First Hand Account Of Judicial Smackdown Of Prenda In Minnesota

from the a-bit-of-confusion dept

Yesterday we had a story about how a judge in Minnesota, Judge Ann Alton, angrily accused Paul Hansmeier of fraud in the lawsuit filed by Alan Cooper against Prenda. There was some confusion by the judge about whether Cooper and Godfread were in on the fraud too, which seems to have made the judge less open to possible damages against Prenda. Either way, without a court reporter, Matthew Sparby, who was in attendance, wrote up the following first-hand account of what happened in the court room. It’s definitely disappointing to see that the judge made a few bad assumptions about Cooper/Godfread, but good to see that she knew that Prenda has been up to no good.

I am not an attorney. I attended today’s hearing out of curiosity and convenience. I happened to have an appointment across the street from the Hennepin County Government Center today and decided that it would be interesting to see the wheels of justice in motion first hand. As such, it is important to note that these are the observations of a layperson.

As the session started, Judge Alton announced that there was no live court reporter and that there was an audio recording being made instead.

Two other cases were called first, and then the Judge called Cooper vs. Prenda. She began by saying, “This one gives me a lot of pause.” Then the attorneys introduced themselves.

Paul Godfread was present representing Alan Cooper (who was not in attendance) and Paul Hansmeier was present representing Prenda, et al. He sat alone at the table and I don’t believe any other Prenda principals were in attendance.

Judge Alton then started off by addressing Hansmeier saying that it would appear he had a bit of a conflict relating to some findings of law, “[an] order from a US District Court Judge sanctioning you for fraud, among other things.” She went on to say, “I’m not sure I should hear you at all.” She asked Hansmeier if Morgan Pietz had filed the list of Bar Associations to which the Prenda principals were admitted as well as whether Pietz had sent copies of Judge Wright’s order to all of the other Judges presiding over Prenda cases. Hansmeier replied, “I believe he did, your honor.”

Judge Alton was clearly agitated going into this. In reference to the Prenda business model she said, “This is fraud, clear and simple.” She also said, “I will be reporting this to the Lawyers Board.” In fact, she would make a similar comment at least one more time at the end of the hearing. Still addressing Hansmeier, she went on, “Your involvement in this case is a TRAVESTY!” She added impact (both figuratively and literally) to that point by slapping her hand on the bench.

If I closed my eyes, I could have very easily assumed I was watching an episode of Judge Judy at this point. Judge Alton’s passion and inflection as she admonished Prenda’s behavior was, quite frankly, a tremendous surprise to me as a non-attorney. My discussions with actual attorneys after the hearing confirmed the abnormality of the scene.

In an attempt to defend their activities, Hansmeier referenced the the actions of the RIAA and MPAA. Judge Alton was unimpressed. She told him, “That doesn’t mean you become your own zealot!” Further berating Prenda’s pattern of mailing threatening settlement letters to alleged copyright violators, Judge Alton said, “You are guilty of fraud every time you send one of these letters.” Hansmeier then began to reference the Jammie Thomas-Rasset case. Again, the Judge wasn’t interested, interrupting with a curt, “So what?”

Now things got a little bit confusing. The Judge called Paul Hansmeier a fraud. Then she said that Alan Cooper is a fraud and that Paul Godfread may be a fraud as well. I looked to the person sitting next to me and the look on his face showed the same confusion. Quite humbly, Godfread told Judge Alton that he took exception to being labeled a fraud. He tried to clarify the situation but his message didn’t seem to get through. In fact, for much of the hearing, Judge Alton was under the impression that Judge Wright’s order actually implicated Alan Cooper as a Prenda Principal. Luckily this comes up again later.

As Godfread was explaining Cooper’s actual position in reference to Judge Wright’s findings, Hansmeier objected. He complained that there was no evidence to support the findings and said that they weren’t given the opportunity to cross examine Cooper during the sanctions hearing in Los Angeles.

Throughout the hearing, Judge Alton would frequently refer back to Judge Wright’s sanctions order, reading portions of it both to herself and out loud to clarify various points including asking where “Nevis” is. Godfread said it was an island in the Caribbean, most commonly known as an offshore tax haven. While he was saying this, Hansmeier was shaking his head.

