Home > Money Fraud Charges > 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

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

January 17, 2014

Teresa and Joe Giudice in Court

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!

“I don’t care who the government is. Let me control the money and I will control the country.” – Mayer Amschel Rothschild (attributed to the German godfather of the Rothschild bank cartel and grandfather to heir Lord Baron Nathaniel Mayer de Rothschild: owner of the Bank of England and a key promoter of the U.S. Federal Reserve Act. 1744-1812)

“The end of democracy and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations.” – President Thomas Jefferson (a founding father of America, condemning present and future monopoly money power. 1743-1826)

“I want to own nothing and control everything.” – John D. Rockefeller (promoter of the U.S. Federal Reserve Act in alliance with the Rothschild bloc. 1839-1937)

“We will have world government whether or not we like it. The only question is whether world government will be achieved by conquest or consent.” – James Paul Warburg (monopoly banker in testimony before the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. Warburg was an agent of the Rockefeller-JP Morgan-Rothschild banking bloc and son of Paul Warburg, chief architect of the Federal Reserve Corporation, an unconstitutional private bank monopoly set up for cartel hegemony. 2/17/1950)

“Who controls the food supply controls the people; who controls the energy can control whole continents; who controls money can control the world.” – Henry Kissinger (ex U.S. Secretary of State and ongoing agent for the ruling class. Living. Quote 1970)

“The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the government of the U.S. ever since the days of Andrew Jackson. History depicts Andrew Jackson as the last truly honorable and incorruptible American president.” –  President FDR (on Fascist rule in a letter to corporate con man “Colonel” Edward M. House, a founder of the Council on Foreign Relations and political fixer for the ruling class. House also handled President Wilson for the foisting of the privately rigged Federal Reserve bank monopoly. 11/21/1933)

“At the time (in 1913), the conventional wisdom in Congress was that the government institution would finally harness the money trust, disarm its powers, and establish broad democratic control over money and credit. The results were nearly the opposite. The money reforms enacted in 1913 (the year the Federal Reserve was established), in fact, helped to preserve the status quo, to stabilize the old order. Money center bankers would not only gain dominance over the new central bank, but would also enjoy new insulation against instability and their own decline. Once the Fed was in operation, the steady diffusion of financial power halted, Wall Street maintained its dominant position and even enhanced it.” – William Greider (Author of Secrets of the Temple. 1/15/1989)


s5 199 f

Categories: Money Fraud Charges
  1. black enga
    January 17, 2014 at 8:23 PM


  2. jackhole2014
    January 17, 2014 at 9:34 PM

    Right @ Enga, my sentiment too. Looks like the cats ( meaning cousins, SIL’s, blood brother, fair weathered friends, fenemies, and drunk fake friends and boss ) are about to get let out of the bag. Disclosure! How can the prosecution not disclose their evidence? This looks promising to me AND I am glad Joe is doing the right thing by his family. Clearly he made some poor choices but all he can do moving forward is the next thing right.

    • January 19, 2014 at 2:26 PM

      I think it looks promising too. I bet TB wet his pants lol

  3. jackhole2014
    January 17, 2014 at 9:42 PM

    This reminds me of a detailed post that gessiewtf (love her! lol) wrote in the summer when this all broke. It was along the lines of, if Joe was any good husband/father, he would be taking the entire fall and saving Teresa! This is exactly what it seems to be going down. Phew. Even if it does not work, kudos to him for trying to do the court thing right. From the tone of these demands, I feel like the Giudice’s might have a sense of a positive outcome…(my wishful thinking)!!

    • January 19, 2014 at 1:58 PM


      • Laram
        January 20, 2014 at 1:13 AM

        You sure did, and was awesome!

      • jackhole2014
        January 23, 2014 at 8:51 PM

        Gessie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 🙂

      • January 23, 2014 at 9:05 PM

        Gessie is a FW favorite, that’s for sure!

        jackhole, here is the link to gessie’s post about Joe taking a plea, which I later published as a guest blog:


        Here is the link to a hilarious post by gessiewtf that I also published as a guest blog because it was too good to miss:


        • Miami53
          January 23, 2014 at 10:20 PM

          After looking at the photo of Tre by the pool….I just don’t get it. Reading your different posts about their finances saying they are trying to pay off their debts. Then there is talk about after selling the house, there probably wouldn’t be nothing left over so the courts said they can keep it. My question is….how are they able to afford things…that pool and pool house is not cheap. They put the car port in too. Soooooooo, are we able to buy things and get loans and don’t worry about paying them off. Who takes out a mortgage for 50 years? Most people think to try and pay off the mortgage as soon as possible but I guess its not a priority with this family…I’m just dumb founded and speechless!

        • jackhole2014
          January 24, 2014 at 3:08 PM

          Thanks Fame, hahaha, I was looking back myself, as usual , you are on the case 🙂

  4. Maria
    January 17, 2014 at 10:26 PM

    Coming out of lurking to say: hurray!

    • elemcee
      January 17, 2014 at 11:59 PM

      No more lurking!

    • January 18, 2014 at 10:15 AM

      Well, welcome Maria!! So glad you made yourself known! 🙂

  5. January 17, 2014 at 11:06 PM

    The Gemini man and his family.

    In family life, Gemini man can be moody and irritable, at times. Family life does not appeal to him, but it is not distasteful. He fails to create a strong bond with his family due to his focus on society and career. As a husband, he will dedicate his energies in favor of his spouse. Gemini man’s family life before and after marriage will be lively and full of variety. As a father, he is more adept at handling the intellectual needs of his children rather than the emotional ones. He will not be a disciplinarian, but he will teach his children important life lessons. He will hardly ever punish them, though he may sting them with an occasional sarcastic outburst. He makes a great father because he spoils his children and treats them as friends. Gemini man is tied to his family because of his strong affection for his children. He is well aware of his responsibilities and will never back down from fulfilling his family’s needs. He loves his family very much and works hard to sustain it. In return, he expects his family to recognize his efforts. He is the sole decision maker for his family, the one who holds them together.

    • Laram
      January 20, 2014 at 1:15 AM

      Kay, was your husband a Gemini?

  6. elemcee
    January 17, 2014 at 11:58 PM

    Do Federal cases not require disclosure? Juicy and T cannot prepare a defense without disclosure. That should have happened long before now?

  7. jackhole2014
    January 18, 2014 at 9:15 AM

    I am also curious about the attorney signing Teresa’s name…what’s up with THAT??!!!!! I do not know, is that common practice in the legal world? And why Teresa’s name? Doesn’t that other Joe have a wife? I am not clear why her name would even be involved in construction dealings??

    • January 18, 2014 at 10:13 AM

      An attorney can sign a client’s name – only if he has a “Power of Attorney” with the client giving consent.

      Enjoy your posts jackhole2014!

      • Miami53
        January 18, 2014 at 12:38 PM

        I’m wondering if Tre gave him Power of Attorney because of Joe owning so many businesses and rentals. Not thinking that it would cause her problems in the future. This is common practice.

        • GPM
          January 18, 2014 at 3:37 PM

          SH previously published a copy of a Power of Attorney that was filed with a Register of Deeds purporting to be from Tre and giving Joe her POA.

          The signature on it, however, doesn’t look at all like her signature.

          And the notary attesting to the fact that it was Tre’s signature? Joe’s business partner, Joe Mastropole.

          I think this is hard evidence of just exactly how far Joe and others were willing to go to keep Teresa in the dark.

          It also supports the fact that, when Joe testifies that Teresa didn’t know what was going on, he isn’t just saying that to “get Teresa off the hook” but is in fact telling the truth of the matter.

          Honestly, my heart just breaks for Tre over all of this. Human behavior is terribly complicated and I can imagine how incredibly difficult it would be for anyone to really get their mind around all of this. It’s one reason I think she focuses on her children to the point where some have accused her of being “in denial;” the role of a good mother is understandable and clear and it seems to come to her quite naturally. But the legal situation in which she finds herself, as well as her relationship with Joe (a lifelong friend who shares her culture and old-school mores, the father of her children, and her first and only sexual partner), is just extraordinarily complicated. It’s so complicated that I truly do not think there is any one right answer or one clear way to proceed, so I would never criticize Teresa for any decisions she might make with respect to how to go forward in life. Sending prayers and best wishes to their entire family during this difficult time.

          • Honnie Badger
            January 18, 2014 at 4:08 PM

            She’s still going to wind up in prison.

            • GPM
              January 18, 2014 at 5:39 PM

              I don’t think so, Honnie Badger but, if she does, it will be a terrible miscarriage of justice.

              • Honnie Badger
                January 19, 2014 at 9:28 AM

                Honestly, why would it be a “terrible miscarriage of justice?” Most people do not believe that. Those who work hard, pay all their bills and taxes would agree that those who scam, cheat, don’t pay taxes all so that they could live a luxury lifestyle (much less than flaunting it all on TV) should be imprisoned. This is the prevailing sentiment.

                That’s not to say I don’t dislike these two; they are the most fun on this show because they are so naturally expressive and not dishwater dull like Kathy. In a sense it would suck total ass because frankly, I enjoy watching them, they make me laugh. Natural characters that are riveting for reality are super hard to find!

                • January 19, 2014 at 10:46 AM

                  What I perceive as a “terrible miscarriage of justice” is the fact that in an era of mortgage corruption it appears most of the banks and loan companies along with their associates – individuals and companies – have gone unscathed. You don’t hear of those who were widely involved going to prison let alone for possibly 50 years.

                  None of us are pure – we all have done things in our lives that was “illegal”. Maybe not to this extent – but until the Giudices have their day in court and all evidence is brought forth (we can all speculate as much as we want but the general public is NOT privy to all of it as yet), I will continue to try to remember we live in a country where “innocent until proven guilty” is struggling to remain what this country was founded on.

                  The hate and lynch mob mentality in general – not just in this case – is becoming more the norm and it is a sad commentary on what society here in the US is becoming.

                  Of course I have my opinions but I am trying my best to remain non-judgemental. I feel the same way about the Lauritas – as much as I despise them and that I feel what they are being accused of is potentially far worse than what the Giudices are charged with, and even though it is a struggle, I will not say “they will spend time in prison” until they are brought to justice and the verdict is in. If that verdict is “guilty” then, hell yeah – they deserve to be in jail and the key thrown away.

                  All this being said, if the Giudices are found guilty – they also do deserve to be punished. My same attitude applies to them as well. However, in this particular case, I do not feel a potential 50 years in prison sentence is fair. The disparity between punishments meted out in this country and state by state to “white collar” crime versus violent and heinous crimes against humanity is ludicrous. Criminals committing rape and even murder have served far less than 50 years.

                  As I said before, unfortunately, Lady Justice peeks out of her blindfold a bit too much in this country. The blindfold needs to be made a little tighter. Punishments need to made proportionate to not only the crime committed but also the extent to which what the intent and knowledge the accused had, as well.

                  • Honnie Badger
                    January 19, 2014 at 3:54 PM

                    As always, Jeannie, so profoundly and exquisitely expressed. I particularly love your lines, “Lady Justice peeks out of her blindfold a bit too much in this country. The blindfold needs to be made a little tighter.” That is brilliant.

                    • January 19, 2014 at 5:35 PM

                      Honnie – as usual, it is a pleasure to have a civil and intelligent discussion with you and, for that matter, everyone else here at FW!! 😀

                • GPM
                  January 19, 2014 at 1:34 PM

                  It’s a great question, Honnie, and I especially appreciate the way you stated it as I think it gives me an excellent framework for reply.

                  Your first paragraph really points out what I think is the fundamental disagreement between us, i.e., that “Those who work hard, pay all their bills and taxes would agree that those who scam, cheat, don’t pay taxes all so that they could live a luxury lifestyle should be imprisoned.”

                  In the U.S,. people who do not pay their bills are generally not imprisoned and, based on the fact that this is something the ACLU (https://www.aclu.org/blog/tag/debtors-prisons) and Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/12/28/local-courts-reviving-debtors-prison-for-overdue-fines-fees/) agree on, I would disagree with your view that imprisoning debtors is the prevailing sentiment.

                  Similarly, as the recent case of billionaire Ty Warner (who deliberately hid income where he thought it would never be found for the specific purpose of evading the payment of taxes on it and then filed a fraudulent tax return with the IRS lying about it) illustrates — along with, of course, the over 3,000 similarly placed taxpayers who did precisely the same thing and who were only required to pay penalties but were never even criminally charged — people who don’t pay their taxes are generally not imprisoned.

