By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Song Radio
BBC - Decrypt - LightRead - Order Affidavit
SDNY COURTHOUSE, Jan 24 – Michael Avenatti's financial affidavit to get a publicly paid lawyer for his Stormy Daniels case, which Inner City Press formally sought to have unsealed for eleven months, were on July 27, 2021 ordered unsealed. Order.
Podcast here. Aug 13 podcast here.
On the weekend before trial there's was a request to delay it, on COVID policy and Constitutional grounds. It was denied.
The trial started on the morning of January 24. Inner City Press live tweet here. It continued in the afternoon, with Stormy Daniels' literary agency Lucas Janklow being cross examined about being introduced to Michael Avenatti at a hotel bar, by Anderson Cooper. Inner City Press live tweeted, thread here; stream here, video here
OK, the jurors are back from their break. AUSA Podolsky: Who wrote the text in the green bubble, and in the gray bubble? Janklow: Myself, and Mr. Avenatti. I wrote, Stormy money was in, the third payment, we'll send it out, we missed the bank deadline for today
Janklow: Then I texted Mr. Avenatti that Stormy WhatsApp-ed me, wanting to talk. AUSA: Why did you tell him?
Janklow: He wanted me too. He wanted to control all that. Federal Defender: Objection Judge: Sustained. Mr. Janklow can't opine as to Mr. Avenatti's mind
AUSA: We introduce a copy of Ms. Daniels' book. To congratulate her about it, Mr. Janklow, did you call Ms. Daniels? Janklow: I asked Mr. Avenatti if I should.
AUSA: And did you? Janklow: I don't believe I did. Janklow: Avenatti wrote back, "It's my birthday as well, I've been dealing with this his all day." I assume he meant sh*t, but he wrote his.
Janklow: Then Stormy told me, Michael is no longer my attorney. Please do not discuss my business with him. I told her, That's disappointing. Have you told Michael?
OK - now cross examination of Janklow by Avenatti's publicly-funded Federal Defender (FD). FD: You met with the prosecutors yesterday, right?
Janklow: Yes. FD: You told the truth, correct? Janklow: I did. FD: The US asked if you had any problems with Ms. Daniels?
Janklow: I said I had no problems with her. FD: Did she accuse you of withholding royalties from her? Janklow: There are no royalties. FD: What about the cover? Janklow: She wanted to use her mugshot. Then she didn't.
FD: Do you remember writing to Mr. Avenatti, Not everyone is a stone-cold motherf*cking professional like us? AUSA: Objection!
FD: So you said, If she wanted to be anything more than a stripper, she -- Janklow: That's not what I said. FD: So what did you say? Janklow: That she was a feminist icon.
FD: You said you weren't sure she wanted anything different. Janklow: I was sad about that.
FD: Who are the "fu*king deluded clowns" you were referring to? Janklow: Denver Nicks. FD: And Stormy?
Janklow: Not necessarily. She was hurt. She was scared. She collapsed when the book came out. I wrote, "She's going to sink this, it's hard to watch."
FD: You're a book agent. So you read a lot. What did you mean, "If you want to unleash me"? Janklow: What I wanted to talk to Stormy. FD: And reprimand her? Janklow: Just talk with her.
FD: You said, Dealing with Stormy is a f*cking nightmare, right? Janklow: About publicity, yes. I was trying to reassure St. Martin's that the PR would go OK. FD: You invited Mr. Avenatti? Janklow: Of course.
[A problem has developed with the jurors' screens. Thread will continue - Inner City Press is going to out to check the sex cult case of Larry Ray, who was threatening to remain in jail and not come to court at 2 pm, here.
We're back. FD: Mr. Janklow, you wrote, So she wants to sink the whole thing because of this moronic as*hole. Which as*hole? Janklow: Denver Nicks, the amateur documentarian.
FD: Where did you first meet Mr. Avenatti? Janklow: At a hotel bar. I was introduced to Mr. Avenatti by Anderson Cooper.
FD: What's this? Janklow: An email between Anderson Cooper, Mr. Avenatti and me. Just after Mr. Avenatti sued President Trump. I liked that.
