Erika Girardi/Erika Jayne: Let them eat cake

[izabella]

28 minutes ago, nexxie said:

But why would we ever put the vicims out of our minds? That’s just not possible.

Right?!  But that's what we're being asked to do every time they tell us to focus on how Erika is the victim.

[RoseAllDay]

6 hours ago, izabella said:

Not me.  Eileen was just on WWHL and she is concerned about what Erika is going through.  "First, we must think of the victims.  But having said that and put it out of our minds, Erika is going through hell."  Paraphrasing, but not by much.

I’m not really surprised at this. Eileen seems to want to avoid controversy at all costs. She’s like Kyle in that regard. Remember, she was the one of the women comforting Erika after Erika went ballistic on her in Hong Kong.

Eileen is being downright dismissive here, though. “Remember the victims, now let’s move on.” All this shows how insular their worlds are. The victims are nameless and faceless (and to them, a class below) so none of them can relate. When they’re mentioned, they’re afterthoughts, if that.

The women don’t do empathy well. 

But still… Erika👏 brought 👏 this 👏 all 👏 on 👏 herself! Not a hard concept to grasp. The hold she has on some of these chicks is fascinating.

[CrinkleCutCat]

8 hours ago, LemonSoda said:

I’ve always thought she was gorgeous even back in the Marcus days. 
I’m in the minority but I like a lot of the boring housewives. I’d take boring over mean any day. 
Maybe we can get them to put together a Boring Housewives show! Joyce, Kathryn, Carlton, Adrienne. Let’s watch them shop! 

To continue with your premise of boring housewives… you would HAVE to include Teddi in the cast (as my #1 most boring) and I just COULD. NOT. WATCH. IT. 😆

I’ve actually found Erika Jayne to be a dull view too….until now.

[LemonSoda]

5 minutes ago, CrinkleCutCat said:

To continue with your premise of boring housewives… you would HAVE to include Teddi in the cast (as my #1 most boring) and I just COULD. NOT. WATCH. IT. 😆

I’ve actually found Erika Jayne to be a dull view too….until now.

How about changing the premise to Boring but likable or entertaining? Teddi isn’t likable (to me) 

[CrinkleCutCat]

1 hour ago, LemonSoda said:

How about changing the premise to Boring but likable or entertaining? Teddi isn’t likable (to me) 

That could work! Agree 100% with your assessment of Teddi.

[HunterHunted]

On 6/12/2021 at 7:57 PM, izabella said:

I think the dementia claim is a ruse and a distraction.  Dementia doesn't turn you into a a scheming criminal who defrauds orphans and widows.  You don't get dementia and suddenly start discovering sneaky and complicated ways to steal money from clients.     You can't use dementia as an excuse if you started stealing money and defrauding clients decades ago.   I don't know how the courts will see it.

22 hours ago, Dutchgirl said:

Ya, and pretty sure "late stage dementia" cannot be made retroactive by 20 years, which is when he was first accused of stealing from clients.

 

They're not using it as a ruse to explain his fraud. They're using it to protect Tom from criminal prosecution. Even though Tom had his wits about him during most of his frauds, a criminal prosecution requires him to be able to assist his attorneys in his defense. A conservatorship means another court has said Tom is incapable of making any decisions for himself. And in contrast to something like a mental illness that can be treated with medication and therapy, diagnoses like dementia and brain injury don't have great, good, or really any options for regaining mental faculties. This leaves prosecutors stuck. They might be able to indict and arrest Tom, but they can't go to trial because he's incompetent and can't assist in his own defense. A defendant being unable to assist in his or her defense is a big deal thing that can stymie a prosecution for years and even decades. At most, the court will stick a mentally incompetent defendant in a health care facility until that defendant can regain competency. If they never regain competency, the defendant might be in the health care facility for the maximum time he or she could be incarcerated for that crime. In a case like this, the prosecutor might not bother filing charges against Tom. If Erika and Tom are faking or playing up his cognitive decline, it's to keep him out of prison.

However, I'd be concerned if I were any of those people fairly close to Tom who might have had reason to know some of what Tom was up to. They should be concerned that some prosecutor might be able to make a conspiracy, RICO, or accessory after the fact case and keep Tom as an unindicted co-conspirator. Granted, I've never practiced criminal law or in California so take all of this with the understanding that I have no expertise in those areas. But I do know IST (incompetent to stand trial) law, which I know from years of mental health policy work.

But there might be larger reasons for a prosecutor to go forward with a prosecution of Tom. The prosecutor might be running for office and wants to be in the headlines as being tough on crime and corruption. They may also plan on using headlines about the prosecution as a hook for calls for larger policy reforms. However, Tom is highly unlikely to see a single second of jail or prison time.

[Dutchgirl]

9 hours ago, HunterHunted said:

I think the dementia claim is a ruse and a distraction.  Dementia doesn't turn you into a a scheming criminal who defrauds orphans and widows.  You don't get dementia and suddenly start discovering sneaky and complicated ways to steal money from clients.     You can't use dementia as an excuse if you started stealing money and defrauding clients decades ago.   I don't know how the courts will see it.

