Law&Crime Sidebar - Elon Musk Sued, Attorney Pleads Guilty, Son Murderer Requests Parole

Episode Date: June 17, 2022

An investor sues Tesla founder Elon Musk for $285 billion claiming he is running a pyramid scheme by promoting the Dogecoin cryptocurrency. Unchained podcast host Laura Shin’s take on the lawsuit. Michael Avenatti pleads guilty to stealing millions from clients in California. His former attorney, Mark Geragos, weighs in on the plea. And an Ohio man comes up for parole for the murder of his disabled foster son, Marcus Feisel. Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters explains why David Caroll should stay behind bars for life.GUESTS:Joe Deters, Hamilton County ProsecutorMark Geragos, Criminal Defense Lawyer, Partner at Geragos & GeragosLaura Shin, Crypto Journalist, Host of UnchainedLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokePodcasting - Sam GoldbergVideo Editing - Sean BauerGuest Booking - Alyssa FisherSocial Media Management - Kiera BronsonSUBSCRIBE TO OUR OTHER PODCASTS:Court JunkieThey Walk Among AmericaCoptales and CocktailsSpeaking FreelyLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law and Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondry Plus in the Wondery app Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Agent Nate Russo returns in Oracle 3, Murder at the Grandview, the latest installment of the gripping Audible Original series. When a reunion at an abandoned island hotel turns deadly, Russo must untangle accident from murder. But beware, something sinister lurks in the grand. View Shadows. Joshua Jackson

delivers a bone-chilling performance in this supernatural thriller that will keep you on the edge of your seat. Don't let your fears take hold of you as you dive into this addictive series. Love thrillers with a paranormal twist? The entire Oracle trilogy is available on Audible. Listen now on Audible.

Well, now... The Doge Fathers. Okay, you're Doge Fathers. So... Hang on. So, we have some questions. So for our viewers who may not know anything about this, what are cryptocurrencies. They're a type of digital money, but instead of being controlled by a central government, they're decentralized using blockchain technology. And lately, prices have been soaring for cryptos like Bitcoin, Ethereum, especially Dogecoin. Elon Musk, the self-proclaimed

world's richest man facing a $258 billion lawsuit over a cryptocurrency alleged to be a pyramid scheme. I'm Anjanette Levy, and welcome to Law and Crimes Sidebar podcast. Elon Musk facing this lawsuit in court in New York. It has been filed by Keith Johnson, and he is accusing Musk of basically acting like Dogecoin had this high value when this man claims, in fact, it didn't have any value. So joining us to talk a little bit about this is Laura Shin. She is the host of the Unchained Podcast. She's also the author of the book, Cryptopians. Laura, welcome to Sidebar.

Thanks for coming on. Thanks for having me. So your general reaction to this lawsuit, this is a major allegation. Obviously, anybody can file a lawsuit. But this is a major claim that cryptocurrency, which we've heard a lot about over the last several years, that Elon Musk, somebody who is a huge name, touted as the world's richest man, that he was running a pyramid scheme with this. So there's certainly a lot of substance, I would say, to the lawsuit. Dogecoin is the original what's called a meme coin, which I'm sure from the name you can gather it similar to a meme stock. And what a lot of kind of true crypto insiders would say about Dogecoin is that there aren't really

strong fundamentals to it. The actual creators of Dogecoin actually made it as a joke. And famously, it does not have a cap on its monetary supply. It has a very high inflation rate. So a lot of the factors that make people kind of find value in other cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin or like Ether, they're actually not present with Dogecoin. And so in the suit, you see time and time again that the plaintiffs take issue with Elon Musk's tweeting about Dogecoin. And honestly, a lot of it is similar to what the SEC had taken issue with in terms of Elon Musk's tweets.

