Michael Avenatti

[UGetPaid]

Am I the only one who thinks this guy should be considered guilty until proven innocent?    


For those unaware, this is the attorney who has been a militant anti-Trumper (representing Stormy Daniels) and who was involved in the "Trumped up" charge against Brett Kavanaugh by the woman who claimed he was a gang rapist. I am not talking about Christine Ford who made the initial assault claim, I am talking about the very suspect woman, Julie Swetnick, who came out of the woodwork and literally accused Kavanaugh of taking part in gang rapes.


Avenatti (and many others) refused to give Kavanaugh a fair hearing and was hell bent on trashing his reputation. The shoe is on the other foot today after Avenatti was arrested on a domestic violence accusation. It may be true or it may be a vendetta by a crazy ex. I don't know which it is, but based on how Kavanaugh was handled, how will he be viewed by the media and the Me Too movement?


My guess is that he will be given a pass on some sort of double standard excuse and that his vehement denials and effort to maintain his [questionable] reputation will be met with strong support.
  

[plennis]

This whole things just seems like a little to convenient.  I think we have to wait and see how it shakes out.   You know, innocent until proven guilty.

[adriarobi]

Everyone is given "innocent till proven guilty".  It could happen to you.

I cannot stand the man. He is shifty, manipulative, and wants do be President...seriously?  He was using lying woen to bring fall charges against Justice Kavenaugh.

However, he is "innocent till proven guilty". I imagine he will wriggle his way out of these charges.

 

[heypeg]

While that is what he did it would be wrong to give him less than the presumption of innocence.

[dancer139]

I'm so tired of all this crap,,,, isn't every one else ?

[gaylasue]

No, no one should be considered guilty until proven innocent no matter what they are accused of doing.  It is against the constitutional freedom and liberty held so dearly in our nation.  Unfortunately, there appears to be some political phonies out there who are trying to undermine the American Constitution to do whatever they want.

[UGetPaid]

You have all restored my faith in the due process of law!   


I must confess that my initial post was made partially tongue in cheek. Regardless of the ultimate truth or any political slant - Yes Absolutely! this man deserves to be considered innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.  The fact that he was unwilling to provide that same standard and due process to another political opponent makes no difference.
    Thumbs up to you all!
Democracy WORKS when it is not abused. This is also the reason why shady/shifty criminal defense attorneys should easily be able to sleep well at night and look at themselves in the mirror in the morning.  Everyone deserves a fair shake and no rush to judgment (both in the courtroom and the public arena/media).


It will be interesting to see how this one plays out.

[articx]

I also agree with others. He is innocent until proven guilty.

[mapiklfish]

He is innocent until proven guilty but, I agree, he didn't give Kavanaugh that same right.  If you go by what he SAID during the whole Kavanaugh thing, then, no, we are supposed to ALWAYS believe the woman no matter what.  Whether there is any truth to it, evidence to back it or anything else.  Oops, snap!  That's only if it's a REPUBLICAN that is being accused.  Same rules do NOT apply to democrats.  Right.  Forgot about that for a second.

[aflyingmonkey]

I believe in due process & innocent until proven guilty.  I would like to see the USA stop trying people in the press based on their political party... it has gotten totally inane.

As for Michael Avenatti... I hope it is finally time for his 15 minutes to be over.  It is all so tiresome.

[thoughtparticles]

I believe someone's innocent until proven guilty. Then, guilt or innocence found by what brand or flavor of jury? A left-leaning jury ruling against a right-leaning defendant? A right-leaning jury saying a lefty is guilty?  I think it very hard to have an "unbiased" or "impartial" jury in this day and age of 24/7 network "news", political polarization, and general hatred spewed between political opposites. Everyone sees some mutated monster under the surface of everyone they disagree with.