Thread by @innercitypress

OK - it's US v. Avenatti Day 9, jury deliberations day 2 - no movement at all,courtroom silent. But Inner City Press is on alert, live tweeted thread below as appropriate. Here's a hybrid story: innercitypress.com/literary7genoc… and hotdog story: innercitypress.com/sdnytrial17ave…

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

Something is afoot - the lawyers are gathering in the courtroom; prosecutors sitting, Avenatti standing up. Drumroll.

It's said, "There's a note." (If so, not yet the verdict). Lawyers are huddled together discussing it. Judge Furman not yet in the courtroom.

Now Judge Furman takes the bench.
Judge Furman: The note says, "We are unable to come to a consensus on Count 1."

Judge Furman: I gave a draft response to my deputy. I'm going to tell them to keep at it.
AUSA: We are comfortable with that or a longer instruction.
Avenatti: I request that the Allen charge be modified.

Judge Furman: So I'll read the instruction to the jurors and send them back.
[Jury coming up]

[It's pointed out that if Avenatti is not guilty of Count 1, wire fraud, he can't be convicted of Count 2, aggravated identity theft, which has to use wires. h/t at the ready]
Still waiting for the jury to enter.

Jury enters.
Judge Furman: We have received your note. Your verdict must be unanimous. Each must decide for him or herself; you must examine everyone's point of view. There is no reason to believe that another jury would be more competent. No one should surrender

Judge Furman: So go continue your deliberation, in light of this.
Jury exiting.
Interim story coming on InnerCityPress.com and patreon.com/MatthewRussell…

Update: Now at 2:20 pm the lawyers are reconvening in Judge Furman's courtroom.

It's another jury note. Lawyers are huddled, studying it. Down in front of the courthouse, a report is already doing a TV stand-up.

Judge Furman: We have received a note. The jurors want the transcript of Stormy Daniels' testimony. I'll send it without sustained objections. Then want a definition of good faith.

Judge Furman: I suggest when we decide what to send them, we send 12 copies, for social distancing purposes. My deputy reminds me we could provide it in the folder they can access in the jury room.
Avenatti: I believe the testimony should be read to the jurors.

Avenatti: I want the testimony read back in open court.
Judge Furman: In my 18 years as a prosecutor and judge I've never seen that.
Avenatti: I've been involved in a number of trials.

Judge Furman: If you can cite authority...
Avenatti: I only saw the note four minutes ago.
Judge Furman: While he prepare the redacted transcript you can look into it. As to good faith, any thoughts? I could just read the paragraph from the jury instructions.

Avenatti: The defense says, read only the good faith instruction.
AUSA: Include the intent to defraud instruction as well. Give us a few minutes. This jury seems very attentive. They are looking for some guidance.

Judge Furman: You might want to look at US v. Alkins, 925 F2d 541, 2d Circuit 1991
[And here it is: casetext.com/case/us-v-alki…

From Alkins: "The court... instructed the jury that "[a]n honest belief in the truth of the representations made by a defendant is a good defense, however inaccurate the statement may turn out to be." No further elaboration was necessary

Judge Furman: I'm printing out a copy of my proposed instruction, as something we can work off.
[This could take a while]

Avenatti: I object to the instruction & have an alternative to propose.
Judge Furman: Can you give the reason for your objection first?
Avenatti: In this case, good faith means Mr. Avenatti believed he was owed money even if it wasn't owed money.
Judge Furman: No.

Avenatti: Alkins was about representations. This is about my actual belief.
Judge Furman: Your belief you were entitled to TAKE the money?
Avenatti: Why provide them a further instruction on good faith? Just re-read what was provided to the jurors previously.

AUSA: They already have that. They are asking for help.
Judge Furman: So I'll re-read & say, if that does not answer, you can send us a new question. The jury cannot convicted based only on his lies to Ms. Daniels, which I don't think are disputed. More is needed.

Judge Furman: Let's given them a non-answer answer.
Avenatti: I don't object, except there's no need to tell them they can send more notes.
Judge Furman: I'm going to tell them that.

Avenatti: I have a case about transcripts, US v. Escotto casetext.com/case/us-v-esco…
Judge Furman: I read that as saying I have the authority to send transcripts it. Reading out loud a full day's testimony would be a colossal waste of the jurors' time.

Judge Furman: The request here is for the transcript, not a read-back. I am prepared to give a cautionary instruction: We are working on getting you full copies of Ms. Daniels transcript. Let me remind you to consider all evidence.

AUSA: Let's add the language from Alkins, about honest belief.
Avenatti: I don't understand. I object.
Judge Furman: You object although you don't understand? I overrule the objections.
AUSA: Transcript is almost ready.
Judge Furman: I have a 3:30 sentencing

[Judge Furman's 3:30 pm sentencing is in a case that Inner City Press has also been covering; US wants him to sentence the defendant, from Puerto Rico-based narcotics conspiracy, to 30 years]
Judge Furman: [reads good faith instruction] You can leave at 5.

Judge Furman: Tomorrow, if you have not reached a verdict, we will stop at 4 pm. With that, you are excused.
Stories coming on InnerCityPress.com and patreon.com/MatthewRussell…

Update of 5:11 pm - Judge Furman re-took the bench, so ran back up to the courtroom. The US had put in a letter with a case they said should trigger another answer to the jury's question about good faith.
Judge Furman said, If not too little, it's too late.

FJudge Furman won't add to previous answer to juror note. Prosecutors said they may put in a letter tonight if they find authority for a supplemental answer.
Avenatti: I don't want to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat, I mean, defeat from the jaws of victory.

Judge Furman: Quit while you are ahead, if another way to say it.
He advised the parties to agree on redactions to transcripts of Regnier and Macias, in case jury asks for them. Adjourned - now running out to Worth St - #FoleySquareFollies?