Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
Stinger97

Trials and Tribulations of Juicy and Tre...

Recommended Posts

Don't you think though that Teresa knew waayyy more than she's letting on to? I agree that she's too dim to have cooked this scheme up by herself (frankly, I'm surprised either one of them were smart enough to get away with it for so long or even come up with any of it by themselves) but her little act of putting it out there that this was all Joe's idea and she was dragged into it as the dutiful wife who can't/won't go against her husband's wishes is one I'm not buying. I think she knew about every ill gotten, illegal penny and where it came from. Joe pleaded to more counts but IMO she's just as guilty and should do equal time. I don't know all the technical details of their plea but I'd bet whatever Joe pleaded to Teresa could have/should have pleaded to also. I think they worked it out so Tre would get less time or probabtion.

 

 

The federal charges against Joe and Teresa are very clear-cut. The indictment is a short, breezy 33 pages, and is basically an itemized list of incontrovertible violations of United States law. The evidence of Joe and Teresa's mortgage (and interstate mail and wire) fraud and hiding or misrepresenting assets and future assets (and therefore perjuring themselves) is factual and speaks for itself. Teresa doesn't have much room to exonerate herself. Whether or not she "cooked up the scheme by herself", she signed off on fraud and actively committed perjury. Although her degree of responsibility for devising the plan may affect her sentencing, Teresa is equally responsible under the law for her actions.

 

The fact that the charges are so clear-cut makes it even harder to fathom why or how she's repeatedly proclaimed her innocence or ignorance. I ultimately think it's because Teresa, in a childish and naive way, believes that she and Joe are good people who didn't hurt anyone and they should not go to prison. She probably half views her crimes as victimless (although there are real, human victims of mortgage fraud, namely honest people who can't get loans because of people like Tre and her husband), and half believes her husband's palliative explanations of what she did. Teresa believes that, because she and Joe didn't (in her mind) have ill intentions - and, of course, aren't the sort of people who go to prison - that she can't and won't go to prison. Remember, she's protected by a higher power (eyeroll.)

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

Don't you think though that Teresa knew waayyy more than she's letting on to?......... I think she knew about every ill gotten, illegal penny and where it came from. Joe pleaded to more counts but IMO she's just as guilty and should do equal time.

Yes, I think Teresa knows way more than she's letting on. Actually, that's an understatement. But knowing about a crime and committing a crime are two different things. Joe is guilty of his crimes, Teresa is guilty of hers. And luckily, the prosecutors got enough hard evidence on both of them, so no one's skating. I don't think we'll ever know whether or not Joe did things behind Teresa's back, or with her complicity and/or encouragement. But the same is true if you switch it around. I'm just glad they both got caught and they both pled guilty. Now I'm hoping they both do time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I'm also obviously tired of Teresa portraying herself as a "victim" (still watching). Can't convince me she didn't know what was going on (see indictment and subsequent filings). Though I don't really see Bravo (or production company?) portraying her that way either. Loved the view of the 500+ sf master bedroom.

But yes, happykitteh - I too think Teresa was in it up to her fake eyelashes. I'm in real estate, and you can't habitually close loans with only a fake notary seal. The Fed's were very specific in their rebuttal (funny for a legal document) to the G's motion to separate the trials+. They said probably loans/guarantees/joint ventures were taken out in Teresa's name without her direct participation, but they were only charging her with those that they knew she had direct participation in. Ouch. And then they called Juicy a liar (see funny). Still have my semi-Juicy crush though.

Long, so won't get too much into again how I think the BK charges could be worse for them. Lie, lie and lie again! Could be an old SNL "Bad Idea" jeans skit.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
I don't think they usually go directly into custody after sentencing.

A relative did. But, of course that's not true in every federal case, as you pointed out citing Apollo's re-entrance into "college". Guess we'll find out in October what will happen to these two clowns (barring another delay). When does the reunion film?

 

Initially the Guidices were trying to portray Teresa as the ignorant innocent who just signed papers without knowing what was going on.

The Guidices actually claimed that? I thought that was just a supposed scenario on behalf of some of the viewers.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Interesting.  If it were me, I'd come clean, express my deep remorse and my true resolve never to get involved in fraud again, and beg for mercy.

 

Technorebel, were it you, you wouldn't have gotten yourself into this mess in the first place.

 

Mortgage fraud, as someone stated earlier, is not something that happens to you.   It is something you perpetrate, having a pretty good idea that what you're doing isn't exactly according to the books.

 

I have no sympathy for Tre and Joe.  None whatsoever.  They knew what they were doing.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

In white collar criminal federal cases, it is much more common that a surrender date is negotiated.  The person can surrender at the sentencing, especially if they are fairly certain of what it will be or if it has also been negotiated in the plea deal.  It is also not uncommon to have a very long delay in federal proceedings when dealing with financial crimes.  A friend's colleague is going to prison for three months for insider trading, a crime he committed six years ago.  There was a lot of back and forth not only working out the sentencing but more so for the amount of retribution payments.  While the Giudices' lawyers may be delaying getting materials to the court to drag things out (speculation only, I can't really say), the court may also be requesting additional documentation, which would make sense given their finances may be as straightforward as untangling a big ole bowl of spaghetti (with or without homemade sauce).  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

From other thread. I'm curious if Teresa actually put the monstrosity up for sale (at a bargain $4M). NJ.com is now posting it and they're generally more reliable then most. The beach house is definitely up (Trulia link). That's only $315K - and I think I remember it's mortgaged for about $500K (ridiculous mortgage payments current).

