Erika Girardi/Erika Jayne: Let them eat cake

[NotChristine]

6 hours ago, albarino said:

Beverley Hills just became so much more interesting.  I never really understood why Erika was cast; she never was very appealing to me.  So I'm loving this.  Sorta like Stassi being let go; there is a certain amount of schadenfreude happening here and I'm thanking Santa.  I'm also wondering why we haven't heard from Rinna.  Where is the "Own It" chorus?  C'mon, man!

Rinna is singing a different time.

[pasdetrois]

I'm kind of shocked that Erika has been so stupid. She's canny and crafty, and those types usually are more careful not to do something that gets them caught in something so egregious. ETA: I think the fame of being on the show, the gushing over her music videos, "Chicago,"...went to her head and made her nuts. She lost all sense of control and caution. Or perhaps she's been crooked for a long time.

Lawyers: how long before she and Tom go to the slammer? I'm curious how long the investigation and prosecutions could drag out, and very curious how the two of them will pay for their defenses. Also, what are the chances of plea bargains?

Prediction: the lovers will come crawling out of the woodwork, eager for their 15 minutes of tawdry fame, and at least one of them will have been giving Erika money. In fact, she may already have another chump waiting in the wings to rescue her.

What tipped off the authorities? Was it some of the plane crash victims figuring things out? How did they figure it out? It sounds as if information and activities that had been carefully shielded somehow became known.

Edited December 19, 2020 by pasdetrois

[albarino]

16 minutes ago, NotChristine said:

Rinna is singing a different time.

Rinna is FOS. Erika isn't going to talk about anything until the court cases get settled.  She can imagine Tom stepped out on her a lot (he didn't--he was sleeping in his number bed) but she is going to keep her mouth shut until she is a guest at one of our Federal Holiday Inns.

[njbchlover]

Does anyone think that Erika will claim complete ignorance of, and total innocence in any of the embezzlement/fraud cases?  

I think that could happen.  She could claim that even though they've been married for 21 years, they's been living separate lives for a long time, and she had no idea about any of his business dealings.  All of which could actually be true - as long as he was paying for her lifestyle.  Now that she is tweeting/deleting screen shots of an alleged mistress, she is setting up her case against Tom.

As someone said upthread - Erika is crafty and canny - I agree, and she is also shrewd.  

Something tells me she's going to land on her feet after all of this.  They may not be shod in Louboutin's, but she'll land on her feet.

Edited December 19, 2020 by njbchlover

[Starlight925]

7 hours ago, suomi said:

https://theblast.com/150956/rhobh-star-erika-jayne-leaks-husbands-alleged-sext-convo-with-ju

Screen grab of the "other woman" post Erika deleted.

I saw the original post before it was deleted.  It had the actual phone #, not the blocked-out version.

In the comments, people said they had tried to call it, but it was already disconnected. 

The name of the "other woman" is Justice Tricia Bigelow.

It should be noted that the phone looks to be an older flip phone.  It even says 3G on it; 3G hasn't been used for years now.

Also, when you look at the dates on the phone, it says "Thur Aug. 4".  August 4th hasn't fallen on a Thursday since 2016, so these do appear to be old messages.

 

Edited December 19, 2020 by Starlight925

[Starlight925]

10 minutes ago, njbchlover said:

Does anyone think that Erika will claim complete ignorance of, and total innocence in any of the embezzlement/fraud cases?  

I think that could happen.  She could claim that even though they've been married for 21 years, they's been living separate lives for a long time, and she had no idea about any of his business dealings.  All of which could actually be true - as long as he was paying for her lifestyle.  Now that she is tweeting/deleting screen shots of an alleged mistress, she is setting up her case against Tom.

As someone said upthread - Erika is crafty and canny - I agree, and she is also shrewd.  

Something tells me she's going to land on her feet after all of this.  They may not be shod in Louboutin's, but she'll land on her feet.

Agree, unfortunately, with the bolded.  Wouldn't surprise me one bit if she doesn't already have a a "glam squad" full of crafty lawyers who are going to "prove" that she is innocent, poor ex-stripper Erika.  

I've never liked her.  Always felt she was cold, distant, and out to prove something.  

This just really makes you wonder....how will Bravo handle all of this?  

[Pattycake2]

4g became widely available in 2010, so those pics have to be a minimum of ten years old.  I don’t think that Erika being on the board is enough to nail her unless they can prove that she was aware of what was going on.  She’ll probably claim ignorance, but the investigation may eventually turn up enough proof.  A full financial investigation could identify loads of issues.