The Judge continued to review the various exhibits filed with the case and Paul Hansmeier again raised the issue of not having been given the opportunity to cross examine Alan Cooper in L.A. Judge Alton glared at him saying, “That, right now, does not concern me.”

She then turned her attention to Godfread saying, “You’re not going to get any damages out of me. I don’t give damages when everyone is a fraud.” Again, she appeared to be under the impression that Alan Cooper was complicit in Prenda’s actions. Godfread repeated his earlier assertions that Cooper was merely a caretaker for John Steele’s property in Minnesota. The Judge then said, “Mr. Steele worked for Prenda Law which is running these phony lawsuits.”

After reading further into Judge Wright’s findings, Judge Alton finally identified the portion that clearly separated Alan Cooper from Prenda’s actions and identified him as a victim of their fraud rather than a willing participant.

Unfortunately, this new realization didn’t seem to alter Judge Alton’s stance on refusing to grant any damages. Godfread decided to approach it from a different angle, though. In lieu of damages, he suggested that Judge Alton order Prenda to return all of the settlement money it had received over the course of its campaign. Judge Alton rejected that suggestion saying that it wouldn’t be possible unless, via discovery or other means, they are able to determine how much money that actually is.

The Judge then took a moment to reiterate that Prenda’s methods of threatening people are not allowed before moving on to the topic of service. This is, after all, a Default Hearing. Hansmeier repeated the assertion that Prenda never received service of the complaint. The judge looked through the folder in front of her and suggested that Godfread may not have properly served Prenda. She asked Godfread if he served them through publication. He said that he didn’t, but told her that, as shown in his Affidavit of Service, he sent the complaint and the interrogatories via certified mail and provided a receipt from the US Postal Service showing that it was received by Prenda on March 18th. He also refers to the fact that Prenda DID respond to the interrogatories, so how can they claim they never received service of the rest of it? Judge Alton then said, “That will satisfy me.”

Hansmeier then claims that Duffy received only the interrogatories and not the complaint, and that Godfread’s receipt doesn’t prove that the complaint was sent in that envelope. The Judge responded with, “Mr. Duffy’s credibility is not good and he’s not here.”

Judge Alton then asked Godfread about other facts such as whether they have proof that Prenda was keeping the settlement money. Godfread said that Hansmeier himself admitted as much. Hansmeier responded saying, “That is categorically false.”

The Judge then asked if Cooper had actually testified to the fact that he did not authorize the use of his name in the AF Holdings cases. Godfread confirmed that Cooper did testify to that. Then, talking to Godfread, Judge Alton said, “I can’t find a conspiracy to harm him. I believe you but I can’t find it.”

She then made her order. She ordered that Prenda and its principals immediately cease using Alan Cooper’s name, “and that’s all. That’s as far as I’ll go.”

In parting, she addressed Paul Hansmeier, once again saying, “I believe you to be in violation of a whole lot of rules.” She then repeated her earlier statement that she was forwarding the case folder to the Lawyers Board.

And that was the end. Judge Alton then called a recess before the next case.

After leaving the courtroom, I sat down with another observer for a cup of coffee as we discussed how strange the hearing was. A few minutes later, Paul Godfread walked up and we chatted for a while about how the hearing had unfolded in such an unexpected way. He understandably lamented the lack of a damage award. When I told him that following all of this over the last several months has been educational, he expressed a fear of it being a poor source of education given how atypical these proceedings have been.

Still, I’m glad that I was able to attend today and I would encourage other members of the laity like myself to make an effort to observe these kinds of proceedings themselves. It was a truly fascinating experience.

Filed Under: , , , , , ,
Companies: prenda, prenda law

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “First Hand Account Of Judicial Smackdown Of Prenda In Minnesota”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
That One Guy (profile) says:

Given the confusion regarding Cooper, and the fact that she originally thought he was involved in the entire mess rather than a victim of it, I almost have to wonder if she was reading Wright’s filling fully for the first time while in the court room, and had just skimmed it beforehand.