 

9 hours ago, HunterHunted said:

They're not using it as a ruse to explain his fraud. They're using it to protect Tom from criminal prosecution. Even though Tom had his wits about him during most of his frauds, a criminal prosecution requires him to be able to assist his attorneys in his defense. A conservatorship means another court has said Tom is incapable of making any decisions for himself. And in contrast to something like a mental illness that can be treated with medication and therapy, diagnoses like dementia and brain injury don't have great, good, or really any options for regaining mental faculties. This leaves prosecutors stuck. They might be able to indict and arrest Tom, but they can't go to trial because he's incompetent and can't assist in his own defense. A defendant being unable to assist in his or her defense is a big deal thing that can stymie a prosecution for years and even decades. At most, the court will stick a mentally incompetent defendant in a health care facility until that defendant can regain competency. If they never regain competency, the defendant might be in the health care facility for the maximum time he or she could be incarcerated for that crime. In a case like this, the prosecutor might not bother filing charges against Tom. If Erika and Tom are faking or playing up his cognitive decline, it's to keep him out of prison.

However, I'd be concerned if I were any of those people fairly close to Tom who might have had reason to know some of what Tom was up to. They should be concerned that some prosecutor might be able to make a conspiracy, RICO, or accessory after the fact case and keep Tom as an unindicted co-conspirator. Granted, I've never practiced criminal law or in California so take all of this with the understanding that I have no expertise in those areas. But I do know IST (incompetent to stand trial) law, which I know from years of mental health policy work.

But there might be larger reasons for a prosecutor to go forward with a prosecution of Tom. The prosecutor might be running for office and wants to be in the headlines as being tough on crime and corruption. They may also plan on using headlines about the prosecution as a hook for calls for larger policy reforms. However, Tom is highly unlikely to see a single second of jail or prison time.

Mostly agree. Erika did try initially to over-simplify the embezzling like an oopsie, Tom made some banking errors because he bumped his head. Paraphrasing, but "He hasn't been the same since the accident and he was solely in charge of the firm. It just got away from him", this implies any irregularities happened post-accident.

Meanwhile his legal team (and likely Erika) knows the severity of the fraud and  the only way to keep him out of jail is to have him deemed unfit to stand trial.

I also think others knew. To play devil's advocate, I don't think Tom is an evil person. I think he's smart and had dimples and charm, and like many, many others, he played a shell game using other people's money, then borrowed from the bank to top up client accounts. He had the hubris to think he could keep all those balls in the air indefinitely. But he got old and the banks cut him off. If he were on Wall Street, he would have been given a federal bailout. Everyone was there to enjoy the free flowing cash though, the parties, women were all over him, and Erika was playing at whatever it is she does. Now they're all gone and all he has is his brother. Sad ending really.

Edited September 9, 2021 by Dutchgirl
annoying typo

[izabella]

1 hour ago, Dutchgirl said:

I also think others knew. To play devil's advocate, I don't think Tom is an evil person. I think he's smart and had dimples and charm, and like many, many others, he played a shell game using other people's money, then borrowed from the bank to top up client accounts. His had the hubris to think he could keep all those balls in the air indefinitely. But he got old and the banks cut him off. If he were on Wall Street, he would have been given a federal bailout. Everyone was there to enjoy the free flowing cash though, the parties, women were all over him, and Erika was playing at whatever it is she does. Now they're all gone and all he has is his brother. Sad ending really.

If anyone wants an education on how these torts attorneys operate, John Grisham's "The King of Torts" shows how the shell game works, and how the greedy as fuck attorneys end up getting rich - complete with Gulfstream jets - while giving the class action plaintiffs peanuts from the huge settlements.

[Happy Camper]

I can't say for sure if Erika knew the full story around Tom's hijinks, but she definitely was aware that he was defaulting on loans. Knowing this she is spending, and spending, and spending and bragging about her XXpensive self. She thought she was titanium.

This from the Season 9 Reunion:

Erika’s happy to talk about Lisa Vanderpump all day, but when it comes to Tom [Girardi] defaulting on a $15 million loan, she doesn’t say a word,” Andy said.

“How ’bout this,” Erika shot back. “Resolved, and they apologized.”

https://www.usmagazine.com/entertainment/news/rhobh-reunion-kyle-dorit-and-erika-address-legal-troubles/

She certainly is complicit in his shady dealings, in that she is using the show to cover up for Tom. She's laying the foundation for his defense every week. Just digging herself in this mess deeper and deeper and she must be held accountable for that. The divorce is a sham, no question about that. She is a liar. Period.

I can't even begin to comment on her Twitter and Instagram posts. She is just unbelievable. 

The reunion will be interesting. Maybe she'll cry her way through, with Rinna and Kyle petting her. 

Maybe she'll put on her smug face and say "Resolved, and the widows and orphans have apologized!"

[pasdetrois]

I remain interested in his relationship and dealings with the CA Bar. Who will go after all of them for their apparently rank activities? CA attorney general?

Can you imagine the panicked conversations that have been going on in board rooms all over CA?

Edited September 9, 2021 by pasdetrois

[izabella]

33 minutes ago, Happy Camper said:

I can't say for sure if Erika knew the full story around Tom's hijinks, but she definitely was aware that he was defaulting on loans. Knowing this she is spending, and spending, and spending and bragging about her XXpensive self. She thought she was titanium.