I always thought the marble-onyx horror was worth more then what the BK trustee said when he filed not to pursue it. It was slightly over the loan ($1.6M?) and wouldn't be worth the closing costs to sell. Based on my "vast" real estate experience (absolutely none in NJ residential real estate!) I figured it was worth at least $2.5M (possibly way off - but pretty sure not $4M). So I was suspicious.

I thought maybe they were holding it back for the criminal court asset surrender. Now I'm also thinking it may be part of the final plea deal (thanks again for the Financial Disclosure statement!). Conspiring minds want to know (well mine).

Share this post


Link to post

 

Quote

    Initially the Guidices were trying to portray Teresa as the ignorant innocent who just signed papers without knowing what was going on.

 

 

The Guidices actually claimed that? I thought that was just a supposed scenario on behalf of some of the viewers.

 

IIRC, when the whole mess started, back with the bankruptcy, Joe and the attorneys (and Tre) were trying their best to keep Tre out of it as much as possible. I don't know, of course, how much the scenes were edited for the viewers when the attorney scenes were shown and the bankruptcy discussed on the show.

Share this post


Link to post

I wonder if Teresa has watched "Orange Is The New Black"?

I wonder where Teresa will serve her time, if any. I'm thinking Brooklyn or Danbury.

Piper Kerman said in the OITNB book that inspired the show that there was a lot of excitement at the possibility that Martha Stewart would do her time there and disappointment when she went somewhere else. I wonder if that's happening with Tre.

Would Joe be going to a maximum security prison or are financial criminals usually sent to medium/min security?

Share this post


Link to post

I do think in most couples the husband would willingly take the fall and allow the wife to get an easier sentence, especially where kids are involved.  I don't think this is just Teresa throwing Joe under the bus. Teresa is dumb - she isn't a criminal mastermind - hello - vasectomy/mastectomy?  Joe isn't this soft, patsy, good-guy even though people enjoy watching him on tv more. How many times have we seen him tell her, "Shut up" or have we forgotten, "Here comes my c-nt wife?" He is facing more charges because of the IRS issues I believe.  She is still pleading guilty to her own charges.  Teresa getting probation will be because she is less culpable than he is. Not because he is a knight in shining armor, and she is an evil witch.

 

I ultimately think it's because Teresa, in a childish and naive way, believes that she and Joe are good people who didn't hurt anyone and they should not go to prison. She probably half views her crimes as victimless (although there are real, human victims of mortgage fraud, namely honest people who can't get loans because of people like Tre and her husband), and half believes her husband's palliative explanations of what she did. Teresa believes that, because she and Joe didn't (in her mind) have ill intentions - and, of course, aren't the sort of people who go to prison - that she can't and won't go to prison. Remember, she's protected by a higher power (eyeroll.)

 

ITA.  And I do believe to some extent in the heyday of easy mortgages people fudged a lot, and Teresa truly believed that "everyone was doing it." (And I think she still thinks that way.  We still see her saying it on TV.)  And that she signed a lot of shit that was put in front of her.  I don't think she ever wanted or asked for details.  I think she was happy with "don't worry about it." And took the money and was happy to spend it.  It doesn't excuse her or make her less liable at all.  You are responsible for what you sign and that is a lesson Teresa is still learning even if she hasn't come to terms with it.

 

As for the bankruptcy filings - she knew they were already in trouble and should have been extra careful.  And she had legal counsel at that point.  That's what I don't get.  She has counsel.  They know she has a Bravo contract.  They know or should have known that she has marketing plans.  Those bankruptcy filings should have been pristine.  Fools.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Would Joe be going to a maximum security prison or are financial criminals usually sent to medium/min security?

 

 Joe will probably end up at a low or medium with a camp. Perhaps he'll go to Fort Dix. (ironic in a way)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I've got a bad, bad, feeling Teresa is going to get probation, maybe home detention, and Joe will take the fall. Pisses me off that she is more than willing to let Joe go to prison but she would never, ever consider doing the same for him.  She'd sell hin out in a fat minute to save her own ass. I also think Bravo will without a doubt keep her on if she doesn't go to prison. Andy has no moral compass and will do whatever it taked for ratings. Unless he and Bravo sense the viewers will be outraged and refuse to watch they will most definitely do a season of how Tre is coping as a single mother. They'll heavily feature the Gorgas "helping" Tre through her difficult time, keep on Dina as the shoulder she cries on and dump the newbies.

I said this a long time ago and I was struck down on the other board and told the feds don't fuck around. Joe will take the fall. She won't serve time in prison.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Joe will take the fall.

He won't, because he can't. Pleas have been given, and neither Juicy nor Teresa has any control over what their individual sentences will be, much less each other's. Juicy may have initially tried to take all the blame when they were just facing charges, but obviously the evidence presented against Teresa shot that notion down. As has been pointed out, whether or not Teresa serves any time will be based on her crimes, not on anything her husband does/says.

Edited by jaync
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

He won't, because he can't. Pleas have been given, and neither Juicy nor Teresa has any control over what their individual sentences will be, much less each other's. Juicy may have initially tried to take all the blame when they were just facing charges, but obviously the evidence presented against Teresa shot that notion down. As has been pointed out, whether or not Teresa serves any time will be based on her crimes, not on anything her husband does/says.

When the probation report is filed there is a section devoted to the crime and the defendant's level of participation.  That is where Joe can accept responsibility as the "mastermind" for the mortgage fraud and mitigate Teresa's involvement.  I really don't know how he can try and take responsibility for the BK fraud as those were Teresa's assets that were being concealed.

