Michael Avenatti Secures Private Counsel After Asking for Public Defender

[jberryhill]

(Not sure if he's still a favored primary candidate among his devoted DU fans, but posting in General anyway)

https://www.thedailybeast.com/michael-avenatti-wants-public-defender-for-his-fraud-and-embezzlement-case

A federal judge rejected Avenatti’s request for a public defender on Tuesday without providing a reason. Public defenders are usually appointed for defendants who cannot afford a lawyer, but can also be appointed for defendants who prove the cost of defending the case exceeds their living expenses. Avenatti argued “that he falls into the latter category of eligibility and requests an opportunity to contribute to his representation,” according to court filings.

Prosecutors wanted Avenatti to fill out financial forms to show he can’t afford an attorney. The Public Defender asked that Avenatti not be required to disclose his finances as it “would be a demanding and time-intensive effort,” the motion reads.

--

The story is somewhat inaccurate in stating that the judge rejected Avenatti's public defender request "without providing a reason."

Avenatti wanted special treatment to obtain a public defender without providing a sworn financial disclosure. As anyone familiar with the charges against him, and his financial shell games played with Tully's Coffee and the IRS, his divorce proceeding, and his bankruptcy court shenanigans, providing a statement under oath about his financial condition is a particularly challenging and hazardous thing for this two-bit scumbag grifter to pull off without engaging in further crime.

On the upside, it's good to see he's still pursuing the things he loves, and regularly engaging with everyday people. He's made "Avenatti-baiting" a thing on Twitter.

[dewsgirl]

1. It is odd he would request a public defender. If I were in

as much trouble as him, I would be doing everything I could, to get the best attorney money could buy. Nothing against public defenders. I wonder if he has a specific one in mind, one that he has a personal relationship with maybe?

[jberryhill]

3. He's broke

Any of the assets that weren't seized in the divorce have been placed under receivership in the dispute with his ex law partner - or at least any of the assets which he didn't squirrel away where his many creditors haven't found them yet. He's been evicted from his offices in Newport Beach and LA, and anyone representing him had better (a) get a huge retainer in cash up front, or (b) have a real need for publicity because they can't attract referral business.

Avenatti has cheated or outright stolen from anyone with whom he's been acquainted either personally or professionally. There certainly are some good lawyers in this world, but most of them like to get paid.

[Progressive Law]

16. Public Defenders are often more skilled than private criminal attorneys.

Especially when you talk about Federal Public Defenders.

I would only choose a private attorney if I could afford one that had years of prior District Attorney experience. And they bill $500+ per hour.

[MGKrebs]

22. But their caseloads and lack of resources make things tough for them.

[cwydro]

2. Weren't there people here who said they donated to him?

Wonder what happened to any money he collected?

[jberryhill]

4. His PAC burned through the rest of the money it had

...and is now 3500 in debt:

http://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/forms/C00685966/1326566/

" (c) Total Federal Election Activity ( 30(a)(i)+30(a)(ii)+30(b) ) 0.00 0.00"

Lol. There's one born every minute.

[cwydro]

6. Yikes.

And yep, ole PT Barnum was spot on with that one.

[MichMan]

8. There were some here that donated to Stein too for her fake recount

[cwydro]

11. Lol, well that PT Barnum quote works there too.

[Alea]

20. One of the few post I had hidden here was over this guy

Everybody was foaming over him, saying he should run for president. I said this guy isn't what you think he is, and is basically a con man. Boom, alerted on and hidden lol.

[cwydro]

21. I didn't get anything hidden, but I was attacked as others were here for saying the same thing.

Crazy, huh?

[jberryhill]

23. That sort of thing happens with regularity on DU

From time to time, DUers will adopt a hero who is above criticism. Former DU heroes include Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden, and Cindy Sheehan.

Self-appointed troll hunters will alert on anything they perceive as negative toward the hero du jour, regardless of whether it is truthful and supported by objective documentation - as was the information posted here about Avenatti's tax issues with Tully's, and his other longstanding and well-documented financial shenanigans.

One of them, you'll notice, showed up downthread.