Edited December 19, 2020 by Pattycake2

[geauxaway]

1 hour ago, Starlight925 said:

This just really makes you wonder....how will Bravo handle all of this?  

I’m putting my money on her bowing out quietly halfway through the season (does anyone know how much filming they have left to do?).   I don’t think any of this will be brought up at all.  They didn’t make Dorit include her stuff and that actively happened on a HW trip during filming didn’t it?   I don’t even think Erika will want to do the one on one Andy interview that Teresa and Luann both did.  I could be completely wrong, though.

[pasdetrois]

Isn't one of the companies that received illicitly funneled funds owned by Erika? One of the LLCs? I would think she cannot hand-wave away these facts. There are limits to how much ignorance one can claim.

[itsadryheat]

https://tamaratattles.com/2020/12/19/erika-jayne-tom-girardi-but-wait-theres-more/

"While I was trying to figure out all of this, Erika Jayne was posting on IG about a California Appellate Justice. She ranted about her husband fucking her and paying her Saks bill and paying for her plastic surgery.. Wow. That sounds like it was a lot cheaper than Erika and her glam squad. It also sounded like drunk posting and either Erika realized that she should not be drunk posting (allegedly) about a California Appellate judge while embroiled in a huge potentially criminal mess (again, not a pretty mess). I’ve opted not to post the IG, because, I’m not that drunk or stupid. And honestly neither is Erika. I’ve rarely seen her on the show being a huge drinker. But tonight, it really looked like she was in the cups and perhaps had a ladysitter who made her take the post down."

"The attorney on Twitter, @RonaldRichards who I don’t think has any skin in the game (but I wouldn’t know) seems to think this is the most blatant and egregious case he has ever seen. I paraphrase but that is what I took from his twitter feed."

"Here’s What Involuntary Bankruptcy Means

Another thing that has confused me in all of this is why Tom’s bankruptcy was “involuntary.” I’ve since gotten a first year Internet law degree that let’s me know that Tom did NOT file for bankruptcy himself. It was brought on by his many, many, many creditors who filed on his behalf on the court and were allowed to do so. This is BEYOND A DOUBT worse than anything Bravo has ever dealt with. It’s way worse than Teresa and Joe. These two are going to prison. At the same time. For way longer than Teresa and Joe in my opinion as an imaginary Internet lawyer."

 

[itsadryheat]

2 hours ago, Starlight925 said:

The name of the "other woman" is Justice Tricia Bigelow.

 

48 minutes ago, Pattycake2 said:

4g became widely available in 2010, so those pics have to be a minimum of ten years old.

https://www.latimes.com/socal/la-canada-valley-sun/entertainment/tn-vsl-engagement-20101124-story.html

NOV. 24, 2010

5:05 PM

"Tricia A. Bigelow, daughter of the late Judge M. Ross and Janet Bigelow of Long Beach, was recently engaged to Terrance J. Manning, son of Don and Rose Manning of La Cañada."

Busy woman, allegedly.

Affair with Ponzi Tom, Engagement/New Marriage, Work, allegedly.

[amarante]

Based on what is public information at this point, Tom definitely could face criminal prosecution at this point. Whether he actually serves time given his age - 🤷🏼‍♀️

I think it unlikely that Erika would face criminal charges because it would be difficult to prove that she had actual knowledge of how Tom was handling his law practice finances. Teresa actually signed fraudulent tax returns and the bankruptcy petition. 

However, Erika will have to deal with the consequences of the civil litigation - i.e. she is on the hook for a lot of money. Even if Tom wasn't involved in criminal stuff, he still owes a lot of money and so all of his assets would be thrown into the pot including any assets theoretically held by Erika or by Erika's corporations.

That is where it is going to hurt because she is going from a lifestyle that was spending millions and millions a year to something that is considerably less lavish. Even assuming the most favorable outcome for her - i.e. her future earnings are now frozen in order to be used for restitution, she still would have a limited income - obviously a nice income but a huge difference between private planes and half a million annually for your glam squad. 

To clarify, even assuming the best outcome, that she emerges from all of this with the ability to keep her future earnings intact - i.e. there aren't liens on her future earnings based on restitution for the creditors, she will face greatly reduced financial circumstances. She still has earning potential from promotional stuff; possible Bravo salary, maybe some acting gigs or spots on shows like Dancing With The Stars or Celebrity Big Brother. There seems to be a way that these D level reality stars seem to move on without needing to get normal jobs. However, her lifestyle would not be that which she enjoyed when Tom was funding it. Most of us would envy a lifestyle where one makes $1 million or so a year but that doesn't go that far realistically in the world of the rich. 

