S11.E17: A Tale of Two Accidents

[Never Again]

On 9/15/2021 at 8:24 PM, RoseAllDay said:

Nothing says “frugal” like a $95,000 handbag. 🙄 

“It’s an investment….”

[amarante]

16 minutes ago, RoseAllDay said:

Probably….plus I’m sure it would be one nasty divorce. Sometimes it’s better to go along to get along (or however that phrase goes). But I’ll be charitable and assume this arrangement is what works for them. Just enough with the “Harry Hamlin”.

I have a good friend who sees no reason to divorce her husband of 35 years because it would not significantly improve the quality of her life and would just make the rest of her life horrendous. And for what - she doesn't want to remarry and has a separate fulfilling existence. She is extremely wealthy so she travels and enjoys the good life - she is not a trophy wife or buying to hide her sadness but just extremely realistic in terms of the cost benefits of a divorce. Very little benefit.

Edited September 17, 2021 by amarante

[Never Again]

On 9/15/2021 at 8:28 PM, Keywestclubkid said:

Wait he was supposed to have brain surgery? 

Well until his wife refused to allow it, out of her greater medical knowledge than that of the hospital neurosurgeons.  Although how she managed to be at the hospital when she wasn’t “allowed” to arrive at the scene of the burglary, because divorce and mean Tom and rules and stuff 

[Boo Boo]

51 minutes ago, bichonblitz said:

I think both Harry Hams and Rinna are obsessed with being thin. He looked really nice all cleaned up and in his suit when he entered Dorit's fake bridal show (with all of 5 dresses) but in regular clothes he's skin and bones, face is sagging and I'm sure the rest of his loose skin is as well. You can really see it on Rinna's stupid IG dance posts when she's dancing around Harry and he's tending to his garden and ignoring her. He has a great head of hair, though. 

YES!  That's what  I don't like about him.  I thought he was actually sick when he was in Mad Men.  

[OdinO.]

I like stoned Maricio and PK much better. 

On 9/13/2021 at 8:46 AM, izabella said:

Roy Black was also one of Jeffrey Epstein's lawyers.  And Kelsey Grammer's.

EW

 

22 hours ago, pasdetrois said:

PR campaign to look poor?

https://pagesix.com/2021/09/15/erika-jayne-shops-tj-maxx-amid-legal-and-financial-troubles/?utm_source=P6Twitter&utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_medium=SocialFlow

Why didn't she just order sweats online?

Also, is she buying fat clothes now that she can no longer afford the expensive treatments that dermatolofists and surgeons offer?

She's looking rough and I am living for it

 

On 9/16/2021 at 9:47 AM, byrd said:

I could build 2 whole houses for what Crystal is spending on her basement.  The cost of living in California is extremely high no doubt .

And, It will never be used

 

[nexxie]

1 hour ago, bichonblitz said:

I think both Harry Hams and Rinna are obsessed with being thin. He looked really nice all cleaned up and in his suit when he entered Dorit's fake bridal show (with all of 5 dresses) but in regular clothes he's skin and bones, face is sagging and I'm sure the rest of his loose skin is as well. You can really see it on Rinna's stupid IG dance posts when she's dancing around Harry and he's tending to his garden and ignoring her. He has a great head of hair, though. 

I’ll bet Harry is only interested when Rinna’s wearing a strap-on and her Antonio wig.

[pasdetrois]

Erika must still have medical power of attorney for Tom, or perhaps did when he needed brain surgery.

Also, I remain interested in whether she will be held responsible for compensating Tom's victims, because it will be fascinating to watch whether her Bravo wages get garnished.

Edited September 17, 2021 by pasdetrois

[Maximona]

I dunno.  I guess I'm out of synch, but I thought this was a bor-r-r-r-ring episode.

My main takeaway was how old these women look without their warpaint.  There was one quick shot of Rinna's face just before the facial mask was applied, and I thought, Ho-kay!  There is no painting in her attic!

Also those pants Kyle was wearing at the two-couples dinner?  They weren't doing her any favors.  (There was also a profile shot of her in that segment that made her look downright matronly.)

Just a data point:  It does snow in the towns in the San Gabriel foothills every once in a blue moon—and it happened the San Gabriels got a lot of snow at the end of Jan/beginning of Feb this year.  Lot of LA cops live in those foothill towns.  If you're not used to driving in snow, even a little snow can be daunting.  So, Erika might not have been fabricating her son's accident (though I'm guessing she embellished it.)

[RealHousewife]

Were there any rumors about Harry being gay or a rapist prior to "let's talk about the husband"?

[amarante]

4 hours ago, pasdetrois said:

Erika must still have medical power of attorney for Tom, or perhaps did when he needed brain surgery.

Also, I remain interested in whether she will be held responsible for compensating Tom's victims, because it will be fascinating to watch whether her Bravo wages get garnished.

The accident involving brain surgery occurred about three years ago when Erika was still married. 
 