                  Which respect to your statement that Teresa and Joe are people who “scam and cheat,” I think I would feel quite differently about their bank dealings if the banks had looked at the false documentation, believed it, and made decisions as to whether or not to loan the couple money based upon them.

                  But that’s not what happened. And we know that’s not what happened because, if the bankers were going to rely on those documents, they would have checked them for validity and quickly learned they were false. The fact that the documentation was so extraordinarily inaccurate but loans were made anyway makes it clear that these were “no documentation” loans and that the bank’s decision as to whether to make the loan or not wasn’t based on those documents at all but was based solely on the value of the pledged collateral. In other words, the bank didn’t care at all whether Teresa and Joe had the ability to pay back the loans; all they cared about was whether, if they didn’t pay them back, the bank could get its money back by foreclosing on the pledged collateral. And, in fact, that’s ultimately substantively what happened, i.e., the properties were sold and the proceeds went to the banks.

                  Since the banks did not rely on those false statements, then, I do nor think it’s fair to criminalize borrowers who simply participated in a system set up by and controlled by banks and bankers for their own enrichment — particularly when those same banks and bankers are not being criminally prosecuted but are simply being assessed fines. The federal government has made it abundantly clear in the case of JP Morgan Chase and countless others that the appropriate punishment is the imposition of a monetary penalty, not imprisonment and, as a result, I think the imposition of a fine is a far more appropriate punishment for the Giudices as well.

                  That brings us to the matter of the bankruptcy testimony. While I agree with Fame that this is where I think Teresa may have some exposure, I note the bankruptcy judge did find Teresa’s testimony to be credible with respect to the signatures and he was also persuaded by her testimony — which was buttressed by Joe’s testimony as well as the testimony of two accountants who worked for him — that she knew nothing about his real estate dealings.

                  So far it seems there has been a substantial and consistent body of evidence that Teresa and Joe’s relationship was such that he treated her as a simple housewife who he deliberately kept in the dark, a circumstance which, as punkinseed has so accurately pointed out, is a reality that many people have faced and is not at all specific to old-school Italians.

                  And while many of us say and/or think that we wouldn’t allow that to happen to us, who think she should have known or might have known or could have known, I think it’s important to understand that, in the absence of any proof that she DID know, those circumstances are not imprisonable offenses. In its innocent spouse rules, the IRS applies a similar standard, i.e., that the purportedly innocent spouse who should have and/or could have known of the unreported income because they benefited from the lifestyle, etc.,is denied characterization as an “innocent spouse.” But the punishment for that isn’t jail; it’s that the spouse remains liable for the taxes, interest and penalties.

                  It is my personal view that it is very important to our society as a whole for justice to be even-handedly applied and for punishment to fit the crime. Based on the information we know to date it appears to me that, with respect to Teresa, monetary penalties are far more appropriate than incarceration and that the question of whether she is liked or not is and should be irrelevant; anything else would in my view and for the reasons stated above be a miscarriage of justice.

                  • Honnie Badger
                    January 19, 2014 at 3:56 PM

                    GPM, you are just wondrous. So smart! Thank you very much. Hey — I WANT them to continue to be not only on RHONJ but on any show that will focus on them. They and their girls are truly riveting. So rare in that world of HW’s, dontcha agree? I think the only other HW who comes to mind who is great to watch is NeNe.

                • January 19, 2014 at 2:06 PM

                  I don’t want anybody imprisoned, not all the welfare cheats, the people faking disabilities, the people who’s homes are in foreclosure, and all the people in jail for dealing pot when now the government is dealing it. When violent offenders are getting six months and getting out and hurting another people, I’d rather see the other people making restitution. Although I think Joe Guidice was shady and dumb and reckless beyond belief, I wish they would go after the medicare/medicaid cheats of which Miami is running the most elaborate scams to cheat the country out of money in the history of the republic.

                • Anonymous
                  January 19, 2014 at 3:07 PM

                  Teresa and Joe filed for bankruptcy protection in 2009 to avoid paying back all the money from the liar loans they used to fix up and furnish the mansion. They were greedy dumbasses for lying to the bankruptcy court so they wouldn’t have to turn over all their assets, especially Teresa’s income from her Bravolebrity, to pay back their creditors.

        • punkinseed
          January 18, 2014 at 5:08 PM

          I wondered the same thing. I also wonder what the best defense will be for Joe’s lawyers in this at trial. There’s so many counts it’s like a deliberate sh*tstorm. The Feds have created this giant vortex with fraud, $ laundering, dairy cows, a couple of pitchforks, three or four law libraries with a couple of gangster movies thrown into the swirl. Did I miss anything? Oh, of course, the house that landed on Tre’s SIL!
          There must be some kind of curse on these Bravo shows. Not too many happy endings anyway.

          • elemcee
            January 19, 2014 at 1:09 AM

            Hell yeah the house landed on TSIL!

      • jackhole2014
        January 18, 2014 at 5:56 PM

        Thanks Jeannie, nice to hear from one of my faves 🙂

      • Laram
        January 20, 2014 at 1:22 AM

        I posted this on another thread. When I had two babies on my hips, and a toddler running around, while making jewelry, painting clients murals and renovating our really old homes, I signed without questioning my exhusband. Never read fine print. After all, he was a BK, Oil/Gas attorney after watching his family take full responsibilty of a bank with a manager committing fraud on eve of October ’89 stock crash. He then became a bond trader and oil/gas broker, trader and analyst. I trusted him. Was I stupid to sign. Hell yes! Will I do it again? Hell no!

  8. January 18, 2014 at 9:57 AM

    To me, this could be Teresa’s best bet to either beat her case, get minimum prison sentence and do house arrest or house arrest and pay some whooper fines (something she’s grown use to doing). If Juicy’s lawyer is successful, separating the trails and beating the case, then that lawyer deserves a clientele wrapped around his office. But I have my doubts about Juicy’s escaping prison time. Guess we’ll have to wait and find out if step one actually pulls through.

    • runtheball
      January 18, 2014 at 7:18 PM

      Considering that Ty Warren the beanie baby creator got zero jail time for failing to report $24 million of income, I can’t see a major sentence in this case for either one of them.

      • January 24, 2014 at 12:17 PM

        He was able to avoid jail time because he had the funds to pay the back taxes as well as a huge fine. Huge to the tune of 26 million for the taxes and additional millions for the criminal fine. He also served community service and is on probation. He also plead guilty, not a plea deal, plead guilty–took it like a man–kind of.
        The Guidices have no money and are trying to fight it.

  9. Honnie Badger
    January 18, 2014 at 10:29 AM

    Sorry. She knew. Suddenly, they have hundreds of thousands of dollars to spend after living in a humble, humdrum house in Paterson (not an upscale town)? I cannot believe she was not involved. he can say all he wants, but the Feds seem to have proof against her too.

    • January 19, 2014 at 2:07 PM

      He told her he was making a killing flipping houses.

      • Honnie Badger
        January 19, 2014 at 3:58 PM

        I may have to amend my statement above. I am starting to think that perhaps she just took his responses about where the money fountain is flowing from at face value and just went back to what she was doing. There are women out there like that. I just met one, recently divorced and is flailing about in a large sense. Nice gal, but … clueless. At least she has a great divorce lawyer, which is how she’s finding out so much of her hubby’s nefarious deeds.

        • January 24, 2014 at 12:22 PM

          She could have took what he told her at face value and Joe clearly had no problem forging anyone’s name. However, let’s not forget that during the bankruptcy trial she lied under oath about many things. So she has no trouble lying. They are both a hot mess and don’t really care about being truthful when it comes to getting what they want–money.

  10. punkinseed
    January 18, 2014 at 4:21 PM

    What are the odds of severing the trial? Anyone know the stats on this?
    Without severance, both Tre & Juicy can use the Marital Privilege … married couples on trial can’t be forced to testify against one another.
    Discovery. WTF is wrong with prosecutors who fail to disclose every bit of discovery?! The jackholes! Failure to provide the other side with all discovery can and has resulted in mistrial and that’s just for starters.
    This whole thing is so blatantly political! Chris Christy will probably use this to distract his people from the bridge closure he failed to notice going on for FOUR days!

    • GPM
      January 18, 2014 at 8:30 PM

      “Under the Federal Rules, severance is not required in every case where codefendants offer mutually antagonistic defenses. ‘Severance should be granted only when there is a serious risk that a joint trial would compromise a specific trial right of one of the defendants, or prevent the jury from making a reliable judgment about guilty or innocence.’ The risk of prejudice is heightened by factors such as evidence admissible against one codefendant but not all, unavailability of exculpatory evidence at a joint trial, and markedly differing degrees of culpability.”

  11. January 18, 2014 at 4:59 PM

    In discovery the DA only hast to be able to make sure you get the information reviewed in enough time before court. Also if Joe was such a stand up guy, then why wouldn’t he go the the DA and get a deal that he will say he’s guilty of everything and allow his wife just probation? The reason is that this separation is a tool that their lawyers will try to use in order for Teresa to say I don’t know (or her lawyer) who signed my name and Joe in his trial to say I signed some things (things that weren’t illegal) but not the loan documents and when asked who he will say I don’t know.

    With both of them together if their lawyer says one thing or them saying I didn’t sign it, then it will be easy for the jury to assume then the spouse aka Teresa did as the DA said she did. And if they said she didn’t do it then it had to be Joe and vice versa. It would look uncomfortable and it would be hard to fool the jury that you got all this money from the banks but yet this signature who signed for the loan and money isn’t you or your spouse. It would look so silly that they would find them guilty buy default. So by separating they can say MR. X did it and not have to explain who this Mr. X is. And at the same time not look guilty in the process.

    • punkinseed
      January 18, 2014 at 5:44 PM

      Catch 22 comes to mind. Thanks for explaining it for me Buckhenry! Short of them getting someone like say, Alan Derschowitz along with a great team of interns like Claus Von Bulowe had, the odds are against both of them big time.
      I know a lot of lawyers who lost faith in the criminal justice system when Steven Titus was convicted back in the 70’s in King County Washington state. The rotten to the core prosecutors deliberately denied Titus his right to Due Process and disclosure and discovery because they just didn’t care that he was innocent. They knew it, but didn’t care. When the exculpatory truth was uncovered do you think one of the prosecutors got fired for it? Hell no. This same bunch of evil prosecutors were headed by Norm Meleng, the rotten jerk (may he rest in peace) who revoked the death penalty on none other than the Green River Killer! After an entire career of overcharging and convicting so many people who were innocent or at least not as guilty as his lying deputies who either marched to his hang em high drums or were out on their ear, Gary Ridgeway gets life?!! Titus died very young from the stress of all this, so being exhonorated didn’t do much for him or his poor family. Sorry for the minor digression, but I’m seeing that prosecutors are the same all over.
      I’m not saying Juicy is clean as the driven snow on this, but 49 plus 2 more counts? Who has time to commit that many crimes? I doubt Juicy can think of 3 chess moves in advance let alone cook up that many crimes.
      Did Tre know? Naw. Juicy probably told her some story about how they got paid for this or that deal and for work and she just said, Ok, and went to the mall.
      I really can’t imagine Tre questioning anything business or mortgagewise that Juicy did. Why? Because if she did he’d be all over her butt for questioning him. She trusted him and would not go over the boundary line by asking him such questions. Is that being stupid? Not in Tre’s culture, and that ain’t just Italians way of doing things.

      • GPM
        January 18, 2014 at 7:36 PM

        “I really can’t imagine Tre questioning anything business or mortgagewise that Juicy did. Why? Because if she did he’d be all over her butt for questioning him. She trusted him and would not go over the boundary line by asking him such questions. Is that being stupid? Not in Tre’s culture, and that ain’t just Italians way of doing things.” — you said that so perfectly, punkinseed!

        In the course of my life there have instances where I’ve betrayed the trust of people I love (for reasons that I thought were “right” at the time) and there have likewise been unrelated instances where I’ve had my own trust sorely betrayed (for reasons that I’m sure the individuals involved thought were similarly “right”).

        I would have thought that that was an almost universal human experience but, as I’ve read some of the comments posted elsewhere, I’ve been amazed to find that that’s not the case and that there are apparently millions of people who have never once broken anyone’s trust and who have likewise never had their own trust even once betrayed.

