Email Chain on PIN Concurrence with No Further Investigative or Prosecutive Action
A redacted email chain records PIN's agreement with other offices' decision not to seek further investigative or prosecutive action in a redacted Michigan matter.
The November 4 sender states that the recipient's office and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Western District of Michigan had evaluated the redacted matter and were not seeking further investigative or prosecutive action, and that PIN agreed based on the information previously provided.
“your respective offices have evaluated the matter and are not seeking further investigative or prosecutive action at this time.”
Email body; part of the matter description is redactedSource: page 1 ↗
“Based on the information provided previously, PIN agrees with that conclusion.”
The earlier October 20 email says the parties had discussed the investigation, a financial review, and the Michigan Attorney General's Office case file, then asks for an updated statement of DOJ/PIN concurrence or nonconcurrence.
“We previously discussed the current state of the investigation, the results of our financial review, and the content of the Michigan Attorney General's Office casefile that was provided to us.”
Earlier email body; the investigation name is redactedSource: page 1 ↗
“Would you be able to provide an updated letter regarding DOJ/PIN's view on concurrence/nonconcurrence?”