This from the Season 9 Reunion:

Erika’s happy to talk about Lisa Vanderpump all day, but when it comes to Tom [Girardi] defaulting on a $15 million loan, she doesn’t say a word,” Andy said.

“How ’bout this,” Erika shot back. “Resolved, and they apologized.”

https://www.usmagazine.com/entertainment/news/rhobh-reunion-kyle-dorit-and-erika-address-legal-troubles/

She certainly is complicit in his shady dealings, in that she is using the show to cover up for Tom. She's laying the foundation for his defense every week. Just digging herself in this mess deeper and deeper and she must be held accountable for that. The divorce is a sham, no question about that. She is a liar. Period.

I can't even begin to comment on her Twitter and Instagram posts. She is just unbelievable. 

The reunion will be interesting. Maybe she'll cry her way through, with Rinna and Kyle petting her. 

Maybe she'll put on her smug face and say "Resolved, and the widows and orphans have apologized!"

Thank you for digging that up.  I remembered that she was well aware of Tom's legal and financial problems years ago, and that she had the nerve to lie and say the plaintiffs apologized, but could not remember the details or which Reunion it was. 

Edited September 9, 2021 by izabella

[HunterHunted]

1 hour ago, Dutchgirl said:

I don't think Tom is an evil person. I think he's smart and had dimples and charm, and like many, many others, he played a shell game using other people's money, then borrowed from the bank to top up client accounts. His had the hubris to think he could keep all those balls in the air indefinitely. But he got old and the banks cut him off. If he were on Wall Street, he would have been given a federal bailout. Everyone was there to enjoy the free flowing cash though, the parties, women were all over him, and Erika was playing at whatever it is she does. Now they're all gone and all he has is his brother. Sad ending really.

I don't think he's evil, but he's a selfish, arrogant, and callous person. Like many gamblers, Tom got lucky on his first time at the metaphorical tables. When no one caught his first fraud, he attributed it more to his skills and smarts than luck. That probably emboldened him and got his adrenaline going. There's a bit of crossover with being a plaintiff's attorney. Taking on those big cases is also a gamble. It is risky and every win emboldened him and made him think the wins had more to do with him than the facts and circumstances of the cases. This allowed Tom to continue to emotionally distance the wins and awards from his clients. The money became more "his" than his clients. He's not evil, but he's pretty fucking terrible.

Additionally, Erika was busy talking about how she's never been in a bank or used an ATM because Erika is trying to void the loan agreement. Erika is trying lay out that she didn't actually understand or comprehend the implications of signing the agreement and all of what that might entail. She's also been saying how she relied upon her attorney husband. She's been trying to void agreement so she doesn't have to repay the money. I doubt it would work because even without a full understanding of the technical working of the loan agreement, almost everyone understands the colloquial use of loan. She can't be all Peggy Sulahian "L...L...LL...OH...AN. What means this word?" FFS Peggy! You have BA in English from UCLA!

[BusyOctober]

Regarding the money owed to the victims Tom represented…

I feel like Erika has the attitude “better me than others” re. the money from “The Firm”. Does she think each of those victims was going to get mmmiiilllYEONS to live the high life?  Like they were planning to join country clubs, purchase several homes they will never live in, invest in private plane shares, and buy tacky unflattering porn star designer clothing?  I don’t think any of the cancer and burn victims were practicing choreography and curating costumes for a new “pop star” career.  I would bet my life that not a single orphan or widow was shopping for a glam squad ahead of getting their 1st check from Girardi Keese 

Those settlements were never going to be tickets to The Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous for any one of them. Once their world famous Ponzi scammer lawyer took his cut, each person was only getting a fraction of what Erika the C**T spent in her lifetime with Tom.

Any money the victims were to receive was going toward medical bills for multiple surgeries, various types of (probable) long term therapy, rent. It was going to provide modest stipends for minors and families who lost parent(s) and as a result, have less or no income to live off of now.

Erika should be made to pay back her LLC’s portion of the stolen money.  She should also be forced to personally visit and apologize to each and everyone of the people who were affected by her illegal and immoral actions.  Sit in their small homes.  See the piles of bills. Watch caretakers dole out medications. Listen to the men women and kids tell her how the accidents that brought Tom into their orbits were slightly less horrifying than what she and Tom have done to make the rest of their lives a never ending fucking nightmare.

[Lady Lucy]

Erika has an offer to pay back $25,000,00.  Think she'll do it?? (Nah.)

https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/erika-jayne-has-9-days-to-voluntarily-pay-back-25-million/?fbclid=IwAR0cUOli7cuw1uYPB4cbGG9THLh1P3RNQpxg-ATSzexT89qvFQqIklRjKc4

 

Quote

Quote

 

 

 

Edited September 9, 2021 by Lady Lucy

[RealHousewife]

7 minutes ago, Lady Lucy said:

Erika has an offer to pay back $25,000,00.  Think she'll do it?? (Nah.)

https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/erika-jayne-has-9-days-to-voluntarily-pay-back-25-million/?fbclid=IwAR0cUOli7cuw1uYPB4cbGG9THLh1P3RNQpxg-ATSzexT89qvFQqIklRjKc4

[IntrovertRed]

Tom acted immorally and knowingly stole from victims? How is that not evil?   

