The full AUSAs’ letter — a three pager — is here. But she has repeatedly ignored both state and federal court orders, in criminal matters. It seems likely that she may not even be in Florida — or the US — any longer. And this is the “patriot” the Powerline boys cheered, after she and a co-conspirator transported the stolen diary from Florida to New York.
She is very likely to see a fairly long sentence with real incarceration, in the teeth, now. But the difficulty will likely be getting the US Marshals to apprehend her — wherever she is, hiding out — and on the lam. Do read the letter — she’s clearly contemptuous of judicial authority.
Her own lawyer puts it this way — as she’s unlikely to be in Manhattan to be sentenced, and presumably be taken into custody, tomorrow at 2 PM EDT:
“…Since Ms. Harris’s last appearance on February 5, 2024, we advised Ms. Harris multiple times to comply with the Court’s Order directing her to provide Pretrial Services with the requested authorization forms and financial information by February 19, 2024.
Despite our consistent and ongoing efforts, she has not done so. We have also endeavored to prepare for her sentencing, including coordinating her travel [from Florida, supposedly]. Unfortunately, her lack of communication has not permitted us to coordinate her travel and work with her to prepare for sentencing. As such, we do not know if she plans to appear tomorrow….”
If I had to guess, assuming she’s a no show tomorrow — the sentence will exceed three years… when she is eventually taken into custody.
Onward.
Powerline Lies... 
Today she claimed childcare issues; the AUSAs say it is a ruse — thus:
…The Government respectfully submits this letter in response to defendant Aimee Harris’s last-minute request for an adjournment, filed earlier this morning. (Dkt. 92). The defendant’s request is a transparently improper attempt to further delay the long-delayed sentencing proceeding. The purported need for the adjournment – childcare issues – is false. Based on the Government’s communications with counsel for the defendant’s ex-husband and the father of her children, he is aware of the sentencing date and is ready and willing to care for the children in the defendant’s absence. Accordingly, the defendant’s request should be denied….
LikeLike