New York: Michael Avenatti, Lawyer Brash California who once represents Stormy Daniels in lawsuits against President Donald Trump, sentenced to Thursday to 2 1/2 years in prison for trying to squeeze up to USD 25 million from Nike by threatening the company by threatening companies with poor publicity , Avenatti, 50, was punished for accusations including extortion and honest service fraud in connection with his representatives from Los Angeles Youth Basketball League organizers who were annoyed because Nike had ended the league sponsor.
Criminal fraud fees on two beaches interfere with avenatti climbing that are fast for fame.
Apart from the results of the trial on Thursday, he faced the beginning of the fraud trial next week in the Los Angeles area, the second California Criminal trial later this year and next year’s separate trial in Manhattan, where he was accused of deceiving Daniels.
Hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Avenatti represents Daniels in 2018 in lawsuits against Trump, often appearing on the cable news program to underestimate the President of the Republic.
Avenatti was explored running against Trump in 2020, bragging that he would “have no problems collecting money.” Daniels said a trump with Trump a decade earlier resulted in him paid $ 130,000 by the Trump private lawyer in 2016 to remain silent.
Trump denied the affair.
The political aspiration evaporated when the prosecutor in California and New York demanded Avenatti with fraud in March 2019.
Prosecutor California said he enjoyed the lifestyle of $ 200,000 per month while deceiving clients from millions of dollars and failed to pay hundreds of thousands to internal.
Income service.
The cost of accusing him to cheat Daniel from the results of the book transaction followed a few weeks later.
Avenatti claimed not to be guilty of all costs.
The prosecutor requested “very substantial” punishment, citing the recommendation of the US Problem Department from an eight-year term.
Avenatti’s lawyer said six months in prison and one year of home detention was sufficient punishment.
On Tuesday, District Judge U.S.
Paul G.
Gardephe rejected the request by Avenatti’s lawyer to discard his belief in the Nike case in the efforts of extortion and the cost of honest service fraud.
The judge wrote that the evidence showed that Avenatti “compiled a Nike approach designed to enrich himself” rather than answering his client’s goal.
In the written penalty argument, the Avenial Prosecutor tried to enrich himself by giving his public profile “to try to force Nike to his demands.
In a statement of the victim’s impact, Nike’s lawyer said Avenatti losses to the company mistakenly tried to connect it with a scandal where bribery was paid to the family of basketball players who were bound by NBA to direct them to programs.
A Adidas employee, Nike competitor, was punished in the prosecution.
The lawyer said Avenatti threatened to carry out billions of dollars in damage to Nike and then mistakenly tweeted that criminal behavior in Nike reached “the highest level.” Former Avenatti Client, Gary Franklin Jr, said in a statement submitted by the prosecutor that Avenatti’s actions had “destroyed me financially, professionally, and emotionally.” Franklin is expected to be in court Thursday.
In the submission of their presentation, Avenatti’s lawyer said their clients suffered enough, quoting a very large public shame and a difficult task in prison last year which ended after the lawyer said he was very vulnerable to Coronavirus.
“Falling epic avenatti and public love have played in front of the world.
The court can take judicial notifications about this fact, because the fall of the Avenatti disaster has been well documented,” said the lawyer.
Even though the prosecutor asked Gardeph to wear a $ 1 million restitution order to help cover Nike’s legal fees, Avenatti’s lawyer quoted a lack of financial losses as a reason for relief.
“There is no financial loss for every victim so there is no restitution in this matter,” they wrote.
“The fact that the federal white collar criminal case is brought although this fact itself is an important mitigation factor..”