FWIW, The detective who handled the burglary said there was no injury. The burglary itself was suspicious since it would have been a perfect way to smuggle out high value items like jewelry.  

Edited September 18, 2021 by amarante

[FlyingEgret]

46 minutes ago, amarante said:

The accident involving brain surgery occurred about three years ago when Erika was still married. 
 

FWIW, The who handled the burglary said there was no injury. The burglary itself was suspicious since it would have been a perfect way to smuggle out high value items like jewelry.  

Thanks - I was just about to ask if the brain vs ankle surgery was "now" or 3 years ago. So many trips to the hospital get confusing. Wonder if his medical insurance is still in place...

[oakville]

5 hours ago, Shannah Banana said:

And therein lies the rub...this is what convinces me that Bravo will do everything in their power to bring back Erika.  Not that they give a rat's ass about Erika and her "plight", they only care about the Benjamin's.  That's the way that rolls.

If Erika is charged with a criminal offense or has her assets seized by the bankruptcy trustees, would she still be on the show next season ?

[amarante]

1 hour ago, FlyingEgret said:

Thanks - I was just about to ask if the brain vs ankle surgery was "now" or 3 years ago. So many trips to the hospital get confusing. Wonder if his medical insurance is still in place...

Tom driving off the cliff was about three years ago. Theoretically that is where he sustained the ankle and brain injuries. Although at time he didn't show any signs of major injury when he was filmed for the show nor did any co-workers state that he had those kinds of extensive injuries.

Like many of Erika's lies, it is completely bizarre in terms of why she is telling lies that are so easily disproved. When she is deposed, she will be asked about what hospital he was taken to etc. and if necessary they will call in co-workers or even the housekeeper to testify as to his medical condition.

And since both Tom and Erika have put his medical condition out there in an attempt to make it relevant to his defense presumably, the creditors and Trustee will be able to get medical information because he has waived that by putting it into play. 

The eye injury theoretically occurred when Tom was burglarized in February 2021. As I posted, the detective stated there were no reported injuries and as I recall - at the time - Tom wasn't home so there wasn't any confrontation with the burglar. Again a really easily disproven lie which serves no real purpose.

[Afwife1992]

7 minutes ago, amarante said:

Tom driving off the cliff was about three years ago. Theoretically that is where he sustained the ankle and brain injuries. Although at time he didn't show any signs of major injury when he was filmed for the show nor did any co-workers state that he had those kinds of extensive injuries.

Like many of Erika's lies, it is completely bizarre in terms of why she is telling lies that are so easily disproved. When she is deposed, she will be asked about what hospital he was taken to etc. and if necessary they will call in co-workers or even the housekeeper to testify as to his medical condition.

And since both Tom and Erika have put his medical condition out there in an attempt to make it relevant to his defense presumably, the creditors and Trustee will be able to get medical information because he has waived that by putting it into play. 

The eye injury theoretically occurred when Tom was burglarized in February 2021. As I posted, the detective stated there were no reported injuries and as I recall - at the time - Tom wasn't home so there wasn't any confrontation with the burglar. Again a really easily disproven lie which serves no real purpose.

I've been binging previous seasons and just saw the episode where she was out at lunch with Kyle and mentioned Tom's accident and ankle injury. So there's bound to be hours of tape (video and audio) around that period that could be subpoenaed. 

5 hours ago, Boo Boo said:

YES!  That's what  I don't like about him.  I thought he was actually sick when he was in Mad Men.  

He never was like that early in his career. I wonder if Rinna has rubbed off on him. Didn't Billy Bob Thornton say he suffering from 'manorexia'? But maybe Harry fixates on exercise because he sure likes to cook and seems really good at it. I was watching an episode just last night where they had a big barbecue and he made some delicious looking food and even homemade pies!

[Afwife1992]

21 minutes ago, oakville said:

If Erika is charged with a criminal offense or has her assets seized by the bankruptcy trustees, would she still be on the show next season ?

They could do what they did with Teresa on RHONJ. Though there they postponed filming at a point, I think. But she's even done jail time and is still on the show. 

[Dixie Sugarbaker]

We all keep trying to understand Erika’s stories, but the most obvious and reasonable explanation is that Erika is a LIAR! And not just a liar, but a really, horrible liar. Her stories have such large holes that Tom’s plane could fly through them. She is so bad I keep expecting Jon Lovitz to come behind her doing his old SNL “Yeah, that’s the ticket” bit. If physics allowed for it, her lies would suck and blow simultaneously. Soap opera storylines are more believable than Erika - maybe Rinna is advising her on what to say.

(Morgan Freeman voice) Erika is just the worst.

 

[Shannah Banana]

2 hours ago, oakville said:

If Erika is charged with a criminal offense or has her assets seized by the bankruptcy trustees, would she still be on the show next season ?

I think she could be on the show next season.  I don't think being charged with a crime automatically exempts you from gainful employment.  Being charged and being convicted are two different things.

2 hours ago, Afwife1992 said:

They could do what they did with Teresa on RHONJ. Though there they postponed filming at a point, I think. But she's even done jail time and is still on the show. 

