Flashback: Joe Giudice v. Joe Gorga Fight Voiced by Chief Wiggum & Moe – “He’s Bitin’ My Nuts, WTF?!”
In the video above, Hank Azaria does voiceover as Chief Wiggum and Moe from The Simpsons for the Joe Giudice v. Joe Gorga fight at Lake George, The Real Housewives of New Jersey season 5 – the episode where Gorga’s spray-on hair polish gets on everybody in the room.
Juicy Joe’s tagline for season 5 should have been: “He’s bitin’ my nuts, WTF?!“
Regarding a takedown of Gorga and Laurita – remember during/after the fight when Joe Gorga said to Juicy, “You made me a bum, just like you!”? – Teresa once said that Juicy showed her brother the “business” (robbing banks by pen, not gun, by amassing loan money and paying it with the next loan). Joe Gorga has done almost the same as Juicy; and Joe Gorga now blames Juicy for showing him the tricks, yet only Gorga has managed to keep up with the loans, even if it means stealing/forfeiting his parents house.
In the video above from April 2010 or earlier, Teresa Giudice gives a tour of her home and the furnishings (custom cabinets, Versace vases, Gucci dishes and glasses, etc.), much of which (including the renovation of the home), was purchased with borrowed money (allegedly obtained by defrauding lenders) rather than earned income (they tried to discharge their debt by filing Chapter 7 bankruptcy in October 2009 – the U.S. government has charged the Giudices with lying to the bankruptcy court, including hiding assets and income that could be used to pay off creditors).
Teresa likes nice things, which she is not ashamed to admit. She certainly didn’t back off on spending before or after filing bankruptcy on October 29, 2009. In the link below, the U.S. bankruptcy trustee claimed that Teresa went on a $60,000 shopping spree after filing bankruptcy (the PDF file below also includes a receipt for purchases she made about two months before filing):
The following is a CBS report about Teresa’s spending spree.
Bankrupt “Real Houswives” Star Teresa Giudice Reportedly Spent $60,000 on Furniture and Luxury Goods
August 18, 2010
Filing for bankruptcy didn’t stop “Real Housewives of New Jersey” star Teresa Giudice from doing what she does best – shopping.
The Bravo star, who owes creditors roughly $10.8 million with her husband Joe, allegedly spent $60,000 on home furnishings and luxury goods just days after filing for bankruptcy last October, according to court documents obtained by E! Online.
The couple’s lawyer, Jim Kridel, defended Giudice’s lavish shopping spree and said she didn’t do anything wrong.
“That was the money she earned as an advance for her book ‘Skinny Italian,'” Kridel told People magazine.”Since she earned it after the filing, she was absolutely free to spend it.”
Kridel added that Giudice needed to buy household necessities, but also acknowledged that her spending spree would “draw scrutiny.”
“She needed to re-buy furniture because she didn’t have any furniture in the house,” Kridel told People. “It’s a big house and she wanted furniture consistent with her style on the show. There is nothing wrong with doing that, except that it doesn’t look good for her to be doing it.”
Note from Fame: Teresa’s cookbook advances for Skinny Italian were prior to her bankruptcy filing; however, she failed to disclose this, as well as other income (including her Bravo raise for season 2), on her petition filed on October 29, 2009, which is why, in the federal indictment against the Giudices, counts 12-34 include bankruptcy fraud.
In October 2011, Jacqueline went off on Twitter, saying Teresa was laughing at beating the system and planning to file bankruptcy again:
In the video below is another flashback with Teresa, Caroline and Jacqueline, happily explaining how “the attention they get is always positive.”
For a final flashback, a week before Joe and Teresa filed bankruptcy on October 29, 2009, they celebrated their 10-year anniversary with a helicopter ride and diamonds. Teresa told Jacqueline, “I really want him to make it big.” Joe told Chris, “It ain’t like the money’s flowin’ like it yous ta, ya know what I mean?”
Caroline Manzo predicted in a testimonial (TH) during season 4 episode 13 – which was taped in 2011 – that Teresa Giudice would leave her husband if he goes to prison and then she would write a tell-all book for the sole purpose of making money.
Joe Giudice Wants a Separate Federal Trial from Teresa and Says She Did Not Sign Nor Did She Have Knowledge of Misrepresentation on Loan Documents
On January 16, 2014, Celebuzz reported on court documents filed by attorneys for the Giudices. According to Celebuzz, in the documents it is clear that Joe wants to get Teresa off the hook, claiming that she had no knowledge of any alleged criminal activity in relation to the 41 counts of federal fraud against the couple and wants to testify to that effect, but only if he gets a separate trial. Joe plans on invoking his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination if they have a joint trial, which is set for April. From the Celebuzz report:
Joe’s legal eagles are arguing that he is entitled to his own trial to allow the mother-of-four to invoke her right to testify on her own behalf and allow her the right to choose not to testify against her husband.