Disappointing that she didn’t award any fees to Cooper/Godfread, but I have to imagine that the fact that she plans to pass the case file to what I assume is the agency in charge of the lawyers of the state has got to have the Prenda gang quite worried, as a more thorough investigation into their actions is the last thing they want.

out_of_the_blue says:


I can see that it might be of interest about once a week, but clearly your mania is due to the copyright related aspects and your notion that a few bad lawyers should mean end all copyright.

Take a loopy tour of! You always end up same place!
ZOMG! Yet another item on Prenda Law! A staple in the soporific “At The Bench” series. Mike sez (short version): “Wow. Wow. Wow. … The story is gripping.

PaulT (profile) says:


“your notion that a few bad lawyers should mean end all copyright.”

Makes a change from your constant obsessive lying, such as the above falsehood. Seriously, you can tell when there’s no way to defend the actions of despicable people in certain stories, because all you guys can do is whine that they’re written about!

DannyB (profile) says:


Each exciting episode of Prenda Law:
1. is more entertaining than most Hollywood tripe
2. is reality
3. has no commercials
4. can be freely shared and discussed
5. costs nothing
6. is public domain
7. is educational
8. and really rankles you because of the the preceding items

But why go all Prenda, all the time? There are so many other clowns to laugh at. I’ll give you a hint:

In an attempt to defend their activities, Hansmeier referenced the the actions of the RIAA and MPAA.

Look judge, there are bigger criminals than us, see?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: just love you command of english

)…the sentence does work perfectly in English. the

‘the’ with a capital T please, such as The for the start of a new sentence.

your , followed by brackets is not correct either, being superfluous.

“about how a judge in Minnesota” capital for “judge” making it Judge as well.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: just love you command of english

And that was the end. Judge Alton then called a recess before the next case.

So a complete sentence starting with “And” and ending with “end”.

And that was the end

What the fuck does that suppose to mean?

I guess he really was trying to say

And that was the end, Judge Alton then called a recess before the next case.

btw, it’s not a ‘recess’ if they go onto another case.

A recess is when you take a recess, and get back to that particular case.

Rikuo (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: just love you command of english

Oh you were commenting on the article as a whole? Rather than trying to find fault with a single sentence that grammatically doesn’t have any faults? Also where is there a case of your followed by brackets? I’ve just searched for all instances of the word your, and nowhere on this page is there a bracket next to the word, so I don’t know where you got that from.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2 just love you command of english

“Other than the last few words being superfluous, (should have stopped at first hand account)…

notice the comma after the word “superfluous”?

Notice the bracket after the comma ?

also noticed the lack of “” encasing “first hand account”

average_joe (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

Oh, I think it’s pretty funny when an obvious pirate gets his comeuppance and Mike scrambles, desperately, to throw out any argument he can think of or “borrow” (usually the latter) to defend them. And it’s funny too how Mike cares nothing about whether these idiots are getting railroaded and denied their due process rights.

Kritbag Difrat says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Hey, have you figured out why you “like” six strikes laws?

Give us a shout when you’ve got that one figured out, because I just don’t see it.

Six strike laws are bureaucratic, do not follow good American principals like allowing accused to see evidence, allowing the accused to make a case, and separating accusers from decision makers.

What’s to “like” about such an obviously unfair system?

Rikuo (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Re:

Here’s what happened.

Prenda lawyers send out letters in an attempt to make cash.
Judge at one of the cases smells something fishy and, after many shenanigans, asks the Prenda team for their side of the tale, to try and defend themselves.
They say no.
They say they won’t talk.

This is the end of due process for them, at least where they’re concerned. They had ample opportunity to set the record straight, but willingly and knowingly said they won’t talk. Therefore, the only evidence before Judge Wright and other judges, the only evidence before them that they could look at and rule on, was evidence that pointed to Prenda’s guilt. By pleading the fifth, by not talking, Team Prenda didn’t enter anything to contest that.

I’m not a lawyer and I’m able to understand that much. What about you?

Rikuo (profile) says:

Re: Re:

And going by your logic, only the very worst of crimes should be talked about or tried in court, everyone else can walk because someone else did it a bit worse than they did. Hey Joe, let’s conflate rape with copyright infringement again! Harry can walk away free after raping 5 kids, cause Tom in the court room next door raped 7. Hooray for the legal system!

DannyB (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

Are you actually suggesting the judge should hold him/her self in contempt of him/her self?