And he is sort of the king of memes. He's famously somebody who has a very casual presence on Twitter and frankly acts probably more like a troll than like a CEO on Twitter. And so, you know, when you put all that together with his promotion of Dogecoin, then that is essentially what the, plaintiffs are upset about in this lawsuit. I think it's very interesting that you point that out that Elon Musk sometimes acts more like a troll on Twitter than a CEO. I do find some of his tweets amusing, okay? The one where he said he was going to, you know, buy Coke and put the cocaine back in it, you know, the McDonald's tweet. They are amusing, okay? But he is also a very powerful man. And he was trying to buy Twitter at the time. And I get that he was joking. But he,

his words have power. His words, as you said, have the ability to impact markets. So it's almost like the president of the United States. When the president of the United States speaks, people take notice and they listen. So there really has been a lot of concerns about a concern about his tweeting. Yeah. Yeah. And that's what this person, you know, says kind of is behind the lawsuit, essentially that Elon Musk had a certain responsibility, perhaps to be more prudent with his tweets, maybe to not promote Dogecoin so much. Actually, with his personal ledges, frankly, is that Elon Musk was promoting Dogecoin for his own personal gain, financial gain, and that, frankly, people who were in on Dogecoin

early, such as Elon Musk, would benefit from his tweets and, for instance, his appearance on Saturday night live where he also promoted Dogecoin, that moment, frankly, ended up being the high point for the price. And so what you probably had there was that a lot of people who were in Dogecoin early, perhaps Elon Musk being one of them. And frankly, I should say simply actually before his appearance on Saturday Night Live, I don't know how early, frankly, he was in Dogecoin. But at that time, when he was promoting Dogecoin on Saturday Night Live, many of those insiders probably realized, oh, this is the moment when a lot of kind of everyday investors, a lot of mom and pop type of investors, retail investors are going to be buying in a doge coin. So this is my opportunity to sell.

And that's why the price essentially crashed after that. It has never really recovered to the highs that it was at that point. And, you know, one thing I will say, though, is that I'm of two minds when it comes to the lawsuit. On the one hand, certainly Elon Musk, you know, I do think that he was probably very well aware that his tweets about Dogecoin would probably move the markets and probably benefit the Dogecoin price, especially, you know, some of his announcements about how some of his companies were going to be accepting it as payment, et cetera. However, on, you know, on the flip side, if you're the kind of person who chooses to invest in something simply because Elon Musk has tweeted about it or has said positive things about it on Saturday Night Live,

without really understanding the fundamentals, without really understanding that it had this unlimited inflation rate and that it was, in fact, actually a very high inflation rate and things like that, you know, I'm a little bit like, well, you know, you can't, who's really to blame here, you know, you didn't do your own research. So you're kind of like also partly at fault. So I actually feel that the lawsuit kind of goes too far as if expecting that Elon Musk is going to, to act in anybody but his own best interest and to also, yeah, like he's not some educator on Dogecoin, you know, he's frankly, like I said, kind of more like an internet troll than a responsible financial advisor. So in that regard, I'm not sure I would say that this

lawsuit definitely has legs. I think the substance of what this person is saying is all true. And yet at the same time, I'm not sure if I would say necessarily that they should win. Very interesting. Well, this gentleman, Keith Johnson, is seeking $86 billion in damages. And he says that represents a decline in Deutsche coins market value since May of 21. And he wants that amount tripled. So we will keep an eye on this and see how Elon Musk responds to it. He will be required to do so in federal court in the Southern District of New York.

So Laura Shin, thanks so much for coming on today to talk with us. about this lawsuit. Thanks for having me. Michael Avenadi, the former Newport Beach attorney who once represented an adult film star, Stormy Daniels, has just pleaded guilty to several fraud charges in Santa Ana. I don't know about you, but I found this very surprising. Michael Avanotti, for years, denied that he ever stole from clients. Now he's admitting to doing so in California, and it's millions and millions of dollars. Avanotti, as you'll recall, was a fixture on the cable news channels.

I would turn on CNN every night, and he was sitting there with Anderson Cooper. He was on there so much. I thought he'd been made a co-host. Well, you know, if anyone knows a con, I guess it would be Donald Trump based on the last two years. Why is it that you don't call Donald Trump the creepy porn president? He's the one that had sex with a four-month old son at home with my client without a condom. Now, in this California federal case, in which, Michael Avanotti is pleading guilty. He has advisory counsel since he wants to represent himself.

His name is H. Dean Stewart, and he told me in an email, Mr. Avinati entered guilty pleas to fully accept responsibility for his actions, save his former clients from the strain of testifying again, and to start the finish to his legal troubles. And someone who knows a whole lot about Michael Avinati is famed criminal defense attorney, Mark Garrigus. Mark has represented lots of famous people. Everybody knows who Mark is. You know who Mark. is he represented Scott Peterson and Michael Jackson and Michael Avanotti. So Mark, welcome to Law and Crime Sidebar. Thanks for coming on. Full disclosure, Michael was a client of mine on his TV case in Los Angeles, Superior Court, which ended up being rejected by the district

attorney and rejected by the city attorney. So I will not say anything negative given the attorney-client relationship or the erstwhile attorney-client relationship. But I'll tell you. you, one of the interesting things that you just mentioned is he did something that is fairly unique today in the federal district court. You would mention that he pled guilty, but he did not do it, pursue it to a plea agreement. Did you know that? Or I'm sure he knew that he, no, there was no plea agreement. He had filed documents with the court saying that he was willing to plead guilty. So I knew that there wasn't an actual plea agreement with the government, which I found very odd. My theory is that he's getting to see the inside of federal prison and maybe doesn't like it so

much. Well, I have a different theory. Let me tell you what I think is. Yours is probably right. I haven't talked to him, but many people have tried this, and I'll call it a gambit because it is that. It's basically, we call it in the state court pleading open where you can't cut a deal with the prosecutor. So what do you do? At least in the state court, even though, for instance, in California, a prohibition on plea bargaining, you have a sense that whatever bench officer, judge, you're in front of is going to do better than the prosecutor will. The prosecutor is acting in an intransigent manner. Here, if you believe what was filed, both by him and by the government, the government did a filing in response, he tried to work out a plea agreement. He is

what's called pro se. So he's got advisory counsel, but he doesn't have a lawyer who is representing him. Apparently, those talks fell apart. So what he did was he entered a plea to, I believe it was five counts today. There still are a number of counts, numerous counts left. Now the ball, the kind of the ball is in the prosecutor, the AUSA's and the Department of Justice's Court. They have to decide, okay, he pled guilty, he admitted various elements, including, if you read the transcript today, he was specifically asked whether he had a corrupt intent. The reason for that is that's an element of the crime and it will probably supply one of the elements that they need for some of the counts that he didn't plead to. The government has to decide, are we going to go through with a trial here, or are we going to just forget about it? about it and have him sentence on these counts since he already got sentenced in the New York cases, both cases, and that waste everybody's time. That's kind of what he did.

And the reason I call it a gambit, I've known people who've done this, and it doesn't always work out well. In fact, most of the time, it's a disaster. Very interesting. Well, in all of my reading in this case, it sounded like Michael Avanotti wanted to try to take you down with him in some fashion. He kept trying to invoke your name in the Nike case in federal court in documents. Now, I, that's, you know, I understand that. I mean, the, and as I indicated, he's an ex-client. I'm not going to demean him and I get it. I suppose I could pile on,

but that's the last thing I want to do. I always feel like somebody who's been kind of eaten up and chewed up and spit out by the system, has got enough issues. And it is what it is. I mean, it's a sad end. You know, I was thinking about this, not the plea, but there's also another case going on. In fact, it may be going to the jury today in Orange County. I don't know if you follow this, Antoinette. But Brian Panish, who's one of the best plaintiff's lawyers in the country, and Brian is representing the widower of the woman who was killed by Alan Baldwin.

Brian, Brian had a case with Michael well before I ever did. And Brian had worked with Michael for many years or many years ago at a, one of the better law firms in town plaintiff's firms in town. And he was dragged into yet another lawsuit that has gone to trial involving a fee dispute, if you will, in Orange County. And so it's a sad, sad kind of end to what could have been a brilliant, brilliant career. And I think Brian said it best is you don't get to the point where Michael was without being a good lawyer and clearly he was a good lawyer. But, you know, I think to quote Michael at a certain point, he flew close to the son. Brian Pinnish, yes. I know exactly who you're talking about because I've covered the rest case and he had a press conference that was very good. It was very interesting about that case. Right. And he did one of those things that I think all good plaintiff's lawyers do is he had done a recreation, a kind of an AI, I think it was an AI version of a image reconstruction of the shooting and how it happened. And it was pretty devastating. And it also in the court of public opinion, I think, really turned things in an effective way.

Brian, at least if you've been following the legal ins and outs, and I realize that this is kind of getting into the minutia, was not happy about having to testify this week down in Orange County, but did it. And, you know, like all of us, who it's a small legal community, and it was, this was in any way you look at it, a tragedy for his ex-clients, a tragedy for him and his family. there's no real winners. No, not at all. But I do think it is a stunning fall from grace, even though Michael Avanotti, you said he's a former client and you won't speak in any ill way about him. You heard the expression, I don't speak ill of the dead,

I don't speak ill under the California business or do you mean your ex-clay. But it is a stunning, I'll say it. It's a stunning fall from grace. This is a guy that people were saying could run for president. A lot of the media loved him because he hated Trump and he was willing to take Trump on and speak loudly at him in almost Trump-esque fashion. So I do think it's a really sad thing because this is somebody who obviously, as you said, flew too closely to the sun and was in dire need of money.

Somebody who wrote a book, and I don't want to misquote who it was, but had done a book and described Trump's reaction, if you believe, that. God only knows how they were in the room. But Trump apparently was mightily impressed, even as Havanaugh was taking him on and wanted somebody of that kind of ilk. And Michael, for whatever you say about him, was photogenic and kind of went where a lot of people wouldn't go. And did he cross a line? And has he crossed the line? It's obvious given today in his admissions that that's no longer an issue. I'll be interested to see what comes for him down the road and what happens with him.

And when he one day gets out of prison, what his life is like. And if he's learned any lessons from this, Mark Garrigus, thank you so much for coming on to talk with us about this. We always appreciate your insight and your time. Thank you. With any luck, we'll see you in California very soon if you can prevail upon a Superior Court judge to do debt redux. I sure hope so. There are times when I come across stories that really rock my faith and humanity, and the story of Marcus Faisal is one of those. He was a little boy who was reported missing by his foster parents back in 2006, and it later came to light that he had been killed by them, by his foster parents, and a woman who was having threesomes with them, and then they burned his body.

and now his foster father is up for parole. Joining me to talk about this is the prosecutor in Hamilton County, Ohio, which is Cincinnati, Ohio. Joe Dieter's. Joe, welcome to Sidebar. Thanks for coming on. Tell us about Marcus Faisal. If you were in Cincinnati at the time, it was a gut-wrenching, riveting story when we didn't know what happened to Marcus because the foster parents, Liz and David Carroll had faked an abduction in a little park in Hamilton County called Julef's Park.

They lived in Claremont County, which is just the east of Hamilton County, but they drove a short distance into Hamilton County and faked a disappearance. They were going to, we learned later they were thinking about doing it at a Bengals game, a Kings Island, but there are too many cameras around, so they chose not to. They decided to use the Julius Park. But basically what happened in August of 2006, they were going on a fan. They had, Marcus was a foster child. They got, he was, he had some disabilities, mental disabilities, probably autistic.

And they got $33.5 a day more to handle Marcus as a foster child because of his, his mental disability. Still, with a mental disability, he was a very cute little boy. You know, he's struggling to get through. He's little. They went on a family reunion in early August. They decided, as believe or not, they had in the past done this with Mark, as we've learned later, they took him, wrapped him in a blanket like a cocoon, rolled him up, and then he's packing tape and wrapped the blanket so he couldn't get out and put him in a playpen in a closet,

which our coroner told us probably got to around 150 degrees. And when they came back about 30 hours later, Marcus was dead. So then they faked his disappearance. And the eastern side of Hamilton County in particular, there was a huge outpouring of support trying to find Marcus, thinking he may have wandered into a wood. woods or anything like that. And this went on for basically two weeks. Finally, we, the detectives, the sheriff's office called, said they had reached a total dead end on it. We knew about Amy Baker. She was the living girlfriend. And we decided on a strategy to bring Amy Baker and Liz Carroll,

serve them with forthwith subpoenas on a Monday morning, throw them in a police car, bring him to the prosecutor's office. and Amy Baker was given a public defender, and I, along with Mark Pete Meyer, who runs my criminal division, and Woody Breyer, and her defense attorney sat in a small conference room in my office, and she started telling the same bull crap story that she's been telling with the carols, that he just disappeared while there. She was, the mom, Liz, was at a, at the park. And I just told her bluntly, I said, ma'am, you don't know me, but I'm telling you right now, you're going to go in front of this grand jury. And if you lie, you're going to prison. I can promise you that.