        How can this be? How can so many people have never once been taken advantage of or been lied to by someone they loved and trusted!?!

      • Laram
        January 20, 2014 at 1:01 AM

        Hey Jules, sorry to interrupt. How are you feeling?

        • mzjulesaz
          January 20, 2014 at 10:42 AM

          Hey Lara,

          I still slowly improving. I read daily, but don’t comment as much sice y’all have normally said it all. Back to work this week 😦

          • Laram
            January 20, 2014 at 6:24 PM

            Well, glad that you are improving! Take it easy!

          • January 21, 2014 at 12:07 PM

            Jules – glad to hear you are healing – slow but steady. Take care of yourself and when you go back to work don’t overdo and tire yourself out!

    • January 24, 2014 at 12:26 PM

      They tried to make a plea deal and keep Teresa out of jail. The DA said no.

  12. GPM
    January 18, 2014 at 6:47 PM

    With respect to Joe’s discovery request, there the Editorial Board of the New York Times wrote an excellent article entitled “Rampant Prosecutorial Misconduct” in its January 4, 2014 issue.

    (See http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/05/opinion/sunday/rampant-prosecutorial-misconduct.html?_r=0)

    There’s also a very easy-to-read blog post about why open-file discovery serves anyone who is truly interested in justice at http://www.popehat.com/2009/05/13/reaping-the-whirlwind-of-stingy-discovery/. That 2009 post is a nice accompaniment to the opinion issued by the American Bar Association in August of that same year regarding a prosecutor’s ethical duty to disclose evidence and information favorable to the defense — and “that prosecutors cannot wait for trial, but have to disclose information early enough so that defendants can use it meaningfully during plea negotiations.”

    But as the commenters point out, most federal prosecutors aren’t members of the American Bar Association and they’re generally more than willing to take the slap-on-the wrist punishment which may come their way after a wrongful prosecution.

    It’s a sad commentary on a society that thirsts for blood far more than we hunger for justice!

  13. January 18, 2014 at 10:37 PM

    I added the following to this blog post today:

    The document filed by Joe’s attorney stated:

    “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 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!

  14. Kali
    January 18, 2014 at 11:32 PM

    Hello Fame et al! It’s been awhile for me here. Hope everyone is doing well.

    I just have to add that this was so well stated, Fame.

    While the likes of Jamie Dimon and all his top echelon cronies fete one another at lavish, over the top soirees, glide along the seas in their sumptuous yachts and move every dime around like pea shells offshore, real Americans, many of whom witnessed this type of behavior and were ignorant and jaded enough to think they, too, could get away with thieving, lying, gamesmanship, behaved similarly. And ended up screwed.

    I imagine that now, when the vile minds of the fed and banking have decided they must move on to pilfer other areas of national monies, (and it is assumed that was plotted long ago), most of the people facing indictments such as this must realize how they are paying for Dimon et al’s freedoms in the public eye. Keep the people focused on the smaller fish, and the big fish swim right past. Heads down. Noses to the grindstone. Whatever, just keep them from looking up. They might actually notice a few things awry, if they do. Brst to keep them focused elsewhere.

    And of course no, I do not believe anyone should get to walk away from any crimes they have committed. But watching the real criminals partying, laughing and clinking champagne glasses is utterly galling, to say the very least.

    I’m sure my feelings toward our once grand nation are showing here, but I just don’t care anymore. And I fear for our kids and their grandkids, unless huge, almost unthinkably huge actions are taken by the public at large. Nor do I see that happening any time soon.

    Fame, thank you for posting this, and so many other well detailed and researched posts. I’m torn on this sad story, but I don’t for a moment think Teresa was running scams and playing criminals. Utterly ridiculous. I know crums. This person just doesn’t have it in her. But she will go to the mats for those she loves. Not trying to make her into a heroine here. Just stating what I consider to be easily seen. Tre is not the one here.

    And Jamie Dimon and his crew should be behind the world’s worst prison’s bars. As well as so many others, so many of whom are in the very highest levels of not just corporations, but of our courts, and of our federal offices. Of OUR lands. Ours.

    Or perhaps not ours, at all, any longer.

    Um. Heh! Happy New Year??!


    • elemcee
      January 19, 2014 at 1:28 AM

      Well said, Kali! Happy New Year!

      • Kali
        January 19, 2014 at 2:42 AM

        Happy New Year to you, too, elemcee! 🙂

    • January 19, 2014 at 10:39 AM

      “But she will go to the mats for those she loves” – I see this in Teresa’s character also. I loved your comments.

      • Kali
        January 20, 2014 at 3:54 AM

        Hi kayswhims! Love your nickname and your comments, too! I read this board a lot but don’t post as often as I’d like. It’s a great board Fame has here. Especially compared to most others out there that I’ve found! There is one other I read daily but it’s just pure HW gossip, where Fame has educated, entertained, informed, and kept this a super atmosphere for all legit posters. And I appreciate that!

    • Grand-Beth
      January 20, 2014 at 5:59 PM

      Great post Kali….

      ITA….. If you have big bucks like JP Morgan you can just buy your way out of anything…
      I am trying to have positive thoughts for 2014 and pray more for other people who need our prayers so much who are losing a lot here America.

  15. wisconsheepgirl
    January 19, 2014 at 1:42 AM

    I appreciated the article link regarding prosecution misconduct. I think we on this forum need to learn all about judicial nullification.

    I have been a juror twice. In the second case I used jury nullification (JN). And let the defendant off the hook–no doubt he was guilty that was proven, but the overcharging on the case by the DA and prosecution is why I voted for aquittal. Needless to say I had to hear it for hours by the other jurors but in the end it was not guilty. I am very tired of seeing how we as citizens just assume that the prosecutor is the good guy. In the case I heard with JN was for a blatant political motives. I was shocked and so happy I was awake and listening in my university class.

    The way that the government is going after the ‘little guy’ and letting the rich ‘Wolves of Wall Street” or those that are very very wealthy (with exception of Bernie Maddof) getting away with crimes that are heavy duty–it has to stop. And the jury is the only one that has that power at level of trial to say “Whoa, Nellie!”

    My two cents. Hugs to all.

    • January 19, 2014 at 10:35 AM

      Good point.

    • Laram
      January 20, 2014 at 1:34 AM

      Agree. We (my ex-husband and I) still suffering from Enron. Literally!

      I was a Fellow for Obama, understand that he had to bail out idiots for world economy. But where is the freakin’ justice that Obama promised for the people? Bailing out banks, mortgage lenders, and changing the limitation laws? I am all for quick cash/pay lenders to be penalized, for their interest rates, but c’mon. The feds start with the people, and not commerce to punish? So disgusting to me, and grew up in Politics, Civil Rights, banking and journalism!

      Which is why, my family can’t know that I watch, much less blog on these shows. Lol

  16. Kali
    January 19, 2014 at 2:41 AM

    Hi wisconsinsheepgirl! ICAM and totally “get it” re your jury duty experience. Where I live, there is an “Old Boy” system still in place since the state was admitted to the Union. Still going strong today. Not all is as it seems, and you have to be a critical thinker, alert, engaged, and actively listening. Not just base your opinions on a person’s title. Sad but very true. My trust is reserved for those who earn it. Naivety gets these types a long way.

  17. January 19, 2014 at 8:14 AM

    Awesome blog Famey! Esp this>>>“The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the government of the U.S. ever since the days of Andrew Jackson. History depicts Andrew Jackson as the last truly honorable and incorruptible American president.” – President FDR

    As a taxpayer, I have zero interest going after the likes of the Giudice’s and until I see some Wall Streeters/Banks zealously prosecuted and over prosecuted (lol)….”meh” to this whole thing.

    I’ve mentioned before that “true crime” has been an interest of mine for several years….not sure why lol….followed the misconduct of home state prosecutor Ken Hulshof for many years…the cases overturned have made national news….nothing ever happens to this guy know…or the many judges.

    What a racket. 😦

    • Deb G
      January 19, 2014 at 2:05 PM

      Tess, I 100% agree with you. I hope the discovery shows a lot, you know the green-eyed monsters!

  18. January 19, 2014 at 11:00 AM

    Anybody see “Wolf of Wall Street”???? The real Jordan Belfort was convicted of fraud crimes related to stock market manipulation and running a penny stock boiler room. According to documents and records, he managed to rip off people for over $200 MILLION.

    Everybody – take a guess how long he was in prison for those crimes???? A mere 22 months. He has been released from prison and is a paid motivational speaker and doing the interview circuit capitalizing on the movie release of his autobiographical story. Yes, that is right – he wrote the book the movie is based on – more revenue for this crook.

    Hmmmmm –

    The scales of Justice: Teresa/Joe Giudice on one side and Jordan Belfort on the other. Which way do those scales tip???????

    As I said in my comment upthread – ludicrous.

    • Deb G
      January 19, 2014 at 2:09 PM

      Wow Jeannie, it is ludicrous!!!

    • Laram
      January 20, 2014 at 1:48 AM

      Can’t wait to see it @Jeannie. Those f**krs should pay. Did they not come of age to Wall Street 1980’s movie?

      • January 21, 2014 at 12:06 PM

        Hello Miss Lara! Good to see you here! 😀

    • Kali
      January 20, 2014 at 3:49 AM

      Hi Jeannie,

      Ludicrous, indeed. I haven’t seen the movie yet. Not sure I can stomach it, if I do see it, either! I don’t go to theatres so it will be awhile for me, either way. So tired of the Big Joke on us.

  19. January 19, 2014 at 3:00 PM

    OT – Laram I hope you still visit this blog. I want to thank you for sharing about auras. I found other people online who saw balls of dancing lights after a loved one passed away. For 18 years my heart was in limbo concerning what happened to my husband and I now am convinced that he saw something of a bright light that morning, bright enough to reflect off of his eyes and I said wow what are you thinking about. I never seen anyone’s eyes to that ever. If he saw an angel he did not tell me, maybe he was afraid I would think he was nuts. Anyway, after he died several people said they saw balls of dancing lights. Three deer came out of the woods and stood close to people during the burial.

    • Laram
      January 19, 2014 at 10:12 PM

      Hey sweetie, I do visit this blog but don’t often comment. I read it all and glorify it and all of you as an example over at Allabouttrh. In fact, a sweet Buddy, Bryn, there told me that you left me a message. Thank you!!!

      So cool, about your husband. We will all, I am sure be in a the ultimate place. Check out Oprah’s Super Soul Sunday’s. It will bring you Peace with Life after Death. Xxoo

  20. January 19, 2014 at 5:22 PM

    The article in the New Jersey Law Journal, mentions the real estate boom from 2000 to 2005 and developers were looking everywhere to build in New Jersey because it was a gold mine. Why? Approximately 10,000 “brownfields” in New Jersey were draining the economy because they had very little to no tax revenue. New Jersey enacted the Brownfiled and Contaminated Site Remediation Act in 1998 . Programs gave developers an incentive because they were reimbursed up to 75%, Developers raked in huge profits.


    • January 19, 2014 at 8:54 PM

      hi kays, ots I left laram a message on another thread telling her to check ur above message.

      • Laram
        January 19, 2014 at 11:22 PM

        Love you so much, @Bryn! Yes, I got it and posted to @kayswhims above! Xo. Such a sweet soul you are!

        • January 19, 2014 at 11:51 PM

          Your so welcome, Lara. xoxo

          • Laram
            January 20, 2014 at 1:05 AM

            Been having a marathon with never watching Mob Wives! Sorry all. This site has brilliant commenters!! Always a joy to read, and Fames researched, and well thought out posts!

            • Laram
              January 20, 2014 at 1:10 AM

              And Dowton Abbey. Can’t believe I couldn’t get into either of them, and what a dichotomy of choices. But, I do like half based factual history stories. Bravo took my passion to a whole other level. Lol. Xo, all!

    • Laram
      January 19, 2014 at 11:23 PM

      Wow, interesting! Thanks for info, Kay!

  21. Laram
    January 19, 2014 at 11:21 PM

    Excellent post @Fame! Thank you for quoting Rothchilds and Jefferson!!!

  22. VALVAL77
    January 21, 2014 at 1:03 AM


    • January 21, 2014 at 10:04 AM

      I agree – I don’t feel sorry for greedy people either, whether they are celebrities or plain folk, if they are found guilty.

