>>9864914 (lb)
>so, that's proof of existence
No it's not, moran.
It's a public statement [tweet] from a lawyer not under oath or anything binding what-so-ever.
Additionally, Dersh saying he waives his right of privacy is a redundant statement. For one, it would only be relevant should he have "had sex" (sure it's not "rape"?) in Epstein's house or on his plane, assuming everything stated is true. Second, there would likely be victims if this were the case and Dersh waiving his rights does not mean the victim's rights are necessarily waived. Now, I'm no lawyer, but if the videos depicted illicit acts with minors and/or rape, then the perpetrators literally have NO rights. Because they are fucking criminals. At least until proven guilty. Video evidence is pretty damning. And Dersh's "right to privacy" really only accounts for what the public gets to see or hear, which really would be illegal to show or possess either way if a minor was involved.
Okay. Now let's talk implications. Dersh is "getting ahead" of this one, kinda like that d-bag who tweeted about his computer was hacked, claiming that's why he had CP on there.
This statement does imply that Dersh had prior knowledge about blackmail, though. Granted, this may have come up in the category of lawyer-client priviledge. However, Epstein's been dead for a year, and Dersh was silent the entire time. This statement is coming just days after Maxwell got arrested. Dersh may be making this statement knowing his tape was destroyed or non-existent. As I pointed out, this only technically applied to Epstein's house/plane. And Dersh had knowledge of the blackmail tapes. So, something may have been arranged specifically for him, as he was the defending attorney for pedo in question.