Before sentencing was announced, Avenatti, dressed in his prison uniform, choked several times while delivering a lengthy statement, saying he had “disappointed dozens of people and failed cataclysmically.”
At trial earlier this year, Avenatti represented himself, grilling his former client for hours about his experiences in early 2018, when he signed a book deal that provided an $800,000 payout. Prosecutors said he illegally pocketed about $300,000 of the advance from him in “Full Disclosure,” released in the fall of 2018.
The book’s publication came at a time when Avenatti’s law practice was failing financially, even as he appeared regularly on cable television news channels. In the appearances, she attacked then-President Donald Trump as he represented Daniels in lawsuits aimed at freeing her from a secret $130,000 payment she received shortly before the 2016 presidential election to keep quiet about a date she said she had with Trump a decade earlier. . Trump denied it.
Daniels was not in court. An attorney spoke on his behalf, saying it was “truly shocking” that Avenatti attempted to present himself as an advocate for his clients during his deposition.
His conviction for aggravated identity theft required a mandatory two-year prison sentence. He is already serving a two-and-a-half year sentence for trying to extort money from Nike. Avenatti was convicted of threatening to ruin the cobbler’s reputation if he didn’t pay him up to $25 million.
And he faces a new trial in California on charges of defrauding clients and others out of millions of dollars there.
In a pre-sentence filing, Avenatti’s attorneys cited an apology letter Avenatti recently wrote to Daniels in which he said, “I’m so sorry.”
But prosecutors in a sentencing filing last week urged that he should face “substantial” additional time in prison for a wire fraud conviction and criticized his apology letter, saying the 51-year-old did not apologize for his crime. real.
And they recalled that during an “extremely lengthy” cross-examination, he “reprimanded his victim for lewd language and being a difficult customer, questioned her invasively about marital and family difficulties, and tried to brand her crazy, as much as he did.” during the course of his fraud to prevent his own agent and publisher from responding to his pleas for help.”
“The defendant certainly had every right to defend himself at trial. But he is not entitled to a benefit for showing remorse, having done so only when it suited him and only after seeking to humiliate his victim in a public trial, and denigrating and insulting her for months before her agent and publisher, while introducing himself. as who took possession. the cause of him against the powerful who might have taken advantage of her,” prosecutors wrote.