[Dorian Gray]

29. I was always in that camp too

and couldn't understand what people saw in him. He's always been an opportunist. When he made Trump seem to sweat a bit, it was funny, but I never thought he was a good human being or a serious contender for president.

[hlthe2b]

5. Really?

"Not sure if he's still a favored primary candidate among his devoted DU fans" Really, jberryhill?

I'd dearly love to have one day without someone launching more DU divisiveness? sigh...

[LanternWaste]

19. If he weren't pushing that particular fictional narrative, there'd be little else.

[MichMan]

7. Maybe he should start up a legal defense fund

Maybe all the people that bought into Jill Stein's BS could also contribute to Avenatti ?

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

9. If disclosing his finances "would be a demanding and time-intensive effort," ...

... then he can afford an attorney.

[ProudLib72]

10. I'm pulling for him, as I know a lot here on DU are

He needs to be done with this in time for the primaries.

[jberryhill]

12. Lol

Because Avenatti is going to be able to show that he really did file federal income taxes for all those years the IRS says he didn’t. It’s all just a misunderstanding. They must have fallen behind the refrigerator in the IRS break room.

But, sure, Trump might need another Supreme Court justice confirmed, and this grifter might come in handy for that again.

But what, other than attracting ridicule for whatever candidate is unlucky enough to be endorsed by Avenatti, could he possibly bring to the primaries? Does Beto need more donations diverted to Avematti’s pocket?

[ProudLib72]

13. At the risk of getting another hide

Sanders/Avenatti 2020!

[jberryhill]

15. Sarah, Bernie, or Colonel?

The evidence against Avenatti is, however, quite strong.

When you falsify a tax return in order to get a loan, and you get charged with identity theft because you faked the name and signature of a tax preparer, then it’s pretty clear whose testimony and records are going to back that up (and whose testimony and records they already have).

What’s the defense to that? “Yeah, it’s a fake tax return, but this guy actually did put his career on the line by actually signing a falsified tax return so I could get a loan!”?

Yeah, that’ll fly.

[jberryhill]

37. It will be tough to be VP from behind bars

https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/us-attorney-announces-indictment-michael-avenatti-aggravated-identity-theft-engaging

From August 2018 through February 2019, AVENATTI defrauded a client (“Victim-1”) by diverting money owed to Victim-1 to AVENATTI’s control and use. After assisting Victim-1 in securing a book contract, AVENATTI allegedly stole a significant portion of Victim-1’s advance on that contract. He did so by, among other things, sending a fraudulent and unauthorized letter purporting to contain Victim-1’s signature to Victim-1’s literary agent, which instructed the agent to send payments not to Victim-1 but to a bank account controlled by AVENATTI. As alleged, Victim-1 had not signed or authorized the letter, and did not even know of its existence.

Specifically, prior to Victim-1’s literary agent wiring the second of four installment payments due to Victim-1 as part of the book advance, AVENATTI sent a letter to Victim-1’s literary agent purportedly signed by Victim-1 that instructed the literary agent to send all future payments to a client trust account in Victim-1’s name and controlled by AVENATTI. The literary agent then wired $148,750 to the account, which AVENATTI promptly began spending for his own purposes, including on airfare, hotels, car services, restaurants and meal delivery, online retailers, payroll for his law firm and another business he owned, and insurance. When Victim-1 began inquiring of AVENATTI as to why Victim-1 had not received the second installment, AVENATTI lied to Victim-1, telling Victim-1 that he was still attempting to obtain the payment from Victim-1’s publisher. Approximately one month after diverting the payment, AVENATTI used funds recently received from another source to pay $148,750 to Victim-1, so that Victim-1 would not realize that AVENATTI had previously taken and used Victim-1’s money.

Approximately one week later, pursuant to AVENATTI’s earlier fraudulent instructions, the literary agent sent another payment of $148,750 of Victim-1’s book advance to the client account controlled by AVENATTI. AVENATTI promptly began spending the money for his own purposes, including to make payments to individuals with whom AVENATTI had a personal relationship, to make a monthly lease payment on a luxury automobile, and to pay for airfare, dry cleaning, hotels, restaurants and meals, payroll, and insurance costs. Moreover, to conceal his scheme, and despite repeated requests to AVENATTI, as Victim-1’s lawyer, for assistance in obtaining the book payment that Victim-1 believed was missing, AVENATTI led Victim-1 to believe that Victim-1’s publisher was refusing to make the payment to the literary agent, when, as AVENATTI knew, the publisher had made the payment to the literary agent, who had then sent the money to AVENATTI pursuant to AVENATTI’s fraudulent instructions.