The $20 million that was paid into her LLC is clearly going to be clawed back by the Trustee in Bankruptcy. It doesn't matter that it was paid into a corporation - it was still money that would be subject to being party of the assets used to pay off the creditors.

Of course the interesting issue will be the coming years in which the creditors will monitor all of her income and spending in order to keep track of the assets in order to get them paid over. Madoff's Trustee spent years tracking down money and clawing it back. The attorneys for Ron Goldman's family are still pursuing money from OJ based on the civil judgment they got.

Edited December 19, 2020 by amarante

[amarante]

2 hours ago, albarino said:

Rinna is FOS. Erika isn't going to talk about anything until the court cases get settled.  She can imagine Tom stepped out on her a lot (he didn't--he was sleeping in his number bed) but she is going to keep her mouth shut until she is a guest at one of our Federal Holiday Inns.

While it's true that Erika has an excellent excuse for deflecting discussion about the case - and for sure if she actually continues to shoot, she will NOT discuss it in any way except to deny and say it is being handled by lawyers and she knew nothing about it.

However, will the OTHER ladies discuss amongst themselves and also discuss in their confessionals. They generally have banded together to protect the other housewives and so there are these ridiculous seasons in which everything interesting is ignored and instead there is Puppygate or whether Denise Richards should have asked the ladies to be more circumspect in terms of loud sexual talk when there were children around. And the completely WTF cares about whether she slept with Brandi - and to a great extent the housewives were allowed to get away with the hypocrisy of treating Brandi as a factual source. In this case they will ignore actual legal pleadings and substantiated rulings by a Federal judge.

[itsadryheat]

https://pagesix.com/2020/12/19/erika-jayne-reveals-california-judge-is-tom-girardis-alleged-mistress/

Photo of her post with texts

"Jayne, 49, posted-and-deleted photos taken of an old cell phone belonging to Girardi, showcasing several text messages allegedly sent from California judge, Justice Tricia A. Bigelow."

[suomi]

Attorney @RonaldRichards opined that the way Erika was selling her clothing could be problematic re claims of ignorance. It weakens a stance of "little ol' me has no idea what Tom does."

"Also, the choice of an obscure French company gives pause as to whether Erika was trying to move money out of the country. The legal team for two of the Lion Air flight victims assert this is further indication that the Girardis jointly and separately continue to siphon fiances away from the grasp of the families of victims of the plane crash."

[Pattycake2]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/2020/12/03/erika-jayne-ex-tom-girardi-real-housewives-sued-embezzlement/3806393001/
 

legal documents obtained from a Chicago law firm accusing Tom and Erika of filing sham divorce .

[emma675]

Is Bravo filming the RHoBH right now? I know they paused filming when Kyle, Dorit, and several crew of caught Covid but I haven't heard if they've started back up yet. Andy must be salivating over the drama and press he could get out of Erika's situation. 

I can see Erika digging in her heels, refusing to leave the show but also refusing to acknowledge the situation. I feel like the other ladies will be more open and gossipy if she isn't around. Kyle and Dorit both liked Erika's crazy Instagram post last night and Kyle commented "Receipts" with a check mark. 

Edited December 19, 2020 by emma675d

[nexxie]

Wow, there’s a whole assortment of scumbags in this story - maybe Erika Girardi/Jayne will get a spin-off!

Edited December 19, 2020 by nexxie

[Slakkie]

All I know is that Rinna and Erika both went after Denise that when you signed up for this your WHOLE LIFE was on stage.  So what is it Erika - you cannot say you were living apart unless you admit YOU WERE LYING and not about a girl or girl action - you literally STOLE MONEY and FAKED a marriage.  Come on Rinna - get those lips warmed up.

 

But they won't because they are also a bunch of phonies.

[Sunnykm]

5 hours ago, NotChristine said:

Rinna is singing a different time.

I clicked over to Instagram but there are so many comments and I can't even load them all.  Can you let us know what Rinna said?

[hoodooznoodooz]

21 hours ago, suomi said:

If I was going to place a bet, I’d bet Erika Girardi is going to go down with Tom on this and both could face federal charges that include prison time. Like I said, it’s a mess and is sure as hell ain’t pretty.