 

Speaking in terms of the show footage-I always thought it was interesting that Teresa claimed to have taught her brother Joe everything he knows about business.  She made these claims when they were pretty much in the government's scope for indictment.  So I don't know how believable she will be to the Court or how far they will try and push this mitigating factor.

 

I am hoping she does get some time but at this point she seems pretty confident she is getting probation.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

He won't, because he can't. Pleas have been given, and neither Juicy nor Teresa has any control over what their individual sentences will be, much less each other's. Juicy may have initially tried to take all the blame when they were just facing charges, but obviously the evidence presented against Teresa shot that notion down. As has been pointed out, whether or not Teresa serves any time will be based on her crimes, not on anything her husband does/says.

 I think Higgins meant that yes Joe would be going to prison for just his crimes but he would receive the heavier, longer penalty.

 

 I believe the Feds don't pussy foot around about punishment, but  If the judge is presiding over both cases I could see him giving Joe the max while letting Theresa delay her time at camp, or put her on probation so she could earn money to try and pay everybody back. If he puts them both in camp at the same time earnings from her nefarious celebrity and from the "cash cow" that is Bravo disappears, and so does the money to pay off their fines and debt. Not that it will all ever be paid off.

 

I can see him structuring the sentences so that society would have the best chance at restitution. Payment both in time served and monies paid back to the victims, to the IRS and in levied fines.

 

 

If I'm wrong Higgins call me on it and beat me over the head with a cannoli...no chocolate please.

Share this post


Link to post

He won't, because he can't. Pleas have been given, and neither Juicy nor Teresa has any control over what their individual sentences will be, much less each other's. Juicy may have initially tried to take all the blame when they were just facing charges, but obviously the evidence presented against Teresa shot that notion down. As has been pointed out, whether or not Teresa serves any time will be based on her crimes, not on anything her husband does/says.

Except the judge has leeway on sentencing. He or she can decide if they want to suspend jail time. Who knows what the plea agreement was? They may have agreed to suspend Teresa's time to save the expense of a trial. It happens.

Except the judge has leeway on sentencing. He or she can decide if they want to suspend jail time. Who knows what the plea agreement was? They may have agreed to suspend Teresa's time to save the expense of a trial. It happens all the time.

 I think Higgins meant that yes Joe would be going to prison for just his crimes but he would receive the heavier, longer penalty.

 

 I believe the Feds don't pussy foot around about punishment, but  If the judge is presiding over both cases I could see him giving Joe the max while letting Theresa delay her time at camp, or put her on probation so she could earn money to try and pay everybody back. If he puts them both in camp at the same time earnings from her nefarious celebrity and from the "cash cow" that is Bravo disappears, and so does the money to pay off their fines and debt. Not that it will all ever be paid off.

 

I can see him structuring the sentences so that society would have the best chance at restitution. Payment both in time served and monies paid back to the victims, to the IRS and in levied fines.

 

 

If I'm wrong Higgins call me on it and beat me over the head with a cannoli...no chocolate please.

This makes total sense. My point is Teresa could very well serve no time in prison for whatever reason. It is not a given that she will serve as I believe it is a given Joe is going to college for at least a couple of years maybe less for good time.

Edited by Higgins
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

 I think Higgins meant that yes Joe would be going to prison for just his crimes but he would receive the heavier, longer penalty.

But, that still doesn't mean there can be a taking of a fall so as Teresa will only get probation. If Joe receives a heavier punishment, it will be because of his guilty pleas, not hers.

 

Except the judge has leeway on sentencing. He or she can decide if they want to suspend jail time.

Sure, but it won't because Joe falls on some imaginary sword for Teresa. It's too late to claim that she was under someone else's control when she committed crimes.

Edited by jaync
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

But, that still doesn't mean there can be a taking of a fall so as Teresa will only get probation. If Joe receives a heavier punishment, it will be because of his guilty pleas, not hers.

Hi Jaync, I think we are all on the same page.  They will each be held accountable for their own crimes and serve their individual imposed sentences, but the Judge may structure their individual sentences in a way that as I said before "....society would have the best chance at restitution. Payment both in time served and monies paid back to the victims, to the IRS and in levied fines."

Share this post


Link to post

Here is what I think is fishy-Teresa's counsel is reaching by using a mitigating factor that incarceration of Teresa will affect the livelihood of others.  I disagree.  Teresa as a brand has become so tarnished by the indictment, denial, change of plea, delay of sentencing that she has essentially destroyed her own brand.  Like so many of the RH Teresa has reduced herself to putting her name on a variety of marginal, generic products emblazoned with whatever the fuck the name of her company is.

Same with her "writing" career-that Heather MacLean wrote the books- my review was there was nothing terribly interesting or innovative in the books except maybe to Teresa fans, with some quips about the show.  They peaked pretty quickly and then ended up on the bargain table-maybe when Heather thought it a good idea to have Teresa as a BBQ/Grilling guru.    I guess the products sold when she showed up and charged $20 for a photo with the star.

 

Next fishy part- the Trustee passed on seizing and selling Teresa residence and beach house because they were upside down.  I believe the "mansion" was valued at $1.6? Yet now the home is listed for $4. million.  That is a huge discrepancy in such a short period of time.

 

As far as being led away after sentencing-we still don't know the status of Joe's state case.  If it is going to trial the authorities would probably rather have Joe free to attend the state trial to save the cost of a Federal marshal having to transport him to and fro the state courthouse.  