      This comment is also apropos towards the Lauritas who think their sh** don’t stink and are above it all. According to the ongoing federal investigation into their bankruptcy, the Lauritas allegedly, with full knowledge and intention, ripped off millions of dollars from charities, companies, and put out of work innocent people in order to finance their own lavish lifestyle. Chris Laurita was caught lying to authorities and, mysteriously, computers seized in the investigation somehow were corrupted. This is all public record. There turn will come.

      See my comment upthread about Jason Belfort – he ripped off $200 million from other people in his greediness to finance his decadent, deviant and drug-infused lifestyle – actually burning and throwing out huge amounts of money for the hell of it – and only served 22 months.

      You’re right – there is an imbalance in the justice system and in quite a few cases, the wheels of justice can turn slowly.

    • January 21, 2014 at 10:19 AM

      I’m going to throw my two cents in on the not wanting to live in someone elses home or wear someone elses clothes. I grew up with hand me downs and the day I earned my own money and bought an outfit that was “me” from head to toe including my hair style, I felt wonderful. We lived in several homes until my father built my mother a house that she still lives in today. Same kind of feeling for them but the home is not something I would have designed for me.

      Andy asks Teresa if she regrets saying it was gross to live in a used house. Teresa says she regrets having that image. “I’ve worked since I was 14. I’ve always been a hard worker and I’m a hustler and yeah, I do regret saying that because people had a different perception of who I really am and took it the wrong way.” — I get what she is trying to say, but then I am a Taurus also lol

      My daughter is a Leo and she grew up wearing things from the thrift store. Even though she could shop and pick put what used clothes she wanted, she did not feel good wearing someone’s clothes. Now she is all grown up and she has a job and she enjoys buying things she likes.

      I do not understand the harsh reaction to someone who works and has a husband who builds living in a humble home while building a dream home. My brother built a beautiful log cabin for his family. People invest in things all the time and sometimes there are losses and sometimes huge profits. Looking at a humble home and thinking wow those peeps don’t have any money is just as bad as driving past a mansion and thinking wow those peeps are rolling in dough. You can not tell what financial situation someone is really in by appearance.

      • January 21, 2014 at 12:04 PM

        As usual, kayswhims, a great introspection and your last paragraph rings completely true.

      • January 21, 2014 at 1:25 PM

        I wonder what jobs Teresa has had since age 14? The only one I read about was the job she had after college. Bravo claims that “after graduating from Berkeley College with a degree in Fashion Marketing and Management, Teresa worked as an associate buyer for Macy’s in New York before deciding to stay home with her children.” Her old Bravo bio also says she has a “two-year degree in fashion marketing and management at Berkeley College in New Jersey” (her new Bravo bio does not mention Macy’s).

        In January 2011, in an interview with Teresa at a sold-out speaking engagement at The Learning Annex in NYC, titled “An Evening With Teresa Giudice” (the seminar cost $44.95 per person and was originally titled “How to Have It All”), Popeater reported:

        “Before she had her oldest daughter, 10-year-old Gia, and became a “housewife,” Giudice worked for Macy’s as an assistant buyer, then associate buyer, then became a sales rep for 9 West and Calvin Klein handbags.


        In one of Teresa’s books, she wrote, “I have a college degree and I worked in NYC as a buyer for Macy’s up until the day Gia was born”:

        “A friend of mine, Heather Maclean, who had been on a reality TV show herself a few years ago and who’s an author, helped me put a pitch together and we sold it to Hyperion. (A lot of people don’t know this, but I have a college degree and I worked in NYC as a buyer for Macy’s up until the day Gia was born. I’m a hustler!) We wrote the book together and it took over a year. I am so proud of how it turned out. It’s a love letter to my mom, to my kids, and to my fabulous fans.”


        In a September 2010 interview with Parade, when asked (concerning their bankruptcy filing), “Do you think that you will have to sell your gorgeous house? Or will you have to get a job?”, Teresa said: “I have a fashion degree and worked as a buyer for Calvin Klein and Macy’s before I had kids. I’ve always worked”:

        “I have a job! I have four jobs actually. My first and most important job is being a mommy. But I’m also an author, I run an online boutique, and I make appearances around the country. I think I’m the only New Jersey Housewife that actually went to college. I have a fashion degree and worked as a buyer for Calvin Klein and Macy’s before I had kids. I’ve always worked. I love to work. But my family comes first. “I just signed with ICM [International Creative Management, a leading talent agency], so yes, you’re going to be seeing a lot more of me! I’m also releasing my own fragrance, a make-up line — and a line of cookware.”


        In an April 2012 interview Teresa gave about Celebrity Apprentice, she said, “I have degree in fashion marketing, was a buyer for Macy’s”:

        My strategy for Celebrity Apprentice was to go in being myself because I knew that would throw people off, that they would be expecting the table-flipping Housewife, and really, that’s only a small percentage of my personality. I have degree in fashion marketing, was a buyer for Macy’s, and wrote three successful cookbooks.


        Teresa’s bio at Hollywood Life says she studied fashion marketing at Berkeley College and then went to work for Vogue and Macy’s in NYC as an associate buyer (her bio for a book signing at Barnes & Noble said the same thing):

        Prior to the show, she studied Fashion Marketing and Management at Berkeley College. She then went to work for Vogue and Macy’s in New York City as an associate buyer. Later, Teresa developed her own online boutique called TG Fabulicious.


        Guidice is a first generation Italian American hailing from Paterson, New Jersey. A graduate of Berkeley College with a degree in Fashion Marketing, Teresa has worked as a contributor to Vogue magazine and has recently launched a fashion and accessory line called TG Fabulicious Guidette. She’s the author of New York Times bestselling cookbook “Skinny Italian: Eat It and Enjoy It: Live La Bella Vita and Look Great, Too!” Her latest book, serving up old world family recipes is due to hit bookshelves on May 3, 2011.


        Celebrity Net Worth says that after Teresa left college, she held a position as a contributor to Vogue Magazine and worked as an accessories buyer for Macy’s:

        She attended a Catholic elementary school, and later went on to Berkeley College, where she majored in Fashion Marketing and Management. After leaving college she held the position as a contributor to Vogue Magazine. She also worked for Macy’s as an accessories buyer.


        In August 2013, a source for NY Daily News said that Teresa actually worked the department store counter at Macy’s for a few weeks:

        Joe and Teresa grew up in working-class immigrant families — her dad ran a shoe repair business while Joe’s dad did light construction and ran an Italian social cafe that’s still open today. Teresa went from high school to study fashion marketing at Berkeley College, while Joe, who attended a technical school, got his GED. Bravo’s bio of Teresa says she worked as a buyer for Macy’s, but in actuality she worked the department store counter for a few weeks, said the source connected to the couple. Joe, painted on Bravo to be a major real-estate developer, is actually a “small-time construction worker who does mostly residential, handyman stuff,” said the source. Before Teresa got on “Real Housewives” in 2009, the source said, the Giudices lived in a modest house near Paterson.


        CommonsenseXI commented at RadarOnline 6 months ago, saying Teresa did not graduate from Berkeley College:

        She did not graduate from Berkley. She attended briefly. She was not a buyer for Macys – she worked for 2 weeks at a counter. Both Teresa and Joe fabricated their lives to get on the show.


        Sidereel says on their website that Teresa briefly attended Berkeley College but she did not graduate college:

        Teresa Giudice, 34, was born in Paterson, New Jersey to Italian-American immigrants. She briefly attended Berkeley College as a Fashion Marketing and Management major, but she did not graduate. After college, she worked in the fashion industry in New York. She is married to Joe Giudice, “an entrepreneur” also from Paterson. They have three daughters: Gia, Gabriella, and Milania, and are expecting a fourth child in September 2009. Teresa manages her daughter Gia’s acting and modeling career, in addition to serving as a committee member for her The Real Housewives of New Jersey co-star Dina Manzo’s Project Ladybug.


      • January 23, 2014 at 11:44 PM

        Love your story @Kays Glad things are better for u and ur daughter. May God Bless you both

    • GPM
      January 21, 2014 at 11:49 PM

      You all always get me to thinking!

      When VALVAL77 said, “I’M SORRY BUT IF THIS WOULD OF BEEN ANY OF MY FRIENDS AND THEIR HUSBAND/WIFE THEY’D ALREADY BEEN ON THEIR WAY TO PRISON!!” I wondered if that were true, so I did a little research.

      Dr. William K. Black, a frequent writer on the subject of “liar’s loans” — the entering into of which a rather shockingly large number of commenters on other states frequently characterize as bank robbery — summarized the WSJ article in a blog post entitled “The Wall Street Journal Pines for the Return of Liar’s Loans.” (http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2013/09/wall-street-journal-pines-return-liars-loans.html)

      Dr. Black makes a number of interesting points, but the first one I thought was particularly significant is that a LOT of people took out liar’s loans — a LOT!

      “Sabeth Siddique, [asked] large banks in 2005 …how many of which kinds of loans they were making. Siddique found the information he received “very alarming,” [N]ontraditional loans made up 59 percent of originations at Countrywide, 58 percent at Wells Fargo, 51 at National City, 31% at Washington Mutual, 26.5% at CitiFinancial, and 28.3% at Bank of America. [T]wo-thirds of the nontraditional loans made by the banks in 2003 had been of the stated-income, minimal documentation variety known as liar loans, which had a particularly great likelihood of going sour.”

      According to this statement, then, in 2005

      39.3% of the loans being made by Countrywide in 2005 were liar’s loans
      38.7% of the loans being made by Wells Fargo in 2005 were liar’s loans
      34% of the loans being made by National City in 2005 were liar’s loans
      20.7% of the loans being made by Washington Mutual in 2005 were liar’s loans
      17.7% of the loans being made by CitiFinancial in 2005 were liar’s loans, and
      18.9% of the loans being made by Bank of America in 2005 were liar’s loans

      So if VALVAL77 is right, there should be a LOT of people in jail for that, right?

      Other than ultramarathoner Charlie Engle (who came to the government’s attention when an IRS agent saw him on a television documentary entitled Running the Sahara and became curious as to how he could afford to train so extensively), I couldn’t find any. They may be out there, but their cases don’t seem to be widely reported in the news or on the Internet. And without question the number of prosecutions are nowhere near the number of liar’s loans made.

      I did, however, find an article entitled “Should you sue your lender?” on MSN (http://realestate.msn.com/article.aspx?cp-documentid=13107799) which states with respect to liar’s loans:

      “As far as attorney Melissa Huelsman is concerned, if you’ve taken on a so-called “no-doc” mortgage, you’d better take a hard look at it. There’s a good chance you didn’t need it, you paid dearly for it and some funny business was involved.

      A “no-document” mortgage is just that — a loan that requires very little documentation of a would-be borrower’s income. The loan was originally designed for the self-employed, who don’t have much of a paper trail to show their income history. “It’s nothing but a tool that has a very limited, narrow legitimate purpose,” she says.

      Yet, as with the YSP, the tool has been abused, Huelsman says. In no-doc loans (occasionally called “liar’s loans”), a mortgage broker sometimes will fill in a false income amount for would-be borrowers. The borrower qualifies for a larger loan, and the broker benefits from a larger commission. “You might think it’s an exception,” but it’s not, insists Huelsman. “This is blatantly wrong, ridiculous stuff — and it happens. All. The. Time.”

      If you’re a no-doc loan holder, you may have been pleasantly surprised in the short run that your broker helped you get into a larger house. So why should you be concerned in the long run? Because you may have shouldered a loan you can’t afford, at a higher interest rate because you’re unnecessarily in a riskier kind of loan, and at an even higher interest rate thanks to the broker’s larger commission (which you’re paying for).

      “When a person goes to see a mortgage broker, the mortgage broker has a duty not to lie and deceive them,” Huelsman says.

      Check your documents. If you now realize your income was falsified without your knowledge, do you have a claim? “Yes — you have been lied to and deceived and have been induced by the mortgage broker to lie about your income.”

      And Dr. Black’s recent post backs up attorney Huelsman, quoting the 2007 testimony of Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller before the Federal Reserve:

      ““[Many originators invent] non-existent occupations or income sources, or simply inflat[e] income totals to support loan applications. Importantly, our investigations have found that most stated income fraud occurs at the suggestion and direction of the loan originator, not the consumer.” Tom Miller, Iowa’s Attorney General, 2007 Fed testimony”

      Regardless of whether the liar loan applicant is characterized as victim or villain, it’s difficult to see how anyone could credibly say the banks were being robbed.