“Without an order severing the trials, she is placed in the position of choosing to testify on her own behalf and against her husband, or not testifying at all,” per the docs.
But if there are two separate trials, he will testify about Teresa’s involvement (or lack thereof) in the alleged criminal activity.
This is what he plans on telling the court should he take the stand, according to the docs… and it’s pretty much what we expected he’d say all along:
- Teresa had no knowledge of any misrepresentation on loan and mortgage applications and lines of credit.
- Teresa was not aware that various properties and businesses were acquired in her name.
- Joe signed Teresa’s name on numerous occasions without her knowledge or permission.
- Joe’s former business partner signed Teresa’s name on docs, as did Joe’s attorney, again without her knowledge or authorization.
- And other people were aware that Teresa had not signed those docs.
He wants the U.S. Attorney’s indictment dismissed with prejudice (translation: the case would be over and no further action could be taken) because the defense claims there is not one single conspiracy as the prosecution alleges.
Joe would also like for certain charges of wire and bank fraud dismissed. For example, the alleged fraudulent loan applications filed between 2001 and 2005 due to the expired statute of limitations.
His defense team is also demanding the prosecution disclose all discovery, including any evidence of other crimes Joe has allegedly committed that will be produced at trial (like reports by any witnesses, etc.).
The hot-heated TV husband also wants the prosecution to provide access to the grand jury transcript “in order to determine whether grand jury abuses led to his indictment.”
And, last but not least, he wants a separate hearing to review all The Real Housewives of New Jersey takes and outtakes that attorneys plan on using against him to determine their “audibility and admissibility.”
The report doesn’t address the bankruptcy fraud charges, which I think are the most serious. Teresa signed the original bankruptcy filing plus later amendments and testified in bankruptcy court before she was denied a discharge of debt – in the federal indictment, she is charged with failure to disclose on her bankruptcy petition all her income and business interests (including her RHONJ season 2 salary increase, cookbook advances, website sales of her TG Fabulicious brand – which she trademarked in April 2009, before season 1 premiered – income from appearances and magazine stories/covers, income from rental properties, etc.) – she claimed in the bankruptcy filing that she was unemployed and stated that she “reasonably did not anticipate any increase or decrease in income within the year following their filing,” which was on October 29, 2009, during taping of season 2 (seven months later her first cookbook hit shelves).
“I own a lot of properties in my name.” – Teresa Giudice, Season 2 Episode 11 (Video)
When season 2 episode 11 premiered in July 2010, some questioned the honesty and integrity of Teresa’s cookbook because, while touring the pizza parlor during the episode, Juicy Joe asked her (to her obvious annoyance) if she’s ever made a pizza; she responded, “not from scratch,” and told him that she buys frozen dough to make her pizzas. However, she has a dough recipe in Skinny Italian for what she calls the “best crust in the world!”
The document submitted to the court states:
“Joe would also like for certain charges of wire and bank fraud dismissed. For example, the alleged fraudulent loan applications filed between 2001 and 2005 due to the expired statute of limitations.”
The Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009 (FERA), which Obama signed into law on May 20, 2009, gives the Justice Department the capability to prosecute mortgage fraud cases as bank fraud and to seek enhanced penalties under the mail and wire fraud statutes. It also extends the statute of limitations on mortgage fraud from 5 years to 10 years (and extends the prison sentence and increases the maximum fine), so loans taken out by the Giudices after 2002 would be subject to the fraud charges:
By amending the definition of “financial institution” to include a “mortgage lending business,” FERA gives the Justice Department the capability to prosecute mortgage fraud cases as bank fraud and to seek enhanced penalties under the mail and wire fraud statutes. As a result, convictions for mortgage fraud can now carry a 30-year maximum prison sentence or a maximum $1 million fine, or both. Even more importantly, mortgage fraud cases will now have a 10-year statute of limitations, as opposed to the 5-year statute of limitations for other frauds, which will give federal prosecutors much more time to develop such cases.
In comparison, there is only a five-year statute of limitations for securities fraud. In February 2013, regulators for the Securities and Exchange Commission argued before the U.S. Supreme Court that the five-year clock should begin when investigators first detect the crime, rather than when the alleged fraud occurred. On February 27, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the fraudsters and limited the authority of the SEC to seek civil penalties to five years from the time a securities fraud took place:
The nine-member court ruled by a unanimous vote that the five-year clock for the government to act on securities fraud begins to tick when the fraud occurs, not when it is discovered. Wednesday’s decision is a defeat for securities regulators, who would have benefited from a favorable ruling because it could have bought them more time to bring complex cases, including cases springing from the 2007-2009 financial crisis.
Of course, mortgage fraud committed by individuals has a longer statute of limitations than securities fraud committed by the rich and powerful on Wall Street!