Will they allow Tom and Erika conjugal visits? Their relationship will suffer without all that intimacy.

Edited December 20, 2020 by hoodooznoodooz

[amarante]

30 minutes ago, Sunnykm said:

I clicked over to Instagram but there are so many comments and I can't even load them all.  Can you let us know what Rinna said?

Just a comment under a very air brushed photo of Erika saying - You better believe she is going to talk about it"

[Slakkie]

12 minutes ago, amarante said:

Just a comment under a very air brushed photo of Erika saying - You better believe she is going to talk about it"

No way her attorney will allow her to discuss it - I cannot wait to see how those counterfeit beyotches handle this

[StatisticalOutlier]

13 hours ago, suomi said:

https://theblast.com/150956/rhobh-star-erika-jayne-leaks-husbands-alleged-sext-convo-with-ju

Here's a photo from that article.  This is Erika??

 

6 hours ago, pasdetrois said:

What tipped off the authorities? Was it some of the plane crash victims figuring things out? How did they figure it out?

They asked for their money and he failed to give it to them. 

[Emmeline]

On 12/17/2020 at 6:51 PM, emmawoodhouse said:

How can she film around having no glam squad? No 6 foot long ponytails, etc. I assume she gets to keep her garish wardrobe. 

When Taylor Armstrong's husband killed himself leaving debt, I remember her saying she had to turn over her handbags and purses.  I’m sure Erika’s used wardrobe could bring in some $$.  So who knows.

[Julyolo]

I don't think they conspired on the divorce. The best strategy for a dual defense would have been her asking to appointed as his guardian a couple of years ago, citing a decline in his cognitive abilities THEN. Currently, they are over the place like the movie Chinatown: "He's cheating" "He's incapacitated"... and if the result of this psychiatric examination proves him to be experiencing a cognitive decline, it's a bad look for her to be dumping him in the middle of it. But then she does have that history of abandoning vulnerable family members to further her own agenda. 

Edited December 24, 2020 by Julyolo
Addition

[Julyolo]

As to her trying to convince the Feds she is an "innocent spouse", they have a chargeable offense for that, called "willfull blindness".

[hoodooznoodooz]

1 hour ago, Julyolo said:

Currently, they are over the place like the movie Chinatown: "He's cheating" "He's incapacitated".

Hilarious. Thank you!

[suomi]

5 hours ago, StatisticalOutlier said:

They asked for their money and he failed to give it to them. 

Some of that is murky. It has been reported that the plaintiffs never signed a settlement agreement and therefore initially were unaware that

a) a settlement had been reached and 

b) there were funds to request/expect.

Perhaps this relates to the discrepancy between what they received and the actual benefit amount, ie: Tom lined his pockets with the difference.

If he was cooking the books he would have to cook the paperwork as well, to hide his theft, right?

[hoodooznoodooz]

20 hours ago, suomi said:

https://theblast.com/150956/rhobh-star-erika-jayne-leaks-husbands-alleged-sext-convo-with-ju

Screen grab of the "other woman" post Erika deleted.

Erika obviously was taken aback when Garcelle bluntly asked about her sex life. We had no idea.

You’re awesome for taking that before she came to her senses.

Do we think Bigelow was the judge when Tom was litigating? You’d think she’d recuse herself.

[MakingBacon]

2 hours ago, suomi said:

Some of that is murky. It has been reported that the plaintiffs never signed a settlement agreement and therefore initially were unaware that

a) a settlement had been reached and 

b) there were funds to request/expect.

What is strange is that settlement money is never turned over to a Plaintiff’s attorney until the settlement agreement has been executed by all parties (attorneys, plaintiffs and defendants) because settlements fall apart all the time. Plus, for large or complex cases, there may be a motion filed with the court to have it sign off on finding the settlement to have been in good faith. If there was money turned over to the firm, then the settlement agreements were likely signed. 

If all of the is true, Erika may be able to successfully say she doesn’t know anything about taking money from the client trust account, which I think is completely understandable. Even the majority of people who work at the firm would not have any access or information about the client trust account. Her main problem would be the transfer of large sums into her own personal or business accounts suddenly or whenever the alleged $20 million was moved. She will have to prove that money was unrelated to client trust account money, and even if she does, she is unlikely to keep any of it due to what is owed by Tom. If Erika is cleared, or not charged, she is likely going to walk away with little to no money or property. 

