Thread by @meghanncuniff

Opening statements are today in Avenatti’s @StormyDaniels trial here at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan courthouse in Manhattan, but as I saw Friday in Judge Furman’s court, the financial info that’s on Avenatti’s law firm servers in California could be a sticky issue. ⚖️🧵⚖️

As @MichaelCohen212 and I wait outside for the courthouse to open in an hour, here’s some background on what’s going on with the servers and why it matters today.

As I reported Friday, Avenatti is trying to get data off the servers regarding his work for Stormy. Judge Selna in OC rejected a request to order DOJ to release it, but Judge Furman was going to try to contact Selna on Friday and inquire about that. 

https://twitter.com/meghanncuniff/status/1484624351676833801

This is the same @Tabs3software that led to the mistrial in California, after Avenatti pushed it to the forefront of the trial as my @lawdotcom article here from back in August explains: bit.ly/2W3ffQ1 (Aug. 24 mistrial article here: bit.ly/3Besso1)

It was remarkable how mystified Judge Furman was Friday by the concept of him being asked to order @USAO_LosAngeles to do something, when he’s on the bench in the Southern District of New York, not the Central District of California.

It’s another example of Avenatti pitting @TheJusticeDept’s dual office prosecutions against them, as he’s trying to do in the Nike extortion case post conviction. (My recent @lawdotcom article on Judge Selna and the SDNY’s Judge Gardephe explains: bit.ly/3F9xfZb)

But it also shows a budding defense for Avenatti like what happened in Cali. His public defender Andrew Dalack filed this motion to compel after Friday’s hearing that asks Furman to order the @USAO_LosAngeles' privilege-review team to release the data. bit.ly/3fKgnhA

The motion includes an important claim from Avenatti that prosecutors produced notes of their Jan. 12 interview with ex-paralegal Judy Regnier that said Regnier said "information relating to the Mr. Avenatti’s firm’s representation of Ms. Clifford was kept in
QuickBooks and Tabs"

That could be a very big deal if true. That same scenario played out with the California case and led to the mistrial, though Regnier mentioned Tabs to prosecutors in that case much earlier, back in July 2019.

Still, the fact that Regnier mentioned it to SDNY prosecutors, too, sure seems to up the relevancy and potential Brady v. Maryland issues involving the still-not-disclosed Stormy Tabs data.

Remember, while Judge Selna said prosecutors didn’t commit misconduct, he was very clear that he believed the Tabs data could have been useful to Avenatti. And here’s the thing that really relates to right now, today...

...Selna didn’t just say that in regards to Avenatti’s cross-exam of witnesses. He said Avenatti could have incorporated Tabs info into opening statement and case theory. Well, opening statements in the Stormy trial are supposed to happen in 80 minutes.

https://twitter.com/meghanncuniff/status/1430214588545474561

I’m surprised Avenatti's defense didn't bring that up on Friday. Not what Selna said about the significance of the data for the California case -  Furman made clear he doesn’t want to hear about the California mistrial.

SDNY defenders’ papers say undisclosed Stormy server info is crucial to the cross of at least one witness….but they haven’t mentioned it could also be part of overarching defense narrative and thus incorporated into the opening statement. Maybe that will come up this morning?

I imagine we’ll hear about the new motion to compel before the jury's brought in, along with hopefully an update on how Furman’s attempts to contact Selna went. (As I said, Selna didn’t have a calendar on Friday so probably wasn’t at the courthouse and easily reachable.)

But Furman really gave Avenatti some momentum on the issue by saying he understands how it could be useful, and even suggesting that SDNY prosecutors call the California prosecutors and tell them to release it.

(@Tabs3Software company for weeks has been assisting @USAo_losangeles in gaining access, which is supposed to finally happen today.)

Judge Furman on Friday mentioned a pending issue he has in this case, regarding relation between @SDNYnews prosecutors and @USAO_LosAngeles prosecutors and whether they’re one unit.

And Furman said the 2nd Circuit could overturn whatever his ruling ends up being, so maybe prosecutors should just hand that stuff over. (Here’s the letter motion on that: bit.ly/3tHQ0kz)

Here’s SDNY prosecutors' response to the dual offices/one unit argument. “As a threshold matter, the defendant’s claim should be denied as untimely because, as explained above, he has had ample notice and opportunity to raise this issue long ago.” bit.ly/355Gld9

The new revelation that Avenatti’s ex-paralegal mentioned Tabs to prosecutors in an interview less than two weeks ago, however, could negate some of prosecutors’ argument about Avenatti waiting too long. And Furman said Friday he sees how it could be relevant to defense.

So where does that leave us? 18 jurors are due at the courthouse at 9 a.m., Dalack and AUSA Andrew Rohrbach are each expecting to give 15-minute opening statements, then @StormyDaniels’ book agent Luke Janklow of @JanklowNesbit is the first witness. bit.ly/3nStC4e

Prosecutors said Friday the second witness is Judy Regnier, ex-paralegal, testifying remotely. I live tweeted every day of Avenatti’s California trial last summer, and you can find PDFs of the threads here. (Regnier’s testimony is day 4, 5 and 6.) bit.ly/3iNTpZf

Remember, as I discussed in Friday's thread, the jury hasn't yet been sworn in, so Avenatti still has a chance to move to represent himself pro se. Here's my thread from July when he made the move in the California case. Look at his reasoning then. 

https://twitter.com/meghanncuniff/status/1417560885254529024

So anyone who tells you "openings are today in the Avenatti-Stormy Daniels trial" and sticks to the book deal is leaving out all the good stuff. This is a fascinating cross-country legal drama...