[LemonSoda]

19 minutes ago, KLJ said:

Tom acted immorally and knowingly stole from victims? How is that not evil?   

I think it was meant as You can do evil things without being an evil person. You can even be an evil person who does good things. 

[Dutchgirl]

1 hour ago, KLJ said:

Tom acted immorally and knowingly stole from victims? How is that not evil?   

Immoral seems a long haul from evil. John Wayne Gacey was evil. He enjoyed hurting people, a sadist. I don't see that in Tom, I don't think he enjoys hurting people. Quite the opposite. He loved spoiling people, he liked to be liked and enjoyed spreading the wealth, however illegal, and buying love from everyone. His problem seems to be saying no to people.

I think it was all just numbers on a page to him..."How can I keep this circus going?" He was just moving shit around trying to keep all the balls in the air, paying the bills to keep up an image of success. That's really the only way you continue to get those big clients. And of course it was all totally illegal, immoral and all that, but I don't know about "evil". 

6 hours ago, izabella said:

If anyone wants an education on how these torts attorneys operate, John Grisham's "The King of Torts" shows how the shell game works, and how the greedy as fuck attorneys end up getting rich - complete with Gulfstream jets - while giving the class action plaintiffs peanuts from the huge settlements.

Yup!

[Stats Queen]

5 minutes ago, Dutchgirl said:

Immoral seems a long haul from evil. John Wayne Gacey was evil. He enjoyed hurting people, a sadist. I don't see that in Tom, I don't think he enjoys hurting people. Quite the opposite. He loved spoiling people, he liked to be liked and enjoyed spreading the wealth, however illegal, and buying love from everyone. His problem seems to be saying no to people.

I understand your perspective. For me, there are levels of goodness and evilness. (Hitler, John Wayne Gacey, pure evil).

For me, Tom is evil because of what he did to all these victims, kept their money, spent their money and jacked them around. He liked spoiling his wife and the California Bar Association, but these victims never got their money, which they desperately needed to pay their medical bills.

He liked to be liked by other powerful people, how he was perceived in the media, and Erika.

He didn’t give a crap about others “below” him and who afforded him his luxury lifestyle. The fact is, with those big judgments made a hell of a lot of money with his 30-40% of the take but that wasn’t enough for him.
 

[RealHousewife]

Roses are red, violets are blue. Tom Girardi is evil, and his ex-wife is too. 

Edited September 10, 2021 by RealHousewife

[Julyolo]

On 9/6/2021 at 1:42 PM, LemonSoda said:

I thought so too but I’m her book it’s different. She had a lot of friends, so many play dates that her Mom kept her bicycle in the trunk of her car. 
Her Mom didn’t really know how to parent, was very negative, spoke to her like an adult. She did meet her Dad as an adult. He gave her a bracelet that she sold to pay rent which was confusing because she lived with her Mom. I don’t know. It sounds like he tried to make amends and she was too full of hate, anger, resentment to build something. 

I saw Tom as both parents actually. He gave her stability, praise, attention, inclusion she never received from either parent and a safe environment to become what she wanted. Almost like she was subconsciously reparented. 
I don’t believe she actually hated being a wife the first ten years, hosting all the charity events. I think her lack of particular social skills made it hard. 

With you on Denise! 

 

She really lacks awareness of others. Ice Queen! 

I see her as being a narcissist. All of this season she has manipulated the focus to be on her, even if it is as a victim, which is a classic narcissist move. When someone challenges her, she blows which is in the narcissist playbook. She uses these photos to get narcissistic supply from people that are deluded enough to think she looks good. Like all narcissists, if she can't use you, she will abuse you.

Edited September 11, 2021 by Julyolo
Clarification

[Dutchgirl]

14 minutes ago, Stats Queen said:

I understand your perspective. For me, there are levels of goodness and evilness. (Hitler, John Wayne Gacey, pure evil).

For me, Tom is evil because of what he did to all these victims, kept their money, spent their money and jacked them around. He liked spoiling his wife and the California Bar Association, but these victims never got their money, which they desperately needed to pay their medical bills.

He liked to be liked by other powerful people, how he was perceived in the media, and Erika.

He didn’t give a crap about others “below” him and who afforded him his luxury lifestyle. The fact is, with those big judgments made a hell of a lot of money with his 30-40% of the take but that wasn’t enough for him.
 

Yup, all true. Ugh, I can't imagine having the career success he's had only to do a complete face plant at 82 and limp off into a senior's home, publicly disgraced, broke and alone. Meanwhile your wife leaves you and is publishing photos of your text messages and her anus and obliterating any trace of dignity you may have had left. Just an unholy nightmare.

[RealHousewife]

Just now, Dutchgirl said:

Yup, all true. Ugh, I can't imagine having the career success he's had only to do a complete face plant at 82 and limp off into a senior's home, publicly disgraced, broke and alone. Meanwhile your wife leaves you and is publishing photos of your text messages and her anus and obliterating any trace of dignity you may have had left. Just an unholy nightmare.

Couldn't happen to a nicer guy. 

[janiema]

49 minutes ago, RealHousewife said:

Roses are red, violets are blue. Tom Girardi is evil, and his ex-wife is too. 

