Pageant in Atlantic City and New York. She described meeting Trump at a press luncheon at the Plaza.
According to her account, Trump offered help with a U.S. visa and admission to New York University. She said Jeffrey Epstein approached her afterward, introduced himself as Trump’s friend and invited her to a future party at Mar-a-Lago.
Keul told staff that a Trump representative later invited her upstairs for a private meeting. She alleged that Trump raped her in a hotel suite and afterward pressed her to remain silent while repeating offers of assistance with her education and visa.
These details come from Keul’s account as presented by the Democratic staff. They are allegations, and the White House disputes them.
How the account differs from earlier reporting
Beatrice Keul had publicly accused Trump of sexual misconduct before this week’s report. The Independent’s October 27 coverage notes that she first discussed the Plaza incident publicly in October 2024, describing unwanted kissing, touching and an attempt to lift her dress.
The congressional report acknowledges that earlier account. Footnote 49 says she had previously chosen to describe talking Trump down during an attempted rape, without disclosing the additional details now presented.
That footnote also states that the section relies solely on extensive discussions between Keul and committee staff over several weeks. This sourcing limitation matters when distinguishing her account from independently established facts about the alleged assault.
The new report should therefore not be described as Keul’s first accusation against Trump. It presents an expanded allegation about an incident she had already discussed publicly.
White House rejects the report
Bis described the report as a politically motivated effort by Democrats to distract voters. She also repeated the administration’s position that Trump had been exonerated of matters involving Epstein.
That is the White House’s position, not a finding made by this article. TIME said it had been unable to independently verify details of Keul’s account. Publication of the congressional report does not resolve the disputed allegation.
The report was issued by Democratic staff, and USA TODAY reported that Republicans on the Judiciary Committee had not endorsed it. It should not be presented as a bipartisan committee determination.
What Democrats are requesting next
Rep. Jamie Raskin, the committee’s ranking Democrat, released the report while calling for an independent special counsel to investigate alleged wrongdoing connected to Epstein. Hourly Times has separately covered the Democrats’ special-counsel request and the administration’s response.
The 53-page Democratic staff report discusses accounts involving 11 women. That total does not mean all 11 directly accused Trump of assault; the report identifies five as making direct rape or sexual-assault accusations.
Under federal special-counsel regulations, appointment requires determinations by the attorney general, or the acting attorney general when recused, about whether a criminal investigation is warranted, conflicts or extraordinary circumstances exist, and an outside counsel would serve the public interest.
The Democrats’ request does not itself appoint a prosecutor. Their announced next step is to seek an independent investigation; the materials reviewed do not establish a new prosecution or hearing date concerning Beatrice Keul’s allegation.
