📄 Extracted Text (481 words)
From: DAVID SCHOEN «
Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2019 1:40 AM
To: J
Subject: Re:
On the one hand it is absurd. On the o=her hand it is potentially a very serious situation. I would need to d= some
research to know just how serious the consequences realistically migh= be.
I have read in the paper that one possible r=medy plaintiffs intend to seek is the nullification of the "illegal=E2$4
agreement and the prosecution of a number of cases against you. &n=sp;There would seem to be a whole host of
impediments to any such radical a=d outrageous course of action like that both of a legal and equitable natur=.
However, I am a worst case scenario person ALWAYS and do not think a=criminal defense lawyer every should be
anything but that.
</=iv>
Perhaps you have done the research already or have counsel who has a=d feel you have a sense of exactly what the
worst case scenario is. l=don't know; but I also would not take anyone else's word fo= it.
The potential consequences are of course the m=st important thing insofar as any consequence directly affects you
(action a=ainst Acosta etc. not really your problem). But the separate and rela=ed issue is what if anything to do about
the fact that the complete story y=u have described in the prospective op-Ed drafts you have sent to me has ne=er come
out - nor has anything that in any way challenges the popular rendi=ion and characterization of you as predator,
monster, etc.
And as you correctly anticipated some time ago, t=at is a real problem and has perhaps been part of what has led to
this snow=alling with no pushback of any kind (notwithstanding all the hot shot lawye=s you had by your side all through
the deal and after - where are they now?=.
Without seeing the papers in the case now before=judge Marra I don't feel like I can give any meaningful advice on
e=ther the legal or pr front. But I do know that you need some good adv=ce now and moving forward.
David
Sent from my iPhone
<=r>On Feb 23, 2019, at 3:31 PM,1 <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]=» wrote:
Any ideas ? Putrid press amazing=how many lawyers argue for a 12 year old pkea deal be rescinded though the
d=fendant fulfilled all his obligations
=nbsp; please note
The informati=n contained in this communication is
confidential, may be attorney-clien= privileged, may
constitute inside information, and is intended only for=br>the use of the addressee. It is the property of
EFTA_R1_01858370
EFTA02633984
JEE
Unauthorized u=e, disclosure or copying of this
communication or any part thereof is st=ictly prohibited
and may be unlawful. If you have received this
commu=ication in error, please notify us immediately by
return e-mail or by e-=ail to [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> , and
destroy this communication and all copies thereof,<=r>including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved
=/div>
2
EFTA_R1_01858371
EFTA02633985
ℹ️ Document Details
SHA-256
cfd69b928bb061378508b44ee9c1ddc268d4af3b5001e14159365f51c990bff0
Bates Number
EFTA02633984
Dataset
DataSet-11
Document Type
document
Pages
2
Comments 0