As for your question: has anyone the judge accused of fraud been convicted of fraud: there is this thing called due process that Hollywood is unfamiliar with. Be patient. The convictions will come. (Unlike the Hollywood case of accusation == guilt.)

As for libel (yes, that’s the correct spelling) or slander, statements in court are privileged. The context matters. If someone accuses you of molesting squirrels in public, that may be actionable. If they accuse you in court, it is not. Quoting the court accusation is not libel, because there is a record to follow in the court to eventually find out if the accusation was proven or not.

average_joe (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

When have I defended them? I recall pointing out that the court in California would not have general jurisdiction, but I did say it would have specific jurisdiction which is all it needs. That’s not defending them. That’s pointing out that the claim about general jurisdiction was incorrect. Got anything else, or is this just a faith-based assertion?

DannyB (profile) says:

Re: Re:

Less than average joe writes:

Wow, you guys really obsess over these guys. You do realize that there’s all kinds of dirtbags out there who do way worse things, right?

Yes, there are bigger dirtbags that do way worse. Let me give an example.

In an attempt to defend their activities, Hansmeier referenced the the actions of the RIAA and MPAA.

Look judge, there are bigger criminals than Prenda, see?

They got away with this copyright trolling extortion shakedown racket and abuse of the court system to send “settlement letters” for a long time before the courts caught on. So why shouldn’t we be able to get away with it too?

But the RIAA/MPAA were smart enough to see the end of copyright trolling, and switched to Sick Strikes instead.

But TechDirt is not obsessed with Prenda. It covers lots of other great topics. DMCA takedown abuse. DMCA criminalizing unlocking and circumventing for legal purposes. Hollywood violating its own most holy copyright laws. Hollywood buying the government and encouraging corruption. And many other interesting topics than just Prenda.

average_joe (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

average_joe really hates it when due process is enforced by the courts.

I love due process. I think that H. has a point that the sanctions are probably criminal, not civil, and that he was not afforded due process. If this were Dotcom or similar, Mike would be going apeshit about the apparent lack of due process. There would be article after article after article about how the person was getting railroaded. But since it’s H., we get nothing. It’s a total double standard. I care about everyone’s due process rights equally.

Rikuo (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

You ignore willingly that Hansmeier is suffering due to his own actions. He and the rest of the Prenda gang, PLED THE FIFTH. That was the end of their due process. They willingly and knowingly ended any attempts for them to tell their side of the story when they admitted that any attempts by them to do so would either catch them in a lie or truthfully reveal their abuses of the law.

average_joe (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

Well, if that hearing was criminal in nature, which it seems to me it was despite the underlying infringement action being a civil action, then drawing any inferences from the silence is impermissible. If you read H’s brief, he points out other ways in which his due process rights may have been violated. My point is that I care about that because I care about everyone’s due process rights. Mike glosses over those arguments because the thought of H’s due process rights being violated doesn’t bother him. The fact is that judges don’t typically investigate, charge, and punish criminals. Even if H is guilty, he deserves the same due process as everyone else. But, of course, Mike enjoys the thought of this guy getting railroaded, no matter whether his constitutional rights are violated or not. I don’t operate that way.

Rikuo (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:5 Re:

Yes of course – internet subscribers being told that they are violating COPYRIGHT law cannot contest it, even though it invokes a law enforced by government, and was in fact a system heavily pushed by Joe Biden.
If there is no force of law behind six strikes, then the subscribers can rest easy, knowing that the accusations have no force and therefore, it would be illegal to arbitrarily restrict or cut off their internet service based on nothing more than an accusation.
If there is force of law behind Six Strikes, then you’ve got to include Due Process.

DannyB (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Re:

if that hearing was criminal in nature, which it seems to me it
was despite the underlying infringement action being a civil action

The underlying purported infringement action may be civil. That is different than the fraud which is what the hearing was about. Fraud upon the court is criminal, even if you commit the fraud in the course of a purported civil action.

