Michael Avenatti’s Wild Ride

[Luke]

Stormy was really funny and relaxed, over 10,000 people watched the show. She had terrible connection problems, she kept going offline and that annoyed her and the audience. She's going to Avenatti's sentencing & was vocal about how much she hates him. She answered a lot of questions (she had trouble keeping up, she needed moderators, it was a free for all). She's from New Orleans and is very into paranormal stuff, tarot card readings, ghosts and stuff. https://spookybabesshow.com/ is the brand. Other than the tech issues, it was actually enjoyable, it was free to watch but people were tipping, she was topless by the end but really it was her feisty personality that was most interesting.

[scirreeve]

I watched some of it cuz my life is sad. The connection issues were annoying.

[sugar magnolia]

Stormy was really funny and relaxed, over 10,000 people watched the show. She had terrible connection problems, she kept going offline and that annoyed her and the audience. She's going to Avenatti's sentencing & was vocal about how much she hates him. She answered a lot of questions (she had trouble keeping up, she needed moderators, it was a free for all). She's from New Orleans and is very into paranormal stuff, tarot card readings, ghosts and stuff. https://spookybabesshow.com/ is the brand. Other than the tech issues, it was actually enjoyable, it was free to watch but people were tipping, she was topless by the end but really it was her feisty personality that was most interesting.

Baton Rouge.

[Estiveo]

[MN-Skeptic]

[RTH10260]

Why Zoom? Does he not appreciate the amenities of federal transport?

[Tiredretiredlawyer]

Why Zoom? Does he not appreciate the amenities of federal transport?

Methinks he "appreciates" the "amenities" more than most.

[Estiveo]

Too bad, so sad.

[MN-Skeptic]

[chancery]

I didn’t follow Avenatti’s latest trial in detail, but I’m under the impression that it was undisputed that he took $300,000 of the publisher’s advance for a book by Stormy Daniels.

I haven’t been able to find Avenatti’s argument for why he was entitled to the money. He seems to have strange notions about fees. I read about a fee he apparently collected for negotiating a settlement of a potential domestic violence claim against a celebrity client. The fee was said to have been a large percentage of the amount his client paid for the settlement. If true, it makes no sense to me as a “contingency fee” and I don’t understand how it could possibly have been ethical.

Did Avenatti claim that Daniels agreed to pay him a percentage of the advance? Or did he simply feel that he was entitled to an override percentage on any income related to her celebrity?

Edit: having spelling trouble.

[Dave from down under]

Iirc he regards other people’s money as his.

He might give his clients a few $ to keep them quiet while he pockets the rest as fees etc.

[chancery]

Yeah, I grok that, but that's not an argument that's likely to persuade a jury. And for all his deranged behavior, Avenatti has some skills as a trial lawyer.

I gather that he did try to build a case that Daniels was nutty, and therefore shouldn't be believed, which isn't a crazy strategy, but I don't see how that, by itself, gets him to "therefore you should acquit me."

[raison de arizona]

Sentencing happening now.

[Kendra]

Judge:

FOUR years for Avenatti, a portion of which is concurrent to his other sentence in the Nike case.

So it's an additional two-and-a-half years.

[Tiredretiredlawyer]

[neonzx]

Only 4?

[Dave from down under]

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-06-03/ ... /101123008

A federal jury convicted Michael Avenatti in February of wire fraud and aggravated identity theft after a two-week trial, agreeing with prosecutors that he embezzled nearly $US300,000 ($413,000) in book proceeds intended for Ms Daniels.

US District Judge Jesse Furman imposed the sentence in federal court in Manhattan, calling Avenatti's conduct "brazen and egregious".

But he said guidelines calling for Avenatti, 51, to serve a sentence of five or six years were "unreasonable", in part due to Avenatti's prior successful legal career.

[Dave from down under]

Eighteen months of the Daniels sentence will run concurrent with the Nike sentence, meaning Avenatti faces a combined five years in prison.

He is still charged in California with stealing millions of dollars from other clients.

[MN-Skeptic]

But he said guidelines calling for Avenatti, 51, to serve a sentence of five or six years were "unreasonable", in part due to Avenatti's prior successful legal career.

I dunno… it seems that you could also make the opposite argument, that with his legal background he should have realized how heinous and illegal his actions were and so a stiffer sentence would be justified.

[chancery]

But he said guidelines calling for Avenatti, 51, to serve a sentence of five or six years were "unreasonable", in part due to Avenatti's prior successful legal career.

I dunno… it seems that you could also make the opposite argument, that with his legal background he should have realized how heinous and illegal his actions were and so a stiffer sentence would be justified.

A successful lawyer should be held to a higher standard.

[bob]

To be very generous, I took the judge to be saying Avenatti had helped others achieve justice while profiting handsomely.

[chancery]

To be very generous, I took the judge to be saying Avenatti had helped others achieve justice while profiting handsomely.

Yeah, that's baloney.

<google> It looks as though he did a bit of high visibility pro bono work, but lawyers are expected to do some pro bono work. And I've always been offended when very wealthy people are given sentence reductions for big ticket charitable donations that don't involve much if any personal sacrifice. It's just another form of wealth consumption; the people who engage in it find it pleasurable, and receive abundant social and psychic rewards.

But my point is slightly different. When you take your oath as a lawyer you should expect that your conduct should and will be held to a higher standard.

[MN-Skeptic]

[Tiredretiredlawyer]

https://news.yahoo.com/michael-avenatti ... 36064.html

Michael Avenatti Ordered to Pay Restitution to Stormy Daniels in Fraud Lawsuit

Michael Avenatti, the attorney who represented Stormy Daniels in a lawsuit against former president Donald Trump, was ordered to pay $148,750 in restitution to Daniels on Friday.

Avenatti was convicted of wire fraud and aggravated identity theft in February for embezzling nearly $300,000 away from the porn actress after she signed her book deal. He is serving a four-year prison sentence in Manhattan.

Avenatti was found guilty of diverting nearly $300,000 of the proceeds form Full Disclosure, after prosecutors claimed that he forged Daniels’s signature to tell the publisher where to send the money, according to Reuters.

Daniels testified in January that “Michael had been lying and stealing from me” after promising he would “never take a penny” from the book proceeds.

The restitution charges are less than the initial embezzled amount because Avenatti has already paid some money back to Daniels. Avenatti has also been ordered to pay $259,800.50 to Nike after he tried to extort millions of dollars from the company.

[Kriselda Gray]

I remember when he first hit the scene and people thought he should run for president....