---
canonical_url: "https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q1a613e55f7531a4c9fc1"
batch_url: "https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000078/pages/3"
content_type: discussion_message
speaker: "reb***"
date: "2026-02-16T00:08:28.160Z"
---

# reb*** 发言 (2026-02-16)

这里汇集爆料革命参与者围绕郭文贵案的持续讨论，包括长期深度参与者及自述投入真金白银的投资者。他们分享亲历过程、资金投入与后续遭遇，并结合案卷展开追问、核对和观点交锋。这些来自事件内部的经验与细节，为理解事件经过和投资者处境提供了外部报道之外的重要视角。请结合具体发言判断其经历与依据，引用时保留发言者、时间和上下文。

批次：[查看所在归档批次](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000078/pages/3)
时间：2026-02-16T00:08:28.160Z

## 发言正文

> 五、没有找到"必须等sentencing后才能mandamus forfeiture"的支持
> Searched extensively for:
> Cases where circuits held mandamus unavailable before sentencing for § 853(n) issues
> Found: NONE
> Rules requiring waiting until sentencing
> Found: NONE
> Circuit splits on timing of forfeiture mandamus
> Found: No evidence of such split
> 实际找到的:
> Seventh Circuit in Kaufmann, 985 F.2d 884:
> Involved forfeiture issues
> No indication that court waited until sentencing
> Court reviewed on regular appeal timeline
> Federal Rules Commentary:
> Explicitly state ancillary proceedings must be before sentencing
> Contemplate that third-party issues are resolved before FOF
> Advisory Committee Notes to Rule 32.2:
> "Congress apparently assumed that the proceedings under the new provisions would involve simple questions of ownership that could, in the ordinary case, be resolved in 30 days."
> 30 days ≠ waiting until sentencing!