Now, I say “purported” because there never really was any infringement action. All they wanted was to game the court system to send out extortion shakedown settlement letters. There never was any intent to litigate — as evidenced by the plaintiff’s own actions whenever they find a defendant willing to fight.

average_joe (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Re:

Then you agree with H that the hearing was criminal in nature and thus he should have been afforded more protection under the Due Process Clause? I haven’t actually researched the issue enough to know for sure, but my initial thought was that it was criminal and H’s petition made some plausible points to that effect. I don’t care if he spends 40 years in jail for whatever crimes he may have committed. But I do care if his due process rights were violated. Just imaging how much Mike’s head would explode if one of his piratical buddies was railroaded like his. I seriously think Mike would have to be hospitalized he’d be so upset.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:5 Re:

If the evidence is stacking up against you and you plead the fifth, they aren’t going to go easy on you. Pleading the fifth is basically admitting that you cannot refute what is being said without further incriminating your self, it isn’t a get out of court free charge. I’m not understanding how you can say they are being railroaded and not being afforded their due process. They were given their due process, they refused to comply with the court’s questions. End game.

average_joe (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

Don’t I know it. If anything remotely bad happens to anyone pro-copyright, that’s front page news on TD, aka, Pirate Central. But if anything remotely bad happens to someone pro-piracy, that’s the end of the world and a complete miscarriage of justice that does nothing but discredit the entire copyright system. But yeah, Mike’s not pro-piracy and he’s just on the fence about whether there’s any propriety to copyright in general.

DannyB (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

On what basis do you say TechDirt is pirate central?

Just because someone might:
* be against copyright
* point out that piracy exists
* point out that individual piracy doesn’t harm copyright owners
* point out that the world has changed and Hollywood needs to change with it
doesn’t make me them piracy.

If something bad happens to someone innocent or at least deprived of due process to potentially show innocence, then it is a big deal, and rightly so. Furthermore proof of guilt should be required, not proof of innocence. When these things continually occur, it is evidence there is something very rotten about copyright.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

“Wow, you guys really obsess over these guys. You do realize that there’s all kinds of dirtbags out there who do way worse things, right?”

You shouldn’t talk that way about the people who sign your paychecks…

…Or were you implicating yourself? In which case I’d start taking a card out of the Prenda book and plead the 5th…

JMT says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

“I just think it’s funny how completely obsessed you guys are about these idiots because, gasp, they’re anti-piracy.”

I’m not sure if you’re genuinely naive or just trying to deflect from the truth (I suspect the latter). These guys are NOT “anti-piracy”, their entire business model depends on it! They’re not trying to stop piracy, they’re trying to profit from it. If piracy stopped, so would their income stream.

Judging by your frequent rape comparisons, you seem to believe copyright infringement is a crime as bad as rape. So surely profiting from piracy is even worse? Maybe even as bad as murder! Are you sure you want to be taking their side of this?

anonymouse says:

Re: Re:

Yes there are worse cases out there, but there are many sites to go and read about them if you can find them.

This is of specific interest to the readers of this site as regards the illegal use of copyright laws.
And the site would not be posting these stories if it did not attract the people who use the site to comment about how much fun they are having reading these stories, If it does not interest you techdirt has many other stories about other subjects regarding copyright violations and misuses etc.

DannyB (profile) says:

Re: Re:

John Steele just hates it and thinks it is unfair that judges are so biased against perpetrating multiple simultaneous frauds upon the court while using the court as a tool in an extortion shakedown.

This bias on the part of the judges is brazenly obvious.

This bias is unfair to the John Steel who has stated he has a goal of making $10,000 per day from extortion shakedown settlement letters.

Anonymous Coward says:

“Now things got a little bit confusing. The Judge called Paul Hansmeier a fraud. Then she said that Alan Cooper is a fraud and that Paul Godfread may be a fraud as well”

this freaking Judge, does not have a clue what she is talking about, and should leave it up to people who actually know what they are doing..

Has anyone been charged with fraud ?? if not she has committed liable, and has no concept of innocent UNTIL PROVEN !!!!..

You want a TRAVESTY !!!! there it is..

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Alton has access to all the information Wright has. Hansmeier failed to break new ground or account for all the holes in testimony or paperwork. When asked to explain himself he went “But, but, but, RIAA!”

You keep wanting to believe anyone who punishes copyright enforcers is bad, and we should all feel bad. Keep talking to your solar panels, you incompetent boob. They’re obviously the only intelligent life form you can communicate with.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

Yes, I am not a Judge, nor do I propose that I am.

