Here is Linda Mastro’s Reply Brief. It’s very pithy, and can be summarized in three short paragraphs.

Argument 1: The Fugitive Disentitlement Doctrine does not apply, because it is not necessary that Linda be present for these issues to be adjudicated.  Where’s your authority on that Gossler?  No case law is cited in the brief.

Argument 2: No evidence to suggest Linda had anything to do with the missing gold, Rolls Royce shenanigan, or the missing money from the Chase account.

Argument 3: Evidence all says the jewelry was Linda’s separate property.

Finally, here’s a link to a recent Seattle Times article about Mastro’s whereabouts, and a potential criminal indictment.