Former federal judge and University of Utah law professor Paul Cassell is facing a rare threat of a bar complaint over his representation of a client in the notorious case of billionaire and convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Even more rare is the source of the threatened complaint: retired law professor Alan Dershowitz of the Harvard Law School. Epstein is good friends with Bill Clinton and Duke of York Prince Andrew, 54, who have been mentioned in litigation over allegations of the use of underaged “sex slaves” and Epstein’s alleged penchant for watching (and filming) people having sex with these girls. Dershowitz’s name has appears on the ignoble list contained in motions before a federal court in Florida. Dershowitz is now threatening to initiate disbarment proceedings against Cassell and Bradley Edwards, a Florida attorney who also represents Jane Doe #3 in the controversy.
Dershowitz says that the sex claims are a “completely, totally fabricated, made-up story” and that he is an “innocent victim of an extortion conspiracy.” That itself could be viewed as defamatory since it makes the lawyers active participants in such extortion and any such statements made in public would be unprotected by privilege governing statements in court.
Cassell and Edwards however did not respond in kind and said that they would confine their statements to court filings “out of respect for the court’s desire to keep this case from being litigated in the press.” They noted however that they have “tried to depose Mr. Dershowitz on these subjects, although he has avoided those deposition requests. Nevertheless, we would be pleased to consider any sworn testimony and documentary evidence Mr. Dershowitz would like to provide which he contends would refute any of our allegations.” In other words, they are saying that if Dershowitz wants to refute these allegations, he should do so under oath.
Two women identified as Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 filed a 2008 petition in U.S. District Court in West Palm Beach that alleges violations of the federal Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CVRA) in the prosecution of Epstein. These women claim that prosecutors cut Epstein, who has a long list of powerful friends like Clinton, a generous deal that failed to address their alleged victimization from sex trafficking and that prosecutors did not even bother to confer with them. They also claimed the right to be heard at public proceedings regarding any plea or sentence, to receive restitution and to be treated with fairness. Epstein was allowed to plead guilty in state court in Florida to two counts of solicitation of prostitution involving a minor and served 13 months in prison before being released in 2009. They want the deal rescinded.
Cassell entered the fray on behalf of Jane Doe #3, who said that she was 15 when she became a sex slave for Epstein, and Jane Doe #4 who said that she was 16 in 2002 when she was used in this fashion. The women claimed to have been abused by Epstein and passed around to his friends. One account details a dinner with Bill Clinton and his allegedly close relationship to Epstein.
Dershowitz has been named as one of the friends cultivated by Epstein. Dershowitz reportedly later helped negotiate the agreement that provided immunity from federal prosecution in the Southern District of Florida to Epstein and potential co-conspirators — including allegedly Dershowitz himself.
One of the women has come forward. Her name is Virginia Roberts and she says that she was forced to sleep with Prince Andrews when she was a minor on three occasions – in London, New York and on a private Caribbean island owned by Epstein – between 1999 and 2002. Dershowitz has indicated that he is preparing legal action against Roberts as well and wants her statements made under oath. He is quoted as saying “My goal is to bring charges against the client and require her to speak in court. If she believes she has been hurt by me and Prince Andrew, she should be suing us for damages . . . I welcome that lawsuit. I welcome any opportunity that would put her under oath and require her to state under oath these false allegations.” Dershowitz has also said that these allegations against him thrilling “anti-Israeli zealots” who hate him for his defense of Israel.
What was a criminal case could now become a significant defamation case involving not just questions of per se defamation but questions of absolute privilege regarding court filings. I am still unclear as to any bar complaint against Cassell and his colleague. If any of these women allege (as reported) that Dershowitz was one of the men who has sex with them as minors, it is hard to see how the attorneys could be accused unless Dershowitz is seriously claiming that they are knowingly trying to help extort money from him or filing false papers. Cassell does not have a reputation for such actions. Indeed, he is highly respected as an advocate and an academic. An indication is found in his statement as to the basis for the disbarment effort: “I’m planning to file disbarment charges against the two lawyers who signed this petition without even checking the manifests of airplanes or travel itineraries, et cetera.”