...that has federal judges questioning their jurisdiction and the prosecutors in New York and California dealing with critical questions about their discovery duties and work together.

Which reminds me - I said in Friday's thread that Judge Selna just stamped "denied by order of the court" on the proposed Stormy Tabs data order, but as the new motion to compel says, the judge also said it was without prejudice pending possible relief in New York.

So Selna did basically say go to New York. As Dalack told Furman on Friday, that puts them between a rock and a hard place and they now need Furman to order California prosecutors to release the data. A legal conundrum, and a pretty unique one.

I’ll be doing a thread later in the week on all the differences between the Central District’s OC courthouse and the SDNY (the court reporter situation is night and day), but remember, one big difference is no electronics are allowed in SDNY courtrooms.

I saw someone with Avenatti’s defense team and someone with the prosecution team both bring electronics into the jury assembly room last Thursday as they sat in the back near me, but the same defense team member had a pen and paper in Furman’s courtroom on Friday.

So these courtroom restrictions aren’t just on press and public. (at the federal courthouse in Orange County, there are no cellphone signs, but that's never ever eeeverrrr enforced.)

Furman said trial will be 9 to 3 w/ one 45-minute break, which reminds me how different court reporter situation is. (As I said, I’ll do a thread later, but let’s just say I have not heard “I DIDN’T GET THAT!” at all from the two SDNY reporters I've seen.) #yourhonorIneedabreak

So, check back on this thread for an update during the 45-minute break, and remember, I’m here to bring you insight into the growing Southern District v. Central District issue, the Judge Selna/Judge Furman interactions, and all the other insight I have. Stay tuned!

Michael Avenatti arrives at the courthouse with his defense team for the opening day of the @StormyDaniels trial. A bit more attention than he gets at the federal courthouse in Orange County, California. 📸

Ok, we’re on the 45-minute break, due back at 12:15 pm. Witness right now is literary agent Luke Janklow of @JanklowNesbit. Here he is walking into the courthouse this morning. AUSA Matt Podolsky is doing the direct exam.

First, Judge Furman rejected the motion to compel and said he's decided the New York prosecutors and California prosecutors are NOT the same unit. He says a written ruling is forthcoming, because he wants to settle the issue. That should be an interesting read when it comes out.

And Avenatti has NOT moved to represent himself. He apparently found some kind of middle ground with public defender Andrew Dalack, because that children's book everyone laughed about on Friday was never mentioned in Dalack's opening.

Anyway, regarding Janklow, he's the kind of guy who has his own @nytimes profile, from 2013. "He also showed up at the ArtsConnection benefit at the behest of his mother, Linda, the charity’s founding chairman and a descendant of the Warner Bros..." nyti.ms/32riOm1

There was an exchange early on that I think really encapsulates Janklow. Podolsky asked him where he met Avenatti in March 2018 to discuss @StormyDaniels' book deal.
"In the city," Janklow answered.
"Which city?" Podolsky asked.
"New York City. The only city," Janklow answered.

I mean, could Janklow make it any more obvious with that "The only city" answer that he's never been to Wallace, Idaho? #centeroftheuniverse

Janklow's testimony details his interactions with Avenatti, and the contract, and the "fake letter" prosecutors said Avenatti sent Janklow that he said was from Stormy. One really interesting thing was Podolsky trying to ask Janklow about Avenatti's own book deal.

Janklow described Avenatti as a "folk hero" and said he had a $2 million book deal and was paid the first payment. But when Podolsky asked what happened to the deal and the other payments, Avenatti's lawyers objected and Furman allowed a side bar.

Then when the side bar ended and Podolsky went back to questioning Janklow, there were no more questions about Avenatti's own book deal. It was all back to @StormyDaniels.

Anyway, I managed to get one of the only public seats in the courtroom so I don't have to watch on overflow screen. Michael Cohen is in there, too. Delightfully, I was seated next to my favorite courtroom people: the sketch artists. There are two of them today. 🥰 Stay tuned!

OK they finished about 45 minutes ago, with Avenatti's public defender Andrew Dalack estimating he has about 30-40 minutes left in his cross-examination of book agent Luke Janklow of @JanklowNesbit, who had quite a bromance with Avenatti back in 2018 and even early 2019.

Dalack has done most all the talking that I've heard, but lead public defender is Robert Baum, who's sitting next to Avenatti. Baum today asked Furman to tell Janklow he can't talk to anyone about his testimony tonight, not even his own lawyers. bit.ly/33FsJFq

Prosecutors objected, saying they've had that request in other trials and it always, always is denied. But Baum had case law and they didn't. Baum cited the 1989 U.S. Supreme Court case Perry v. Leeke. bit.ly/3qVeB3l

Prosecutors asked if Janklow could leave while they discussed the legalese, and Judge Furman agreed. "Other than boring him, I'm not sure why it would matter to him." (Janklow smiled at that one.)

