With
Avenatti Sentencing July 8, Now Nike Asks
For $1 Million, US Attorney Supports It
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.
Now into the
docket on June 25, Nike's
request for $1 million in
restitution, essentially all
of its attorneys fees, photo
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.
This case is US v. Avenatti, 19-cr-374
(Furman).
The Nike
case is US v. Avenatti, 19-cr-373
(Gardephe).
***
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
|