The association of these men with Jeffrey Epstein is itself shocking. At best, Epstein is a convicted sex offender and a truly creepy character. (Shortly after his release from prison, he was quoted as denying that he is a real criminal and said “I’m not a sexual predator, I’m an ‘offender’. It’s the difference between a murderer and a person who steals a bagel.”). Those accused will hardly benefit by the association with such a character but the allegations obviously go well beyond the “bad friends” problem. In Clinton’s case, Roberts details how she was required to be at a dinner with Clinton where he and Epstein had a lively time. However, she did not personally see Clinton take advantage of two girls that were also at the dinner and appeared underaged. Nevertheless, the allegation of a former president having dinner with underaged girls at the house of someone later convicted of sex crimes could be viewed as itself defamatory if untrue.
As for the most sensational allegations, sex with minors is clearly a crime and an act of moral turpitude and would qualify as per se defamation. As such, no special damages would have to be proven. Clearly there are celebrities who would have to satisfy the higher standard under New York Times v. Sullivan and show either knowing falsehood or reckless disregard of the truth. They would also have to either find statements made in public or somehow overcome the privilege associated with court statements.
In other words, this is a mess and it is likely to get messier.
Source: SL Tribune
Help! someone in charge Help! I keep having to put my info in, even though I’m responding to your e-mail. What should I do? Put in a disgusting word to get attention? Your opinions will be appreciated.
They have a very different attitude about age and sex in Arkansas. In Tennessee a lady I know was married at 14 due to pregnancy.
Why is it necessary to insult Hillary’s physical characteristics? I won’t vote for her, but honestly why be so mean? So is it Christie fair game for weighty insults?
Inga – Christie has been a continual target for weighty insults. Haven’t you been keeping up?
Exactly why I mentioned him. I’d think that was evident.
As for, G-d forbid, Hillary as President…her fat arse is the least of our worries. She has no values and no principles, none, and shapes her perspectives daily to fit whatever she thinks if good for her, only her, and nobody else. Not even horndog Bill. She can do a 180, then a 360, on her stances, faster than a prima ballerina or ice dancer.
Aridog – with Hillary’s cankles I think ballerina or ice dancer are out for Hillary. 😉
I agree with Nick about Hillary being overweight. We don’t need an igPay in the White House. As to Desertowitts, he looks like a dork. Now he might think that my calling him a dork is somehow defamatory. But NOOOO. A dork is a person whom we all ascribe to and there is nothing negative about being a dork. It is kind of like that fraternity of punks in that old movie about New York City when they sang their song about the gang name Jets.
When you’re a dork, you’re a dork!
You’re a dork all the way.
From your first laundramat to you’re wife’s pile of hay.
etc.
Harvard Law school produces more dorks than any school in the nation. It is number one in dorks.
Last night Desertowitts was on tv ranting. Don Lemon or one of those guys put up with it. The rest of us put up with it. If it was in the newspaper I could go wipe the arse when I poop. But on tv there is just no retaliation except turn it off and don’t eat at Jack in The Box. Which is what was airing for commercials for Desertowitts story.
Hillary needs to drop 40 lbs. prior to running for president. She eats compulsively when emotional. I pity those poor girls when the infamous Clinton “bimbo patrol” team pounce on them.
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/552437406415458304
Email sent by Rabbi Shumley’s PR firm, Rubenstein, on the Rabbi’s edict to Jews in the Alan Dershowitz matter
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2897753/Ghislaine-Maxwell-woman-accused-facilitating-Prince-Andrew-s-acts-abuse.html
Ghislaine Maxwell, the woman accused of ‘facilitating Prince Andrew’s acts of abuse’
Ghislaine Maxwell stands accused of ‘procuring’ girls for Jeffrey Epstein
She is described in court papers as his ‘co-conspirator’ in ‘sexual abuse’
Accused of ‘facilitating Prince Andrew’s abuse by acting as a madame’
‘Sex slave’ Virginia Roberts claims she met the royal at Maxwell’s home
Ms Maxwell has previously denied any involvement with Epstein’s crimes
The lawsuit claims that Clinton was friends with an unnamed woman who ‘kept images of naked underage children on her computer, helped to recruit underage children for Epstein… and photographed underage females in sexually explicit poses’.
This unnamed woman was reportedly one of the guests at Chelsea Clinton’s 2010 wedding
Paul Cassell is a right wing theocrat who, in support of the death penalty, has made the preposterous claim that no innocent person has ever been executed in the United States. In addition, he has been in the forefront of trying to get the Miranda decision overturned. As far as I am concerned, he has no credibility whatever.
http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/bill-clinton-underage-sex-lawsuit-shocker-jeffrey-epstein
Bill Clinton has been identified in a sex lawsuit involving underage girls – and the sleazy scandal threatens to blow up his wife Hillary’s bid to be president!