But have they divorced? What is going on with their divorce? She filed 10 months ago and there hasn’t been much info about any legal process since then. 
For the lawyers in our group: if the Girardis are not divorced, can Erika be compelled to testify against Tom?

[Dutchgirl]

Just now, janiema said:

But have they divorced? What is going on with their divorce? She filed 10 months ago and there hasn’t been much info about any legal process since then. 
For the lawyers in our group: if the Girardis are not divorced, can Erika be compelled to testify against Tom?

Nope. Their divorce will be like unscrambling an egg. It will take forever.

[nosedive]

45 minutes ago, Dutchgirl said:

Immoral seems a long haul from evil. John Wayne Gacey was evil. He enjoyed hurting people, a sadist. I don't see that in Tom, I don't think he enjoys hurting people. Quite the opposite. He loved spoiling people, he liked to be liked and enjoyed spreading the wealth, however illegal, and buying love from everyone. His problem seems to be saying no to people.

I think it was all just numbers on a page to him..."How can I keep this circus going?" He was just moving shit around trying to keep all the balls in the air, paying the bills to keep up an image of success. That's really the only way you continue to get those big clients. And of course it was all totally illegal, immoral and all that, but I don't know about "evil". 

Yup!

In the Hulu documentary, The Housewife and the Hustler, a voicemail from Girardi to one of his clients is played, in which he persuades the client (it might have been the man who was severely burned) to allow him to hold onto the client's settlement and invest it on the client's behalf (which, of course, didn't happen).  On the phone Girardi was as smooth as silk and as sweet as honey, as he took advantage of the client's trust in him and of his naiveté.  Girardi was smart, shrewd and personable, and he used those attributes to manipulate and victimize his less astute clients.  He's a snake in the grass, who fully knew what he was doing and to whom he was doing it, who knew how desperately these people needed the money from their settlements, and he just didn't give a damn.  And he did this for years and years with tens of millions. I doubt there is a decent bone in his body.  

[Dutchgirl]

1 minute ago, nosedive said:

In the Hulu documentary, The Housewife and the Hustler, a voicemail from Girardi to one of his clients is played, in which he persuades the client (it might have been the man who was severely burned) to allow him to hold onto the client's settlement and invest it on the client's behalf (which, of course, didn't happen).  On the phone Girardi was as smooth as silk and as sweet as honey, as he took advantage of the client's trust in him and of his naiveté.  Girardi was smart, shrewd and personable, and he used those attributes to manipulate and victimize his less astute clients.  He's a snake in the grass, who fully knew what he was doing and to whom he was doing it, who knew how desperately these people needed the money from their settlements, and he just didn't give a damn.  And he did this for years and years with tens of millions. I doubt there is a decent bone in his body.  

Manipulative. "Don't be mad at me, I'm a nice guy". He got a long way on his charm no doubt.

[Thumper]

50 minutes ago, Dutchgirl said:

Yup, all true. Ugh, I can't imagine having the career success he's had only to do a complete face plant at 82 and limp off into a senior's home, publicly disgraced, broke and alone. Meanwhile your wife leaves you and is publishing photos of your text messages and her anus and obliterating any trace of dignity you may have had left. Just an unholy nightmare.

She published photos of his texts?  Where?

[Dutchgirl]

37 minutes ago, Thumper said:

She published photos of his texts?  Where?

Pour more gasoline on it, Erika. That'll put out the fire. Idiot. 

https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/erika-jayne-shares-text-messages-from-tom-girardis-alleged-mistress/

 

EDIT: Just read that the 'mistress' (who actually had an open affair with Tom according to witnesses at the firm) announced her resignation 4-months after Erika posted this. 

http://www.metnews.com/articles/2021/Bigelow_04292021.htm

Edited September 10, 2021 by Dutchgirl

[hoodooznoodooz]

8 hours ago, HunterHunted said:

Like many gamblers, Tom got lucky on his first time at the metaphorical tables. When no one caught his first fraud, he attributed it more to his skills and smarts than luck. That probably emboldened him and got his adrenaline going. There's a bit of crossover with being a plaintiff's attorney. Taking on those big cases is also a gamble. It is risky and every win emboldened him and made him think the wins had more to do with him than the facts and circumstances of the cases. This allowed Tom to continue to emotionally distance the wins and awards from his clients. The money became more "his" than his clients. He's not evil, but he's pretty fucking terrible.

This is extremely interesting. I think you’re right. How on earth did you figure this out?

[Cosmocrush]

8 hours ago, HunterHunted said:

Like many gamblers, Tom got lucky on his first time at the metaphorical tables. When no one caught his first fraud, he attributed it more to his skills and smarts than luck. That probably emboldened him and got his adrenaline going. There's a bit of crossover with being a plaintiff's attorney. Taking on those big cases is also a gamble. It is risky and every win emboldened him and made him think the wins had more to do with him than the facts and circumstances of the cases. This allowed Tom to continue to emotionally distance the wins and awards from his clients. The money became more "his" than his clients. He's not evil, but he's pretty fucking terrible.

Good theory but don't you guys think having Ericka as a trophy wife had something to do with it?  A trophy wife who spent money like it was coming out of a tap?  A wife he knew was only going to be around as long as she got everything she wanted?   Because I think that was also a big motivation in stealing the money.   

