Yesterday, Michael Avenatti was arrested outside a California Bar hearing to initiate disbarment procedures against him. As we type, he's sitting in a courtroom explaining to a federal judge why his bail shouldn't be revoked just because he hid a million dollar payment from his creditors and put $717,000 of it in an account belonging to his ex-wife. His attorney just lobbed an accusation of misconduct at the prosecutor. Oh, and Jacob Wohl is there, too.
That's it, that's the tweet.
Just kidding. That's 2020, already on pace to surpass 2019 as the weirdest goddamn year on record. This is the tweet.
He is on the phone w someone. “Yeah I’m here for a court hearing this morning. No not for me, for Michael Avenatti.”
— Mike Ensminger Fan Account (@Mike Ensminger Fan Account) 1579112890.0
After Avenatti's arrest yesterday, the court unsealed a 51-page motion to revoke his bail. Whether Michael Avenatti's machinations to hide cash from his creditors make him "a danger to the community" as prosecutors suggest is unclear. Nor is it clear why the government waited until January to try to throw him back in jail, since the alleged financial fuckery seems to have taken place last May. What is clear, though, is that this guy is a reckless fool.
According to prosecutors, last May, Avenatti got a $1,000,000 settlement check from one of his clients. And instead of paying some of his $1.5 million of child support arrearage, or any of his other $10 million in debts, Avenatti deposited it in a brand new account at J.P. Morgan Chase. Immediately after which, he transferred $717,000 of it to one of his ex-wives -- not the one he owes money to, of course. The former Mrs. Avenatti then transferred $500,000 back into yet another account belonging to Avenatti at a different bank. She then took title to a brand new Mercedes, which he was chauffeured around in by his driver, J.C. Which probably stands for JESUS CHRIST, DID YOU THINK THEY WEREN'T GOING TO CATCH YOU?
He's also alleged to have engaged in an egregiously brazen attempt to deny cash to his creditors by "flipping" cashier's checks to himself.
Specifically, defendant would purchase cashier's checks payable to himself so as to drain his bank accounts of any remaining funds, would hold onto the cashier's checks, would briefly "redeposit" the cashier's checks to immediately access the funds, and would then purchase additional cashier's checks payable to himself to again drain any remaining funds in the account.
Subtle!
And doing this shit, when your face has been all over the news and every bank teller in California knows who you are, is just insane.
Specifically, defendant would withdraw cash in an amount just below the $10,000 reporting requirement and simultaneously purchase a cashier's check for a similar amount – resulting in a total withdrawal amount that, if withdrawn entirely in cash, would have been greater than $10,000. Defendant would then cash the cashier's checks soon thereafter. By doing so, he prevented U.S. Bank from filing currency transaction reports, which would likely have alerted the government to defendant's bank account information and suspicious banking activities.
Whether that makes Avenatti a danger to society or just an absolute lunatic is debatable. In any event, US District Judge James V. Selna decided that he was pretty likely to keep on criming if permitted to remain at large.
There is an ongoing danger that Avenatti will engage in similar conduct. Danger is real and palpable. Avenatti is o… https: //t.co/OUwziZN8BX
— Mike Ensminger Fan Account (@Mike Ensminger Fan Account) 1579118220.0
So it's off to New York for Avenatti, who is due to face extortion charges there next week from that time he maybe sorta tried to shake down Nike for $20 million. Whoops!
[ Avenatti Bail Revocation Motion ]
Follow Liz Dye on Twitter RIGHT HERE!
Also donate us money, so we can write all the breaking newses all the time whenever we want!
As much hay as these motherfuckers make about "gay stuff," there should be great chunks of scripture devoted to the subject. Folks with more knowledge about that particular work of fiction tell us that it is pretty much silent on the issue.
I reckon it's possible.