In a bombshell exclusive, The ENQUIRER has obtained shocking court documents that reveal details of Bill’s close relationship with billionaire money manager Jeffrey Epstein, a convicted sex creep.
According to the legal papers, Clinton traveled on Epstein’s private jet numerous times and partied on a Caribbean island owned by Epstein, who served 13 months for soliciting a minor for prostitution.
“While it’s been reported that the two men were friends, Bill’s name is all over the legal papers, which are chock-full of sordid claims about Epstein,” a source told The ENQUIRER.
“This could end up being the final nail in the coffin of Hillary’s bid to be president!”
The documents filed in Florida’s Palm Beach Circuit Court, are part of a legal dispute between Epstein and lawyers Scott Rothstein and Bradley Edwards.
The former president’s name pops up frequently in the recently filed papers.
Meanwhile, having her horndog husband named as a friend of a sexual felon is the latest embarrassment for Hillary, who’s been gearing up for a 2016 White House run.
As The ENQUIRER recently reported, Hillary was deeply humiliated when Bill was photographed grinning ear-to-ear with two call girls.
Sources told The ENQUIRER the 67-year-old former first lady exploded in anger when she saw a picture of Bill, 68, flirting with the women, who are hookers for hire from the infamous Bunny Ranch brothel in Nevada.
Clinton posed with the prostitutes, brunette Ava Adora and blond Barbie Girl, at a Feb. 27 fundraising event in Los Angeles.
And as The ENQUIRER has also revealed, Hillary is already under attack – with her enemies planning to dredge up her skirt-chasing hubby’s sordid behavior to sully the Clinton name.
Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, a possible 2016 contestant himself, publicly cited Bill’s Oval Office affair with Monica Lewinsky as ammo that can be used to help derail Hillary’s campaign.
Paul’s remarks promoted GOP chairman Reince Preibus to tweet: “Remember all the Clinton scandals…that’s not what America needs again.”
The source added: “Think of the field day Hillary’s enemies will have,” the source added, if these sordid details were to come to light. “Bill and underage girls? Hillary will be toast!”
http://www.nationalenquirer.com/celebrity/secret-document-protected-prince-andrew-sex-slave-pal-charges
Secret plea deal for Britain’s Prince Andrew’s pedophile pal financier Jeffrey Epstein protected the prince and any other high-powered friends who may have used his alleged sex slaves.
Federal prosecutors promised they “will not institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein” if the Wall Street money manager pled guilty to two relatively minor state underage sex charges that put him in a local jail for 13 months, the confidential plea agreement obtained by RadarOnline read.
A lawsuit filed by four women, who say federal prosecutors Illegally ignored them amd kept them in the dark while while they negotiated with Epstein, claim Prince Andrew and “many other powerful men” lobbied the U.S. government to go easy on Epstein.
As The National ENQUIRER previously reported former U.S. President Bill Clinton once traveled to Africa on Epstein’s plane and was publicly associated with the billionaire before cutting ties with him after Epstein’s 2008 arrest in Florida.
The women want a judge to reject the plea deal that allowed the billionaire to avoid prosecution on federal human trafficking charges that could have carried life sentences.
The secret non-prosecution agreement ended FBI and federal grand jury investigations of allegations that Epstein held sex slaves that he loaned to his powerful friends and sexually abused dozens of underage girls.
The deal, kept secret until a federal judge allowed it to be used in the women’s lawsuit, promised immunity from federal prosecution to anyone who “knowingly and willingly conspiring with others known and unknown to commit an offense against the United States, that is, to use a facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce to knowingly persuade, induce, or entice minor females to engage in prostitution.”
The women’s complaint withholds the names of some of Epstein’s friends who allegedly engaged his sex slaves, referring them only as “numerous prominent American politicians, powerful business executives, foreign presidents, a well-known Prime Minister, and other world leaders.”
A woman first identified only as Jane Doe #3 contends that she was “forced to have sexual relations” with Prince Andrew in London, New York and on Epstein’s private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands.
The ENQUIRER in a bombshell world exclusive identified “Jane Doe #3″ as Virginia Roberts.