[Dutchgirl]

1 minute ago, Cosmocrush said:

Good theory but don't you guys think having Ericka as a trophy wife had something to do with it?  A trophy wife who spent money like it was coming out of a tap?  A wife he knew was only going to be around as long as she got everything she wanted?   Because I think that was also a big motivation in stealing the money.   

Hm. To hold onto her, he stole client money? Anything is possible. The timeline certainly fits.

It could also be that he tried to keep her topped up and quiet because she knew his scam and there was no prenup. A divorce would have ended him. 

It’s hard to believe he (or anyone) was so enamoured of this particular woman, who seems to lack any warmth, social graces or emotional intelligence, that he risked everything to be with her. But then, I’ve never been a fan of her flat talking, psycho she-devil schtick.

[chlban]

19 hours ago, Happy Camper said:

I can't say for sure if Erika knew the full story around Tom's hijinks, but she definitely was aware that he was defaulting on loans. Knowing this she is spending, and spending, and spending and bragging about her XXpensive self. She thought she was titanium.

This from the Season 9 Reunion:

Erika’s happy to talk about Lisa Vanderpump all day, but when it comes to Tom [Girardi] defaulting on a $15 million loan, she doesn’t say a word,” Andy said.

“How ’bout this,” Erika shot back. “Resolved, and they apologized.”

https://www.usmagazine.com/entertainment/news/rhobh-reunion-kyle-dorit-and-erika-address-legal-troubles/

She certainly is complicit in his shady dealings, in that she is using the show to cover up for Tom. She's laying the foundation for his defense every week. Just digging herself in this mess deeper and deeper and she must be held accountable for that. The divorce is a sham, no question about that. She is a liar. Period.

I can't even begin to comment on her Twitter and Instagram posts. She is just unbelievable. 

The reunion will be interesting. Maybe she'll cry her way through, with Rinna and Kyle petting her. 

Maybe she'll put on her smug face and say "Resolved, and the widows and orphans have apologized!"

Surely by now, they realize the other howives see what they say in all of the scenes and the confessional. Still, I find it hilarious that Erika has "discovered" that Kyle is two faced. Gee, she turned on Denise on the word of Brandi, threw Vanderpump, one if her close friends, under the bus and outed her own sister as an alcoholic on national TV  Erika, the no talent, no personality, no warmth, sense if humor or human compassion Narcissist, thought she would be exempt? Yeah, right. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-9970525/Erika-Jayne-furious-two-faced-Kyle-Richards-speaking-true-friend-Lisa-Rinna.html?ito=social-facebook-celeb

Edited September 10, 2021 by chlban

[RoseAllDay]

9 hours ago, Cosmocrush said:

Good theory but don't you guys think having Ericka as a trophy wife had something to do with it?  A trophy wife who spent money like it was coming out of a tap?  A wife he knew was only going to be around as long as she got everything she wanted?   Because I think that was also a big motivation in stealing the money.   

I can’t help but think back to the scene in one of Erika’s early seasons when she was explaining her relationship with Tom. She said that she got a cold reception from the wives of other attorneys, which she alluded to as being because of the age difference (and maybe also her “career” can’t remember). Plausible story, since she hardly fit the stereotype of a “high-powered attorney’s wife”. But now I’m wondering if rumors and concerns weren’t floating around about Tom even then. I imagine attorneys are like doctors when it comes to reporting malfeasance until it becomes too serious to ignore. 

I’m certain there was some genuine affection for her from Tom, going only on their early scenes together. He truly wanted to keep her happy, and that was through material things. She, however, saw him as a meal ticket and a guarantee of a life she wouldn’t know otherwise. This was a purely transactional relationship on her part. (Not defending Tom’s actions here in the least, however.) Erika is just a straight-up user, taker, and bad person. 
 

 

[chlban]

1 hour ago, RoseAllDay said:

I can’t help but think back to the scene in one of Erika’s early seasons when she was explaining her relationship with Tom. She said that she got a cold reception from the wives of other attorneys, which she alluded to as being because of the age difference (and maybe also her “career” can’t remember). Plausible story, since she hardly fit the stereotype of a “high-powered attorney’s wife”. But now I’m wondering if rumors and concerns weren’t floating around about Tom even then. I imagine attorneys are like doctors when it comes to reporting malfeasance until it becomes too serious to ignore. 

I’m certain there was some genuine affection for her from Tom, going only on their early scenes together. He truly wanted to keep her happy, and that was through material things. She, however, saw him as a meal ticket and a guarantee of a life she wouldn’t know otherwise. This was a purely transactional relationship on her part. (Not defending Tom’s actions here in the least, however.) Erika is just a straight-up user, taker, and bad person. 
 

 

I actually thought there was some affection on her part. Maybe not romantic love, but there are different kinds of love and most long term marriages have a large element of friendship. She seemed at least appreciative of his support. Maybe she is a better actress than I thought, but she seemed genuinely touched when he said he was proud of her for the Roxie Hart role. The big red flag to me though was when she said he never saw her on Broadway. Of course now we know how frantically he must have been juggling all the moving parts of his larceny which was about to hit the fan. 

