Looming Nike Scandal (Zion allegation shown to be a hoax)

[uh_no]

https://www.espn.com/mens-college-ba...ted-california

Unrelated to the nike case, but related to a separate case where he apparently violated the conditions of his pretrial release.

Me thinks he and bernie madoff may be bunking before too long.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

https://www.espn.com/mens-college-ba...ted-california

Unrelated to the nike case, but related to a separate case where he apparently violated the conditions of his pretrial release.

Me thinks he and bernie madoff may be bunking before too long.

Perhaps they can check into the Epstein Suite.

[Pghdukie]

And watch O.J. tapes

[chrishoke]

https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/08/polit...ion/index.html


"A federal judge on Thursday sentenced celebrity lawpyer (sic) turned criminal defendant Michael Avenatti to 30 months in prison for attempting to extort millions of dollars from Nike."

[DoubleBlue]

"A federal judge on Thursday sentenced celebrity lawpyer (sic) turned criminal defendant Michael Avenatti to 30 months in prison for attempting to extort millions of dollars from Nike."

Good riddance.

[budwom]

https://www.espn.com/mens-college-ba...ted-california

Unrelated to the nike case, but related to a separate case where he apparently violated the conditions of his pretrial release.

Me thinks he and bernie madoff may be bunking before too long.

Alas, Bernie escaped that fate.

[chrishoke]

https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/08/polit...ion/index.html


"A federal judge on Thursday sentenced celebrity lawpyer (sic) turned criminal defendant Michael Avenatti to 30 months in prison for attempting to extort millions of dollars from Nike."

"Speaking before the court Thursday, Avenatti openly wept, choking up at several points and pausing in his remarks before continuing. Referring to the two mediums that fueled his rise to fame, he told the judge that "TV and Twitter, your honor, mean nothing."

"I betrayed my own values, my friends, my family and myself," he said. "I, and I alone, have destroyed my career, my relationships, my life.""

[heyman25]

"Speaking before the court Thursday, Avenatti openly wept, choking up at several points and pausing in his remarks before continuing. Referring to the two mediums that fueled his rise to fame, he told the judge that "TV and Twitter, your honor, mean nothing."

"I betrayed my own values, my friends, my family and myself," he said. "I, and I alone, have destroyed my career, my relationships, my life.""

His sentence should have been at least 5 years, if not longer. Avenatti's fraud of his clients and extortion of Nike is terrible behavior.Disgrace to Law profession.

[burnspbesq]

His sentence should have been at least 5 years, if not longer. Avenatti's fraud of his clients and extortion of Nike is terrible behavior.Disgrace to Law profession.

In California, disbarment is pretty much automatic after a felony conviction. He can apply for reinstatement in five years (the Donald Segretti rule).

[dukelifer]

"Speaking before the court Thursday, Avenatti openly wept, choking up at several points and pausing in his remarks before continuing. Referring to the two mediums that fueled his rise to fame, he told the judge that "TV and Twitter, your honor, mean nothing."

"I betrayed my own values, my friends, my family and myself," he said. "I, and I alone, have destroyed my career, my relationships, my life.""

He had his 15 minutes- so there is that.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

He had his 15 minutes- so there is that.

Is this thread officially and mercifully closed?

[niveklaen]

His sentence should have been at least 5 years, if not longer. Avenatti's fraud of his clients and extortion of Nike is terrible behavior.Disgrace to Law profession.

He may still end up doing 5 years or more - this was just one a his pending criminal cases. If he listens to smart defense counsel he will cop a plea to concurrent time in the other cases to avoid the risk of consecutive sentences. If on the other hand he has greedy lawyers who want to run up his bill they will encourage him to fight every case tooth and nail. I shook my head as a public defender when I saw hucksters blead families dry 'fighting the good fight' and getting their kid locked away for years longer than they should have in the process. Being a lawyer himself one might think Avenetti would be immune to this risk, but lawyers like doctors make the worst clients...

[tommy]

He may still end up doing 5 years or more - this was just one a his pending criminal cases. If he listens to smart defense counsel he will cop a plea to concurrent time in the other cases to avoid the risk of consecutive sentences. If on the other hand he has greedy lawyers who want to run up his bill they will encourage him to fight every case tooth and nail. I shook my head as a public defender when I saw hucksters blead families dry 'fighting the good fight' and getting their kid locked away for years longer than they should have in the process. Being a lawyer himself one might think Avenetti would be immune to this risk, but lawyers like doctors make the worst clients...

Youre assuming the prosecutors in the open cases offer concurrent time to the 5. They may. They may not. Lots of factors go into those decisions.

[cato]

He may still end up doing 5 years or more - this was just one a his pending criminal cases. If he listens to smart defense counsel he will cop a plea to concurrent time in the other cases to avoid the risk of consecutive sentences. If on the other hand he has greedy lawyers who want to run up his bill they will encourage him to fight every case tooth and nail. I shook my head as a public defender when I saw hucksters blead families dry 'fighting the good fight' and getting their kid locked away for years longer than they should have in the process. Being a lawyer himself one might think Avenetti would be immune to this risk, but lawyers like doctors make the worst clients...