Yeah, I would think this would be the same standard they could/would use with Erika.  Bravo was there every step of the way with Joe and Teresa Guidice with their criminal journey's, both in and out of prison, and gave Teresa her job back.  Even after they were convicted there was time before they had to report to prison, and I think Bravo was filming then too.   Since the ratings have been so high this season because of Erika and her jacked up life, Bravo will do what they can to keep her around.

Edited September 18, 2021 by Shannah Banana

[Baltimore Betty]

6 hours ago, Dixie Sugarbaker said:

We all keep trying to understand Erika’s stories, but the most obvious and reasonable explanation is that Erika is a LIAR! And not just a liar, but a really, horrible liar. Her stories have such large holes that Tom’s plane could fly through them. She is so bad I keep expecting Jon Lovitz to come behind her doing his old SNL “Yeah, that’s the ticket” bit. If physics allowed for it, her lies would suck and blow simultaneously. Soap opera storylines are more believable than Erika - maybe Rinna is advising her on what to say.

(Morgan Freeman voice) Erika is just the worst.

 

Dr. Phil should do one of his timelines for all her story telling.

8 hours ago, amarante said:

Tom driving off the cliff was about three years ago. Theoretically that is where he sustained the ankle and brain injuries. Although at time he didn't show any signs of major injury when he was filmed for the show nor did any co-workers state that he had those kinds of extensive injuries.

Like many of Erika's lies, it is completely bizarre in terms of why she is telling lies that are so easily disproved. When she is deposed, she will be asked about what hospital he was taken to etc. and if necessary they will call in co-workers or even the housekeeper to testify as to his medical condition.

And since both Tom and Erika have put his medical condition out there in an attempt to make it relevant to his defense presumably, the creditors and Trustee will be able to get medical information because he has waived that by putting it into play. 

The eye injury theoretically occurred when Tom was burglarized in February 2021. As I posted, the detective stated there were no reported injuries and as I recall - at the time - Tom wasn't home so there wasn't any confrontation with the burglar. Again a really easily disproven lie which serves no real purpose.

Wouldn't we think there would be security camera's around the home, we would be able to see someone on the property, right?

[oakville]

7 hours ago, Shannah Banana said:

I think she could be on the show next season.  I don't think being charged with a crime automatically exempts you from gainful employment.  Being charged and being convicted are two different things.

Yeah, I would think this would be the same standard they could/would use with Erika.  Bravo was there every step of the way with Joe and Teresa Guidice with their criminal journey's, both in and out of prison, and gave Teresa her job back.  Even after they were convicted there was time before they had to report to prison, and I think Bravo was filming then too.   Since the ratings have been so high this season because of Erika and her jacked up life, Bravo will do what they can to keep her around.

I am not familiar with RHONJ, but are the crimes similar ?

Would they show Erika & her glam squad getting ready for court appearances?

Would there be episodes where they auctioned off Erika's clothes and other assets ?

Tom's legal issues are getting so much attention in the media that I believe it would be even harder for Erika to keep her stories straight. 

[RoseAllDay]

16 hours ago, Shannah Banana said:

And therein lies the rub...this is what convinces me that Bravo will do everything in their power to bring back Erika.  Not that they give a rat's ass about Erika and her "plight", they only care about the Benjamin's.  That's the way that rolls.

Well, then, I’ve got a decision to make. Is it worth an hour of my time every week to watch this hateful, cold, manipulative, grifting bitch threaten and bully, and otherwise be one of the most unlikeable people in the history of reality TV? 

Here’s an idea for Bravo, if it insists on inflicting her on us: Give her her own show. That way, then, those hardcore fans will have their fix, and the rest of us won’t have to be bothered. And we’ll see how long it lasts, between the court cases that will start to suck up most of her time and her apparent boring, solitary existence. (Have we ever seen her with anybody besides Mikey, her glam squad, and her backup dancers? Or doing anything else other than “performing?”) I think if you take away RHOBH, she basically has nothing. Nobody will give a damn about her.

I can’t take another season of everyone else playing punching bag or second fiddle/toady to this woman. (This does not apply to Rinna or Kyle. They can go, too, AFAIC.)

Yes, Andy Cohen loves her, so most likely she’ll keep her diamond. But that said, Andy Cohen does not have access to my remote control, either — and I just may use it.

 

11 hours ago, oakville said:

If Erika is charged with a criminal offense or has her assets seized by the bankruptcy trustees, would she still be on the show next season ?

Andy will find a way. In an ideal world, no, she wouldn’t.

[jinjer]

On 9/16/2021 at 1:34 PM, dmeets said:

 

Zero chance Kathy doesn't know who Bernie Sanders is. I'm sure she was right there with Sutton dreading the prospects of his presidency at that time the prior year. Just more of her weak attempt to play the kooky neighbor.