[suomi]

2 hours ago, MakingBacon said:

What is strange is that settlement money is never turned over to a Plaintiff’s attorney until the settlement agreement has been executed by all parties (attorneys, plaintiffs and defendants) because settlements fall apart all the time.

This is the part that sounds murky, from the lawyer on twitter who is interpreting (and Tamara Tattles quoted). 

Earliest reports informed that two plaintiff(s) rec'd 1.5 million (each) but should have rec'd 2 million. So if Tom diverted 25% of the settlements to himself (and he can't increase his fee after the fact) how how did he do it, what type of fraud took place? He forged signatures or docs or both, or ? What does the info below indicate to you? TIA.

Regarding the Indonesian Boeing aircraft crash of the Lion Air flight two of the clients that hired Girardi have obtained new counsel (who appear to be working pro bono).These two clients claim that they never gave consent to settle with Boeing. It seems to have be[en] alleged that to perpetuate the alleged fraud by Girardi, he settled cases without client consent to fund Erika Girardi's lifestyle. Upon review of court dockets, no notices of settlement were found. And, the former Girardi Keese clients claim they never signed any formal settlement documents. Richards states that this type of criminal conduct is brazen. It is no different than committing identity theft of someone else’s account.

[Starlight925]

15 hours ago, Emmeline said:

When Taylor Armstrong's husband killed himself leaving debt, I remember her saying she had to turn over her handbags and purses.  I’m sure Erika’s used wardrobe could bring in some $$.  So who knows.

Yes, when Russell died, his debts became Taylor's, so she had to sell off her handbags and jewelry.

I'm sure Ms. Expensive-to-be-Me has lawyers lined up to "prove" that she was just his innocent ingenue.

Ruth Madoff did have to give up the assets that were in her husband's name, plus assets that were in her name too.  She now lives a very modest life, far from the Birkin-bag Park Avenue lifestyle she once had.

What a house of cards so many of these people are living.  Who's next....Dorit?

[amarante]

6 hours ago, suomi said:

This is the part that sounds murky, from the lawyer on twitter who is interpreting (and Tamara Tattles quoted). 

Earliest reports informed that two plaintiff(s) rec'd 1.5 million (each) but should have rec'd 2 million. So if Tom diverted 25% of the settlements to himself (and he can't increase his fee after the fact) how how did he do it, what type of fraud took place? He forged signatures or docs or both, or ? What does the info below indicate to you? TIA.

 

The reason why penalties are so severe regarding misuse or commingling of the client trust funds is because disbursement relies on the integrity of the lawyer. The settlement is paid to the law firm and the law firm deposits it into the trust account and then writes a check to the client.

This is because there are legitimate amounts that are taken out of the settlement for the lawyer and these are between the lawyer and the client - e.g. percentage owed as the contingency fee as well as any legal costs that are incurred.

It is unlikely that Erika will be charged with any kind of crime based on what happened at the law firm because it was unlikely that she was involved with the finances of the firm on that level. However, the criminal liability is completely separate from the amount of money owed and since it is all community property any money paid to her and all of her assets - clothing, jewelry, whatever - can be seized and sold. 

And since they are likely heading into involuntary bankruptcy the Trust will put them on a budget. Under community property law, once Erika legally filed for divorce - *theoretically* her earnings would no longer be part of community property. However it is pretty murky in terms of tracing the money and what amount of restitution she would be responsible for since that would be an on-going obligation.

Easy to freeze assets based on selling clothing since they were acquired prior to the separation and therefore are community property. 

[Jel]

Will this whole "Erika knew/Erika didn't know" thing eventually come down to a judge's opinion of her credibility?  For years now, she's been cultivating an image of herself as "cunty", and giving zero fucks, and being exxxpensive, etc.  I think, at its core, Erika Jayne's image has a Marie Antoinette vibe, and I wonder if that will penetrate the psyche of the judge deciding her case, ultimately contributing to, say, an unconscious bias.

I think she may find herself in Leona Helmsley, Ruth Madoff territory.

[itsadryheat]

11 minutes ago, amarante said:

It is unlikely that Erika will be charged with any kind of crime based on what happened at the law firm because it was unlikely that she was involved with the finances of the firm on that level. However, the criminal liability is completely separate from the amount of money owed and since it is all community property any money paid to her and all of her assets - clothing, jewelry, whatever - can be seized and sold. 

https://champagneandshade.com/2020/12/05/rhobh-erika-girardi-lawsuit-complaint/

"...and claiming that Erika’s company has been receiving millions of dollars in loans from the account set up for the victims.?