[RoseAllDay]

35 minutes ago, chlban said:

I actually thought there was some affection on her part. Maybe not romantic love, but there are different kinds of love and most long term marriages have a large element of friendship. She seemed at least appreciative of his support. Maybe she is a better actress than I thought, but she seemed genuinely touched when he said he was proud of her for the Roxie Hart role. The big red flag to me though was when she said he never saw her on Broadway. Of course now we know how frantically he must have been juggling all the moving parts of his larceny which was about to hit the fan. 

And all that happened when he was supposedly in steep cognitive decline.

They always kind of struck me as more father-daughter, but I still can’t help but think she was in a lot of this for herself. Maybe not at the very beginning, but certainly as her “career” took off. I’m sure she was grateful for that. Motives don’t always stay true in marriage.

When did Broadway close down due to COVID? I remember a scene of huge boxes of Playbills, suggesting that she wasn’t there for very long. I just assumed Tom never got the chance to see her, but you may well be right.

[Slakkie]

I will never forget when Erika was on DWTS and the entire cast was really cold to her.  I mean they always seem to try and be kind to any of the random people but it seemed like no one but her partner had any warmth towards her.  I am going to assume that she was as fake their as now.

[HunterHunted]

12 hours ago, Cosmocrush said:

Good theory but don't you guys think having Ericka as a trophy wife had something to do with it?  A trophy wife who spent money like it was coming out of a tap?  A wife he knew was only going to be around as long as she got everything she wanted?   Because I think that was also a big motivation in stealing the money.

12 hours ago, Dutchgirl said:

Hm. To hold onto her, he stole client money? Anything is possible. The timeline certainly fits.

 

No! Because he was defrauding clients for 20 years before he married Erika in 1999. Tom's 2nd ex-wife, Kathy Risner, indicated there was something hinky happening with his finances when they were divorcing. Tom's theft and fraud predates Erika.

I suspect the Hinkley case in 1996 ($333 million), the Lockheed Martin case in 1998 ($130 million), and the Erin Brockovich film in 2000, for which Tom served as an adviser, were actually the precipitating influences that made Tom more reckless in his theft and spending. The millions of dollars of political contributions, heavily subsidized continuing legal and judicial education classes for judges and members of the CA State Bar, and hundreds of thousands in gifts and favors for prominent individuals in California had absolutely nothing to do with Erika, but we know that Tom used his misappropriated money for those things and many more lawyer focused things too.

Remember, this Erika Jayne folly only started about a decade ago. They absolutely didn't spend $100+ million on just her whims and desires. The itemized bills of that $25 million loan shows that $10 million went to Erika Jayne shit and $15 million was for the couple's Amex bill. But he owned 2 planes that were mostly used by Tom before Erika joined RHOBH.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-12-17/tom-girardi-erika-jayne-rhobh-divorce

I have never liked Erika, but we can't act like her greed and desires are the external forces that prompted Tom's theft and fraud. He'd been stealing from before he met her. There were lawsuits about Tom's sketchy behavior and actions in 1983 and there have been one hundred lawsuits since. Erika isn't the cause of this. Tom's marriage to Erika is likely a symptom of the same risk-taking, impulsive, and arrogant behavior present in the rest of his life. He's in the middle of an acrimonious property division wife his 2nd ex-wife while the plaintiffs from Hinkley and Lockheed Martin were complaining that he wasn't handing over their settlement money and that's the moment he decided to marry without a prenup a 28 year old cocktail waitress he'd been dating for 6 months.

[Cosmocrush]

26 minutes ago, HunterHunted said:

I have never liked Erika, but we can't act like her greed and desires are the external forces that prompted Tom's theft and fraud. He'd been stealing from before he met her. There were lawsuits about Tom's sketchy behavior and actions in 1983 and there have been one hundred lawsuits since. Erika isn't the cause of this. Tom's marriage to Erika is likely a symptom of the same risk-taking, impulsive, and arrogant behavior present in the rest of his life. He's in the middle of an acrimonious property division wife his 2nd ex-wife while the plaintiffs from Hinkley and Lockheed Martin were complaining that he wasn't handing over their settlement money and that's the moment he decided to marry without a prenup a 28 year old cocktail waitress he'd been dating for 6 months.

Interesting.  I was not aware his  crimes preceded his marriage to  Erika.  But just for the record I didn't mean that Erika was the reason for his stealing - just added motivation as the years went on and she went from high-powered attorney's wife to self funded showgirl.

[gingerella]

23 hours ago, HunterHunted said:

I don't think he's evil, but he's a selfish, arrogant, and callous person. Like many gamblers, Tom got lucky on his first time at the metaphorical tables. When no one caught his first fraud, he attributed it more to his skills and smarts than luck. That probably emboldened him and got his adrenaline going. There's a bit of crossover with being a plaintiff's attorney. Taking on those big cases is also a gamble. It is risky and every win emboldened him and made him think the wins had more to do with him than the facts and circumstances of the cases. This allowed Tom to continue to emotionally distance the wins and awards from his clients. The money became more "his" than his clients. He's not evil, but he's pretty fucking terrible.

How bad does a human being have to be to be deemed 'evil' then? I'm asking seriously because if stealing payout money for widows and orphans who lost their loved ones in a plane crash, and who live close to or in poverty in a developing country and for whom that money would likely set them up for life in their country given the breadwinner of their family was killed suddenly in a plane crash, then what constitutes 'evil'?