      And would VALVAL77’s friends be on their way to prison? Probably not — unless, of course, they were on television.

      • January 22, 2014 at 7:30 AM

        I agree with you GPM, a relative of mine got over $800,000 in loans based on income of $15,000 per month in social security ( no one receives that large of ss income) and also a huge pension, all fabricated. This was in New jersey too, by the way. She eventually filed for bankruptcy and did lose her house. Plenty of people got these loans and none are going to jail. Everybody was doing it.

      • January 22, 2014 at 7:38 AM

        I find these numbers and statistics astounding.

        And, to add fuel to the fire, alot of these homes that were acquired by liars’ loans were either bailed out, went into foreclosure or short sale, or the “owners” abandoned their houses and just walked away, not being able make the payments. They are not serving time in prision – and neither are the people associated with the banks, mortgage and title companies who so cavalierly issued these mortgages. And in order to grant these mortgages, mail fraud and falsification would have had to be involved given the volume and the speedy expedition these mortgages were being approved. Maybe some fines have been issued and slaps on the wrist but certainly not prison, let alone 50 years.

  23. January 21, 2014 at 9:46 AM

    It would be very interesting to see just what and which “takes and outtakes” from the footage of RHONJ the attorneys plan on using against Joe Giudice in their prosecution. Wonder if that scripted ambush of Teresa on Jacs’ patio with Caroline (just so happened to be returning the kids’ bathing suit my a$$!) and Jacs clearly setting Teresa up fishing for information along with Chris eavesdropping is included in that?!

    • Deb G
      January 21, 2014 at 4:55 PM

      Jeannie, from what I remember Teresa said that deck ambush went on for hours. I also remember Chris lurking around the corner on the deck and when Caroline showed up I knew they were trying to set Teresa up. Till this day Andy and the rest of the crew never brought up the Laurita’s legal problems. Why?? I also remember Joe Guidice calling Chris shady.

      • Anonymous
        January 21, 2014 at 8:00 PM

        You know, I could never finish watching the deck ambush scene because it was uncomfortable and unfair.

    • LifeIsGood
      January 22, 2014 at 6:46 AM

      Jeannie, I have a hard time believing that anything from RHONJ would stand up in court. Although I would love to see the producers and other housewives (namely Jac and Caroline) be forced to take the stand and testify as to whether or not those scenes are set up by the producers. I doubt that either of them is stupid enough to perjure themselves. But then again…

      If the prosecution introduces that “evidence”, I think it would be fairly easy for Teresas lawyers to counter with evidence that the drama is largely scripted.

    • Miami53
      January 22, 2014 at 7:30 AM

      On the site,Stoopid Housewives, they are showing a clip where Joe bought the pizzeria and in the TH, Tre says that they or she owns lots of properties.They think that it could be used.

      • January 22, 2014 at 7:52 AM

        While prosecutors could possibly submit the tapes as evidence to the court, it would probably be up to the judge to decide what would and would not be admissible. And I would agree, producers and castmembers would probably have to come forward and be deposed as to what and which scenarios were spontaneous, scripted, suggested, or even prodded.

        As to Teresa saying they own alot of properties in a TH, that could easily be verifed by public records. I am sure the prosecution, at this point, has a comprehensive list of what the Giudices own and don’t own and what exactly their portfolio looks like gleaned from the discovery process.

      • January 22, 2014 at 9:43 AM

        Yes, Miami, in season 2 episode 11, which premiered in July 2010, Teresa did say: “I own a lot of properties in my name.”

        Here is the Bravo link to the video clip:


        When season 2 episode 11 premiered in July 2010, some questioned the honesty and integrity of Teresa’s cookbook because she said during the episode 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!”

        I just added the video and her comment to this blog.

        • Miami53
          January 22, 2014 at 10:02 AM

          I watched the video….I think Tre looks better now then before!

  24. January 21, 2014 at 10:17 AM

    Hi all!!!!!! Been away for a long time and am going to try to get caught up on everything & everyone. Hope you all are having a great 2014 so far!!!

    • January 21, 2014 at 10:22 AM

      Wow, hey there. I was just thinking yesterday, what ever happen to Bree.

    • January 21, 2014 at 12:05 PM

      Hi Bree!!! Good to see you here and hope 2014 treats you well too!!

    • elemcee
      January 24, 2014 at 5:06 PM

      I was wondering where you have been, too! We have missed you.

  25. January 21, 2014 at 4:04 PM

    Howdy folks! Just got back from a trip interstate to get Ava Baptised and to have an early celebration of her first birthday with family! Boy was it strange to carry out a cake with a giant 1 on it!

    • Miami53
      January 21, 2014 at 4:49 PM

      Happy early Birthday, Ava!!! I remember you talking about how you were getting up during the night to feed her and wondering when she was going to sleep thru the night……..my, how time has gone by!!!

    • LifeIsGood
      January 22, 2014 at 6:34 AM

      Happy birthday baby girl!!

      My kids birthdays are my favorite days of the year! I love telling them the story of that day, and having the family over for cake and ice cream. I kept my kids parties simple and at home. Food, family and friends…doesn’t get any better.

      My kids are grown now and they still love hearing the story of their arrival day. I am really looking forward to the grandchildren so the tradition can start anew.

      Bless you and little Ava, Sackem. It gets better every year.

    • January 22, 2014 at 7:41 AM

      It is amazing how quickly time flies by, oh my!!!! Hugs and kisses to you and Ava!! 🙂

    • January 22, 2014 at 9:47 AM

      We were with you through your pregnancy, Sackem – time has flown by fast! Please give a birthday hug from me to Ava. ♥

    • January 22, 2014 at 11:24 AM

      Welcome back Sackem! I cannot believe our little Ava is already a year old! It truly is not until you are a parent that you realize the meaning of time flies in the blink of an eye, etc. Enjoy those blinks.

    • elemcee
      January 24, 2014 at 5:04 PM

      Wow, our sweet Princess is one! I cannot believe it. I hope she grows healthfully, happily, and peacefully in her second year!

  26. luvfamewhorgas
    January 21, 2014 at 10:11 PM

    Lawsey is Ava a year old already?

    • Sackem
      January 21, 2014 at 10:28 PM

      Yup, one! That has flown. I’ve appreciated all the advice I’ve gotten here. You’re all such wonderful people!

  27. January 22, 2014 at 9:49 AM

    There has been an ongoing investigation of a case involving mortgage fraud in Paterson New Jersey. A former loan officer Amer Mir, was connected with a mortgage fraud and property flipping scheme involving rental properties in Paterson. He received $200,000 in commissions once the fraudulent loans closed, as well as substantial cash payments from one of the ringleaders of the scheme.

    So far, they have convicted these people involved in the scheme. Each person has a role to play to make it work like a well oiled machine. I think they have been trying to find the ringleaders ( the big fish ).

    * Michael Eliasof, a former real estate agent who helped orchestrate the scheme;
    * Gerald Carti, a former loan officer and shareholder of U.S. Mortgage Corp. who originated fraudulent mortgage loans during the scheme;
    * Frederick Ugwu, a real estate investor who sold many Paterson properties during the scheme;
    * Norman Barna, who like Ugwu sold many Paterson properties through the scheme;
    * William Ottaviano, an appraiser who misstated the condition of many of the Paterson properties involved in the scheme;
    * Renford Davis and Hopeton Bradley (now deceased), who jointly managed many of the Paterson properties involved in the scheme;
    * Claribel Morrobel, a recruiter for the scheme;
    * Melanie Gebbia, the former legal assistant of William Colacino (now deceased), a former Garfield attorney and municipal court judge.

    “Michael Eliasof would find borrowers to purchase the properties at vastly inflated prices. The borrowers were told that the properties would be good investments and that they would: (a) neither pay deposits and closing costs to acquire the properties, nor make monthly mortgage payments after they owned the properties; (b) receive monthly cash payments and a percentage of future sales profits when the conspirators sold the properties; and (c) not have to manage the properties because Eliasof would maintain them, locate tenants, collect rent and make mortgage payments.”



  28. GPM
    January 22, 2014 at 11:03 AM

    RadarOnline has an interesting post today regarding Teresa’s home indicating that the bankruptcy trustee has abandoned any interest in it. (See http://amradaronline.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/giudice-doc.pdf)

    The article says “Teresa’s home is reportedly worth $500,000, and she still owes $1.65 million on the mortgage to the Community Bank of Bergen.” These figures did not come from the bankruptcy trustee as the documents recently filed indicate that the fair market value is $1.65 million and that the associated debt is a mortgage of $1,716,737, the same amounts as were reported on the 2009 bankruptcy petition.

    A reduction in the loan outstanding from $1,716,737 to $1,650,000 is certainly within the realm of possibility given the fact that five years have passed and mortgage payments have presumably been made, the property having avoided any foreclosure actions, tax liens, etc.

    But it’s kind of disturbing to me that someone may have leaked updated information about her current mortgage balance as I do not think that would be public information.

    Any thoughts as to whether the $500,000 fair market value is accurate?

    • January 22, 2014 at 2:37 PM

      I just found this comment in the spam folder, GPM, which is why it didn’t post until now. Sometimes WordPress marks comments as spam, and I’m no sure why.

      • GPM
        January 22, 2014 at 3:31 PM

        No problem, Fame — I assumed I typed it and then stupidly didn’t click Post Comment!

        I really appreciate your expertise below with respect to the property value. I don’t think her current mortgage balance would be public information, would it?

        • January 22, 2014 at 8:10 PM

          I don’t think the mortgage balance normally is public record, but I could be wrong – perhaps the balance due was disclosed in a court document connected to the federal indictment. The updated story at RT (per Jeannie’s comment) states that the balance on the mortgage is approximately $1,716,737, which would mean the Giudices have paid only about $3,000 in principal over the past five years (see explanation below), which seems unbelievably low.

          After signing onto the show in 2007, the Giudices completed the renovation of their mansion while taping season 1 by taking out a $1.7 million construction loan in February/March of 2008, which was converted to a 50-year mortgage of $1.72 million with the Community Bank of Bergen County (CBBC) in September 2008.

          • January 22, 2014 at 8:41 PM

            I just checked out the link in the RadarOnline story, and the balance due on the mortgage is listed in the court document, so I would say that the balance is not public record unless the property is part of a legal case.

            From the Notice of Proposed Abandonment (link below):
            Fair Market Value: $1,650,000
            Due Approximately: $1,716,737


            The RadarOnline report is claiming that the Giudices get to keep their home because the bankruptcy court has abandoned any interest in it to pay off creditors since there is zero equity (or negative equity). I don’t understand why the bankruptcy court issued this “notice of proposed abandonment” since the court denied the discharge of debt and the Giudices withdrew their petitions. Maybe it’s because if they are convicted of the fraud charges, they will be required to forfeit the mansion to the U.S. government, and for this reason the bankruptcy trustee has returned the property to them.

            In the federal indictment it states that the government will seek the forfeiture of property as part of any sentence:

            “… requires any person convicted of such offenses to forfeit any property constituting or derived from proceeds obtained directly or indirectly as a result of such offense.”

            In counts 1-6 of the federal indictment against the Giudices, they are charged with bank fraud for the February/March 2008 construction loan on their mansion with Sterling and the September 2008 mortgage loan on their mansion with CBBC; in counts 7-11, they are charged with loan application fraud for the September 2008 mortgage loan on their mansion with CBBC.

            The bankruptcy trustee’s “notice of proposed abandonment” dated December 20, 2013 (the subject of the RadarOnline story) was sent to all creditors that were part of the bankruptcy filing. “A notice of abandonment identifies each asset to be abandoned”; “Abandonment severs a bankruptcy estate’s interest in property” (in this case, because the property of the estate is burdensome or of inconsequential value to the estate); “Abandonment means that the property is being returned to the Debtor because the property cannot be liquidated for the benefit of creditors.”

  29. NCGal
    January 22, 2014 at 11:24 AM

    Off topic, sorry,but did anyone see these tweets from Richie Wakile. Seriously, what is wrong with him?

    juliusmichael ‏@JuliusMichael 18h
    I love seeing the #USA flag waving so proud in the #Snow #Storm when I look out my window. Everyone… http://instagram.com/p/jcolsMRxOn/

    Richard Wakile ‏@richardwakile 15h
    @JuliusMichael fucking patriot now?

    juliusmichael ‏@JuliusMichael 15h
    “@richardwakile: @JuliusMichael fucking patriot now?” Yes always love my #USA

    (I don’t know if its Twitter or if he has his page set up some weird way, but I had to click on “All” to see these)

    • January 22, 2014 at 11:26 AM

      He is a nut job who thinks his shit don’t stink.