FD: So on March 13, the day after you met him, you sent Mr. Avenatti the contact info for meetings with two publishers, MacMillan's imprints Holt & St Martin? Janklow: Yes. I didn't remember it as being so fast. FD: So why did they want Ms. Daniels to have a press blackout?
Janklow: So that the public would want more, wouldn't be saturated. FD: And Mr. Avenatti assured Ms. Richardson of St. Martin that he would work on that Stormy Daniels' media blackout? AUSA: Objection
FD: Richardson was getting heat from her legal department? Janklow: I don't recall. FD: Here's defense exhibit R5. You say, We are moving toward the close we want, and Sally is getting pressure, 'pus*y squares of the highest order."
FD: What does that mean? Janklow: The bureaucratic side of the business. Business affairs. Belt and suspenders type people. They wanted radio silence from Ms. Daniels, since they were buying her story.
Judge Furman: We'll stop here for the day. Jurors, if you see any news of this, close your browser.
With jury done, Federal Defenders cite a 1989 Supreme Court case. Janklow is still in the witness box, sans mask. He's asked to leave. Judge Furman says, Other than boring him, I don't see why he should stay. But he steps out- as will we, to see if Avenatti speaks
Update: Judge Furman orders that Janklow should not speak with anyone about his testimony - including his own lawyer, from Skadden Arps. Says may reverse that in docket.
[See US letter arguing he CAN speka to counsel, tweeted here] Avenatti, still at defense table, passes note to Federal Defender.
Federal Defender then complains that he got 3500 material about US meeting the Janklow earlier today.
Judge Furman: 3500 only has to be given at conclusion of direct examination and they complied. Plus you can prepare over night. Email chambers your COVID results
Now after a scheduling discussion they're done, Judge Furman is done. Avenatti still in the courtroom with big gray briefcase. Inner City Press rushing down to see if Avenatti speaks, as before, on Worth Street
He did: stream here, video here
Judge Furman released his juror questions, asking each side to respond by January 19 at 10 am. The questions include: "Based on anything that you have read, seen, or heard about Mr. Avenatti, have you formed any opinions about Mr. Avenatti that might make it difficult for you to be a fair and impartial juror in this case? 10. Would you have any trouble following my instructions to put anything you may have read, seen, or heard about Mr. Avenatti out of your mind and decide this case based only on the evidence presented at trial? 11. Do you or does any member of your family or a close friend personally know or have past or present dealings with the alleged victim in this case, Ms. Clifford (also known as “Stormy Daniels”), or with any of her family members?...
"Do you know or have you heard of any of the following people or entities, which include the lawyers in this case, people who may testify at the trial, and other names that may be mentioned during the course of the trial? • Pamela Baez • Elizabeth Beier • Thomas Bolus • Clark Brewster • Christine Carlin • Michaela Catando (also known as Kayla Paige) • Dmitri Chitov • Dwayne Crawford • Jennifer Donovan • Anna Finkel • Mark Geragos • Jack Guiragosian • Holtzbrinck Publishers • Luke Janklow • Janklow & Nesbit Associates • Geoffrey Johnson • Global Baristas • Sean Macias • Macmillan Publishers • Susan McClaran • Benjamin Meiselas • Travis Miller • Mareli Miniutti • Erik Nathan • Denver Nicks • Kevin Carr O’Leary • David Padilla • Brandon Parraway • Pro Tech Security and Automation • Judy Regnier • Sally Richardson • Security and Automation LLC • St. Martin’s Press • Enrique Santos • Jessica Volchko • Juliet Vicari • Donald Vilfer 25. Are you familiar with anyone else present in the courtroom, including your fellow jurors, all Court personnel, and myself?"