It is amazing how often people will pay good money they can ill afford to pay for private defense counsel who are not as good as a public defender or state appointed appellant counsel.

[uh_no]

It is amazing how often people will pay good money they can ill afford to pay for private defense counsel who are not as good as a public defender or state appointed appellant counsel.

i mean, the heavily overworked public defender is unfortunately going to have to optimize for how little time they have to spend on your case whereas the private counsel will be monetarily incentivized to spend as much time on your case as possible. (which is, of course, not the public defender's fault...)

Further, isn't it the case you have to demonstrate you cannot afford private counsel in order to qualify to be assigned a public defender?

[cato]

i mean, the heavily overworked public defender is unfortunately going to have to optimize for how little time they have to spend on your case whereas the private counsel will be monetarily incentivized to spend as much time on your case as possible. (which is, of course, not the public defender's fault...)

Further, isn't it the case you have to demonstrate you cannot afford private counsel in order to qualify to be assigned a public defender?

Generalizing is always dangerous, but usually the busier the lawyer, the more likely they are to be effective. Certainly public defenders tend to be of higher quality than many, many private criminal defense attorneys. At least in the places where I have known prosecutors and public defenders.

[JetpackJesus]

It is amazing how often people will pay good money they can ill afford to pay for private defense counsel who are not as good as a public defender or state appointed appellant counsel.

I can't speak for all jurisdictions, but in general, if you can afford (ill or otherwise) private defense counsel, you will not qualify for a PD or court-appointed attorney. Heck, even if you can't really afford private defense counsel, you still may not qualify for a PD or court-appointed attorney if you have assets or steady income.

[tommy]

It is amazing how often people will pay good money they can ill afford to pay for private defense counsel who are not as good as a public defender or state appointed appellant counsel.

While this certainly does happen, I don't think you can fairly generalize like that. There are many private defense counsel who are just cashing a check, and there are others who are some of the finest criminal defense attorneys I have ever seen. Likewise, there are public defenders and other state appointed counsel who have neither the time, desire, nor skill to represent clients at a high level, and others who are some of the finest criminal defense attorneys I have ever seen. What makes it difficult is that when a client seeks representation by the Public Defender's Office, he/she does not get to choose which lawyer within that office gets assigned to his or her case. You may get someone who is older and tired and is playing out the string, and who wasn't very good to begin with, or you may get a star litigator in his or her prime. And there's nothing you can do to try to choose which one you get.

i mean, the heavily overworked public defender is unfortunately going to have to optimize for how little time they have to spend on your case whereas the private counsel will be monetarily incentivized to spend as much time on your case as possible. (which is, of course, not the public defender's fault...)

Further, isn't it the case you have to demonstrate you cannot afford private counsel in order to qualify to be assigned a public defender?

Your statement is true in theory, but not really in practice. Yes public defenders have to be very efficient with their time, and they have to prioritize in many different areas of their practice. But private counsel, at least most of them, aren't monetarily incentivized to spend as much time on any individual case. Most private counsel get their retainer paid up front, for good reason. Many times, the fee depends on how far the case goes. If it settles early in the process, the fee is less, because less work needs to be put in by counsel. If it goes all the way to a jury trial (which is rare) then the fee goes up substantially. But the last thing private defense counsel wants to do, if it can be avoided, is to go to trial. That is a hugely inefficient use of his or her time. Being stuck in one courtroom representing a client at trial every day for a couple of weeks prevents the attorney from doing everything else he has to do on all his other cases, and largely prevents him from doing what is necessary to bring in new clients. Being in trial costs private counsel money, so unless the client says "I'm not taking any deal, I'm innocent and I'm going to trial," counsel definitely is incentivized to facilitate a settlement of the case rather than go to trial.

Your last sentence is also true in theory but not really in practice. It is rare for the Public Defender's Office to turn down a case because the prospective client does not qualify financially. They find a way to get him qualified, often with a wink and a nod.

I can't speak for all jurisdictions, but in general, if you can afford (ill or otherwise) private defense counsel, you will not qualify for a PD or court-appointed attorney. Heck, even if you can't really afford private defense counsel, you still may not qualify for a PD or court-appointed attorney if you have assets or steady income.

See my comments just right above. The PD finds a way to get just about everybody qualified. They try hard to not turn anybody away.

[cato]

While this certainly does happen, I don't think you can fairly generalize like that.

You are entirely right and I overstated the case. Let me revise it to say, when criminal cases come up on appeal, from what I see, public defenders are better counsel than many private defense counsel.

[uh_no]

You are entirely right and I overstated the case. Let me revise it to say, when criminal cases come up on appeal, from what I see, public defenders are better counsel than many private defense counsel.

do you think there is selection bias there, where people who can afford to hire private defense are more than willing to throw garbage at a wall on appeal to see what sticks, but public defenders might be more likely to only appeal when they actually have a case? (honest question)