Trials and Tribulations of Juicy and Tre...

[LotusFlower]

I think it is kind of a waste of time.  In order for the judge to rule on the letters the judge has to read them.  I know she has the amazing judicial mind that simply erases everything deemed inadmissible-by her, in this case.  This judge has had a pre-sentencing report since at the very latest June.  Since that time there have been probably many additions but I would think she has a pretty good picture of who the Giudices are and what sentence is appropriate.

No, I don't think so. The very point of the hearing is to determine whether the letters should be considered. The Gov. will likely argue relevancy and victims' rights, and the defense will likely argue irrelevancy and bias. The judge will then only read the letters if she denies the motion and rules in favor of the Gov.

[merylinkid]

Of course Theresa is going to show remorse when she gets our prison.   I said show, not actually feel.   That way she can go on the redemption tour.   Because America loves someone who admits their mistakes, says they are really really sorry and makes millions going around saying they are sorry.   I would bet on Oprah doing one of her series on how Theresa came out of prison stronger and a better person and shows her rebuilding her life afterwards.   She did it for Lindsay Lohan why not these scumballs who give hard working Italian-Americans who do not commit fraud a bad name.

[Rahul]

 I would bet on Oprah doing one of her series on how Theresa came out of prison stronger and a better person and shows her rebuilding her life afterwards.   She did it for Lindsay Lohan why not these scumballs who give hard working Italian-Americans who do not commit fraud a bad name.

 

I don't see that happening at all. Lindsay was universally panned by critics and did nothing to rehabilitate Lohan's image. The show had incredibly low viewership, even by OWN network standards. Moreover Oprah was severely mocked for the production and even vowed never to take such a risk again. Oprah may have taken a chance on a former Hollywood B-lister, but she sure as hell won't be investing Harpo funds to give Guilty Guidice the same treatment. I think she's learned her lesson. 

[LotusFlower]

Of course Theresa is going to show remorse when she gets our prison.   I said show, not actually feel.   That way she can go on the redemption tour.   Because America loves someone who admits their mistakes, says they are really really sorry and makes millions going around saying they are sorry.   I would bet on Oprah doing one of her series on how Theresa came out of prison stronger and a better person and shows her rebuilding her life afterwards.   She did it for Lindsay Lohan why not these scumballs who give hard working Italian-Americans who do not commit fraud a bad name.

Not at all the same. Lindsay Lohan was (is) a drug addict, Teresa is a criminal, convicted on massive tax fraud. Not only is it not her m.o. to acknowledge her crimes, but she's not smart enough to know how to talk about it. And she's just a reality star - who definitely has fans (and has lost many more), but it was all based on fraud. She's won't be bankable or compelling at all, let alone popular. Lastly, Lindsay snowed Oprah, and got a free apt. and lots of money for a "journey of redemption" that never happened. Plus, the show tanked. Oprah would never make that mistake again, let alone on someone with Teresa's story. She ain't all that.

[zoeysmom]

No, I don't think so. The very point of the hearing is to determine whether the letters should be considered. The Gov. will likely argue relevancy and victims' rights, and the defense will likely argue irrelevancy and bias. The judge will then only read the letters if she denies the motion and rules in favor of the Gov.

The letters are part of the motion.  The Court can't make a ruling on relevancy if the don't know what the letters say.  Although I was trying to be funny -the judge is expected to forget about them if she deems them irrelevant or contrary to law.   

[zoeysmom]

Not at all the same. Lindsay Lohan was (is) a drug addict, Teresa is a criminal, convicted on massive tax fraud. Not only is it not her m.o. to acknowledge her crimes, but she's not smart enough to know how to talk about it. And she's just a reality star - who definitely has fans (and has lost many more), but it was all based on fraud. She's won't be bankable or compelling at all, let alone popular. Lastly, Lindsay snowed Oprah, and got a free apt. and lots of money for a "journey of redemption" that never happened. Plus, the show tanked. Oprah would never make that mistake again, let alone on someone with Teresa's story. She ain't all that.