    • January 22, 2014 at 4:07 PM

      I looked at Richie’s Twitter page on Sunday and he was telling some people to”STFU”! One lady questioned why he tweeted her that since she didn’t tweet him. It was weird and typical vulgar Richie behavior. I hope rumors that Kathy was demoted are true. The Wakile’s do not know how to handle fame, especially Richie! They let their RHONJ fame go to their heads in a bad way. I wouldn’t be surprised if Richie got pushed around by someone’s father, brother, husband, son or boyfriend by the way he treats women. Kathy isn’t any better because she just eggs him on.

      • NCGal
        January 22, 2014 at 6:49 PM

        I saw those STFU tweets. One person said she doesn’t even follow him. I think he is trying hard to get attention. Did you see the Eddie Murphy tweet from a few days ago?

        RIP @eddiemurphy #snowboarding

        It’s an old internet hoax and some people called him out on it, saying he was just trying to get some attention.

        He used to tweet pictures of all of Kathy’s events and the “crowds” that came to see her. He got called out on that too. Most of the people were just milling around.

        Her cannolis are not carried anywhere that I can see except her website. If she’s been demoted (and I think she has), by the time her book comes out, no one will remember who she is.

        And, I think he drunk tweets too. Alot.

        • Miami53
          January 22, 2014 at 7:01 PM

          She is going to be in CT this weekend for the Home Show. They’ re describing her appearance as meet “The Real Housewives of New Jersey” star Kathy Wakile for fabulous ideas on being creative in your kitchen, home and garden.

          • January 22, 2014 at 8:34 PM

            This Home Show connected to her home they are building, as in her home being one big advertisement?

            • Miami53
              January 23, 2014 at 12:14 AM

              The Home Show is at the XL Center. It has over hundreds of different businesses displaying their products. You have to pay to get in.

        • January 23, 2014 at 5:42 AM

          I did not see the Eddie Murphy tweets, NCGal. Richie sure has a sick way of trying to stay relevant! He’s an attention seeking whore who has no morals, kind of like the Gorga Jr.’s. I wonder if the thought ever crossed the Wakile’s and Gorga’s mind about what would happen when the show ends for them? I really believe both families assumed they would be adored by fans all over and their “brand” would make them Bethenney Frankel rich. Instead their left with a handful of fans and labeled as backstabbers by Teresa’s fans. Kathy’s cannoli’s were a joke. I really doubt her book will sell well, it’s not that I wish her failure, it’s just that Kathy isn’t that popular. Also, her husband doesn’t help her brand very much. I’ve read many comments from people on various website’s that have said they would never buy anything Kathy markets because her husband is jerk!

          • January 23, 2014 at 2:59 PM

            If he reminds me of someone who sexually abuses children, I am sure that there are others who can not stand the sight of him. Kathy defining him as funny just makes it worse, because she reminds me of all the family members who close their eyes.

            If any of them had a good reputation and did Bravo scripted scenes where boundaries were crossed, they shot themselves in the foot and killed their reputation. You can not do and say all that stuff and expect people that are watching to think that your different than the way Bravo portrays you.

  30. January 22, 2014 at 11:28 AM

    OT — Is anyone planning on watching the Wahlburgers on A&E tonight, as it is the series premiere. It looks cute and I think I already love the Mother.

    • January 22, 2014 at 12:46 PM

      I hadn’t heard of this and just looked it up! It does look cute and I love the city of Boston!! If I remember, I will definitely DVR this and give it a try! Thanks, Jules!

  31. Miami53
    January 22, 2014 at 12:28 PM

    I can’t believe this article at all….Tre’s home is appraised for $500,000 and has a over a $1,000,000 mortgage loan. You have to be pretty dense to think her house is only worth that much.


    • January 22, 2014 at 12:30 PM

      Great minds think alike Miami53!

      It appears Teresa got a small bit of good news. According to an Exclusive article posted by ROL, Teres will not have to sell her mansion “towards settling her million dollar debts.”

      “Eviction? Fuhgeddaboutit! Lucky Break For Teresa Giudice As Bankruptcy Court Rules She’ll Get To Keep Her NJ Mansion
      Posted on Jan 22, 2014 @ 3:58AM | By Radar Staff

      The legal hits just seem to keep on coming for embattled Real Housewives of New Jersey couple Teresa and Joe Giudice. But though they’re still facing more than 50 years in prison over ongoing fraud charges, at last, there’s a bit of reprieve: RadarOnline.com has exclusively learned that a bankruptcy court recently ruled she won’t have to sell her over-the-top home towards settling her million-dollar debts.

      According to court documents obtained by Radar, the trustee of Teresa and husband Joe’s ongoing bankruptcy case filed on December 23 to “abandon” her mansion in Towaco, New Jersey, because it is of “inconsequential value” to her estate.

      Abandonment is usually an option when the sale of a property would be too difficult, or would not bring in enough money to settle outstanding debts. Teresa’s home is reportedly worth $500,000, and she still owes $1.65 million on the mortgage to the Community Bank of Bergen. Under abandonment, the bank may decide to proceed with foreclosure. Teresa’s home has faced foreclosure several times in the past, but she somehow squeaked out of all those previous situations so far.

      The court’s proposal for abandonment was certified as having no objections on January 13, according to documents obtained by Radar.

      The ruling is a small reprieve for the RHONJ couple who are still facing 41 counts of federal fraud, including conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud, bank fraud, making false statements on loan applications and bankruptcy fraud. If convicted, they face 50 years in prison, but as Radar has reported, Joe is angling for a deal that would spare Teresa from getting locked up.

      In addition, Joe is still mired in an ongoing trial for charges of obtaining a driver’s license through false identification, a case that stems from allegations he used his brother Pietro’s marriage and birth certificates to get a license while his own was suspended for DWI. He faces ten years in prison for this charge.”


    • January 22, 2014 at 5:41 PM

      RT has updated their article making corrections, stating the FMV of Teresa’s home is $1,650,000. The following is an excerpt which is an interesting read:

      “Here are snippets from the actual court documents – the house is worth much more than $500K.


      John Sywilok, Trustee for the above−captioned case, has filed a notice of intent to abandon certain property described below as being of inconsequential value to the estate.
      If any creditor or other party in interest has an objection to the proposed abandonment, the objection and a request for a hearing on such objection shall be in writing, served upon the Trustee and filed with the Clerk of the United States Bankruptcy Court.

      If no objection is filed with the Clerk and served upon the Trustee on or before January 9, 2014, the abandonment will take effect on the fifth day following the last day to file objections.

      The description of the property to be abandoned is as follows:
      Debtors interest in real property located at: (Joe & Teresa’s Address) NJ 07082
      Fair Market Value: $1,650,000.00

      The liens on the property to be abandoned are as follows (including amount claimed due):
      Subject to mortgage held by Community Bank of Bergen County on which there is due approximately $1,716,737.00.

      The amount of equity claimed as exempt by the debtor is: No Equity

      There is a court date set for January 27th. “

  32. January 22, 2014 at 2:17 PM

    I don’t know where the $500,000 figure is coming from because the ROL link clearly states the FMV at $1,650,000. There are so many misconceptions and opinons out there regarding this case.

    • January 22, 2014 at 3:10 PM

      The Giudice’s home is worth more than $500,000.

      The assessed value of the home increased from $424,900 in 2008-2010 (they completed the remodel during this time period) to $1,215,300 in 2011. It was assessed at $1,766,300 in 2012-2013, perhaps because they added an attached carport and a detached garage (and they also installed a pool and poolhouse in 2013, according to DailyMail).

      “The State Constitution of New Jersey requires, property to be assessed for taxation by general laws and uniform rules and that all real property, except for agricultural/horticultural land, must be assessed according to the same standard of value. New Jersey statute defines the standard of value as the true value of property. Taxable assessed value is that percentage of true value established by each county board of taxation. All 21 counties in New Jersey have chosen 100%. The statute describes true value as the price at which, in the assessor’s judgment, each parcel of real property ‘would sell for at a fair and bona fide sale by private contract on October 1 next preceding the date on which the assessor shall complete his assessments.’ New Jersey courts have determined ‘full and fair value,’ ‘market value,’ and ‘true value’ to be synonymous.”


    • January 23, 2014 at 11:20 AM

      Teresa has stated that they purchased the home for $500,000.

      • January 23, 2014 at 1:40 PM

        The Giudices bought 6 Indian Lane in Towaco/Montville on 12/14/2001 for $530,000. In 2001, the lot was valued at $169,700 and the buildings were valued at $424,900. At that time, the home on the lot (built in 1975) was only 4863 SF – the Giudices added on to it as they were remodeling it before they moved into the home around 2009 (hence Melissa congratulating them on their “redone house”). I don’t think they tore down the old structure; I think they added the huge addition to the back side of it, more than doubling the square footage from 4863 SF to 10044 SF, and renovated the inside and outside (a total gut). However, they could very well have torn down the old structure and built the new structure from the ground up, but in public records the year built is listed as 1975, which normally would mean that the original structure was not totally demolished.

  33. January 22, 2014 at 10:12 PM

    People.com just published tonight an article that is a rehash of the separate trials for the Giudices. However, it does mention that a new court date has been decided. Teresa and Joe are scheduled to be back in court on April 9th.

    • January 22, 2014 at 10:21 PM

      Thanks for this Jeannie. According to People:

      As Joe’s declaration states, he will testify that:
      • Teresa has no knowledge of any misrepresentation on loan applications, mortgage applications, or lines of credit;
      • Teresa was not aware that various properties were acquired in her name;
      • Teresa was not aware that various businesses were owned in her name;
      • Mr. Giudice signed Teresa’s name on numerous occasions without her knowledge and authorization;
      • Mr. Giudice’s business partner, Joe Mastropole, and Mr. Giudice’s attorney, Fred Roughgarden, both signed Teresa’s name on numerous occasions without her knowledge and authorization;
      • Other individuals including bank represenatives were aware that Teresa had not signed various documents, including loan and mortgage applications, lines of credit, or HUD-1s.

      Unquestionably, [Joe] Giudice’s conduct and anticipated testimony would be just as imperative to Teresa’s defense. If the codefendants are tried jointly, and Mr. Giudice invokes his Fifth Amendment Right, Teresa will be prejudiced.”

      While there is no confirmation as to whether the trials will be separate, the couple is due back in court April 9.


      I find it strange the Giudices are claiming that Teresa didn’t authorize Fred Roughgarden to sign her name since on March 26, 2004 she appointed Power of Attorney to him – unless they also are claiming the notary public really didn’t witness her signing the POA:

      Teresa also appointed Power of Attorney to Juicy on June 24, 2005, which was both witnessed and notarized by Joe Mastropole – they must be claiming that POA was forged by Mastropole. However, to me, Teresa’s signature on her bankruptcy petition looks very much like the signature on the June 24, 2005 POA witnessed and notarized by Mastropole.

      Teresa’s authentic signature is on Ebay:


      • January 23, 2014 at 7:55 AM

        Fame, this POA is for the sale of one piece of property only.

        • January 23, 2014 at 7:58 AM

          Also, this looks like a poor replication of the signature on the e-bay site. I am sure they will have handwriting experts testify.

          • Miami53
            January 23, 2014 at 8:16 AM

            I have to agree with you…..it wasn’t even close!!!!!

          • January 23, 2014 at 2:23 PM

            I screen captured Teresa’s inscription to Joey at the book signing (it wasn’t easy to do, but I got lucky after a few tries) in season 3 episode 15 (http://www.bravotv.com/the-real-housewives-of-new-jersey/season-3/videos/book-signing-drama), and the signature looks just like the one on eBay:

            teresa's authentic signature S3 E15

            • January 23, 2014 at 3:11 PM

              I agree that this looks like the signature on ebay but the signature on the POA looks rigid and the G is so different.

              • Miami53
                January 23, 2014 at 4:11 PM

                I watched the video….what a B$$ch the sister in-law is…she needed a invite. If that was my SIL, I would have been down there without an invite. Family is suppose to be there for you!!!

            • January 23, 2014 at 3:31 PM

              Awesome, Fame!!! Great job with the SS and so impressed with what you did!!! So cool!