ETA: Just to be clear, I think Tom is evil and and I think Erika is BEYOND evil. She knowingly spent the shit out of her Amex card right before all this shit went down. How dumb do you have to be to ignore the fact that your Amex bill will be scrutinized when the shit hits the fan? Or more likely, how arrogant and uncaring do you have to be? Exhibit A: Erika Girardi

Edited September 10, 2021 by gingerella

[chenoa333]

Why are the other "ladies" so afraid to "take on' skanky twat hole Erika? I don't get it. Bring back Brandi Glanville just for this one time. 

 Bravo needs to fire Erika pronto. She needed to go a long time ago simply out of boredom. Now Bravo is paying Erika to bring ratings for being a demonic entity. Bravo sucks dick just like Erika. 

[RealHousewife]

Erika tearfully asking all the ladies "what are you doing?" with this look of disgust was really something. It's the attitude she should have for Tom stealing from orphans and widows. Something tells me she never spoke to him that way. 

[emmawoodhouse]

They're shooting what Andy calls " the most highly anticipated reunion in years" today. I guess that means that Erika showed up. 

[RoseAllDay]

2 hours ago, Slakkie said:

I will never forget when Erika was on DWTS and the entire cast was really cold to her.  I mean they always seem to try and be kind to any of the random people but it seemed like no one but her partner had any warmth towards her.  I am going to assume that she was as fake their as now.

If she came in with the same shitty attitude she has now, no wonder. She didn’t last all that long, either, IIRC. The porn dancer didn’t transition too well to the ballroom.

11 minutes ago, emmawoodhouse said:

They're shooting what Andy calls " the most highly anticipated reunion in years" today. I guess that means that Erika showed up. 

You know Andy is definitely looking forward to it…ready to lob those softballs at Mrs. Girardi? 

[NoWhammies]

1 hour ago, HunterHunted said:

and that's the moment he decided to marry without a prenup a 28 year old cocktail waitress he'd been dating for 6 months.

It was probably the Alzheimer's that made him do it. 

[amarante]

33 minutes ago, RoseAllDay said:

If she came in with the same shitty attitude she has now, no wonder. She didn’t last all that long, either, IIRC. The porn dancer didn’t transition too well to the ballroom.

 

I don't watch DWTS but I am not surprised that she wasn't a good dancer. Her act was completely choreographed in order to hide her lack of grace and dancing ability - to get people to focus on the actual background dancers and have her perform relatively simple moves.

It's pretty standard to do this kind of choreography when the "performer" can't really dance especially when they can't sing. I mean no one expected Streisand to do anything but sing and not put on a spectacle. I never saw Celine Dion but I don't think she danced around. 

Edited September 10, 2021 by amarante

[Slakkie]

14 minutes ago, RoseAllDay said:

If she came in with the same shitty attitude she has now, no wonder. She didn’t last all that long, either, IIRC. The porn dancer didn’t transition too well to the ballroom.

 

Her first dance was basically her stripper stuff and it did NOT go well because instead of it looking hot it looked like porn.  And it went down from there.  She was definitely told to tone it down

[RoseAllDay]

1 hour ago, chenoa333 said:

Why are the other "ladies" so afraid to "take on' skanky twat hole Erika? I don't get it. Bring back Brandi Glanville just for this one time. 

 Bravo needs to fire Erika pronto. She needed to go a long time ago simply out of boredom. Now Bravo is paying Erika to bring ratings for being a demonic entity. Bravo sucks dick just like Erika. 

I’m stealing “skanky twat hole” for future use. And yes, Brandi would be a huge improvement over this bitch. 

5 minutes ago, Slakkie said:

Her first dance was basically her stripper stuff and it did NOT go well because instead of it looking hot it looked like porn.  And it went down from there.  She was definitely told to tone it down

I may have watched some of this, because this rings a bell…wasn’t Len particularly put off? 

[RealHousewife]

We need a list of all of Erika's lies! 

She and Tom had a wonderful marriage. Anyone who thinks the age gap is weird should try to be married as long and as happily as these two have been. Can't everyone see how kind and charming he is? Actually, Tom is one mean motherfucker. She wanted out for years but had nowhere to go. 

Her mother raised her to be tough and treated her like an adult. People forget she knows how to take care of herself, has worked different jobs and was a single mom prior to meeting and marrying Tom at nearly 30 years old. But wait, how do you bank? 

Tom's money was THEIR money! How dare anyone say Erika just spent Tom's money! What's mine is mine, and what's his is ours, unless it's theft/debt, then fuck Tom. That bastard hasn't reached out to her one time. But he calls her every day. 

She doesn't know if Tom cheated on her. Wait, she knows he's cheated throughout the years but has no clue just how many women he's cheated on her with.

Tom was in a little car accident and is fine. No, Tom was in an accident that people only survive in movies. The side effect is he has dementia that's sort of retroactive and got him to steal many years prior to the accident. Sometimes his dementia goes away and if he finds out you're questioning Erika's stories, he will sue your ass. 

Edited September 11, 2021 by RealHousewife

[NoWhammies]

The face is unrecognizable, but I'd know that soulless lack of talent anywhere.