Full Analysis Summary
Epstein immigration tactics
Newly released Department of Justice records show Jeffrey Epstein and people in his circle actively managed immigration pathways — including student visas, English classes, work petitions and at least one marriage — to secure or extend the U.S. status of women close to him.
Times Now reports the files include detailed correspondence about Karyna Shuliak, described as a Belarus-born longtime partner whose status was precarious by 2013.
Lawyers told Epstein she had "overstayed" and warned that reinstating a student visa would be difficult, and that pursuing asylum would conflict with the temporary-intent requirement of a student visa.
South China Morning Post (SCMP) similarly reports the DOJ files describe broader tactics, noting the records show use of student visas, English courses and sham marriages to "control and retain women around him."
Coverage Differences
Narrative Emphasis
Times Now (Western Mainstream) emphasizes legal-strategy details about visa overstays and internal debate over asylum versus prosecutorial discretion for Karyna Shuliak, while South China Morning Post (Asian) frames the same files as part of a broader manipulation of immigration channels to keep women in Epstein’s orbit and provides specific long-term outcomes for a named woman.
Student status to citizenship
The records describe what the outlets identify as a coordinated effort to convert temporary student status into permanent residency and later citizenship.
Times Now recounts lawyers warning Epstein that reinstating a lapsed student visa would be difficult and that asylum would conflict with the temporary-intent rule, and the files show Epstein weighing asylum versus seeking prosecutorial discretion.
SCMP supplies a fuller post-hoc timeline for a woman named Viktoria Shuliak, reporting she entered Columbia University's dental program through a complicated transfer beginning in 2011, later obtained a green card and naturalized in 2018, and that an Epstein-linked immigration lawyer celebrated her naturalization day in messages suggesting a party.
Coverage Differences
Detail Level
Times Now (Western Mainstream) focuses on the legal hurdles and internal debate recorded in correspondence (visa reinstatement, asylum conflict, prosecutorial discretion). SCMP (Asian) adds detailed biographical outcome: a transfer into Columbia’s dental program in 2011, green card, 2018 naturalization, and social connections tied to Epstein, which Times Now’s snippet does not report.
Naming ambiguity in reports
The two outlets differ in naming and social details, creating ambiguity about whether they describe exactly the same individual or different people in Epstein’s orbit.
Times Now uses the name Karyna Shuliak and emphasizes her Belarus origin and a visa-overstay problem in 2013.
SCMP uses the name Viktoria Shuliak and reports later milestones — a transfer to Columbia, a green card, and 2018 naturalization — and includes an account that she later divorced a spouse named Jennifer, who had been introduced by Epstein and once dated Kimbal Musk.
Both articles derive from the same DOJ release but highlight different elements, so the record is unclear in these snippets whether Karyna and Viktoria are the same person or reflect reporting choices.
I report this ambiguity rather than assume they are identical.
Coverage Differences
Contradiction
Times Now (Western Mainstream) identifies the woman as Karyna Shuliak and stresses an immigration status problem by 2013; South China Morning Post (Asian) names her Viktoria Shuliak and traces a path to naturalization in 2018 with personal social ties. The pieces could be referring to the same person with name variants or to different individuals; the articles themselves do not resolve that ambiguity.
Immigration links in Epstein network
Both sources portray Epstein’s circle using institutional immigration mechanisms to secure the presence of women he favored.
They differ in tone and specificity, with Times Now foregrounding legal correspondence and strategy about visas and potential asylum, while SCMP supplies a narrative of long-term outcomes, social links and the apparent use of sham marital arrangements.
Because only two article snippets were provided for this prompt, further confirmation and additional sources would be needed to resolve the name discrepancy and to map the full timeline.
I have not added facts beyond the two sources and flag the limits of the available excerpts.
Coverage Differences
Tone
Times Now (Western Mainstream) conveys a legal-document focus on immigration maneuvers and counsel to Epstein; South China Morning Post (Asian) delivers a more narrative account with biographical outcomes and social details (naturalization party message, spouse Jennifer, Columbia transfer). Each source's type and editorial focus shape what facts they emphasize.