This time the big mouth of Alan Dershowitz may have bitten off more than he can chew. When a women told the story of how when she was a 15-year-old girl she was lured into becoming a prostitute by Jeffrey Epstein a close friend of Alan Dershowitz and how as a young girl she was forced by Epstein into prostituting herself to Alan who had to be in his sixties and having sex with him he was squealing like a pig over all the media where he could gain a forum that he had nothing to do with the girl.
Alan’s tactic was to scare off the accuser Virginia Roberts and to intimidate her lawyers. It’s apparently a tactic he used in the past. The accusation against Alan came out on December 30, 2014, in a court filing where Virginia told of at least two of the men who she had granted sexual favors to: Alan and Prince Andrew of Great Britain. We’ve learned since that time that with respect to the prince she has photographs showing her with him and kept a diary that spelled out her illicit transactions with him in London.
You see what was going on according to Virginia is that she said she was flying around at Jeffrey Epstein’s direction from state to state and overseas for the purpose of engaging in sex with older men which he believed helped his businesses. I always thought there was a federal law against having a woman moved from state to state called the Mann Act or the White Slave Traffic Act punishable by ten years in prison. If what Virginia alleges is true then you’d think the FBI and U.S. attorney would have been all over this guy Epstein but there seems little signs of it. In fact, the opposite seems to be the case. She’s getting little to no cooperation.
By January 5, 2015 Alan was in full defense mode. It was like he took a page from Joseph Goebbels who said: “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” I’m not suggesting Alan was telling a lie about his relationship with Virginia Roberts, if any. All I am stating is that he repeated a big denial of the charges and he has kept repeating it hoping that people will eventually come to believe it.
He told as reported in Reuters on January 5, 2015, that he “would file a defamation lawsuit based on the lawyers’ public statements about the case. He also plans to file complaints with their respective states’ disciplinary boards asking that they be disbarred.” Alan’s immediate instinct was to attack the lawyers expecting them to back off.
It is reported Alan also “says that the sex claims are a “completely, totally fabricated, made-up story” and that he is an “innocent victim of an extortion conspiracy.” Alan seems to have a fondness for the word “extortion” as we’ve seen. But this time he may have slipped. One legal expert wrote: “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.”
The lawyers didn’t back off. They doubled down. They brought their own suit against Alan for defamation. Alan’s complaint that he didn’t have a forum into which to clear his name which I wrote about previously evaporated with that suit.
It should be noted that the lawyers Alan is seeking to disbar are no fly by night attorneys. These two lawyers were described as: “Paul Cassell and Bradley Edwards. Edwards is a Florida attorney representing Epstein’s victims pro bono. Cassell is a University of Utah law professor focusing on crime victims’ rights. He argued before SCOTUS on behalf of child pornography victim Amy Unknown in last term’s Paroline v. United States, for example. He is a former D.C. Circuit and Supreme Court clerk, and a former Assistant U.S. Attorney. Most notably, Cassell is a former U.S. District Judge. Neither he nor Edwards are amateurs.”
The legal expert mentioned above ended his column saying: “this is a mess and it is likely to get messier.” I wholeheartedly concur with that statement. This is a case where powerful forces of connections and influence with oodles of money lining up on one side; the victim of sexual abuse with little power on the other. It will be a case to let us take a look at justice in America. It is a case that deserves watching no matter how messy it gets.