On October 14 Judge Furman held a proceeding in the Stormy Daniels case and Inner City Press live tweeted it here and podcast here
On August 10 Avenatti's Federal Defenders filed a copy of the affidavit with multiple redactions. The form refers on nearly every question to an attachment, which is blacked out in absurd ways. It reads, for example, "I own stock in two closely held companies that may have value: (a) [REDACTED] located in [REDACTED] and (b) [REDACTED] located in [REDACTED]... I technically still have an interest in a private aircraft (model: HondaJet 420) that was seized by the IRS and is still in their possession. This interest is held through a single-purpose entity named [REDACTED]," and so forth.
Inner City Press published the redacted affidavit on its DocumentCloud here and asked, Will the Court be accepting this?
On August 11, the correct answer was: No. "MEMO ENDORSEMENT as to Michael Avenatti (1) on [139] LETTER MOTION re: [139] LETTER MOTION addressed to Judge Jesse M. Furman from Robert Baum, Tamara Giwa & Andrew Dalack dated August 10, 2021 re: Letter Motion In Response to Court's Order to File Financial Affidavit. ENDORSEMENT: The Court is unpersuaded that privacy interests justify redacting the names and locations of the corporate entities in Paragraphs 14, 15, and 17 of ECF No. 139-1."
After hours on August 12, some redactions were removed: Avenatti's owned a plane through Passport 420 LLC; an unnamed "non-family-member acquaintance" paid a NY-based attorney in the Nike case, whose name is redacted. Unredacted: Avenatti owns stock in Tyrian Systems (aka Seek Thermal) of Santa Barbara, CA and Centurion Holdings I, LLC of St. Louis Missouri."
Not so fast. Inner City Press research in the hours after the removal of the improper redactions found that Centurion Holdings I, LLC is based in Arnold, Missouri - and "received a PPP loan of $60,477 in May, 2020." That's the Paycheck Protection Program; the funds came through the Central Bank of St. Louis.
Bigger, the aka: "Seek Thermal, Inc of 6300 Hollister Ave in Goleta, California received a Coronavirus-related PPP loan from the SBA of $1,365,062.00 in April, 2020." We'll have more on this.
Watch this site.
On August 27, Inner City Press filed a formal request that documents in the case not be sealed, full filing on Patreon here.
On November 12, Inner City Press made a third filing with Judge Furman, on a decision to unseal issued earlier in the day by SDNY Judge J. Paul Oetken after Inner City Press filed to similarly unseal Lev Parnas' co-defendant David Correia's financial infor: "we again ask, why should lower income and less high profile defendants in the SDNY -- and now David Correia -- have their financial information so disclosed while Avenatti's information is sealed in its entirety? The documents at issue should not be sealed and should be made available."
On August 28, 2020 Judge Furman entered an order: "The Court received the attached communication from Matthew Lee of Inner City Press “seeking leave to be heard and for the unsealing of the CJA Form 23, affidavit, and all associated documents” relating to this litigation. To the extent that Mr. Lee (who is admitted to the bar of the Southern District of New York) seeks leave to be heard, his application is GRANTED. The Court reserves judgment on the question of whether Defendant’s CJA Form 23 and related documents should be unsealed. SO ORDERED. Dated: August 28, 2020 New York, New York JESSE M. FURMAN." Docket No. 85, on Inner City Press' DocumentCloud, here.
On July 27, 2021, Judge Furman four times citing Inner City Press ordered Avenatti's affidavits unsealed: "Avenatti filed a letter brief arguing that the Initial Financial Affidavit should remain under seal. ECF No. 80 (“Def.’s Mem.”). Thereafter, the Court received submissions from Inner City Press, a media outlet that intervened to seek disclosure of the Financial Affidavits, ECF Nos. 85, 90, 99... The Defendant initially argued that the Government lacked standing “to assert any right on behalf of the public to access Mr. Avenatti’s sworn financial statements.” Def.’s Mem. 7 n.1 (citing United States v. Hickey, 185 F.3d 1064 (9th Cir. 1999)). Subsequently, however, the Court granted leave to Inner City Press to be heard on the Defendant’s motion, ECF No. 85, which indisputably does have standing to assert such rights." Full order here, filings due August 10. Watch this site.
This case is US v. Avenatti, 19-cr-374 (Furman).***
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.