 

Otherwise it is not uncommon for the federal system to allow defendants to report at a later date.  My guess if she or he are given any time it will be after the holidays and this would enable them to get their affairs in order and Teresa to bang out another lackluster season of RHONJ.  My question is with diminished ratings will Bravo still pay the big bucks?  I think the season and its ratings have been pretty dismal and the retention of Teresa has done nothing to add to the show this year.  We knew well before the beginning of the season she and Joe had plead guilty.  I would think after week after week of shooting and getting nothing from Teresa the producers should have figured out they should just drop her.

 

Edited to Add:  I loved that Teresa and Joe waited until after Labor Day to list the shore house.   

Edited by zoeysmom
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

While I cannot believe I care this much, it is going to make me all kinds of mad if Teresa doesn't have to "go away". I think it is because they have acted - from the very beginning when the charges were first announced - like this was going to be the deal. That Joe would go away and leave poor Teresa alone. Even on the show recently, you had Teresa telling Joe over Christmas that their family simply couldn't work if he wasn't there. WTF?? She never acts like there is any danger of her going away as well. Last week, you had that bald guy, Rino, Rico, or whatever his name is (I haven't even cared enough to learn any of the names of the new folks yet) telling his twin wife that "this man could be away from his kids for 2 or 3 years, and that's a problem". Why is there never any mention of Teresa being in the slammer, only Juicy? Is everyone in denial? 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Hi Jaync, I think we are all on the same page.  They will each be held accountable for their own crimes and serve their individual imposed sentences, but the Judge may structure their individual sentences in a way that as I said before "....society would have the best chance at restitution. Payment both in time served and monies paid back to the victims, to the IRS and in levied fines."

In sentencing, the judge decides punishment, not just financial restitution. Why would Teresa escape prison time, when other criminals convicted of fraud have to do their time in Camp Fed? Yes, the judge wants both Teresa and Joe to pay restitution, but, like everyone else, they can do so after they get out.

Furthermore, some of you are looking at Teresa as a big star with a big salary and lots of money and earning potential. None of that is true. Yes, she currently has a presumably large paycheck from Bravo, but not only has that all gone to lawyers and her new payment plan to the IRS, but there's no guarantee she'll get another one after sentencing. And the same goes for her companies and cookbooks. She's damaged goods now. It's likely her businesses will suffer. She can't make any promises to the judge about earning potential. For that matter, neither can Joe. But they're both in the same boat. BOTH pled guilty, both will be sentenced, and both will have to pay restitution.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

 

But, that still doesn't mean there can be a taking of a fall so as Teresa will only get probation. If Joe receives a heavier punishment, it will be because of his guilty pleas, not hers.

 

I absolutely do think there can be a "taking of a fall". Not because the judge will put most of the blame on Joe, not because he will be punished for her guilty pleas but because of an arrangement made between Joe and Tre when they were figuring out how to play this once they knew they were caught. I believe between the two of them they agreed Joe would plead to more of the offenses, take more of the blame in an effort to minmize any punishment for Tre. By "taking the fall" I do not mean NOW, I mean when Joe and Tre were planning their strategy. Joe will fall on his sword to lessen the blame on Tre - something Tre would never do for Joe, IMO. I think she would sell out Joe in a fat minute to save her own ass if it came to that and was a possibility for her.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I absolutely do think there can be a "taking of a fall". Not because the judge will put most of the blame on Joe, not because he will be punished for her guilty pleas but because of an arrangement made between Joe and Tre when they were figuring out how to play this once they knew they were caught. I believe between the two of them they agreed Joe would plead to more of the offenses, take more of the blame in an effort to minmize any punishment for Tre. By "taking the fall" I do not mean NOW, I mean when Joe and Tre were planning their strategy. Joe will fall on his sword to lessen the blame on Tre - something Tre would never do for Joe, IMO. I think she would sell out Joe in a fat minute to save her own ass if it came to that and was a possibility for her.

I get what you're saying, but what makes you think Joe isn't guilty of the charges he pled to? I think Teresa is guilty of A LOT, but so is Joe, and, as dirty as she is, I don't think she had the smarts or the where-with-all to have come up with this scheme. Joe did, and then she participated, imo.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

While I cannot believe I care this much, it is going to make me all kinds of mad if Teresa doesn't have to "go away". I think it is because they have acted - from the very beginning when the charges were first announced - like this was going to be the deal. That Joe would go away and leave poor Teresa alone. Even on the show recently, you had Teresa telling Joe over Christmas that their family simply couldn't work if he wasn't there. WTF?? She never acts like there is any danger of her going away as well. Last week, you had that bald guy, Rino, Rico, or whatever his name is (I haven't even cared enough to learn any of the names of the new folks yet) telling his twin wife that "this man could be away from his kids for 2 or 3 years, and that's a problem". Why is there never any mention of Teresa being in the slammer, only Juicy? Is everyone in denial? 

The original news report, the one that had Amber in tears, that report said Joe was getting five years and Teresa was getting probation.  So I think most of the reactions were to that story. Slowly but surely I think the idea the two of them would escape incarceration punishment has eroded.  All efforts and I bet monies are probably being out into getting evidence before the court that would mitigate Teresa's sentence.   I think in deference to Teresa, Queen of Denial, the producers have just not been able to pull out of Teresa what would happen if she were incarcerated.

 

That leads me to believe one of two scenarios-Teresa has a pretty good idea she is getting probation, Teresa has been told she can serve her time after Joe has completed his-in about four years.  I think if Teresa gets time there will be plenty of time for her to film another season.

Share this post


Link to post

I absolutely do think there can be a "taking of a fall". Not because the judge will put most of the blame on Joe, not because he will be punished for her guilty pleas but because of an arrangement made between Joe and Tre when they were figuring out how to play this once they knew they were caught. I believe between the two of them they agreed Joe would plead to more of the offenses, take more of the blame in an effort to minmize any punishment for Tre. By "taking the fall" I do not mean NOW, I mean when Joe and Tre were planning their strategy. Joe will fall on his sword to lessen the blame on Tre - something Tre would never do for Joe, IMO. I think she would sell out Joe in a fat minute to save her own ass if it came to that and was a possibility for her.

I know next to nothing about this, but I will assume that their lawyers gave them guidance on what what/how many charges they would need to cop to in order to work the plea deal. Probably something from column A (maybe wire fraud), something from column B (maybe bankruptcy fraud), and then of course there had to be something from the "not filing taxes" column. Only Joe was charged with not filing taxes, so he would have been the only one who would have been able to plead guilty to this charge. I believe on the other 4 charges, they both pled guilty to the same crimes? 

 

These criminals have known for years that they were being investigated. I think that their plan probably in the beginning before shit got real was to act like it was all Juicy, with Teresa knowing next to nothing and just signing where/when she was told.  I think there were folks in their circle that were aware that something was going on in the background. Caroline made the exact statement in S3. That Juicy would have to "go away" to protect the family and that Teresa would have to go on alone. She said then that Juicy did some things just to keep Teresa happy. My husband would take the fall for me, and I think most husbands would if given the chance. I think the thing that surprised them was when the charges actually came down and she was charged count for count, save for the tax deals. The Feds spent time on their case and had plenty of evidence to suggest that Teresa was in on the scheme. From the other case against Juicy in the past they knew that he had already admitted to forging his partner's signature, so they probably had a heads up that he would attempt to do the same thing here. I think the evidence they had was shocking to the Giudice's, as they hadn't expected her to be charged right along with him (at least not on the mortgage fraud stuff). 

 

I have said it before, and I will say it again.  I am just completely bummed that we don't get to see/hear a trial. I would have loved to hear about all the evidence they had against them, piece by piece.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

 

I get what you're saying, but what makes you think Joe isn't guilty of the charges he pled to? I think Teresa is guilty of A LOT, but so is Joe, and, as dirty as she is, I don't think she had the smarts or the where-with-all to have come up with this scheme. Joe did, and then she participated, imo.

 

Oh, no, no, no, no!!! I do not believe Joe is innocent, not at all! My point is that, IMO, Tre is equally at fault but they cooked up a plan where Tre would take less of the blame. I agree Tre could not come up with this scheme by herself, and frankly I don't think Joe could either. I do believe someone gave them "advice". Tre knew as much as Joe, profited from the illegalities as much as Joe, yet he agreed to take more blame to lessen her culpability. Of course I was not privy to their private conversations so this is speculation on my part and JMO.

Share this post


Link to post

It happens all the time. Judges do use discretion in sentencing and couples cut deals with prosecutors. Prosecutors make deals with defendants to save the court time and money. Attorney's negotiate all the time. This is not unusual.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I agree Tre could not come up with this scheme by herself, and frankly I don't think Joe could either. I do believe someone gave them "advice". .

 

This is the interesting part, and we'll probably never know where Joe got the idea. I see your point, though.

 

It happens all the time. Judges do use discretion in sentencing and couples cut deals with prosecutors. Prosecutors make deals with defendants to save the court time and money. Attorney's negotiate all the time. This is not unusual.

But that's already happened. The prosecutors cut a deal with Joe and Teresa to save the time and expense of going to trial. I'm not sure what that has to do with sentencing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

These criminals have known for years that they were being investigated. I think that their plan probably in the beginning before shit got real was to act like it was all Juicy, with Teresa knowing next to nothing and just signing where/when she was told.  I think there were folks in their circle that were aware that something was going on in the background. Caroline made the exact statement in S3. That Juicy would have to "go away" to protect the family and that Teresa would have to go on alone. She said then that Juicy did some things just to keep Teresa happy.

You're right! Caroline did say that. Man, they must have all known. And I agree with your assessment that the plan all along was to keep Teresa out of it. Everything makes sense in this context - everyone acting like this is all Joe's case, Teresa constantly using the "stand by your man" mantra, the whole cast talking about Joe, and only Joe, going away, Caroline's prediction in s3, etc... Only it didn't work once the Feds went digging. As they say, most criminals are stupid.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Oh, no, no, no, no!!! I do not believe Joe is innocent, not at all! My point is that, IMO, Tre is equally at fault but they cooked up a plan where Tre would take less of the blame. I agree Tre could not come up with this scheme by herself, and frankly I don't think Joe could either. I do believe someone gave them "advice". Tre knew as much as Joe, profited from the illegalities as much as Joe, yet he agreed to take more blame to lessen her culpability. Of course I was not privy to their private conversations so this is speculation on my part and JMO.

 

The thing is, I don't know if Tre and Joe's scheme to defraud their creditors (first in securing mortgages and then in bankruptcy court) is a mark of their intelligence. Their fraud was pretty blatant and, with a modicum of effort, easy to uncover. Falsifying W-2s (etc.) for and lying about assets on mortgage applications and then lying about one's assets in bankruptcy court doesn't take intelligence; it takes foolhardiness, entitlement, and a certain kind of audacity. Compared to Joe and Teresa's "take the money and run"-type acts, there's plenty of more sophisticated white collar crime. Maybe because their fraud was so obvious - and in such plain sight - they got away with it for so long. Not that many people have the balls (or stupidity) to lie as blatantly and fearlessly. It also makes those who they deceived look bad. For example, it does say quite a bit about the ease of obtaining a mortgage in the '00s that no one bothered to verify Teresa's supposed high-paying employment at non-existent positions or to independently verify their family's income.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

 

This is the interesting part, and we'll probably never know where Joe got the idea. I see your point, though.

 

But that's already happened. The prosecutors cut a deal with Joe and Teresa to save the time and expense of going to trial. I'm not sure what that has to do with sentencing.

Because the prosecutors make recommendations to the judge on sentencing.

Sometimes the prosecution will agree to a specific sentence and make it part of the plea deal by promising the defendant to "recommend" the sentence to the judge when it comes time for sentencing. For example, the prosecutor may recommend sentence of fewer years in prison than a defendant might face if he goes to trial or gets convicted. The prosecutor may also promise to recommend probation instead of jail time.

 

http://criminal.lawyers.com/criminal-law-basics/plea-bargains-or-agreements-and-sentencing.html

Edited by Higgins
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Because the prosecutors make recommendations to the judge on sentencing.

Of course. But court time and expenses are no longer an issue for the judge. Only restitution and/or prison time are being considered at sentencing.

Edited by LotusFlower

Share this post


Link to post

In sentencing, the judge decides punishment, not just financial restitution. Why would Teresa escape prison time, when other criminals convicted of fraud have to do their time in Camp Fed? Yes, the judge wants both Teresa and Joe to pay restitution, but, like everyone else, they can do so after they get out.

Furthermore, some of you are looking at Teresa as a big star with a big salary and lots of money and earning potential. None of that is true. Yes, she currently has a presumably large paycheck from Bravo, but not only has that all gone to lawyers and her new payment plan to the IRS, but there's no guarantee she'll get another one after sentencing. And the same goes for her companies and cookbooks. She's damaged goods now. It's likely her businesses will suffer. She can't make any promises to the judge about earning potential. For that matter, neither can Joe. But they're both in the same boat. BOTH pled guilty, both will be sentenced, and both will have to pay restitution.

 

 Wow, I never said that Theresa would escape "punishment" or prison time, nor did I say that the judge only decides financial restitution.  I did say that the judge will decide the type of, length of, and start date of their individual punishments for their separate, individual cases. We won't know what will happen until he hands down his decision.

 

What I did say that it was possible that he could give Theresa probation. He may have one serve their time first while the other was "free" to take care of the girls and find some sort of work to begin paying their fees, fines and restitution to injured parties. When the first one gets out of prison hopefully they can find work while the other one serves their time. And yes, the judge might throw them both in the slammer at the same time. I've never thought differently. 

 

I liked Theresa more than the others on RHoNJ, but I have never thought of Theresa as a "big star", not any housewife nor most actors. She was/is a woman who was entertaining on a reality show, who turned out to be a criminal that was caught. Thank God. We know she is tainted and her businesses will suffer and have a good chance of failure. She can't make any promises of future income. We know it, the judge knows it. That being said she seems to be a hard worker who will try anything to make a buck. There is a slice of society and of the entertainment industry that may find a niche for her to earn some money, as they have with other criminals and sleazy types. Heck Andy Cohen may be spinning ideas about a "Theresa show". He has few scruples when it comes to housewife lives.  I'm not saying it is going to happen but you never know. She may end up serving the twins coffee at Dunkin Donuts.

 

As I said before, I think we are all on the same page. we are just each saying it differently and have arrived, or are arriving at a consensus of opinion . We know they are both guilty. We hate that Theresa is playing the victim card. We hate that this has been dragged out for so long. We want the book thrown at them. We all want both of them to serve a sentence, preferably time, and know they will serve a sentence in some form. We all want both of them to pay restitution and fines, and know they will be ordered to pay but more than likely, unfortunately, what they ultimately pay back will be much less than what they stole.

Edited by Giselle
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Giselle - I was responding to a bunch of comments , not just yours. I also don't think that we're all on the same page. Some people think Teresa is just as culpable as Joe, some don't. Some think she'll get off with just probation, some don't. Some think that Bravo will keep her on RHONJ, some don't. Some will watch the sentencing hearing via livestream drinking Fabellini, some eating cannolis. It's all good!

P.S. I think you might be thinking that the bankruptcy case is part of this case. It's not. They pleaded guilty to tax and wire fraud, so yes, they owe money, but it's to the IRS, not their creditors. That's a whole other ball of wax ($13 million, I think) that they're going to have to face down the road in terms of financial restitution.

P.P.S. The judge is a woman, btw. I'll repeat my fantasy - that Teresa flips the table in the courthouse after sentencing and screams "Restitution Whore!" at the judge.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, but they tend to put a lot weight on the recommendations and that is where the deal comes into play with sentencing

Here is the official unvarnished plea agreement-beginning on Page 3 it goes into sentencing and what the Government will or will not do and states the Court is not bound by anything in the agreement when it comes to sentencing:

http://www.justice.gov/usao/nj/Press/files/pdffiles/2014/Giudice,%20Teresa%20Plea%20Agreement.pdf

 

I hope it helps.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

You do understand though Lotus that Plea bargains would never happen if the defendants had nothing to gain from them. They agree to plea because they have been promised something advantageous to them. So the judge, in the interest of the court and the people, rarely go rouge. I suspect that the only way they would have taken the agreement was if the prosecutors agreed to recommend suspending Teresa's jail time or at the very least, a very short sentence served for her staggered with Joe's relatively longer sentence.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

 

Speaking in terms of the show footage-I always thought it was interesting that Teresa claimed to have taught her brother Joe everything he knows about business.  She made these claims when they were pretty much in the government's scope for indictment.

I thought she said that Juicy Jo taught her brother everything her knew.  Which, if I were Melissa, would have me very worried.

 

Higgins I agree that the Juicys probably think that the US Atty will make a recommendation to the judge at sentencing for probation or house arrest or for a later incarceration for Teresa because she is acting like she isn't going away any time soon.

 

Maybe no one is talking about her going away because they all agreed that they didn't want to freak out the kids anymore than they already are by Joe finally going to college.

 

I wonder if he will just plead guilty to the state DUI case.  Can he have the fed time count toward the state case?

Share this post


Link to post

I wonder if the judge with give Tre probation or an in home sentence because she is able to work and has an income stream, which means that she can begin to pay restitution. It will be interesting to see if there is more weight given to potential paying of monies back over the wish to punish by incarceration. If she is able to work, she makes at least 250K per year just from Bravo. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I wonder if he will just plead guilty to the state DUI case.  Can he have the fed time count toward the state case?

 

 

Setser v. U.S., 132 S. Ct. 1463 (2012).

• A district court has the discretion to order that a federal

sentence run consecutively to an anticipated state sentence

that has not yet been imposed.

• The federal district court, not the BOP, has the discretion to

order whether the whether a sentence runs consecutively or

concurrently.

 

 

I would assume the state case has been postponed by Joe's attorneys?

 

Share this post


Link to post

P.P.S. The judge is a woman, btw. I'll repeat my fantasy - that Teresa flips the table in the courthouse after sentencing and screams "Restitution Whore!" at the judge.

Now that is a dream worth having!  

 

When Joe "goes to college", the real issue is whether he'll be there long enough to earn an Associate's degree, a Bachelor's or a Master's.  Let's just hope the younger children really don't think he is at college and not in prison.  I would hate for them to grow up thinking you need to commit a felony to get into school.  They are wading in a shallow genetic pool.  They may need more help than most figuring out the difference.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I wonder if the judge with give Tre probation or an in home sentence because she is able to work and has an income stream, which means that she can begin to pay restitution. It will be interesting to see if there is more weight given to potential paying of monies back over the wish to punish by incarceration. If she is able to work, she makes at least 250K per year just from Bravo. 

I think Teresa would have to first prove that she still has an income stream.  It sounds like her product sales are way down and I doubt Bravo/NBC Universal/Sirens media, is going to go on record and guarantee Teresa a contract at this point.  They have to be disappointed with the ratings this year and Teresa essentially dialing it in.  What would change if she came back for another year?  Transition into a smaller home?  Visiting Joe at college?

 

What keeps most people from committing crimes is their fear of loss of freedom.  In Teresa's case she spent the first seven years or so after Gia's birth being a stay at home mom and committing fraud to maintain her lifestyle.  Once she started making money, she wanted a clean slate and the past to be the past. Is there anything to indicate Teresa has a future outside of RHONJ?  I think she is fairly one note.  Every working person who faces incarcerations has the same plea-if I am granted probation I can work and support my family.  I have often wondered if the Court grants a staggered sentence with Joe's would Teresa be willing to be the first one to do  the time?  I don' t think so.. . and I hope the Court recognizes these are five year old or better crimes and it is time for the delays to stop.  At some point it does appear crime pays.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I wonder if the judge with give Tre probation or an in home sentence because she is able to work and has an income stream, which means that she can begin to pay restitution. It will be interesting to see if there is more weight given to potential paying of monies back over the wish to punish by incarceration. If she is able to work, she makes at least 250K per year just from Bravo.

As zoeysmom said, her so-called income stream from Bravo and other sources is not guaranteed. Which puts her in the same boat as Joe, so I'm not sure why one would get preference over the other.

Share this post


Link to post

You do understand though Lotus that Plea bargains would never happen if the defendants had nothing to gain from them. They agree to plea because they have been promised something advantageous to them. So the judge, in the interest of the court and the people, rarely go rouge. I suspect that the only way they would have taken the agreement was if the prosecutors agreed to recommend suspending Teresa's jail time or at the very least, a very short sentence served for her staggered with Joe's relatively longer sentence.

No, that is incorrect. Did Teresa have something to gain in taking the plea? Yes - the Government dropping charges. Serious charges that would have increased her sentence exponentially if convicted. That's the ONLY thing she was "promised." The US Attorney offered no sentencing recommendations to the judge. In fact, the deal reads: "This Office cannot and does not make any representation or promise as to what guideline range may be found by the sentencing judge or as to what sentence Teresa Giudice ultimately will receive." (emphasis mine).

It's all in the plea agreement posted on the previous page. I recommend reading it to anyone who's interested. There are no back room deals here. We can speculate about the sentence, but not the plea agreement - it's all out in the open. The prosecutors made NO recommendation, let alone promise, of probation, house arrest, or prison time, staggered, length, etc... to Teresa (or Joe). None. Why would they? Not only is it not the way it's done, but they have the goods on them. They had the leverage, not the defendants. The sentence is up to the judge in whole. That's why Teresa is on pins and needles. And praying.