----------


"Victim-1" is, of course, Stormy Daniels.

You think they just made all that up?

You think Stormy will show up and say, "Oh, no, I authorized him to forge my signature and receive my payments. It's all a big misunderstanding."

[ProudLib72]

38. Now JB, I'm pretty sure you know I am usually being snarky

And my snark above was due to getting three hides in a matter of an hour over my negative comments about Avenatti.

[jberryhill]

39. Still, I'm not entirely averse to Colonel Sanders

Although I'm not entirely clear on which side of the war he fought.

But, given the choice between him and the tyrannical Burger King...

[ProudLib72]

40. I finally found the tweet I was looking for

From a Colonel Sanders fanboy. It does not convince me they are on our side.

Link to tweet

[jberryhill]

41. There are some strange creatures who inhabit this world

[W_HAMILTON]

14. Did your DU name used to be oberliner?

[jberryhill]

17. No

My DU name is unchanged since 2006, and is my actual name.

Why do you ask?

[W_HAMILTON]

18. Because...

...for awhile, anytime a negative story about Michael Avenatti came up, it was always being posted by someone named oberliner. I haven't seen him much around lately, and it seems that you post many of the negative stories about Avenatti now, so, I was just wondering if you were the same poster.

[jberryhill]

24. Oh, okay, so...

...just so I understand what you are saying, you have nothing of substance to contribute to the discussion other than to personally accuse someone else of having sock puppet accounts merely because anyone who does not share your opinion must be posting from multiple accounts.

Do I understand you correctly?

Do you think Stormy Daniels posts here as Oberliner too? Because she has a few things to say about this con artist also.

[W_HAMILTON]

25. I politely asked you a question and then politely answered your question. No need to be rude.

[jberryhill]

26. Your question was a personal accusation

[W_HAMILTON]

27. Wrong. My question was a question. If I wanted to accuse you, I could have just done that.

No need to be so defensive either.

[pintobean]

28. I saw it as a personal attack, too.

You accused him of having multiple accounts by asking that question. Now, you're trying to be coy about it.

[W_HAMILTON]

30. You saw it wrong as well then -- your fault, not mine.

Had I not been specifically asked why I asked my original question, I wouldn't have even posted about it again. I had a genuine question and wanted an answer and I got it -- that was enough for me.

Furthermore, I don't know how asking if someone changed the name of their account constitutes "accusing someone of having multiple accounts," but continue to feel whatever feelings you feel!

[pintobean]

31. lol

[jberryhill]

32. "if someone changed the name of their account"

Really?

Would you mind walking me through the steps on how someone would "change the name of their account" on DU?

Explain how that works. Where is the "change your name" feature on DU?

If your question was meant sincerely, then surely you know how one changes their DU name, right?

(Hint: it was only permitted one time, back in around 2009, so that people could get rid of Bush-pejorative usernames that were no longer relevant)

[W_HAMILTON]

33. I don't know, I've never changed the name of my account.

It's a pretty common feature on most message boards, I've seen posts asking if they could change the name of their account on this message board, and you yourself even admitted that people were able to change their account name at one point. I've been a member here since before 2009 -- joined right around the same time as you, actually -- so the example you mention could have been what I was remembering.

[jberryhill]

34. Give it a rest

So you are remember the "ONE TIME NAME CHANGE" thing from 2009 as an ongoing feature of DU? Or are you suggesting that prior to 2009, I used to post about Avenatti under another username?

Lame.

[W_HAMILTON]

35. We can agree on that -- give it a rest. I'm sorry you were offended.

[jberryhill]

36. Perhaps you can go hunting for sock puppets on the most recent news

This just in...

https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/us-attorney-announces-indictment-michael-avenatti-aggravated-identity-theft-engaging