Thread by @innercitypress

OK - US v. Avenatti trial Day 7 begins with Judge Furman reading out the rulings he alluded to in short text-only orders last night. Things going so badly for Avenatti, jury will be sent home; then charge conference. Inner City Press will live tweet, thread below

https://twitter.com/innercitypress/status/1487467879683526662

Jury enters.
Judge Furman: It is my understanding, Mr. Avenatti, that you intend to rest your case. Is that correct?
Avenatti: Yes it is, Your Honor.
Judge Furman: The evidence is closed. I'm going to dismiss you for the day. Don't hold it against either side.

Judge Furman: Jurors, you now have heard all evidence in the case. We'll see you tomorrow and hopefully get a full day in.
All rise!
Jurors leave.
Judge Furman: Let me give you a few more rulings. If anything, Mr. Avenatti was to blame for the delay...

Sometimes-CJA lawyer Richard Palma is told he can go; "Mr. Avenatti is not calling your client."
AUSA says closing will be 1 1/2 hours.
Avenatti: "Two hours, Your Honor."
Judge Furman: That will be the maximum. I will not hesitate to cut you off.

Judge Furman: We'll reconvene later for the charge conference.
Adjourned - thread will continue. For now, next installment in "Genocide Games of Guterres, In Stormy Times" : ) innercitypress.com/literary7genoc…

Update: For those waiting for the US v. Avenatti charging conference that was supposed to start at 1pm, Avenatti & his Federal Defenders are at their table, and the prosecutors at theirs, so it should be getting going soon. Inner City Press will live tweet, below

OK - Judge Furman takes the bench at 1:23 pm, having made more changes to the draft jury-charge.
Judge Furman: Let me give my general reactions to Mr. Avenatti's submission. This morning he made four requests. The first one, I'm not going to give that instruction

[Inner City Press has put Judge Furman's draft jury charge in US v. Avenatti on its DocumentCloud, may help follow along with this charging conference documentcloud.org/documents/2119…

Judge Furman: The government does bear the burden of proving Mr. Avenatti's intent. They can get up and say that under California law you can't just take the money. The nuance being, I don't think he can argue he had good faith, but he can say the US hasn't shown

Judge Furman: Mr. Avenatti's presentation of the defense theory of the case is legally and factually wrong but I have proposed a change, to page 20.
[From 21: US must "prove fraudulent intent and the consequent lack of good faith beyond a reasonable doubt."

AUSA: One proposal we have, on page 26 about attorneys fees - take out a paragraph so defendant is precluded from arguing that he could have brought an action for the money. There is no evidence in the record that he did.

Judge Furman: So you're saying Mr. Avenatti should be precluded from making any quantum meruit argument?
AUSA: Indeed, your Honor. He could, I suppose, say he worked hard. But he can't say it entitled to him to money.

Judge Furman: I am very very concerned that Mr. Avenatti in closing doesn't testify, without being cross examined. I'm inclined to have him refer to himself in the third person

AUSA: Yes, our concern is Mr. Avenatti in closing saying "I believe" or "I maintain."
Avenatti: I object to being required to refer to myself in the third person.

Avenatti: Referring to myself in the third person could be viewed as arrogance by the jury [!]
Judge Furman: I would tell them I ordered you.

Avenatti: Under California law, there is no need to get client authorization each time you take money out of the trust account.
Judge Furman: Ms. Daniels is not instructing the jury on the law. You should be discussing the specifics of my change.

Judge Furman: Did you send Ms. Daniels a bill, yes or no?
Avenatti: It depends how you define bill.
Judge Furman: Is there any evidence in the record that you sent Ms. Daniels a bill?

Judge Furman: You are not going to get up and say Michael Avenatti, or I, whatever it will be, subjectively believed X.
Avenatti: You're negating the good faith defense.

Avenatti: The defendant objects to any further highlighting of pro-se status.
Judge Furman: I like your use of the third person, Mr. Avenatti.

Avenatti: I'd prefer, rather than you telling the jury that a criminal defendant has the right to represent himself, you tell them, "Mister Avenatti has has a right"
Judge Furman: I'm not going to do that. But I will not remind them you were initially represented

Avenatti: I don't think it's correct to tell the jury that it's not unusual for witnesses to have lawyers
Judge Furman: I'm going to leave it as it is.

Avenatti: I ask for the inclusion of the following words, "knew of such information" and "defendant was under"
Judge Furman: Isn't that point already made? I don't think it's ambiguous.

Federal Defender Dalack: We'd like you to say, clearly, you cannot hold it against the defendant that he did not testify.
Judge Furman: I see what you mean, but I think since I address it twice, they will understand.
Dalack: Thank you your Honor.

Avenatti: Page 21, line 11, I propose the first sentence say direct proof of intent is not required.
Judge Furman. Denied. Next?
Avenatti: I cannot state too strongly how much I object to this language, which provides jury with the court's view of the case.

Judge Furman: I have done my best to come up with an instruction, using California law, Judge Gardephe's work - but you'll need to be more specific. You've made your record.

Judge Furman: Just to be clear, Mr. Avenatti, you haven't objected to anything from page 28 on, nor to the verdict sheet. And also to be clear, on quantum meruit, I do not expect to hear those words tomorrow.

Avenatti: I had intended to refer to the court's instructions in my closing, with a PowerPoint. I've never had an issue, I don't want to run afoul of your Honor on this. Or on anything else... I don't think anyone here will think I am the one to instruct the jury

Judge Furman: Should Mr. Avenatti be required to refer to himself in the third person?
AUSA: There is no authority saying you can't order it, your Honor.

Avenatti: I'd rather use the first person. If I run afoul, I'll pay a price.
Judge Furman: I might say, 3d person going forward.
Avenatti: Can I say, Ms. Daniels and I entered into a contract? But not, "I believe I was entitled to the money."
Judge Furman: Yes.

Judge Furman: Someone approached my law clerk and asked what time the jury begins tomorrow. We asked for their business card and it said New York COUNTY jury. It's strange.
Avenatti: Michael Avenatti will be in state court, but I will be here.

Judge Furman: You can go. See you tomorrow.
All rise!
OK - more Foley Square Follies to follow