"Defendant Jayne’s company, Defendant EJ Global, has allegedly received tens of millions in “loans” directly from Defendant GK, of which Tom is the sole equity shareholder."

 

Could she have a company but not be responsible for it?

[amarante]

56 minutes ago, itsadryheat said:

https://champagneandshade.com/2020/12/05/rhobh-erika-girardi-lawsuit-complaint/

"...and claiming that Erika’s company has been receiving millions of dollars in loans from the account set up for the victims.?

"Defendant Jayne’s company, Defendant EJ Global, has allegedly received tens of millions in “loans” directly from Defendant GK, of which Tom is the sole equity shareholder."

 

Could she have a company but not be responsible for it?

The money could be clawed back. 
 

However she wouldn’t be criminally liable unless it could be proven that she was involved with the law firm. She would have had to participate in the actual criminal activity to be criminally liable. And I doubt she was. Ruth Madoff faced no criminal liability but all of the assets were seized. 
 

Similarly Erika would not be able to keep the money or anything bought with it. It is all community property. But thst is different from the criminal liability which Tom faces in addition to the civil liability in terms of bankruptcy. 

[amarante]

1 hour ago, Jel said:

Will this whole "Erika knew/Erika didn't know" thing eventually come down to a judge's opinion of her credibility?  For years now, she's been cultivating an image of herself as "cunty", and giving zero fucks, and being exxxpensive, etc.  I think, at its core, Erika Jayne's image has a Marie Antoinette vibe, and I wonder if that will penetrate the psyche of the judge deciding her case, ultimately contributing to, say, an unconscious bias.

I think she may find herself in Leona Helmsley, Ruth Madoff territory.

Ruth Madoff was not criminally liable.
 

Leona was criminally liable for tax evasion but she owned and ran the company. In fact her husband was not criminally liable because  he had nothing to do with the operation of the business at that point. 
 

Teresa was liable because she signed the fraudulent bankruptcy papers and the joint tax returns. 
 

There is no evidence that Erika was ever involved in the actual business operation of the firm.  It doesn’t come down to a judge determining her credibility. It comes down to proof of her actually being involved amd with financial transactions there is always a paper trail and people at the firm testifying regarding her involvement. None of the other lawyers at the firm were involved. 
 

I doubt Erika ever was involved in running the law firm. Why would she be? It had nothing to do with her as she didn’t work at the firm. 

Edited December 20, 2020 by amarante

[Jel]

1 hour ago, amarante said:

Ruth Madoff was not criminally liable.
 

Leona was criminally liable for tax evasion but she owned and ran the company. In fact her husband was not criminally liable because  he had nothing to do with the operation of the business at that point. 
 

Teresa was liable because she signed the fraudulent bankruptcy papers and the joint tax returns. 
 

There is no evidence that Erika was ever involved in the actual business operation of the firm.  It doesn’t come down to a judge determining her credibility. It comes down to proof of her actually being involved amd with financial transactions there is always a paper trail and people at the firm testifying regarding her involvement. None of the other lawyers at the firm were involved. 
 

I doubt Erika ever was involved in running the law firm. Why would she be? It had nothing to do with her as she didn’t work at the firm. 

I was just kind of thinking aloud, about how even though justice is supposed to be blind, judges are people and are therefore susceptible to bias, conscious or unconscious. I don't think Erika's Exxxpensive image is going to do her any favors in that regard. 

Is there ever a time where the evidence isn't perfectly clear and a judge has to rely on her reason?  Where, after all the evidence is presented, judicial decision making is going to be the thing that decides it? (I'm asking -- maybe there isn't, I don't know) But if that situation does arise in Erika's case, how would a judge view her? Perhaps the judge won't know anything about her. Perhaps s/he is a fan? or perhaps, s/he would be put off by Erika's carefully crafted image and her message of "me, at all costs".  Will "Erika Jayne" end up costing Erika Giradi even more than the 40K a month she pays for glam?

I mentioned Ruth Madoff and Leona Helmsley because they are two high profile rich ladies that popped into my head,  and I think it's fair to say neither ended up winning in the court of public opinion.  If the same happens to Erika, I can't see her continuing to be successful on tv or as a performer.  Tbh, I don't expect her to go to jail, but I do expect there will be some sort of personal cost.  

[Jel]

2 hours ago, amarante said:

Ruth Madoff was not criminally liable.
 