Then Baum said something that just really really spoke to me as someone who's taking notes with pen and paper today when I'm used to typing - he said he wasn't sure if he was reading directly from the ruling because "when I took my notes, I didn't put in quotations." I feel ya!

Podolsky is to file something for Furman tonight with his case citations, and Furman said his ruling could change once he sees that. But for now, he sided with Baum and is not allowing Janklow to discuss his testimony with his @SkaddenArps lawyers.

Janklow's lead lawyer is David Meister, who pulled down his mask to start talking and was quickly told by Furman to put it back on.

Meister: "We would request the opportunity to speak with our own client." Furman told him he may get a new order later. But for now, no testimony talk between Janklow and his lawyers.

Regarding Janklow's testimony, we saw a lot of messages between him and Avenatti, and I was stunned at how buddy-buddy they were just up to like six weeks before Avenatti was federally indicted, the whole time covering Avenatti's financial legal problems for @LADailyJournal.

In cross, it came out that @andersoncooper introduced Janklow to Avenatti back in March 2018. Janklow and Anderson are friends and introduce each other to interesting people all the time, Janklow said. "He said he was a dynamic, energetic guy," Janklow said Anderson told him.

Janklow sounded quite smitten with Avenatti back in March 2018, just like many people were. He testified today that he wanted to meet him "because I liked him and loved what he was doing." And they really seemed to have hit it off.

Janklow is obviously one of those guys who has suffered the lifetime burden of having to constantly deal with idiots. And he has some pretty colorful ways to describe them. "Fucking diluted clowns" in a text to Avenatti that he said today described people around Stormy.

Janklow also called some people at @StMartinsPress "pussy squares of the highest degree" in a 2018 email to Avenatti. He said today it meant they're "belt and suspenders people" who can make things more difficult.

In one text to Avenatti, Janklow seemed to be laying on praise, telling him, "Not everyone is a stonecold motherfucking professional." In an exchange in June 2018 Janklow told Avenatti, "You are not dependent on stormy. She was the foot you kicked down the door with."

Janklow told Avenatti in 2018 that Stormy was much a liability as a benefit, and said, I'm not sure she wants a different life, you know?" And Avenatti responded, "Exactly!!!!

One big thing was how much control Avenatti had over Janklow until the very end, just six weeks before he was criminally charged and up to when Stormy told Janklow wasn't her lawyer anymore. Avenatti told him not to talk to Stormy about $, and Janklow obeyed for months and months

Janklow would get messages from Stormy and ignore them because Avenatti told him to. He'd send Avenatti everything she sent him and go along with whatever Avenatti told him, until it started to get really bad in early 2019, then Janklow started to speak up.

Anyway, I'm not going to get into the details of all the book deal payments and what prosecutors called the "fake letter" Avenatti sent Janklow purportedly signed by Stormy, because that's well covered everywhere. The trial is already behind schedule with Janklow's cross.

Stormy may testify Wednesday and into Thursday, prosecutors said. Then after she testifies Furman will decide whether Avenatti can call Stormy's lawyer Clark Brewster @cbrew1 during the defense case-in-chief.

One thing: Avenatti was incredibly busy in 2018. All these text messages with Janklow, who btw once told Avenatti he couldn't call him because he was in London at a dinner for the Beastie Boys, overlap with his interactions with the five clients in his California wire fraud case.

Particularly Alexis Gardner and Greg Barela. This story from his California trial last summer touches on that. bit.ly/3xLyWZ4

So does this one: bit.ly/3rO4uw2

Anyway, I'm going to hop on over to Judge Carter's Zoom hearing for this John Eastman/Chapman University Jan. 6 committee subpoena TRO hearing. I'll do another thread on that so check it out! bit.ly/3AnZPVX

OK scratch that "Janklow can't talk to his own lawyers about his testimony" stuff - Furman changed his mind. New order in, and he says Perry v. Leeke "does not provide much, if any, support for Defendant's request."

The order follows Podolsky's filing that basically calls BS on Baum's claim that Perry v. Leeke supports his request. But it's unclear if Furman if needed it, because Furman's ruling begins "upon reflection" and doesn't cite it at all. bit.ly/3qTrXxc

https://twitter.com/kbriquelet/status/1485729611619131392

This is the first thing that popped up on my Instagram just now. Courtroom sketch artist Jane Rosenberg has at least two other sketches - all awesome, of course - and one is really magnificent w/ Avenatti, Janklow, Judge Furman, Podolsky and a screen with Stormy’s book cover. 🔥

Here’s the main scene sketch from the legendary Jane Rosenberg, as seen in this @WSJ article. on.wsj.com/3KDqseh

Btw, I said above that Podolsky is in the sketch, and he is in the original sketch I saw in court, but he’s cut off in the online version. Avenatti’s lawyer Robert Baum is pictured along with Judge Furman, Janklow and Avenatti.