              This signature, along with the Ebay authentic signature easily resemble one and other. They are both what I would call “loopy” with flairs and swirls. There is a fluidity and the end “tails” in these two sigs pretty much stay straight. The signature on the POA is definitely much more “stilted”and stick-like, without any flow – almost hesitant – and the end “tails” curve up (something left-handed people tend to do. I am left-handed and I do that but not that extreme.).

              I’m not a handwriting expert but, to me, there definitely appears to be a question here.

        • jackhole2014
          January 23, 2014 at 7:18 PM

          I agree with dookie here. This doc clearly states that the POA is for the matter of the property sale. I think these guys took the situation and ran with it!!! I also do not think the signature looks like hers. Hers is way more…frilly for lack of a better word. And now I am wondering ( I have no clue ) but if it is a conflict of interest that the business partner be a notary for transactions that would directly benefit him. I am going to look into this…hmmm, he tried to take Joe Giudice to task for things that he clearly was doing himself. I feel like the lawsuit from the business partner was the beginning of the public negativity bandwagon for this family. Now I see how Mastrolople (sp?) had the audacity to go for this lawsuit, he had inside knowledge of how to stick it to Juicy Joe bc of his trade in notarizing!!! I will look into it more, but upon a quick google search, it says that notaries cannot notarize for family members bc they cannot have “a direct beneficial interest” in the document…my guess is that would also be true of business partnerships as well!!!!

          SMDH…how did Ne Ne say it?? ” You never can win when you dirty- you never can win!!”

  34. Sharon
    January 22, 2014 at 11:00 PM

    Another gossip site said today that Teresa will get to keep her house and not be forced to hand it over to creditors.

    • January 22, 2014 at 11:03 PM

      The bankruptcy court has “returned” the property back to the Giudices, but in the federal indictment it states that the U.S. government will seek the forfeiture of property as part of any sentence. From the indictment:

      “… requires any person convicted of such offenses to forfeit any property constituting or derived from proceeds obtained directly or indirectly as a result of such offense.”

      Asset Forfeiture Under U.S. Law

      • Sharon
        January 23, 2014 at 8:55 PM

        Thank you for the Link and the information. It looks like that other site needs to do their home work.

  35. January 23, 2014 at 8:06 PM

    I have two distinct ways I sign my name: one is just a scribble that I call my doctor’s signature, which I use most often; and the other is my attempt to make my signature more legible, which I use for more formal documents. They look nothing alike, and you would think two different people signed. That could be the case with Teresa, or not.

    Teresa probably has a signature she uses for fan autographs (the one she used in the inscription to Joey). She very likely could have had a different signature before becoming a celebrity, one that was less frilly, like the images below.

    The image below is for the December 14, 2001 purchase of her home on 6 Indian Lane in Towaco – she signed on the dotted line twice (if indeed that is her signature in both places). The images right below that are her signatures on her bankruptcy petition.

    Teresa's signature in different forms

  36. January 23, 2014 at 8:30 PM

    Below are more images of signatures on POAs, deeds, mortgages, etc. from databases I found online.

    Teresa's signature in different forms 2

  37. jackhole2014
    January 23, 2014 at 9:17 PM

    I have different signatures myself. In fact, the signature on my license is so far different from the one I use today, every now and again, I wonder if it will be a problem!!

    But from my view, the 1st one posted on the POA doc looks too sharp and jagged. There is something off about it. These others presented are variations that look closer to the ones on the book and website but more so like her husbands handwriting when viewed all together. The odds of them both making very uncommon capital Gs the same is very unlikely… but I guess only time (and hopefully the trained eyes of experts!?) will tell!!

    Meanwhile, about the notary public, it seems to be a state by state thing, but I am sure there is general best practices and ethical standards that are nation wide. For anyone interested…page 7 makes you go hmmmmm!


  38. January 24, 2014 at 11:52 AM

    In a January 2011 blog at LynnNChicago, buffywood commented, saying Teresa testified at the November/December 2009 trial of Mastropole v. Giudice that “she didn’t sign her own bankruptcy petition”:

    buffywood said at LynnNChicago on January 4, 2011 –

    Plus it seems that Joe (Mastropole) is telling everyone that will listen (and hopefully people are), that Teresa lied on the stand regarding her not signing many of the closing documents and is providing names to prove it. He said she was personally at one of the property closings, gave the notary’s name, and said she paid him with her American Express card.

    And here is his comments about the beach house closing:

    When Teresa Giudice took the stand last week with regards to a dispute with Joe Mastropole over a fraudulent loan discharge paper, she stated she did not know anything “about it”. And furthermore stated that she did not sign her own bankruptcy petition either. Under cross examination she was asked about her beach house and she stated, “Is that in my name?”

    Fred was in fact the notary on the closing of the beach house as well as at least one other mortgage that I saw. Well according to Joe Mastropole, Teresa was at every closing. He told ibuysss.com Tabloid:

    “She knew every mortgage and attended every closing on all props in her name and paid by way of her American express card. Who is she kidding.” And he named Fred Roughgarden as the closing attorney.


    If it is true the Teresa didn’t sign the original bankruptcy petition, I’d say that, based on the images of the signatures above, Joe forged her name on the June 24, 2005 POA to him and on the October 29, 2009 bankruptcy papers.

    But I don’t think Teresa is off the hook since she testified in bankruptcy court concerning her petition and perhaps signed the amendments to the original petition – the case went on for two years before the trustee denied the discharge and the Giudices withdrew their petitions:

    In December 2010, approximately one year after Teresa and Joe filed bankruptcy, the US Trustee overseeing their case accused Teresa and Joe of lying to the court by knowingly concealing various assets, which were legally required to be included in their bankruptcy paperwork. According to a consent order in December 2011, Teresa “agreed to waive discharge of her debts, and acknowledged that she wishes to resolve the Trustee’s proceedings against her ‘without the need for further inquiry or litigation, and without her making any further admissions’.”



    Real Housewives Star Teresa Giudice Denied Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Discharge
    Steve Rhode, GetOutOfDebt.org
    March 2, 2012

    Previously I covered the filing of a chapter 7 bankruptcy in 2009 for Real Housewives of New Jersey start Teresa Giudice. It’s been quite a while so I thought I’d drop back in to see what’s been going on in the case.

    Looks like the court, in a somewhat rare move, has agreed to waive Teresa from relief of her debts under bankruptcy. – Source

    According to information, Teresa neglected to tell the court when she filed some critical information that later came back to bite her. For those familiar with the show, I feel the need to throw over a table right about now.

    Documents state when Teresa and her husband filed for their chapter 7 bankruptcy they omitted information about their bank accounts, vehicles, and interest in intellectual property.

    After a request from the court in late 2009, they amended their original bankruptcy filing to include undisclosed properties, checking account, three businesses, three vehicles and a boat. They also then added a leased 2005 Maserati Quattroporte.

    In March, 2010 they filed yet another amended set of documents. This time they listed $89,254.81 which attributable to consumer credit cards and store credit at Bloomingdale’s, Neiman Marcus, and Nordstrom.

    On April 23, 2010 Teresa was questioned regarding her bankruptcy filing. More information emerged.

    Teresa testified that she has a bank account with Lakeland Bank, and she is the only person with signature authority on that account, that she owned a previously undisclosed business by the name of TG Fabulicious, LLC, of which she is the sole member, and she had a previously undisclosed deal with Hyperion, an imprint of Buena Vista Books, Inc., to publish a previously undisclosed cookbook titled “Skinny Italian.”

    Teresa’s husband Joe (Giuseppe) was questioned at the same time and apparently he remembered some additional details as well. Joe admitted that prior to his employment with G&G Stucco & Stone Specialist, Inc., for a three- to four-year period beginning in 2005 he withdrew funds from his LLCs as needed.

    He also said he signed a mortgage application dated July 23, 2008, which indicated that he received $54,269 in monthly income from “G&G Stucco & Stone” and that the IRS informed him “three or four or five months ago” that the purported 2006, 2007, and 2008 individual income tax returns, which had previously been presented to the Case Trustee, were never actually filed. Oops.

    Joe also recalled he was the sole member of a previously undisclosed business named 1601 Maple Avenue Associates, LLC, which owns a parcel of real estate in Hillside, NJ, and collects rents from two commercial businesses operating at that location.

    The bankruptcy trustee filed a lawsuit against Teresa and her husband claiming that they had knowingly and fraudulently made false statements under oath. Additionally, that their original bankruptcy filing was not even close to being a full disclosure.

    For example, Teresa’s “Skinny Italian” book deal with Hyperion was dated October 22, 2009, approximately one week prior to the bankruptcy petition date, and was signed by Teresa on November 18, 2009, but the $250,000 advance owed slipped her mind.

    Statements of Roberts DeAngelis, United States Bankruptcy Trustee:

    The original Schedule B, which the Defendants attested under penalty of perjury was true and correct, failed to disclose Defendant husband’s bank account, two pieces of real property, the Defendants’ vehicles, the Defendant wife’s pending book deal, and certain business interests including TG Fabulicious, LLC and 1601 Maple Avenue Associates, LLC.

    The original Schedule I, which the Defendants attested under penalty of perjury was true and correct, stated that Defendant wife was unemployed with no likelihood of an increase in income in the near future, and understated her true income.

    The Defendants knew that the information contained in their originally- filed Schedules and Statement of Financial Affairs was not true and correct.

    Even after multiple amendments to their Schedules and Statement of Financial Affairs, the Defendants still have not filed any amendments disclosing the existence of the book “Skinny Italian,” the Defendant wife’s publishing deal with Hyperion, the Defendant wife’s interest in TG Fabulicious, LLC, and the Defendant husband’s interest in 1601 Maple Avenue Associates, LLC.

    The Defendant wife testified at the Meeting of Creditors that she does not have any interests in any businesses, which was a false oath in light of her subsequent disclosure of her ownership of TG Fabulicious, LLC.

    The Defendant husband testified at the Meeting of Creditors that the filings with the Court had disclosed all of his business interests, which was a false oath in light of his subsequent disclosure of his interest in 1601 Maple Avenue Associates, LLC.

    The Defendants’ initial and amended Schedule I indicated that the Defendant wife had no income on the petition date other than income from Sirens Media, which was a false oath in light of documents indicating that she had pre-petition income from operations of TG Fabulicious, LLC.

    The Defendants intentionally did not disclose the existence of the undisclosed assets in order to conceal their existence from creditors and the Case Trustee.

    As a result, the Defendants have knowingly and fraudulently made false oaths in this case in the form of false statements on sworn documents filed with the Court and false sworn testimony provided at the Meeting of Creditors.

    Wherefore, the UST respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment denying the Defendants’ discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 727(a)(4)(A) and providing for such other relief as is just.

    The contract between Defendant wife and Hyperion indicates that, during the year preceding the filing of the petition, the Defendant wife was in negotiation of a book publishing deal for which she was to receive a $250,000 initial advance, a $30,000 additional advance, and royalties based on sales of her cookbook “Skinny Italian.”

    The certificate of formation and Lakeland Bank statements for TG Fabulicious, LLC indicate that, during the year preceding the filing of the petition, the Defendant wife owned and operated a business that had a bank account into which over $100,000 was deposited in the six months preceding the petition.

    Since the petition was filed, the book publishing deal with Hyperion was signed, the cookbook “Skinny Italian” was released, and, upon information and belief, the initial $250,000 advance was paid to the Defendant wife.

    In addition, the Lakeland Bank account statements produced by the Defendants reveal that TG Fabulicious, LLC had total deposits of over $190,000 during the first three months after the petition was filed.

    The Defendants presented documents to the Case Trustee that purported to be their 2006, 2007, and 2008 individual income tax returns.

    However, upon information and belief, the Defendants have not filed individual income tax returns for several years. – Source

    And in the end, Teresa’s bankruptcy discharge was denied, withdrawn or waived. She fair game for her creditors again.


    • GPM
      January 24, 2014 at 2:58 PM

      I haven’t read carefully through all of Steve Rhode’s post yet but in my quick reading one statement stood out to me as likely to be highly inaccurate, i.e., that “The bankruptcy trustee filed a lawsuit against Teresa and her husband claiming that they had knowingly and fraudulently made false statements under oath.”

      That’s just not how it’s done.

      If fraud is suspected the trustee and/or the court can refer the matter to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for criminal prosecution. (In this case, they may have done just that.)