Edited by LotusFlower
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

I agree with LotusFlower - the Giudice's taking the plea was the something "advantageous" to them. Otherwise if they took this debacle to court they could possibly be found guilty and sentenced on each count and facing stricter sentencing guidelines (according to my Federal prosecutor friend). Being this case was basically document driven I'm pretty sure the Feds had the goods on them. They should have looked closer at the "I attest on penalty of perjury that the above is true and correct".

I don't get that she'd get probation or house arrest so she'd be able to earn and have more money to pay back her debt. I've never heard that before except in connection to this case. The BK is over, I didn't think the criminal judge could compel them to pay to or garnish wages. I thought that was now up to the creditors to go after them on their own. The IRS doesn't need the Judge to get their money. They can do that on their own quite well. I know they have to show up with $200k maybe that's fine related?

Edited to add I pray for "restitution whore". But unfortunately I don't think God listens to my petty dreams (or jail time re larceny).

Edited by Jennifersdc
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I don't get that she'd get probation or house arrest so she'd be able to earn and have more money to pay back her debt. I've never heard that before except in connection to this case.

Honestly? I think that theory was started by Teresa fans who were looking for a compelling-sounding reason to keep her out of jail. And it doesn't make any kind of sense, because a conviction changes every person's earning potential. Or at least has the potential to do so, so nothing's guaranteed. Plus, think about some high profile people who committed tax fraud, like Wesley Snipes or Lauren Hill. Why weren't they allowed to avoid prison time in order to make a movie or record an album and tour as a way to pay restitution? If the system was set up that way, then the only tax cheats who serve time are people in a lower economic status, and the rich have an easier road. Oh , wait.....

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

No, that is incorrect. Did Teresa have something to gain in taking the plea? Yes - the Government dropping charges. Serious charges that would have increased her sentence exponentially if convicted. That's the ONLY thing she was "promised." The US Attorney offered no sentencing recommendations to the judge. In fact, the deal reads: "This Office cannot and does not make any representation or promise as to what guideline range may be found by the sentencing judge or as to what sentence Teresa Giudice ultimately will receive." (emphasis mine).

It's all in the plea agreement posted on the previous page. I recommend reading it to anyone who's interested. There are no back room deals here. We can speculate about the sentence, but not the plea agreement - it's all out in the open. The prosecutors made NO recommendation, let alone promise, of probation, house arrest, or prison time, staggered, length, etc... to Teresa (or Joe). None. Why would they? Not only is it not the way it's done, but they have the goods on them. They had the leverage, not the defendants. The sentence is up to the judge in whole. That's why Teresa is on pins and needles. And praying.

We will see. So much of this stuff goes on behind closed doors. Have you ever had any involvement in a criminal trial?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I agree with LotusFlower - the Giudice's taking the plea was the something "advantageous" to them. Otherwise if they took this debacle to court they could possibly be found guilty and sentenced on each count and facing stricter sentencing guidelines (according to my Federal prosecutor friend). Being this case was basically document driven I'm pretty sure the Feds had the goods on them. They should have looked closer at the "I attest on penalty of perjury that the above is true and correct".

I don't get that she'd get probation or house arrest so she'd be able to earn and have more money to pay back her debt. I've never heard that before except in connection to this case. The BK is over, I didn't think the criminal judge could compel them to pay to or garnish wages. I thought that was now up to the creditors to go after them on their own. The IRS doesn't need the Judge to get their money. They can do that on their own quite well. I know they have to show up with $200k maybe that's fine related?

Edited to add I pray for "restitution whore". But unfortunately I don't think God listens to my petty dreams (or jail time re larceny).

Part of the plea agreement is that at the time of sentencing Teresa surrender $200,000.00 as an initial payment to the "Forfeiture Money Judgment" which will be determined at time of sentencing.  This is separate for fines, or any money owing the IRS - I had to go back and check and YES Teresa and Joe are jointly liable for repayment of the fines and forfeiture.  As part of any sentence and granting of probation a defendant obey all laws-in Teresa's case she was required to file and pay all income taxes or make payment arrangements with the IRS.  I am sure the State of new Jersey will be jumping in with tax liens as soon as her taxes are filed.

 

Normally what happens is a defendant is assigned a certain base amount of money they must pay each month to satisfy fines and forfeiture judgments.  In Teresa's case it may be something like $300.00 per month and if and when her income exceeds $3,000.00 per month she would be required to pay 25% of the income.  So if Teresa makes $250,000.00 on a book deal, she would be required to turn over $62,500.00 until the fines, back taxes and forfeiture is paid for she and Joe.

 

The other thing of interest ". . . this office reserves the right to take any position with respect to the appropriate sentence to be imposed on Teresa Giudice by the sentencing judge. . . ."  So Teresa did not even really get any breaks from the government.  I noticed also there is apparently a lot of back and forth with submissions to Probation that prepares the report for the Court and the sentencing judge may use independent evidence.  Lots of talk in the agreement about the fact the parties may not stipulate to certain facts. 

 

I am sure the Probation Officer is probably suffering from eye strain at this point.

Share this post


Link to post

We will see. So much of this stuff goes on behind closed doors. Have you ever had any involvement in a criminal trial?

Yes. And the only thing that's up in the air is the sentence. The plea agreement is settled. But you don't have to take my word for it - it's all available to read in the link provided.

ETA: I think it might be helpful to watch the US Attorney's press conference outside the courthouse on the day Teresa and Joe entered their guilty plea. And this was, of course, after the plea agreement was signed by both sides. So I think it's a pretty good representation of how the Feds feel about the Giudices and their crimes, and what they're going to ask for at sentencing. Recommend probation? A short sentence? Why? He went after them hard.

Edited by LotusFlower

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size