In Other Media-eg New Statesman, AJE, FP, Georgia, NYT,  Azerbaijan, CSM Click here to contact us     .

By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Song Radio
BBC - Decrypt - LightRead - Honduras - Source

SDNY COURTHOUSE, June 25 – When after three days of jury selection the trial of Michael Avenatti for allegedly extorting Nike began, Assistant US Attorney Robert Sobelman told the selected jurors that Avenatti was supposed to look out for the interests of his client, but he did not - he had a weapon, social media.  More on that first day on Patreon here.

On June 21, Avenatti's lawyers wrote in asking to postpone his June 30 sentencing to late August, citing a request for $1 million in restitution for Nike to be filed "in camera" - this while Avenatti seals his application for free counsel, and wants media banned from voir dire sidebars -- and because he has his California trial on July 13, for four weeks.

On June 22, the US Attorney's Office opposed the request for delaying, saying it would mean Avenatti was being sentenced 1.5 years after conviction. They quote a decision by Judge Friendly, about a defendant who "stood mute, gambling on an acquittal while holding this issues in reserve," alluding to Avenatti's motion to compel.

Now now on June 25, the date has been set: July 8: "MEMO ENDORSEMENT as to Michael Avenatti on [327] LETTER MOTION addressed to Judge Paul G. Gardephe from Assistant United States Attorneys Matthew D. Podolsky, Daniel C. Richenthal, and Robert B. Sobelman dated June 24, 2021 re: Movement of Sentencing from July 9, 2021 to July 8, 2021. ENDORSEMENT: The sentencing for Defendant Michael Avenatti, currently scheduled for July 9, 2021, will now take place on July 8, 2021 at 1:00 p.m. SO ORDERED." Watch this site.

   On June 18 - Juneteenth (observed) when most of the SDNY was closed - Avenatti's Federal Defenders filed in the Stormy Daniels case, to preclude her WhatsApps with Avenatti: "The government’s opposition to Michael Avenatti’s pre-trial motions fundamentally misapprehends the core issues at play and urges the Court to deny Mr. Avenatti relief without even an evidentiary hearing. But notwithstanding the government’s protestations, there remain legitimate concerns about how and why the government obtained incomplete and inauthentic versions of Stephanie Clifford’s WhatsApp communications with Mr. Avenatti, and why it also failed to acquire other equally material communications and relevant electronically-stored information from Ms. Clifford’s cell phone. The defense has also never waived an objection to the government’s use of a “filter team” to search of Mr. Avenatti’s iCloud account—which contained attorney-client communications and attorney work-product relevant to Mr. Avenatti’s defense preparation across his three criminal cases—and respectfully submits that the issue demands further scrutiny, particularly since a court-appointed “special master” conducted the privilege reviews of seized devices and files belonging to two other high-profile attorneys investigated in this district... Separately, the government’s opposition to its prompt disclosure of statements made by three key witnesses (Ms. Clifford, Luke Janklow, and Judy Regnier) misses the crux of Mr. Avenatti’s concern: that the government’s perspective on what constitutes Brady material is far too conservative, and that delaying the disclosure of materials bearing on Ms. Clifford’s veracity prejudices Mr. Avenatti’s defense preparation. In particular, and because her testimony and competence as a witness is central to the government’s entire case, Ms. Clifford’s statements in the government’s possession, custody or control about her book deal and relationship with Michael Avenatti are plainly material to the issue of guilt and should be disclosed without further delay. And given Mr. Janklow’s and Ms. Regnier’s intimate involvement with Ms. Clifford over the time period at issue in the indictment, the Court should at least review in camera these witnesses’ statements in the government’s possession, custody, or control to determine whether they are helpful to the defense." Full filing on Patreon here.

 Jump to June 9, 2021, when after conviction Avenatti filed his Nike sentencing submission, asking for "a sentence of no more than eighteen (18) months - six months in prison followed by 12 months of home confinement." His submission cites, among other things Guantanamo, Epstein, El Chapo, and Obama not ending torture.

  Now in later June, the US Attorney's Office has filed victim impact statements from Gary Franklin and from Nike. They say Probation recommends 96 months, and they say "very substantial." The guideline is 135 to 168 months. More to follow - watch this site.

 On August 7, 2020 in the Stormy Daniels case, Avenatti had motions heard by U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Judge Jesse M. Furman. Inner City Press live tweeted it, here.

***

Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA

Mail: Box 20047, Dag Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017

Reporter's mobile (and weekends): 718-716-3540

Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.

 Copyright 2006-2021 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com for