On the other hand, she IS a Judge, and displays almost total ignorance.

I am also not biased either way, fact is I don’t really give a flying fuck about Prenda, whatever that is. Or Alice Cooper, though he does write some great songs.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

For someone who doesn’t “give a flying fuck” you are pulling out all the stops to make them look good. I’d be inclined to believe you – what the hell would supporting Prenda do for you all the way in Australia, anyway? – if not for the fact we already know you’re more full of shit than a clogged toilet.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Re:

“what the hell would supporting Prenda do for you all the way in Australia, anyway? – “

To get up your nose, and Mick the nicks.

It’s an easy source of amusement.

It’s managed to get you all upset, job done!

As I said, I don’t support Prenda, I don’t care what or who Prenda is, (therefore the flying fuck thing).

It’s funny you can almost see the conversation between Mick the nick and Sparby..


“For Prenda = Bad”

“Against Prenda = Good”

Do you understand Sparby ???

Sparby “I think so, can you run it by me one more time, just to make sure?”

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Re:

And you wonder why no one believes your claims of credentials. This is supposed to be the level of intelligence that embodies the anti-piracy movement? The shining star of righteousness that average_joe rushes to defend?

You’re deluding yourself if you think anyone’s “upset” at you. An exchange with you is like kicking a retarded puppy that begs for more.

jackn says:

Its a shame that people are able to judge without knowing the facts. Well, I guess -like the general population – there are stupid judges too.

To bad someone can’t claim incompetence (not just on this case) of a judge and have them quickly removed from service. esp when they are doing the kind of damage this judge has done. I am sure this pattern of not knowing what you are ruling on is not isolated to this case.

Does this judge normally handle other complaints (like family court?). This seems a little out of her league.

What a stupid judge. I guess this is why the wheels turn slowly. 5 steps forward and one idiot judge sends it 3 steps back.

Anon E. Mous (profile) says:

Where is Nora? Maybe she is busy posting away somewhere as BitTorrentBetty.

Love how the Judge kept shooting down Hansmeier “We didn’t get to question Alan Cooper” Defence. I notice that he conveniently forgot to mention how He and the rest of the Prenda gang took the 5th.

Another referral to the State Bar, that’s twice now for Hansmeier, he better do and apply for that driving course at Truck Masters he may need it.

With Gibbs, Duffy and Hansmeier all being referred to the various State Bar they belong to, and the possibility they could lose their licence to practice, which will leave their career choice dead in the water but yet leaves Steele unscathed.

You would have to think their is going to be a little animosity creeping in to the minds of Gibbs, Duffy and Hansmeier that they are taking the brunt of the court beatdowns while Steele (who is allegedly retired from the practice of law) is left with his law careers intact so to speak.

So if the IRS brought a case forward or a RICO indictment
came down, you would be foolish not to think that Gibbs, Duffy or Hansmeier would consider a deal to save themselves from harms way and maybe to extract a little revenge on Stelle who has escaped virtually unscathed where his licence to practice is concerned compared to the others.

I wonder how Steele is sleeping at night knowing that Gibbs would be the first good candidate to cut a deal since Gibbs seems to be on the outside looking in as far as Team Prenda is concerned.

It will be interesting to see what the Federal & State AG’s come up with in their investigation and the IRS Criminal Division with their investigation of Team Prenda.

I would bet their are a lot of people are moving their assets in to wives, girlfriends (or boyfriends if your so inclined, right Nora -er- I mean John) and even Pet’s names to avoid a possible forfeiture of assets.

Of course there is also the possibility if a RICO indictment comes down that some long Jail sentences could fall on some of Team Prenda, unless of course some of Team Prenda cuts a deal, but I would bet Steele will be the guy holding the bag.

Of course just my opinion, but who knows one day our dream may come true.

Anonymous Coward says:

“In parting, she addressed Paul Hansmeier, once again saying, “I believe you to be in violation of a whole lot of rules.” She then repeated her earlier statement that she was forwarding the case folder to the Lawyers Board.

And that was the end. Judge Alton then called a recess before the next case.”

I beg to differ, if she refers this to the Lawyer’s Board it is only the beginning.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...