Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00205761DOJ Data Set 9

Subject: RE: Re:

Other

Subject: RE: Re: Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 20:02:17 +0000 Importance: Normal Nobody knows. At the very first hearing -- 3 years ago - the judge said the most he could do is order us outside to "confer." Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 3:56 PM Subject: Re: What if the court disagrees and says we violated cvra - what's the remedy? A declaratory judgment? He can't set the np aside and he definitely can't get money. Ori inal Messa e l e :54:03 2011 Subject: RE: Setting aside the non-pros and prosecuting him as though the Non-pros had never been signed. 111111M Subject: Re: Suggest what thing? Sent: Mon Sep 26 15:48:05 2011 Subject: RE: EFTA00205761 No. He already served his sentence in state court and performed all his other obligations under the Non-Pros (including paying damages to 30-some girls). I argued it would be a Due Process violation to even suggest such a thing. ----Ori inal Messa e ' Have we conceded that a showing that we violated the CVRA would justify reo

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
EFTA 00205761
Pages
2
Persons
1
Integrity
Loading document viewer...

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit
Review This Document

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,500+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Support This ProjectSupported by 1,550+ people worldwide
Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.