Leona was criminally liable for tax evasion but she owned and ran the company. In fact her husband was not criminally liable because  he had nothing to do with the operation of the business at that point. 
 

Teresa was liable because she signed the fraudulent bankruptcy papers and the joint tax returns. 
 

There is no evidence that Erika was ever involved in the actual business operation of the firm.  It doesn’t come down to a judge determining her credibility. It comes down to proof of her actually being involved amd with financial transactions there is always a paper trail and people at the firm testifying regarding her involvement. None of the other lawyers at the firm were involved. 
 

I doubt Erika ever was involved in running the law firm. Why would she be? It had nothing to do with her as she didn’t work at the firm. 

I also doubt Erika was involved in running the law firm, but I've also read (don't know if it's true) that a lot of money from the firm was transferred to Erika's company.  

[amarante]

15 minutes ago, Jel said:

I was just kind of thinking aloud, about how even though justice is supposed to be blind, judges are people and are therefore susceptible to bias, conscious or unconscious. I don't think Erika's Exxxpensive image is going to do her any favors in that regard. 

Is there ever a time where the evidence isn't perfectly clear and a judge has to rely on her reason?  Where, after all the evidence is presented, judicial decision making is going to be the thing that decides it? (I'm asking -- maybe there isn't, I don't know) But if that situation does arise in Erika's case, how would a judge view her? Perhaps the judge won't know anything about her. Perhaps s/he is a fan? or perhaps, s/he would be put off by Erika's carefully crafted image and her message of "me, at all costs".  Will "Erika Jayne" end up costing Erika Giradi even more than the 40K a month she pays for glam?

I mentioned Ruth Madoff and Leona Helmsley because they are two high profile rich ladies that popped into my head,  and I think it's fair to say neither ended up winning in the court of public opinion.  If the same happens to Erika, I can't see her continuing to be successful on tv or as a performer.  Tbh, I don't expect her to go to jail, but I do expect there will be some sort of personal cost.  

Unless a defendant requests it, the jury decides all factual matters and evaluates the truthfulness of the witness. That is the reason why witnesses are required to testify in person.  The judge rules on issues of law like whether evidence or even witnesses are admissible. The Judge would craft the jury instructions  which are enormously important. You can only appeal on matters of law and not on factual issues which are determined by the jury. The right to a jury of one’s peers is one of the most fundamental rights. 
 

At any rate, it is almost never that Federal crimes go to trial especially ones involving financial crimes. They are almost always negotiated in a plea deal because financial crimes leave paper trails. 
 

Her personal cost will be losing her over the top lifestyle but I don’t think that she will become unemployable in the realm of entertainment and social influencing. Her persona has never been that which could really be damaged. Why would fans of pat the pussy be offended? Teresa has continued to thrive professionally. 

[emma675]

I'm also wondering if that justice Tom was accused of having an affair with will face problems. A judge can't preside over a trial when she's involved with one of the attorneys, right? Do she and Tom have any crossover in cases?

[Jel]

32 minutes ago, amarante said:

Unless a defendant requests it, the jury decides all factual matters and evaluates the truthfulness of the witness. That is the reason why witnesses are required to testify in person.  The judge rules on issues of law like whether evidence or even witnesses are admissible. The Judge would craft the jury instructions  which are enormously important. You can only appeal on matters of law and not on factual issues which are determined by the jury. The right to a jury of one’s peers is one of the most fundamental rights. 
 

At any rate, it is almost never that Federal crimes go to trial especially ones involving financial crimes. They are almost always negotiated in a plea deal because financial crimes leave paper trails. 
 

Her personal cost will be losing her over the top lifestyle but I don’t think that she will become unemployable in the realm of entertainment and social influencing. Her persona has never been that which could really be damaged. Why would fans of pat the pussy be offended? Teresa has continued to thrive professionally. 

Thank you for the info , amarante. I don’t know why I didn’t even consider the possibility that there would be a jury, but I didn’t. I just thought a judge would hear it. A jury could make it worse for her.

I don’t really like much of Erika’s message, so perhaps that opinion is colouring my view. I can’t see things going well for her. But you might be right that nothing will push her fans away.

Let’s meet here in eight years when the case is decided and the public opinion verdict is in, so we can compare notes 😉

[amarante]

1 hour ago, Jel said:

I also doubt Erika was involved in running the law firm, but I've also read (don't know if it's true) that a lot of money from the firm was transferred to Erika's company.  