She told us that she and Prince Andrew took a bath together and he licked her feet. “And we went into the bedroom and he proceeded to make love to me, , so to speak. He wasn’t rude. It wasn’t like rape. But it wasn’t like love, either. It was more like, ‘I’m getting my business done.’ I’m pretty sure he didn’t use a condom.”
If the federal lawsuit is successful, it could mean the plea deal that protects Epstein’s friends from federal charges could be declared void.
Andrew, who is the Duke of York, was formerly married to Sarah “Fergie” Fergurson, did not respond to media’s request for comment, but a spokeswoman for the royal family at Buckingham Palace issued a short statement: “This relates to long-standing and ongoing civil proceedings in the United States, to which The Duke of York is not a party. As such we would not comment on the detail. However, for the avoidance of doubt, any suggestion of impropriety with underage minors is categorically untrue.”
Btw Micheal Reiter is NOT a pedophile. He tried to investigate and stop the pedophile ring that Clinton is involved in.
Police chief’s fury over plea bargain
Michael Reiter was a popular small-town police chief with a lifetime’s experience in finding the balance between patrolling the millionaire’s playground of Palm Beach, Florida, and its blue-collar neighbour West Palm Beach, home to unglamorous social housing projects and trailer parks.
Throughout his 28-year career, he prided himself that his force treated the wealthy on his patch just the same as the very poorest. But his investigation into the lifestyle of predatory paedophile Jeffrey Epstein exploded his illusion that law enforcement could ever be impartial.
He soon discovered at first hand that a man such as Epstein, with almost unlimited wealth and influential friends including former President Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew and Israeli defence minister Ehud Barak, can effectively bend the law to his whim.
The 53-year-old police chief, who retired in 2009, was so furious at what he believed was obstruction by state prosecutors, who he felt had downplayed charges against Epstein, that he outlined his frustrations in an extraordinary letter to Florida state attorney Barry Krischer in May 2006.
He wrote: ‘I must urge you to examine the unusual course that your office’s handling of this matter has taken and consider if good and sufficient reason exists to require your disqualification from the prosecution of these cases.’
After failing to get a satisfactory response from prosecutors he believed had been ‘got at’ by Epstein, he referred the case to the FBI.
He wrote to one of Epstein’s victims, saying: ‘I do not feel that justice has been sufficiently served by the indictment that has been issued.’
Epstein’s conviction for solicitation of prostitution came after an unprecedented plea bargain designed to protect him from future charges.
Mr Reiter later complained in sworn testimony connected to civil actions brought against Epstein that prominent politicians had repeatedly leaned on him to downplay the allegations against the financier.
Mike Fisten, an ex-FBI taskforce superviser who has led the campaign for the Epstein case to be reopened, said: ‘Reiter went up against the entire town of Palm Beach to do what was right but he is not chief any more because of this.
‘And eventually Epstein was given an immunity from prosecution deal the like of which I have never seen in my entire career.’
This story is going to explode.
Look up The Clintons, spitzer, prince charles, Ghislaine Maxwell, Jeffrey Epstein, Robert Maxwell, Jimmy Savile, Ehud Barak, former Palm beach Police Chief Michael Reiter
international Pedophile ring. Royal Crown is trying to cover it up. The Guardian is reporting that the Crown is threatening British media over this.
There are some people in the world who, if you could buy them for what they are worth and could sell them for what they think they are worth, would allow you to immediately retire.
Mr. Dershowitz has been injudicious and flaky for at least the past 10 years or so. He clearly shoots from the hip and speaks from his back-end. Arrogance is his trademark and his brand, making him an authoritarian, much like a closed-minded, prejudiced “Dutch uncle” that you would plot to escape at all expense. The world has passed Dershowitz by, and there’s no evidence that he’ll ever figure it out.
Anyone who takes a position on this (before or after – facts mean nothing) will be branded a sexist or an anti-semite.
http://abovethelaw.com/2015/01/a-second-look-at-the-allegations-against-alan-dershowitz/?show=comments#comments
Sorry: Link to quotes:
ABOVE THE LAW:
A Second Look At The Allegations Against Alan Dershowitz
By Tamara Tabo Jan 5, 2015
Nate:
Thank you for the video. In my opinion, based upon what was presented in the video, Professor Dershowitz lost the debate.
He used numerous times deflection and did not answer the questions posed to him that the information in his book was inaccurate. It seems from what I read that the professor made an offer that if anyone could disprove the facts in his book then he would pay money to that person. In my view he should start writing a check.
Plus, the interview does not add to his credibility.