I agree-not redemption road for Teresa and certainly not one Oprah would want.  What is her redemption-she learns to live within her means and her means are generated by televising her post conviction behavior?  Let's face Teresa has zero discernible talent. 

[LotusFlower]

The letters are part of the motion.  The Court can't make a ruling on relevancy if the don't know what the letters say.  Although I was trying to be funny -the judge is expected to forget about them if she deems them irrelevant or contrary to law.

These letters aren't like evidence in a criminal jury trial, where the judge has to see the evidence to rule whether it's admissible. In this scenerio, the jury is making the decision, so there's no bias involved by the judge seeing the evidence. You've probably heard of cases where one side presents evidence or asks questions that were ruled inadmissible, and sometimes a mistrial is declared for this very mistake. The jury can't "unhear" what they heard or saw. In other words, you can't unring the bell. In this case, since the judge is making the sentencing decisions, she can't read the letters and then forget about them if she decides they're not relevant! But it really doesn't matter, since the motion doesn't involve the contents of the letters, but rather the relevancy to sentencing. Take what will likely be the prosecution's stance - that the judge should take into consideration the plight or hardships of the many people who were defrauded by Joe and Teresa before deciding their fate. The judge doesn't have to read the letters to understand the prosecution's point. Nor is she allowed to, before she renders her decision on this motion.

If this delays the sentencing, I'm going to hurt someone!!!

[Lablover27]

I think that is ridiculous. The judge should decide the sentence on what she is charged with and pled guilty to not what some reality star audience thinks........ period. What a circus. Is this even for real?

Yup, I'm guessing my letter bitching about them not filing tax returns won't matter.  I know that.  Lablover's letter says "It pisses me off they didn't pay their taxes!!!!  Lock em up!"  I'm so certain it would be a 3 point dunker into the trash basket.  But a girl can dream...for a penalty ;)

Edited September 28, 2014 by Lablover27

[Emme]

She's not really pregnant - is she? If so, what a stroke of good luck on her part. I thought she and juicy had fertility issues after Gabriella... Or was that just consulting to help make a baby boy?

Last weekend before sentencing. I wonder how they're spending it. I'm snuggled in bed with my youngest right now... He on his 3DS, me wasting time on my iPad. Some fresh cinnamon rolls on a tray between us. Other kids still asleep. Very peaceful. I cannot even imagine being in the position of it all going away.

[zoeysmom]

These letters aren't like evidence in a criminal jury trial, where the judge has to see the evidence to rule whether it's admissible. In this scenerio, the jury is making the decision, so there's no bias involved by the judge seeing the evidence. You've probably heard of cases where one side presents evidence or asks questions that were ruled inadmissible, and sometimes a mistrial is declared for this very mistake. The jury can't "unhear" what they heard or saw. In other words, you can't unring the bell. In this case, since the judge is making the sentencing decisions, she can't read the letters and then forget about them if she decides they're not relevant! But it really doesn't matter, since the motion doesn't involve the contents of the letters, but rather the relevancy to sentencing. Take what will likely be the prosecution's stance - that the judge should take into consideration the plight or hardships of the many people who were defrauded by Joe and Teresa before deciding their fate. The judge doesn't have to read the letters to understand the prosecution's point. Nor is she allowed to, before she renders her decision on this motion.

If this delays the sentencing, I'm going to hurt someone!!!

I know you don't believe me so I thought I would give you the relevant statute regarding sentencing:  http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_32

 

Sentencing is governed by Rule 32 of Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

 

Most relevant are Rule 32  section  (g) (h) (i) B and D.   (when this status conference was held the parties were at the 32(g) part of the process).

 

So the part that makes me nervous is it appears we are headed into Rule 32 (h) territory-departure from guidelines.  Departure usually involves a lesser sentence such as probation.  Only because the Giudices lack significant criminal records do I believe it is not an upward departure from the federal sentencing guidelines.

 

Rule 32 i(3)(B) is maybe the most relevant. It deals with what the Court must do with disputed portions of the pre-sentence report.  In this case it would be the letters from the concerned citizens.

 

BTW to anyone reading it-in camera means in the judge's chambers outside the presence of either the jury or public.  It is akin to when you see on TV, "your honor may we approach?"

 

My fear is that defendants have not waived time and will request another continuance.  The magic number seems to be 10 days.  So on Monday we may very well hear the matter has been continued to October 9th.

[becauseIsaidso]

Attempting to get pregnant in order to avoid answering for her crimes is exactly what I have come to expect from this pig. She seems to diligently dig for ANY angle to prevent justice from being served and, even worse, she has had absolutely no problems with flaunting her raunchy, gutter-level sexuality for all the viewing public to see. Plus, it now seems she sees nothing wrong in pimping out any and/or all of her four 'beautiful' daughters. After a few episodes of season one, I tuned out (don-Caro was too much, Dina was a very uninteresting bitch-diva and Teresa was pretty much a non-entity - until the table flip, but I have NO idea if that was season one or two. I came back in Gorga season one or two at the suggestion of a board-mate, but I have been SO VERY turned off by the knuckle dragging neanderthal behavior of both JoGo and Juicy that I find it rather off-putting to even consider tuning in.) At this point, my only interest in following this show - not so much the watching, but definitely these boards-  has been in hopes of seeing both her and her felonious spouse having to answer for all the fraud and deceit they have perpetrated. I only wish those who have suffered financially could be assured of recovering the hard earned dollars the jooooooooodeeeeeeechays have cheated them out of.

Edited September 28, 2014 by becauseIsaidso

[LotusFlower]

I know you don't believe me so I thought I would give you the relevant statute regarding sentencing:  http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_32

 

Sentencing is governed by Rule 32 of Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

 

Most relevant are Rule 32  section  (g) (h) (i) B and D.   (when this status conference was held the parties were at the 32(g) part of the process).

 

So the part that makes me nervous is it appears we are headed into Rule 32 (h) territory-departure from guidelines.  Departure usually involves a lesser sentence such as probation.  Only because the Giudices lack significant criminal records do I believe it is not an upward departure from the federal sentencing guidelines.

 

Rule 32 i(3)(B) is maybe the most relevant. It deals with what the Court must do with disputed portions of the pre-sentence report.  In this case it would be the letters from the concerned citizens.

 

BTW to anyone reading it-in camera means in the judge's chambers outside the presence of either the jury or public.  It is akin to when you see on TV, "your honor may we approach?"

 

My fear is that defendants have not waived time and will request another continuance.  The magic number seems to be 10 days.  So on Monday we may very well hear the matter has been continued to October 9th.

You're either doing incredibly detailed research, or driving yourself crazy! (I DO appreciate the former, btw!). This doesn't pertain to whether the judge reads the letters, does it? If it's about your fear of yet another continuance, I'm with you, but at this point, I think everyone wants to get this done. Even Teresa and Joe. Let's hope the judge expedites things this week.

[zoeysmom]

You're either doing incredibly detailed research, or driving yourself crazy! (I DO appreciate the former, btw!). This doesn't pertain to whether the judge reads the letters, does it? If it's about your fear of yet another continuance, I'm with you, but at this point, I think everyone wants to get this done. Even Teresa and Joe. Let's hope the judge expedites things this week.

Lotus -I don't need to do any extensive research I have lived around it for a very long time.  I just think you are not really paying attention to the wording or that you may not be familiar with the legalese. 

 

This what transpired on September 24, 2014:

 

Telephonic Status Conference:

 

"Govts, opposition to the defts, sentencing memos, is due on 9-29-14.  Hearing on the defts, application requesting that the court not consider sentencing letters submitted by concerned citizens to the court. "Decision reserved."

 

Court=judge, submitted = read by the court (judge).

The court can't rule on the admissibility if it does not see and weigh the evidence.  The term letters from concerned citizen means nothing. 

 

Here is the applicable portion of Rule 32 FCP: 

 3.  Court determinations.  At sentencing the court:

 (B) Must for any disputed portion of the pre-sentence report or other controverted matter-rule on the dispute or determination that a ruling is unnecessary either because the matter will not affect sentencing or because the court will not consider the matter in sentencing.

 

 What my questions why are they still fiddling around with the pre-sentence report?  There is a 10 day rule but it can be waived by the parties.  Is the court taking a departure from sentencing guidelines and given the appropriate notice on Monday and giving the reason for the departure (which I believe the departure would favor Teresa.)  And just how many more continuances can the they get?  This is not really a huge crime in the deferral scheme of the things.

 

That particular Rule 32 is pretty much everything that happens to a defendant prior to sentencing.

[LotusFlower]

Telephonic Status Conference:

 

"Govts, opposition to the defts, sentencing memos, is due on 9-29-14.  Hearing on the defts, application requesting that the court not consider sentencing letters submitted by concerned citizens to the court. "Decision reserved."

 

Court=judge, submitted = read by the court (judge).

The court can't rule on the admissibility if it does not see and weigh the evidence.  The term letters from concerned citizen means nothing..

"Submitted" doesn't mean read by the court, unless it's a legal term that you say I'm not familiar with. I don't agree with your interpretation, but if I'm wrong, I'm wrong. Truth be told, we might not even find out after tomorrow's hearing, but I guess we'll see. It feels like the rest of your posts (and link) are about the pre-sentencing report and the possibility of another delay. I think we're all in agreement that we want this over and done with.

Btw, are you a lawyer? I meant it when I said I appreciated the links. I don't know where you're getting this stuff! But a lawyer chiming in on these issues changes the discussion.

[Lablover27]

So, I'm just hoping that on Thursday the "mullet" comes down and it's done.  Rino - "Mullet, gavel, same thing." 

 

I just wish this was in front of Judge Judy ~ "Are you a moron?  I don't have time for this.  You think you two can scam me too?  Ain't happening. Judgment for the government and all those people YOU SCAMMED!   Good bye!"

Edited September 29, 2014 by Lablover27

[zoeysmom]

"Submitted" doesn't mean read by the court, unless it's a legal term that you say I'm not familiar with. I don't agree with your interpretation, but if I'm wrong, I'm wrong. Truth be told, we might not even find out after tomorrow's hearing, but I guess we'll see. It feels like the rest of your posts (and link) are about the pre-sentencing report and the possibility of another delay. I think we're all in agreement that we want this over and done with.

Btw, are you a lawyer? I meant it when I said I appreciated the links. I don't know where you're getting this stuff! But a lawyer chiming in on these issues changes the discussion.

Submitted in legalese means it is given to the court for review (reading) and consideration. I guess that is where the grey area was-I am use to the terms and what they mean.    Submitted doesn't mean admitted though-so the court could read them and grant the defendant's application that they not be considered at sentencing.

[One Tough Cookie]

just wish this was in front of Judge Judy ~ "Are you a moron?  I don't have time for this.  You think you two can scam me too?  Ain't happening. Judgment for the government and all those people YOU SCAMMED!   Good bye!"

 

 

And the  grace:  "Get them outta here, Byrd".

Edited September 29, 2014 by One More Time

[sunflowers83823]

It was great to finally hear someone on RHONJ say that if you do bad things you are going to get caught. Kathy's mom is hands down the most intelligent person on the show. She did not mince her words and try to make it sound nice. She simply said that there are consequences for bad behavior. In stark contrast, the late Mr. Guidice said sometimes you make mistakes, but you try to fix them. This is not an accidental situation, these people purposefully committed fraud. They did this of their own free will. It's not like it's a tragic illness or accident...they broke the law! So as Jim Carey would say...STOP BREAKING THE LAW ASSHOLE!

Edited for spelling...apparently I have not had enough coffee this morning.

Edited September 29, 2014 by sunflowers83823

[zoeysmom]

It was great to finally hear someone on RHONJ say that if you do bad things you are going to get caught. Kathy's mom is hands down the most intelligent person on the show. She did not mince her words and try to make it sound nice. She simply said that there are consequences for bad behavior. In stark contrast, the late Mr. Guidice said sometimes you make mistakes, but you try to fix them. This is not an accidental situation, these people purposefully committed fraud. They did this of their own free will. It's not like it's a tragic illness or accident...they broke the law! So as Jim Carey would say...STOP BREAKING THE LAW ASSHOLE!

Edited for spelling...apparently I have not had enough coffee this morning.

It was strange how Bravo demoted Jac and Kathy only to have to bring them back on to state the obvious about the convicted felons.  I too am sick and tired of the walking on eggshells around the criminal element known as the Giudices-a group of people cannot even agree on the correct pronunciation of their last name.

 

I agree it isn't as if Teresa accidently put the car in reverse and back over a litter of puppies.

[Higgins]

Teresa is too dumb to realize that now that she has pled guilty, she would make a much more interesting character if she would accept some blame and explain what she did. She is boring as shit now. I'm tired of the "so strong" narrative. I'm interested in how people like this think they will continue to get away with it. That is fascinating to me. Even if you have NO morals, you would think, I'm going to get busted and go to jail, right? I know I would....why didn't they?

Edited September 29, 2014 by Higgins

[Emme]

Her lack of culpability is stunning. It reminds me of my daughter, aged 3, cutting her hair. The evidence was there - jagged hairline, scissors and wisps of hair in her bathroom... But she maintained over and over that it had "happened to her" and how sad she was that she was going to have to deal with her awful-looking hair. To this day I haven't gotten a confession from her (she's in high school now), and it remains one of our favorite family stories!

[jaync]

 

 I can't imagine a judge is going to jail a pregnant mother with 4 other young children.

Judges have, and do. If being pregnant/having kids was a "get out of jail free" card, then the female prison population would be cut in half. (Though, I'm sure Teresa would see herself as a special flower who's the exception.)

Edited September 29, 2014 by jaync

[Rhetorica]

Here's a good article from nj.com. it has a clear timeline of events.

http://www.nj.com/entertainment/celebrities/index.ssf/2014/09/real_housewives_of_new_jersey_joe_and_teresa_giudice_timeline_federal_fraud_sentencing.html

[zoeysmom]

Here's a good article from nj.com. it has a clear timeline of events.

http://www.nj.com/entertainment/celebrities/index.ssf/2014/09/real_housewives_of_new_jersey_joe_and_teresa_giudice_timeline_federal_fraud_sentencing.html

I was left with who and how did they get a $500,000.00 loan way back in 2001

 

 

Her lack of culpability is stunning. It reminds me of my daughter, aged 3, cutting her hair. The evidence was there - jagged hairline, scissors and wisps of hair in her bathroom... But she maintained over and over that it had "happened to her" and how sad she was that she was going to have to deal with her awful-looking hair. To this day I haven't gotten a confession from her (she's in high school now), and it remains one of our favorite family stories!

 

  I think that was the beginning of their trip down fraud lane.  I thought Vicki did an excellent job of setting up this weeks sentencing.

 

 

 

Her lack of culpability is stunning. It reminds me of my daughter, aged 3, cutting her hair. The evidence was there - jagged hairline, scissors and wisps of hair in her bathroom... But she maintained over and over that it had "happened to her" and how sad she was that she was going to have to deal with her awful-looking hair. To this day I haven't gotten a confession from her (she's in high school now), and it remains one of our favorite family stories!

Maybe your daughter will tell you it was a series of mistakes.  It is a cute story.

[merylinkid]

That's the thing about people who commit crimes -- no they really don't think they would get caught.   Otherwise, they wouldn't commit the crimes.   They honestly believe that they will never be caught for robbing a bank, stealing checks out of mailboxes, shoplifting -- or committing millions of dollars in fraud.   It really is surprise to them when they get caught.   

[shoegal]

It was strange how Bravo demoted Jac and Kathy only to have to bring them back on to state the obvious about the convicted felons.  I too am sick and tired of the walking on eggshells around the criminal element known as the Giudices-a group of people cannot even agree on the correct pronunciation of their last name.

 

I agree it isn't as if Teresa accidently put the car in reverse and back over a litter of puppies.

 

 

What.  The.  Hell.  Jew-dice?  Jew-dee-chay?  Jew-da-chay?  Why the hell can't these people decide how to pronounce their own damn name??  It's like they were debating it or something. 

Edited September 29, 2014 by shoegal

[shoegal]

I was bored this weekend and watched an old episode of RHONJ that I had on DVR, it was the episode immediately following the "ambush" with Teresa, Jacqueline and Caroline.  Teresa kept going on and on about how Jacqueline wanted her to admit she was "going to jail".  Every time Teresa said "jail", I corrected her with "not jail, prison!  You are going to prison!".  It made me laugh. 

Fingers crossed that the judge doesn't make me a liar!!  Come on, Thursday!!

Edited September 29, 2014 by shoegal

[Jennifersdc]

I know people with the same last name (LI) and it was pronounced Jew-da-jay. Meant chay not jay.

Edited September 30, 2014 by Jennifersdc

[Lablover27]

Here's a good article from nj.com. it has a clear timeline of events.

http://www.nj.com/entertainment/celebrities/index.ssf/2014/09/real_housewives_of_new_jersey_joe_and_teresa_giudice_timeline_federal_fraud_sentencing.html

 

Fantastic link! 

 

Copied and saved.

[motorcitymom65]

I know people with the same last name (LI) and it was pronounced Jew-da-jay.

The fact that 3 years later they still cannot decide how their name is pronounced is hysterical. I always thought it would have been funny for Bravo to show us them sitting their girls down and explaining that the way they always been taught to say their names would change. Or better letting us see Gia trying to explain this to her teachers and friends at school.

[motorcitymom65]

Judges have, and do. If being pregnant/having kids was a "get out of jail free" card, then the female prison population would be cut in half. (Though, I'm sure Teresa would see herself as a special flower who's the exception.)

Mary Kay Letourneau was sentenced to prison while pregnant and gave birth while incarcerated.

[Lablover27]

The fact that 3 years later they still cannot decide how their name is pronounced is hysterical. I always thought it would have been funny for Bravo to show us them sitting their girls down and explaining that the way they always been taught to say their names would change. Or better letting us see Gia trying to explain this to her teachers and friends at school.

 

I would love to watch them explain why daddy and mommy are going to "college". 

 

And the girls ask "Why?"  "What did  you do?"  "Why did you do that?"  "Why did you do that you old troll?"  "Who do we get to vacation with while you are at 'college'?"  "So, when I go to college you can visit me and bring me Top Ramen?"  "Do all college kids wear stripes?"  "I don't want to go to college." 

 

Sorry...just having fun being snarky.  Because I can.  I'm not going to jail.   

[motorcitymom65]

Is it safe to assume sentencing won't be delayed again since we are already at Tuesday? 

[SFoster21]

Is it safe to assume sentencing won't be delayed again since we are already at Tuesday?

No.

[zoeysmom]

Is it safe to assume sentencing won't be delayed again since we are already at Tuesday? 

Government submitted objections to defense trial sentencing memo yesterday-so if the defense asked for more time to respond it could be delayed another 10 days. 

[TheFinalRose]

According to Radar Online Teresa and Joe had a going away party Saturday night.

 

 

http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2014/09/teresa-giudice-joe-giudice-throw-stays-strong-party-rhonj/

 

Maybe they want it over with and don't plan to ask for any delays.  

[Higgins]

I wonder who paid for that.

Edited September 30, 2014 by Higgins

[Emme]

So odd. On the one hand, I can see getting the whole family together before "college" starts. But to do it at a nightclub? It just seems so stupid and cavalier. I wonder, in general, how far in advance the judge makes up her mind regarding sentencing. Obviously she's had the documentation for quite some time. If it were me, I would be treading lightly, portraying myself in the most pious and humble way possible.

[jinjer]

Joe's going away party, right?  Because doesn't Teresa have a gig booked for next week, or is she just anticipating another delay?

[zoeysmom]

Joe's going away party, right?  Because doesn't Teresa have a gig booked for next week, or is she just anticipating another delay?

From date of sentencing you have 45 days to report to prison.  So she might be trying to make a little extra $$$$$.  I think her Gelato Bars are released this week or next week as well.

[chlban]

According to Radar Online Teresa and Joe had a going away party Saturday night.

 

 

http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2014/09/teresa-giudice-joe-giudice-throw-stays-strong-party-rhonj/

 

Maybe they want it over with and don't plan to ask for any delays.  

WTF? These people are just too screwed up for words. Yes, I can certainly see wanting to get together with family, but a freakin' party? Really?

I bet Teresa had her make up artist and hairdresser come out and get her ready. I pray to got the Judge taking all this in. These two losers deserve th have the book thrown at them. 

[Lablover27]

Can you imagine how much drinking Joe is doing now?  I know I would ~ in private.  Not at some night club.  They owe millions and they are partying in a night club before their sentencing.  Even I am shocked.  You would think they would have their last shing dig in that house they about to lose.  IMO

[fliptopbox]

I don't really understand why a pregnant woman would want to party at a nightclub. Unless that's just a rumor to garner sympathy for sentencing. I have a feeling we could be hearing about an unfortunate miscarriage due to extreme stress.. Or some other bullshit.

 

Just a theory.

[LotusFlower]

Where's the sentencing clock countdown?

We're getting close!

[zoeysmom]

Where's the sentencing clock countdown?

We're getting close!

Just for you Lotus Flower-the official countdown clock:  http://allaboutthetea.com/2014/09/30/watch-amy-phillips-impersonate-teresa-nicole/

[zoeysmom]

Looks like probation is in the air for Teresa around the courthouse.  http://www.northjersey.com/news/sentencing-set-for-n-j-real-housewives-teresa-and-joe-giudice-1.1099474

[bosawks]

I would love to watch them explain why daddy and mommy are going to "college".

And the girls ask "Why?" "What did you do?" "Why did you do that?" "Why did you do that you old troll?" "Who do we get to vacation with while you are at 'college'?" "So, when I go to college you can visit me and bring me Top Ramen?" "Do all college kids wear stripes?" "I don't want to go to college."

Sorry...just having fun being snarky. Because I can. I'm not going to jail.

I think even Tre's theoretical inutero child isn't dumb enough to believe those two knuckleheads are going to college.

Maybe traffic school.

[LotusFlower]

Just for you Lotus Flower-the official countdown clock:  http://allaboutthetea.com/2014/09/30/watch-amy-phillips-impersonate-teresa-nicole/

 

Thanks. I love Amy Phillips, but I think that was the wrong link! (Don't worry about it - we're close enough to the date that we can do our own math now).

 

Looks like probation is in the air for Teresa around the courthouse.  http://www.northjersey.com/news/sentencing-set-for-n-j-real-housewives-teresa-and-joe-giudice-1.1099474

My prediction stands - prison time for both of them. Those quotes were from Joe and Teresa's lawyers spinning the charges for sympathy, and from defense attys who didn't appear to read the indictments or plea agreements.

[AndreaK1041]

Looks like probation is in the air for Teresa around the courthouse. http://www.northjersey.com/news/sentencing-set-for-n-j-real-housewives-teresa-and-joe-giudice-1.1099474

Someone needs to tell the author of that story that "hid" is the word they are looking for. Hided. What a moron.

[Muffyn]

Someone needs to tell the author of that story that "hid" is the word they are looking for. Hided. What a moron.

Are you sure Teresa didn't write this?  She is a master of the English language.  Perhaps she texesed it to the publisher.  

 

The best way for Teresa to stay out of prison - take an IQ test.  They could argue she's not mentally competent.  Of course, she'll need someone to handle all of her affairs from now on, but wouldn't that be for the best?  That is, as long as that someone is Joe.  

Edited October 1, 2014 by Muffyn