Obviously none of us have all the facts in terms of how Tom paid Erika.

It is alleged that he made a $20 million payment into her corporation but that isn't enough to make Erika CRIMINALLY liable if Tom acquired the money unlawfully. 

Based on their marriage he has paid a lot of money to her over the years - the Pat The Pussy Road Show was never a money making affair. I would imagine that Tom took generous tax write-offs every year since theoretically she was doing it as a business and not as a hobby. They might also have structured payments to her glam squad so that a lot of the money was also a tax write-off. The laws regarding clothing and makeup/styling are a bit of a gray area. You can't write off standard clothing even if you use it when you make a professional appearance. However, you would most likely be able to write off makeup/hair services and so many people just allocate a lot of payments towards the tax write-off services.

[Stats Queen]

A huge thank you for all the legal experts here, it has been very appreciated, interesting and impressive.

Thanks for sharing your expertise - it is helpful.

[Door County Cherry]

13 hours ago, Jel said:

Will this whole "Erika knew/Erika didn't know" thing eventually come down to a judge's opinion of her credibility?  For years now, she's been cultivating an image of herself as "cunty", and giving zero fucks, and being exxxpensive, etc.  I think, at its core, Erika Jayne's image has a Marie Antoinette vibe, and I wonder if that will penetrate the psyche of the judge deciding her case, ultimately contributing to, say, an unconscious bias.

I think she may find herself in Leona Helmsley, Ruth Madoff territory.

No.  Luckily for all of us, the legal system isn't run like an entertainment message board. 🙂 

There's a long way to go before she'd be before a judge.  Hell, there's a long way to go before Tom would be before a judge as a criminal defendant.  The judge who froze his assets said he was going to refer the case to the US Attorneys office for an investigation.  

A referral isn't a guarantee that the US Attorney will even feel a full on investigation is necessary.  It will depend on what is uncovered.  Then, after the investigation, if they find evidence of criminal behavior, they'll arrest those people. 

They're not going to bring anyone into court without more evidence than "I have a gut feeling about so and so."  And no judge is going to convict without evidence.  

It's also doubtful that a judge is going to know that much about Erika Jayne beyond who they'd get in a courtroom---and if she ever got there, she'd be clean faced and toned down. 

[J80134]

Last time Erika was innocent, Madonna was married to Sean.

Coniving, Underhanded, Narcissistic, Tramp.  C-U-N-T indeed.

[RealHousewife]

9 hours ago, Jel said:

Thank you for the info , amarante. I don’t know why I didn’t even consider the possibility that there would be a jury, but I didn’t. I just thought a judge would hear it. A jury could make it worse for her.

I don’t really like much of Erika’s message, so perhaps that opinion is colouring my view. I can’t see things going well for her. But you might be right that nothing will push her fans away.

Let’s meet here in eight years when the case is decided and the public opinion verdict is in, so we can compare notes 😉

Does Erika have a ton of fans? She seemed like a cool chick in the beginning, fairly laid-back her first season. She's still very beautiful and her message of not giving up having fun in life past your 20's is a great thing to me. But much of the rest-valuing money above everything, her aggression, temper tantrums, social media activity, yeah no thank you. 

LOL!

[LemonSoda]

3 hours ago, RealHousewife said:

Does Erika have a ton of fans? She seemed like a cool chick in the beginning, fairly laid-back her first season. She's still very beautiful and her message of not giving up having fun in life past your 20's is a great thing to me. But much of the rest-valuing money above everything, her aggression, temper tantrums, social media activity, yeah no thank you. 

LOL!

I really loved that message. It’s something so many of us need. We can have fun at any age. We can pursue new things at any age. But the rest? Yeah, I’m with you. I really soured on her after her book signings. I get playing the cold bitch on tv, I get being a cold bitch in real life. A cold bitch who can’t be bothered when others are lining up to purchase a book you wrote? No thank you! 
 

It’s funny, as awful as some of the other housewives are or get dragged by fans, it’s surprising who is nice at their events. 

[emma675]

I'll freely admit i was one of the watchers who really liked her up until last season, for the most part. She seemed cool and laid back, she stayed out of the catty drama (most of it), her talking heads were funny, and she had fun with fashion and her job. The cattiness with Denise, the lack of humor and being able to take a joke, the obsession with money and labels, and now everything else that's come to light has ruined her for me. There is no coming back from all of it.

I do have a question about assets being frozen. How does Erika pay her bills, buy food, etc if her bank accounts are frozen?