So the defense attorney asked for some time. They, we said, sure, we left. The prosecutors left. And, um, and her lawyer was in there with her for over an hour, probably an hour and a half and came out. And he was, he was totally ashen face. he was just in shock because he had learned what happened to this kid. He said, I'll tell you exactly what, she'll tell you what happened,

but, you know, I need to protect her. I'm a lawyer. I said, and I told him, Amy Baker does not have a duty of care to Marcus Feisle. Should she have intervened? Hell yes, she should have, morally, but ethically, she should have done it. Legally, she had no requirement to do that. So it would be like if you go in a Kroger store, and you see some woman beating a hell out of her kid.

And should you intervene? Yeah, probably. But if you don't intervene, is that a, you're already breaking the law? No, you're not. So the duty of care to Marcus was with Liz and David Carroll. And they're the ones that wrapped him. They're the ones that put him in the closet. Anyway, she told us what happened.

We put her in front of a grand jury. She told the grand jury what happened. Everyone was, like, horrified. And then we brought Liz. Carolyn cold in front of the grand jury, and she started telling the same nonsensical story about Julius Park. Mark, Pete Meyer, I was in the grand jury with him. Mark asked her, well, what about the family reunion? What'd you do with Marcus then? And you could just see in her face, I mean, she knew it was over, that we knew. And she told us the whole story. Liz did. We arrested both

of them. We decided Don White was a prosecutor in Claremont County. Mark took Calvia is now, but we decided to try the case in Claremont County. That's where the kid was actually killed. We decided Claremont County would be a lot cleaner. So how, Joe, how is David Carroll already up for parole? Okay. What happened was, yeah, that's a good question. What happened was they're being tried separately in Claremont County. And I remember the discussions very clearly, Mark, Pete Meyer, and Woody Breyer, who was the first assistant in Claremont County, came to both me and Don White and said, look, they're charged of the murder. If they plead guilty to the murder, it's 15 to life.

The accompanying charges like false alarm and all that stuff would be dismissed, but they would plead guilty to murder and get 15 to life. So Liz's trial was first. I'm sure David Carroll talked to her into going to trial. She went to a jury. She was found guilty within like four hours. Jury deliberate. I probably took him longer to pick a foreman.

They came back, guilty is charged on the murder, as is usually happens when you show no remorse and you force a case to trial, a jury trial in particular, you're going to get jammed up by this judge. I mean, that just happens. And she got 51, I think, 51 to life. when she was found guilty of all these charges, and she was sentenced and was sent away. The next week or so was David Carroll's trial, and he saw, obviously, what happened to Liz Carroll, and he decided, you know what, 15 to life doesn't sound so bad. So he took the 15 to life.

So Liz is in jail for a long time. David got 15 to life, and we're at that point now where we're, We have to argue that he should stay in jail for the rest of his life. And that's what we ask the public, because the parole board doesn't listen to me. They don't listen to Mark DeKalvey from Claremont County. They listen to the public. And we ask the public to get a hold of the parole board and say, this guy should never get out. What he did did at this little boy is unconscionable.

And, you know, I said this in the press conference, and Jeanette. I hope he's a great prisoner. He's a model prisoner. He's saved. He preaches. I don't care what he does. He should never get out of jail for what he did to Marcus. How do people reach out to the parole board? They can go to our website, Hamlin County Prosecutor's Office, and we have an area on the website called Parole Watch. And David Carroll's, I think, the first case. And you can click on that, and you can express your concerns or discuss that he could potentially get out. And all of those will be forwarded at the parole board. And we'll be at the parole board.

And we'll be at the parole hearing, I'm sure. Well, Hamilton County, prosecutor Joe Deeters, thank so much for being on with us today to talk about this awful, awful, sad case. Okay, Ingenet, anytime. And that's it. For this edition of Law and Crime Sidebar podcast, we will see you next time. Sidebar is produced by Sam Goldberg and Sean Bauer. Bobby Zoki is our YouTube manager, and Alyssa Fisher is our booking producer.

I'm Ann Jeanette Levy, and we'll see you next time. You can binge all episodes of this law and crime series ad free right now on Wondery Plus. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.