 

On 9/16/2021 at 3:53 PM, ichbin said:

 

As someone mentioned upthread somewhere regarding Kathy's claimed lack of knowledge regarding national politics, I don't find her dottiness, real or manufactured, to be as endearing as most based upon comments here and elsewhere. 

I agree - Kathy is playing the dimwit. She came on the show I read bc she was bored. She is shrewd - takes after her mother Big Kathy. She's the real sniper from the side with Thomasina, sitting Sutton next to Erika, bringing up "Why is not seeing color a problem" in reference to Sutton- she wasn't bringing it up out of the blue. "I never heard of Sutton." She's friends with Crystal and is backing up Crystal.

Also her nonsense about not wanting to be associated with unsavory people (like criminal Erika). She cut off Kyle for years for bringing up Kim's alcoholism. Then she cut her off bc she didn't want Kyle to out the crappy things their mother did. Her whole house is full of skeletons and it's a lot deeper than Paris' sex tape. Meanwhile, Sutton may surprise us all. https://www.instagram.com/p/CHLN7oCgHHA/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link

On 9/16/2021 at 3:58 PM, Mar said:

Well now

https://www.monstersandcritics.com/tv/reality-tv/bethenny-frankel-claims-she-knew-about-tom-girardis-legal-problems-4-years-ago-warned-andy-cohen/?fbclid=IwAR19dgEtx-67qsrVhbuAG-4lonsVCfgSNRQhPA26VPpeKVSQkcRw9kFUtk4

 

 

On 9/16/2021 at 9:40 PM, Mrs peel said:

I call bulls@@t on this.  B always needs to insert herself and be the know-it-all.

let’s start with the elephant in the room — the very idea that “it was known - among the “best of the best””.  Honey, Personal injury plaintiff lawyers, no matter how much money they make (and some make mega-bucks) are NOT considered the “best of the best” in the legal community.  Folks at white shoe corporate firms likely never heard of Girardi.  Nor are the folks who are involved in “litigation funding” (loaning money to lawyers and plaintiffs on the bet that the PI case will result in a  big payoff) particularly well respected.  Those guys are sucking the life out of many people who have been injured.

and while Girardi may have borrowed money from Shields’ company, I’m pretty sure there were confidentiality clauses in those agreements , such that if he gave this information to B, he was violating a contract.  Not smart.  And $500k may be a lot to us, it’s not a lot in the realm of Girardi’s world.

And, if “everyone knew” no firm would have agreed to become co-counsel or local counsel to the firm.  I am, though, shocked to learn that  CA ethical rules do not require that an attorney who has knowledge of ethical lapses by another attorney report that attorney to the bar for disciplinary action.

Agree on a lot of points - although I wonder if some plaintiff's firms borrow to fund litigation costs. Dennis type firms charge exorbitant interest rates. Many people who are victims like Tom represented borrow against their anticipated recovery/settlement and pay these interest rates when they finally get their monies only to have interest eat into a good chunk of it. I hope none of Tom's victims borrowed against their settlements.

I do have one caveat - there are some highly respected plaintiff's firms and civil rights firms. Their attorneys attended the finest law schools, and they take on important cases including class actions. They aren't what people think of as "ambulance chasers."  White shoe firms are corporate firms and any litigation they engage in is mainly defense oriented. Ask any of them the name of a partner at Simpson Thatcher or Cravath and they won't know their names either.  They are different worlds. 

[chlban]

12 hours ago, oakville said:

If Erika is charged with a criminal offense or has her assets seized by the bankruptcy trustees, would she still be on the show next season ?

Tune in Sunday night to watch Salt Lake City and you will have the answer😀 Then, of course, there is Teresa and Joe 

[princelina]

On 9/16/2021 at 7:45 PM, Emmeline said:

Whatever Andy really thinks about Erika, he is going to kiss her ass and pray she will come back next year.  Erika’s sordid storyline brought back viewers.  Money is his bottom line as well as Erikas.  I feel dirty even watching but not enough to stop.  I want to see Erika get what’s coming to her.

 

10 hours ago, Shannah Banana said:

I think she could be on the show next season.  I don't think being charged with a crime automatically exempts you from gainful employment.  Being charged and being convicted are two different things.

My question is:  will she still bring the viewers? I know we're all watching now to see her downfall, but after it happens will she still be a ratings draw?  Doing what - whining about her cute house and shopping at TJ Maxx?  (with her assistant!!🤣 )

[Shannah Banana]

11 hours ago, Dixie Sugarbaker said:

She is so bad I keep expecting Jon Lovitz to come behind her doing his old SNL “Yeah, that’s the ticket” bit.

Yes!  I was thinking that Erika's stories sounded like Jon Lovitz when he was doing his Pathological Liar skits on SNL!  That's the ticket!!! 

[Shannah Banana]

2 hours ago, oakville said:

I am not familiar with RHONJ, but are the crimes similar ?

Would they show Erika & her glam squad getting ready for court appearances?

Would there be episodes where they auctioned off Erika's clothes and other assets ?

Tom's legal issues are getting so much attention in the media that I believe it would be even harder for Erika to keep her stories straight. 

I believe the Guidice's were charged and convicted with fraud.  Erika hasn't been charged with a crime (yet?) so we will have to wait and see how all that plays out.

[izabella]

20 minutes ago, princelina said:

 

My question is:  will she still bring the viewers? I know we're all watching now to see her downfall, but after it happens will she still be a ratings draw?  Doing what - whining about her cute house and shopping at TJ Maxx?  (with her assistant!!🤣 )

We are watching to see her downfall, but it's really getting harder and harder to watch because so many of the women are coddling her, as Andy will do at the reunion.  I cannot get behind them piling on Sutton for asking questions when Erika is busy spinning herself as the real victim here, and they are helping her do that.  I can barely watch Kyle yelling at Sutton to "be HONEST!" when it is Erika they should be saying that to.  And the lack of concern for Tom's victims from Erika and these women is disgusting. 

I guess plenty of people will keep tuning in because most people are casual viewers and don't dig into the facts beyond the show.  If they stick to this kid-gloves approach with Erika at the reunion, which Andy and Bravo will, some of us won't be back next season.  Coddling Erika who gives zero fucks about the victims is a new low for show, and I didn't think that was possible.

[Boo Boo]

11 hours ago, Shannah Banana said:

I think she could be on the show next season.  I don't think being charged with a crime automatically exempts you from gainful employment.  Being charged and being convicted are two different things.

Yeah, I would think this would be the same standard they could/would use with Erika.  Bravo was there every step of the way with Joe and Teresa Guidice with their criminal journey's, both in and out of prison, and gave Teresa her job back.  Even after they were convicted there was time before they had to report to prison, and I think Bravo was filming then too.   Since the ratings have been so high this season because of Erika and her jacked up life, Bravo will do what they can to keep her around.

Bravo would probably like nothing more than an Erika going to and getting out of jail. 

I mean, this is a boon to RHOBH.  i can't imagine how boring this season would've been if the only real drama was nakedgate.  

[Cosmocrush]

10 minutes ago, Boo Boo said:

I mean, this is a boon to RHOBH.  i can't imagine how boring this season would've been if the only real drama was nakedgate.  

Agreed.  This has been one of the best seasons in years because there have been multiple stories: Garcelle and Kyle working out stuff from the reunion, Sutton and Crystal, Erika and her bullshit,  and of course the addition of Kathy Hilton.  So some variety unlike past seasons of relentless gang ups on one person over and over. 

[Boo Boo]

Just now, Cosmocrush said:

Agreed.  This has been one of the best seasons in years because there have been multiple stories: Garcelle and Kyle working out stuff from the reunion, Sutton and Crystal, Erika and her bullshit,  and of course the addition of Kathy Hilton.  So some variety unlike past seasons of relentless gang ups on one person over and over. 

Exactly!  I just feel badly that I'm enjoying it so much b/c the Erika storyline was built off the backs of widows and orphans.

[pasdetrois]

"Bravo would probably like nothing more than an Erika going to and getting out of jail. 

I mean, this is a boon to RHOBH.  i can't imagine how boring this season would've been if the only real drama was nakedgate."

Absolutely. Andy doesn't "like" Erika - he's using Erika. (See Theresa, NeNe, etc.)

The question is whether Erika realizes it, or is vulnerable to false flattery. I suspect she realizes it and will use Andy right back (for big bucks).

I still believe that some of the women are being coached by production in how they take sides.

Edited September 18, 2021 by pasdetrois

[Shannah Banana]

1 hour ago, izabella said:

I guess plenty of people will keep tuning in because most people are casual viewers and don't dig into the facts beyond the show.  If they stick to this kid-gloves approach with Erika at the reunion, which Andy and Bravo will, some of us won't be back next season.  Coddling Erika who gives zero fucks about the victims is a new low for show, and I didn't think that was possible.

For me, it's a dilemma because BH's has always been my favorite franchise.  When Teresa Guidice was going through her legal battles and stint in the clink, I quit watching for a couple of seasons because I didn't want to support that shit, but NJ wasn't a fave and I never liked Teresa, so it was easy to not watch.  With BH it's different.  So far, Erika hasn't been charged with any crimes (except in the Court of Public Opinion) and so it feels kind of up in the air, and inquiring minds want to know.  If Erika comes back next season, I'm not even gonna lie, I will be watching. 

[gingerella]

10 hours ago, Baltimore Betty said:

Dr. Phil should do one of his timelines for all her story telling.

Wouldn't we think there would be security camera's around the home, we would be able to see someone on the property, right?

Yeah but a bear probably came down the hill and ate the cameras...DUH! C'mon Betty, use your head woman!

Edited September 18, 2021 by gingerella

[Raiderred]

2 hours ago, izabella said:

We are watching to see her downfall, but it's really getting harder and harder to watch because so many of the women are coddling her, as Andy will do at the reunion.  I cannot get behind them piling on Sutton for asking questions when Erika is busy spinning herself as the real victim here, and they are helping her do that.  I can barely watch Kyle yelling at Sutton to "be HONEST!" when it is Erika they should be saying that to.  And the lack of concern for Tom's victims from Erika and these women is disgusting. 

I agree completely. I thought it would gradually turn into most, if not all, of the women turned on her but it sucks watching her go Incredible Hulk on Sutton and the other women supporting her ragtag ass.  I stopped watching NY and I watched all of them from the first season but I can quit any of them when Andy pulls his B.S.

[SemiCharmedLife]

I think a lot of us would continue to watch next year if Erika was on, but ONLY if she is getting her just desserts (and if her wages were garnished to pay back the true victims). This season many of us tuned it to see her downfall, only to see that those who question her are getting beat up by the FF5.  I don't enjoy Erika being coddled by the mean girls (two-faced though they may be) because she has shown not an ounce of sympathy over the victims of Tom's grift.  She is not the victim here and some of these Housewives need to wake up!

[Mrs peel]

5 hours ago, jinjer said:

 

I agree - Kathy is playing the dimwit. She came on the show I read bc she was bored. She is shrewd - takes after her mother Big Kathy. She's the real sniper from the side with Thomasina, sitting Sutton next to Erika, bringing up "Why is not seeing color a problem" in reference to Sutton- she wasn't bringing it up out of the blue. "I never heard of Sutton." She's friends with Crystal and is backing up Crystal.

Also her nonsense about not wanting to be associated with unsavory people (like criminal Erika). She cut off Kyle for years for bringing up Kim's alcoholism. Then she cut her off bc she didn't want Kyle to out the crappy things their mother did. Her whole house is full of skeletons and it's a lot deeper than Paris' sex tape. Meanwhile, Sutton may surprise us all. https://www.instagram.com/p/CHLN7oCgHHA/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link

 

Agree on a lot of points - although I wonder if some plaintiff's firms borrow to fund litigation costs. Dennis type firms charge exorbitant interest rates. Many people who are victims like Tom represented borrow against their anticipated recovery/settlement and pay these interest rates when they finally get their monies only to have interest eat into a good chunk of it. I hope none of Tom's victims borrowed against their settlements.

I do have one caveat - there are some highly respected plaintiff's firms and civil rights firms. Their attorneys attended the finest law schools, and they take on important cases including class actions. They aren't what people think of as "ambulance chasers."  White shoe firms are corporate firms and any litigation they engage in is mainly defense oriented. Ask any of them the name of a partner at Simpson Thatcher or Cravath and they won't know their names either.  They are different worlds. 

I think plaintiffs law firms do both kinds of  not unusual for firms to use lines of credit to tide over the ebb and flow of receivables (for PI firms even more important).  I am guessing Girardi turned eventually to litigation funding, but don’t  know.  

i am thinking of the vaginal mesh cases, where PI lawyers encouraged their clients to have revision surgery, paid through litigation funding.  Those surgeries were also often horrible, and of course if the client didn’t win the case, was on the hook for the surgery costs too.  Blood suckers.

I agree there is a difference between the ambulance chasers and class action cases, though many of the latter sadly don’t provide lasting benefits either (except to counsel).

And while attorneys may not know the names of specific Cravath partners, EVERYONE knows of the firm.  The whitest of white shoes😂

[amarante]

22 hours ago, Mrs peel said:

I think plaintiffs law firms do both kinds of  not unusual for firms to use lines of credit to tide over the ebb and flow of receivables (for PI firms even more important).  I am guessing Girardi turned eventually to litigation funding, but don’t  know.  

And while attorneys may not know the names of specific Cravath partners, EVERYONE knows of the firm.  The whitest of white shoes😂

The Wall Street law firms have a salary scale for first year associates and essentially all of the law firms pay what is called the "going rate". When I was a third year law student, the joke was - What is the going rate? The going rate means if you don't match it, we are all going to Cravath. 😂

Girardi definitely used loans from companies that specialize in funding large litigation cases. They have experts to assess the *value* of the cases. It's not really shameful per se to have loans at because class actions especially are incredibly expensive to fund since everything is contingent. 

With a standard contingent fee case, the plaintiff generally pays the costs and fees as they arise. For example, any filing fees or any experts hired. A huge expense is the cost of a deposition since you have to hire a videographer and/or a court reporter to record the deposition. And then you have to pay xeroxing and distribution for the copies that need to be sent out to the other side. When I was involved in a lawsuit as a plaintiff in a contingency fee situation, I was billed each month for the costs and fees. The only thing I didn't pay for were my attorney's billable hours which he took from the eventual settlement. 

From what I read, Girardi was actually scamming the LENDERS as he was using the same collateral to get loans from different lenders. In others words, he would borrow against the XYZ litigation from Lender A and then borrow from Lender B from the same XYZ litigation.

Edited September 19, 2021 by amarante

[hoodooznoodooz]

On 9/16/2021 at 6:34 PM, hoodooznoodooz said:

Heh. The WWCL guys said that Dorit sent mirror invitations, thinking her face would appear to those opening the invitations.

They also said it looked like an award you might receive at a conference if you worked for J.D. Power.

[ladyscorpio]

On 9/17/2021 at 12:34 PM, Boo Boo said:

I don't even think he's attractive for his age!  

 

Me neither!! He's always looked kinda like a deranged professor to me with his hair sticking up all over.

[RoseAllDay]

Rewatching the episode, and I am ROFL at how Erika is relating the latest turn of events to Kyle. Monotone voice, fast delivery, no pauses. It reminds me of those radio commercials for products where they have to disclose all the fine print, so the tape is sped up to like x1,000, and you can’t process what you legally need to know, so you’re like, “Well, OK, then.”

That, plus the ho-hum way she tells it. Just another day in the life of Erika Girardi…

EDIT: OMG, the mental gymnastics of Dorit trying to buy Erika’s story. That dinner scene is pure comedy gold. These episodes only improve with age.

😄

Edited September 18, 2021 by RoseAllDay
More thoughts as I rewatch.

[Boo Boo]

On 9/17/2021 at 6:35 PM, Maximona said:

My main takeaway was how old these women look without their warpaint.  There was one quick shot of Rinna's face just before the facial mask was applied, and I thought, Ho-kay!  There is no painting in her attic!

Kyle looked horrendous also in the discussion with Erika scene.

I think when these women get there faces filled up, they really need a full face of makeup to make it look good.  Its like their eyes are more sunken in b/c of the fillers and their faces look too waxy.

They are lucky that Bravo's lighting/filtering is generally good. I watched Bethenny Frankel's HBO reality show and she looked absolutely horrible in the THs.  And probably gives you an idea of what she really looks like if you were to see her in person.

 

Edited September 18, 2021 by Boo Boo

[gingerella]

9 minutes ago, Boo Boo said:

Kyle looked horrendous also in the discussion with Erika scene.

I think when these women get there faces filled up, they really need a full face of makeup to make it look good.  Its like their eyes are more sunken in b/c of the fillers and their faces look too waxy.

I thought the same exact thing. Am I shallow that it made me snicker? Because Kyle thinks she's all that, and honestly, she really isn't.

[janiema]

4 hours ago, amarante said:

The Wall Street law firms have a salary scale for first year associates and essentially all of the law firms pay what is called the "going rate". When I was a third year law student, the joke was - What is the going rate? The going rate means if you don't match it, we are all going to Cravath. 😂

Girardi definitely used loans from companies that specialize in funding large litigation cases. They have experts to assess the *value* of the cases. It's not really shameful per se to have loans at because class actions especially are incredibly expensive to fund since everything is contingent. 

With a standard contingent fee case, the plaintiff generally pays the costs and fees as they arise. For example, any filing fees or any experts hired. A huge expense is the cost of a deposition since you have to hire a videographer and/or a court reporter to record the deposition. And then you have to pay xeroxing and distribution for the copies that need to be sent out to the other side. 

From what I read, Girardi was actually scamming the LENDERS as he was using the same collateral to get loans from different lenders. In others words, he would borrow against the XYZ litigation from Lender A and then borrow from Lender B from the same XYZ litigation.

Isn’t using the same collateral to secure multiple loans what the Guidices did too?

[Thumper]

5 hours ago, Mrs peel said:

I think plaintiffs law firms do both kinds of  not unusual for firms to use lines of credit to tide over the ebb and flow of receivables (for PI firms even more important).  I am guessing Girardi turned eventually to litigation funding, but don’t  know.  

i am thinking of the vaginal mesh cases, where PI lawyers encouraged their clients to have revision surgery, paid through litigation funding.  Those surgeries were also often horrible, and of course if the client didn’t win the case, was on the hook for the surgery costs too.  Blood suckers.

I agree there is a difference between the ambulance chasers and class action cases, though many of the latter sadly don’t provide lasting benefits either (except to counsel).

And while attorneys may not know the names of specific Cravath partners, EVERYONE knows of the firm.  The whitest of white shoes😂

I have never heard of Cravath.  I am not a lawyer.  Had to google.

[Ms Blue Jay]

Why does everyone say that the ratings are so good this season?  On Wikipedia it shows the numbers as less than last season.

Edited September 19, 2021 by Ms Blue Jay

[Anne Thrax]

On 9/15/2021 at 5:35 PM, eleanorofaquitaine said:

I am still laughing over the idea of a snow storm in Pasadena. 

Well, the story of the accident IS far fetched, but to be fair Castaic is only 40 mins. or so away from Pasadena and it does snow there once or twice almost every year.

[RoseAllDay]

On 9/17/2021 at 6:35 PM, Maximona said:

I dunno.  I guess I'm out of synch, but I thought this was a bor-r-r-r-ring episode.

My main takeaway was how old these women look without their warpaint.  There was one quick shot of Rinna's face just before the facial mask was applied, and I thought, Ho-kay!  There is no painting in her attic!

Also those pants Kyle was wearing at the two-couples dinner?  They weren't doing her any favors.  (There was also a profile shot of her in that segment that made her look downright matronly.)

 

The howives are not immune to the passage of time, gravity, and other laws of nature. That’s why I find their obsession with plastic surgery, facials, etc., to be hilarious.

Nothing can really top those Gucci pants that Garcelle was gushing about, though. 

(And while I’m here, I respectfully take back my observation that Harry is attractive for his age.)
 

 

[jinjer]

On 9/18/2021 at 3:41 PM, amarante said:

The Wall Street law firms have a salary scale for first year associates and essentially all of the law firms pay what is called the "going rate". When I was a third year law student, the joke was - What is the going rate? The going rate means if you don't match it, we are all going to Cravath. 😂

Girardi definitely used loans from companies that specialize in funding large litigation cases. They have experts to assess the *value* of the cases. It's not really shameful per se to have loans at because class actions especially are incredibly expensive to fund since everything is contingent. 

With a standard contingent fee case, the plaintiff generally pays the costs and fees as they arise. For example, any filing fees or any experts hired. A huge expense is the cost of a deposition since you have to hire a videographer and/or a court reporter to record the deposition. And then you have to pay xeroxing and distribution for the copies that need to be sent out to the other side. When I was involved in a lawsuit as a plaintiff in a contingency fee situation, I was billed each month for the costs and fees. The only thing I didn't pay for were my attorney's billable hours which he took from the eventual settlement. 

From what I read, Girardi was actually scamming the LENDERS as he was using the same collateral to get loans from different lenders. In others words, he would borrow against the XYZ litigation from Lender A and then borrow from Lender B from the same XYZ litigation.

Just wondering who gets paid first in bankruptcy - Tom's clients who were victims or the lenders who fronted Tom money. Yikes what a mess. Why haven't criminal fraud charges been filed yet? And where's the IRS? The Guidices went down on taxes too I think? 

[OdinO.]

On 9/17/2021 at 8:15 PM, FlyingEgret said:

Thanks - I was just about to ask if the brain vs ankle surgery was "now" or 3 years ago. So many trips to the hospital get confusing. Wonder if his medical insurance is still in place...

He has Medicare at least

[Anne Thrax]

On 9/16/2021 at 4:52 AM, CrinkleCutCat said:

I don’t believe anything Erika says anymore so I’m down a rabbit hole on the Internet right now… I started by trying to find a funny gif of a car flipping or rolling down a cliff but ended up elsewhere, damn Internet!

Can someone who knows her son’s name etc look up his accident report, pretty please? There would have to be some record. A car can’t flip over 5-6 times without being written off/police called. Although he’s a police officer… could it have been ‘covered up’?

I’m even googling to see how fast a car has to travel to flip over that many times! I’m finding things like this ‘Fundamentals of Rollover Crash Reconstruction’! (No idea of the source… just www surfing!)

https://www.jhscientific.com/downloads/Rollovers.pdf

 

edit:

found footage of a car flipping 5 times (as an example) not pretty and causes a lot of damage.

 

 

We should ask Tiger Woods about how many times you can roll and still come out without any life threatening injuries.  Although he probably doesn't remember how many times he flipped due to his altered state of consciousness in that one.

On 9/16/2021 at 5:37 AM, Lassus said:

I feel like this whole moving the show inside because it will rain was a massive lie.  I mean, I lived in Los Angeles, and sure it rained.  And I was even in a flash flood once on La Cienega.  But for four days in a row?  That seems unlikely.  And no one seemed rain dressed.  I call bullshit.

Well, if you don't live in SoCal, then you wouldn't know we don't own rain gear here.  And it did rain four days straight here in 2020.

[amarante]

2 hours ago, jinjer said:

Just wondering who gets paid first in bankruptcy - Tom's clients who were victims or the lenders who fronted Tom money. Yikes what a mess. Why haven't criminal fraud charges been filed yet? And where's the IRS? The Guidices went down on taxes too I think? 

It is complicated and it depends. 

Generally someone who has a lien on the property/assets would be first in line. For most people, their mortgage company has a lien on the house which means it is first in line.

One of the issues regarding the lenders is that even if they had a security interest in the collateral, that collateral would only be for the portion of the payment that was owed to Tom as his contingent fee. In other words, if Girardi had received a settlement of $10 million, Tom would only have been entitled to $4 million at most since the clients were owed the rest of it.

The issue with the "loan" to Erika's company is that EJ Global (the LLC) has no assets and theoretically Erika is not personally liable for loans to a corporation. That is theoretically the reason people have LLC's - to separate personal and corporate liabilities. However, it is very likely that the corporate veil will be pierced and Erika will be personally responsible to repay that amount. The whole issue of piercing the corporate veil has been discussed extensively on the Erika  thread and why it is likely that the creditors will prevail. 

Edited September 20, 2021 by amarante