      In addition, the trustee can argue — and the bankruptcy court can order — that the bankruptcy petition be disallowed. (In this case, I believe Joe and Teresa voluntarily withdrew their petition and, as a result, the question of whether the petition should be allowed became moot.)

      If a bankruptcy petition is disallowed — or voluntarily withdrawn — the automatic stay against collection that debtors are afforded while a bankruptcy proceeding is pending is lifted and creditors are free to immediately use whatever means the law allows them to collect the money owed, i.e., foreclose on collateral, repossess cars, obtain civil judgments and then utilize legal collection processes such as the garnishment of wages, bank accounts, etc. (This is why Mastropole hasn’t collected anything; he only has a judgment against Joe and Joe apparently doesn’t earn wages that can be garnished or have a bank account Mastropole can find.)

      But to the best of my knowledge a bankruptcy trustee would NEVER “file a lawsuit claiming that [the Giudices] had knowingly and fraudulently made false statements under oath.” I honestly cannot come up with any scenario where that would have ever happened.

      I’m open to ideas — can anybody either point me to said “lawsuit” or even a lawsuit involving another debtor where the alleged fact pattern is similar?

      • GPM
        January 24, 2014 at 3:25 PM

        Okay, I’m still reading but I checked the Source link in Steve Rhode’s post and found the trustee’s objection to the Guidice’s bankruptcy petition.

        This is not “a lawsuit against Teresa and her husband” — it’s the trustee argument to the bankruptcy judge that the bankruptcy petition should be disallowed, which I described above.

        The trustee’s objection is interesting reading. It’s online at http://cdn3.getoutofdebt.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/118127555615.pdf

        I do think it’s important to point out, though, that this is only one side; the Giudice’s bankruptcy attorney would have had the opportunity to respond to the allegations. I don’t know if he filed a response, however, because his clients may have decided to withdraw their petition instead.

        I would say, moreover, that there are numerous red flags that call the competency of the bankruptcy attorney into question here.

        Going back to signatures, I think it might be important to know whether the signature purporting to be Teresa’s on TG Fabalicious’ Certificate of Formation filed with the State of New Jersey Department of the Treasury is really hers.

      • jackhole2014
        January 24, 2014 at 3:55 PM

        Great points GPM and Fame. Also, I am going to keep putting this point out there until ppl feel as annoyed as I do (lol) but WHY IS JOE THE BUSINESS PARTNER NORATIZING DOCS FOR HIS BUSINESS PARTNER/WIFE?!!!!! His actions right there are a red flag that he was actively involved in whatever scheming Joe G. was up to. I hope he is being investigated!!

        I recall when Joe and Teresa did that firesquad interview on WWHL after this story broke and Joe passively said something about accountants and advisors that handled all of the accounts and I believe that. Neither Joe nor Teresa strike me as cerebral enough to even think about pulling this off on their own, and that is said with the warmest regard.

        He definitely had knowledge of what was going down but probably felt a little safe considering that he was not the only one involved in these activities. He had a hand in making poor decisions but it probably began from getting some really bad (and shady) business advice . Also, I think Teresa is traditional to her culture about gender roles. Even if she had an inkling about what was going on, I think it is common for Italian women to not involve in “men’s business.” It just makes sense to me, how she would not know the ins and outs of what her husband was up to AND/OR not questioning him.

        • GPM
          January 24, 2014 at 6:02 PM

          Hold on, jackie, ’cause I might just blow your mind here (***twinkle***) —

          Do you think it’s possible Joe G. forged Mastropole’s notary signature?!

          I think that’s what the court ultimately decided with respect to the Mastropole note (i.e., that Joe G. had forged Mastropole’s signature) and that he had also retained/taken/used the notary seal of one of the notaries who worked in the office and forged her name as well.

          My gut tells me that (1) the bankruptcy lawyer did not come anywhere close to doing his due diligence, but (2) Joe G. may very well have been deliberately keeping some info from him, and (3) Tre probably didn’t even sign her own bankruptcy petition — I actually thought of that possibility last night just from looking at the signatures but it is just so hard to believe that a bankruptcy attorney would allow that to happen I just find it almost impossible to believe. Joe probably nearly died when he found out she was going to have to appear before the creditor’s committee, he probably waited until the last minute to even tell her and she probably just believed everything Joe and the bankruptcy attorney (assuming he even met with her at all) told her about their affairs and that’s what she said on the stand. But I still think that Joe got absolutely TERRIBLE advice from the bankruptcy attorney and that that attorney has a LOT of ‘splaining to do!

          • jackhole2014
            January 25, 2014 at 3:21 PM

            Mmmmmmm, I could see a scenario like this. But that is a pretty ballsy move to outright steal an officiating instrument and forge numerous times with it and think that it would never come back to bite… and THEN go on a TV show and flaunt the wares of the dirty deeds…but then again, I do say everyday that people NEVER cease to amaze me…it is a head scratcher for me!

  39. January 24, 2014 at 12:38 PM

    Haven’t paid much attention to all of this–must say, it is entertaining to see what is “up” as of late. Wondering what I could do in my life if I had a Public Relations team. Great effort at minimizing what is esentially the theft of 11 million or so dollars. Separate their trials if they may–they will both end up in jail. The fact that the mortgage company has abondoned their collection efforts isn’t a good thing. It means that there is no money to begot. The liens are more than the value of the house. It would probably cost them more If they continued their foreclosure process, they would only be throwing good money after bad. The Giudices may indeed be still paying a mortgage payment but the Government is going to take the house eventually anyway–even if they by some freaky chance keep Teresa out of jail (which is highly unlikely). This is all going to end very sadly especially for their children.

    • GPM
      January 24, 2014 at 2:18 PM

      Can you explain what you mean by “theft of 11 million or so dollars,” graceloved?

  40. punkinseed
    January 24, 2014 at 1:49 PM

    Oh my! Their life is in shambles and why? I remember my gramma saying to me in her once in awhile preacher voice: “Ohhhhh what a tangled web we weave if first we practice to deceive!”
    Yes! It’s so tempting to fudge on this or that to get what we want, but this little saying has kicked that wicked devil off my shoulder countless times.
    I reckon some folks think they can tangle their web all they want to and get away with it.
    Ever see a spider leave a hole or tangle in its web and manage to keep it functioning for its food? Not I.
    Why the heck did Juicy lie so much? To what end? And it’s so stupid that he left all that information off his chapter 7. It costs a lot of extra $ to add and amend after the original petition is filed. Now look where they are and it’s all in shambles.
    I do think Juicy and his partner both forged Tre’s signature as needed to expedite whatever scheme they had cooking at the time. Note the letter G in her sig. She’s been writing that particular capital letter all of her life, so there is no shift in her style much in writing it. Look at your old signatures from when you were a teen and you’ll see your signature doesn’t drastically change, it matures for the most part. That’s my theory anyway.
    Imagine if they’d all been honest, law abiding on all the loans, court papers, etc. It would be interesting to write a what if, item by item showing the outcomes in that POV. Sort of like something I read the other day saying: What if Hitler and his cohorts hadn’t hated Jews and there was no concentration camps, and possible outcomes from that in itself. I hadn’t ever thought about it like that before. Makes one stop and think how far lies and hatred are so destructive. Anyway, about the signatures again:
    I recall Catch Me if You Can’s Abergnaille I think his name is, saying this tidbit for anyone wanting to forge a signature: Turn the original upside down and write it upside down! YEP. Good old Right brain helping out forgeries. I bet Juicy and Mascapole wished they’d had that little pearl of wisdome when forging sigs. It does work, btw. When not trying to forge a check, try it when you draw something and you’d be shocked how great an artist you are.

  41. NCGal
    January 24, 2014 at 8:51 PM

    Sort of OT, but sort of on topic as well. RHOA Viewers: Apollo Nida, Phaedra Parks husband has been arrested and charged with bank fraud and identity theft



  42. January 24, 2014 at 9:20 PM

    Two interesting articles out of Reuters today regarding JPMorganChase and the fallout from the financial crisis:

    US Attorney General Eric Holder, in an interview on MSNBC today, stated “No American financial institution is too large to indict and no bank executive immune from criminal prosecution.” citing the ongoing case against JPMorgan Chase. According to the last paragraph of this article the Justice Department will be pursuing civil suit mortgage fraud charges against several financial institutions:

    “No Bank Too Big To Indict, U.S. Attorney General Says
    WASHINGTON Fri Jan 24, 2014 9:45am EST

    Jan 24 (Reuters) – No American financial institution is too large to indict and no bank executive immune from criminal prosecution, Attorney General Eric Holder said in a television interview.

    In an interview with MSNBC scheduled to be broadcast on Friday, Holder cited the case against JPMorgan Chase & Co , which in November agreed to a civil settlement under which it would pay $13 billion to end a series of government investigations into its marketing and sale of mortgage-backed securities.

    The settlement with JPMorgan, the largest U.S. bank, allowed prosecutors to pursue criminal charges if warranted, and that investigation is ongoing.

    “There are no institutions that are too big to indict,” Holder said, according to an MSNBC transcript released before the interview.

    “There are no individuals who are in such high level positions that they cannot be indicted, criminally investigated,” he said.

    The Justice Department is investigating “significant financial institutions,” Holder said without elaborating.

    “And the focus of those investigations is not only on the institutions but on individuals as well,” he told MSNBC.

    Holder told Reuters in December the Justice Department plans to bring civil mortgage fraud cases against several financial institutions early in 2014, using the JPMorgan case as a template.”


    And in another turn of events, while most of the employees of JPMorgan did receive any pay increase in 2013 due to the company’s poor returns because of high legal costs, the chairman and CEO was granted a 74% pay increase for 2013:

    “JPMorgan Directors Raise Dimon’s Pay After Prior Cut
    NEW YORK Fri Jan 24, 2014 8:06pm EST

    (Reuters) – Jamie Dimon, chairman and chief executive of JPMorgan Chase & Co (JPM.N), got a 74 percent pay increase for 2013, when $20 billion of legal settlements weighed on the bank’s income.

    The CEO received $20 million, including $18.5 million of restricted stock recently awarded, the company said in a public filing on Friday. Dimon’s base salary is $1.5 million.

    Dimon was paid $11.5 million for 2012, half the $23 million compensation in each of the prior two years, according to company filings, after the company lost $6.25 billion on bets known as the “London Whale” derivatives trades. When those trades first came to light in April 2012, Dimon dismissed them as a “tempest in a teapot”.

    Most employees at JPMorgan did not get pay increases for 2013 because profits declined as a result of high legal bills to settle government and private claims against the bank.

    JPMorgan, the biggest bank in the U.S. by assets, employed 251,196 people at year-end.

    The bank suffered a number of black eyes in 2013. In January of last year, the U.S. Federal Reserve and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency imposed sanctions on the bank for weak risk and financial controls, as well as deficient safeguards against money laundering and violations of the U.S. Bank Secrecy Act, over the 2012 derivatives loss.


    Over the course of the year, the bank agreed to a series of high-cost legal settlements, including $13 billion to resolve claims that it overstated the quality of the mortgages it was selling to investors before the financial crisis.

    Those settlements cut into the bank’s earnings for the year — JPMorgan’s income fell 16 percent for 2013 to $17.92 billion.

    In the new pay package, half of Dimon’s restricted stock units will vest after two years and half after three years, which JPMorgan’s statement said ties his compensation to the company’s future performance, including progress meeting requirements from regulators to improve its risk controls.

    U.S. median household income was $51,017 in 2012, adjusted for inflation, according to the Census Bureau.

    Directors cited the 2012 pay cut as evidence that the board is independent from Dimon, who is its chairman. The board’s independence became an issue at the company’s annual meeting when some shareholders tried, but failed, to pass a referendum to separate the roles of board chairman and CEO.

    Shareholders voted against that proposal after board members said that Dimon might leave if he did not retain his chairman title.

    The New York Times reported Friday that directors had decided to pay Dimon more for 2013 after a series of meetings that turned heated at times. JPMorgan spokesman Joseph Evangelisti said the Times’ characterization of the director meetings was wrong.


  43. jackhole2014
    January 25, 2014 at 3:26 PM

    Hmmmm, maybe Sonja Morgan can now begin to heal and be thankful that she is not part of this family now because it looks like they are going DOWN!

  1. No trackbacks yet.
Comments are closed.
%d bloggers like this: