{"id":"q09509c588364761fb9ae","batch_id":"batch-000149","seq":170,"speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-21T19:19:37.047Z","text":"所以这两个身份不能混。\n\n⸻\n\n更有意思的是：刑事案里的§853(n)产权主张人，到了破产案里可能更适合主张“这根本不是estate property”\n\n比如你不是说：\n\n“郭欠我10万美元。”\n\n而是：\n\n“这个账户里的10万美元就是我的钱，Luc没资格拿进estate。”\n\n那你和普通creditor不同。\n\n普通creditor逻辑是：\n\nestate有100块钱，我是其中一个来分的。\n\nproperty claimant逻辑是：\n\n这里有20块根本不属于estate，先拿出去，剩下80块你们再分。\n\n这个区别非常大。\n\n如果5739要把某项资产：\n\n分给美国政府\n或留给Luc\n或双方五五分，\n\n而你主张：\n\n“这项资产里有我的直接产权。”\n\n那你就可能有非常现实的理由反对9019 settlement。\n\n这也是为什么现在5739已经出现第三方正式objection会很重要。破产案里历史上也早已有Mei Guo、Taurus parties、Greenwich parties、G Club等大量第三方作为objecting parties参加各种motion hearing。\n\n⸻\n\n那刑事案自诉人能不能直接参与5739？\n\n能，但不是因为“自诉人”三个字。\n\n要看5739是否会具体影响你的：\n\nclaim、property interest、distribution right、litigation right。\n\n例如可以主张：\n\n我是22-50073的creditor；5739改变了原本可供creditors分配的资产池，所以我受直接经济影响。\n\n或者：\n\n我对某项被5739划给government/Trustee的资产主张ownership；Luc和政府不能靠两方和解消灭我的第三方权利。\n\n或者：\n\nsettlement release影响了我正在主张的权利。\n\n这种就有基础去：\n\nfile an objection to Dkt.5739\n\n请求在8月25日听证发言；\n\n必要时申请Rule 2018 intervention/appearance。\n\n但如果只是说：\n\n“我在二巡是Tony/Chunk/Ryan那类mandamus petitioner，我认为郭案有问题。”\n\n破产法官很可能说：\n\n这和5739对你的bankruptcy interest有什么直接关系？\n\n所以一定要把身份切换过来。\n\n⸻\n\n你们刑事案第三方最有潜力的三个破产案身份\n\n我会这样排：\n\n第一：property claimant。\n\n这是最强的。\n\n尤其如果你有：\n\n* 银行汇款凭证；\n* HEX/Hamilton/Farm账户记录；\n* 钱最终进入哪个账户的trace；\n* 合同；\n* 对账；\n* ownership文件。\n\n你可以直接问：\n\nLuc凭什么把这笔钱当estate property？\n\n这和刑事案§853(n)可以形成平行主张：\n\n刑事法院：不是郭的forfeitable property。\n\n破产法院：也不是郭的estate property。\n\n这个非常有意思。\n\n⸻\n\n第二：creditor / proof-of-claim holder。\n\n如果已经报过债权，则5739可能直接影响你未来可分的钱。\n\n这时你参加9019 hearing的理由很直观：\n\nsettlement把一部分潜在estate assets让给美国政府，会不会损害creditors？\n\n这正是Rule 9019批准和解时法院需要考虑的传统问题之一：和解是否对estate和creditors整体公平合理，而不是只看Luc和政府愿不愿意。","text_en":null,"edited":false,"reply_to":null,"reply_status":"none","has_attachment":false,"url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q09509c588364761fb9ae","reply_url":null,"reply_label":"","batch_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000149","batch_canonical_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000149","notice":"围绕郭文贵案的社区讨论与观点交锋。发言仅代表讨论者观点，不等同于法院认定。","content_type":"discussion_message","canonical_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q09509c588364761fb9ae","markdown_url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q09509c588364761fb9ae/markdown","json_url":"https://mubeitech.com/api/discussion-messages/q09509c588364761fb9ae","surrounding_messages":[{"id":"q5904d204a5834ac06057","speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-21T18:57:20.643Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q5904d204a5834ac06057"},{"id":"q605e9b65c4e23f5b32fa","speaker":"ntp***","date":"2026-08-21T19:11:26.357Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q605e9b65c4e23f5b32fa"},{"id":"q90d0fea82e873ea0b946","speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-21T19:19:00.110Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q90d0fea82e873ea0b946"},{"id":"q6f3a248c0ec14eb29795","speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-21T19:20:19.780Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q6f3a248c0ec14eb29795"},{"id":"q96fa8fd28248b2c2d6c6","speaker":"roy***","date":"2026-08-21T19:20:51.571Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q96fa8fd28248b2c2d6c6"},{"id":"q6bdbaaf9c2273661aef5","speaker":"ntp***","date":"2026-08-21T20:00:40.159Z","url":"https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q6bdbaaf9c2273661aef5"}],"parent_message":null}