Girardi Lawyers Try to Pin Blame on His Ex-CFO Ahead of Trial

Disbarred plaintiff’s attorney Tom Girardi’s alleged theft of millions of dollars in client funds was due to disorganization at his firm or manipulation by co-defendant Christopher Kamon, Girardi’s lawyer said Thursday, offering a peek at trial strategy weeks ahead of the Aug. 6 start date.

The arguments on Thursday before US District Judge Josephine L. Staton in the Central District of California over evidence inclusion, witness testimony, and jury selection followed her ruling that Girardi is competent to stand trial despite some level of cognitive impairment, forcing the defense to switch gears — bringing Kamon into focus.

Girardi’s defenders and his prosecutors both want the jury to see evidence that they say shows ex-CFO Kamon aided and abetted the lawyer’s scheme. The former Girardi Keese principal was indicted by grand juries in Chicago and Los Angeles and charged in both places for stealing millions from clients. Kamon is also alleged to have embezzled millions of dollars while at the firm.

Girardi Keese, which represented thousands of clients in its mass tort heyday, pooled its funds in a way that withdrawals required “meticulous organization” to avoid accidentally taking the wrong person’s money, Girardi public defender Charles Snyder said — organization the firm lacked.

Girardi’s personal dollars were “swimming around” among funds that belonged to clients in what amounted to “dubious” accounting from Kamon, he said. Snyder also claimed that Girardi didn’t use a computer, email, the internet, or a smartphone, so the only person who could intermediate his access to funds was Kamon.

Kamon’s attorney, Pasadena-based Michael Severo, contends that multiple other accountants and observers also had access to the accounts, and pressed the judge not to admit the evidence on the grounds that it would overcomplicate the trial.

“Mr. Snyder tells a nice story,” Severo said. “It’s just fiction.”

US Supreme Court Influence

Staton indicated that the US Supreme Court’s Thursday ruling in Diaz v. United States — finding that experts witnesses can testify as to what “most” defendants would typically know at the time an offense was being committed — could help guide her call on whether to allow Girardi’s physician to testify in the case.

The ruling, published just hours before Girardi’s hearing, is “very consistent with what the Ninth Circuit has done, anyway,” Staton said.

She appeared open to allowing Dr. Helena Chui, of the University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, give a limited testimony at the trial, over Assistant US Attorney Ali Moghaddas’ objections that her testimony should be confined to the attorney’s competency proceedings.

“What if Chui testified that someone with dementia may not be able to keep things from today or yesterday in mind? Wouldn’t confusion be relevant to whether someone engaged with intent to cheat or deceive?” Staton said.

But she was sympathetic to Moghaddas’ point that Chui may not directly link dementia symptoms to criminal behavior, which would leave Girardi’s attorneys to inappropriately make the connection themselves during closing arguments.

Diaz might not fully apply because it sets up guidelines for how much an expert witness can say, Staton said, not what to do when that witness doesn’t say “enough” to tie a state of mind to the lack or presence of criminal intent.

‘Real Housewives’

Potential jurors will receive a questionnaire at the courthouse a few days prior to the start of the trial to make jury selection more efficient, Staton said. A panel of between 80 and 100 jurors will be summoned to potentially partake in the 12-day trial.

Girardi’s attorneys want the form to vet jurors’ “Real Housewives of Beverly Hills” exposure, where his ex-wife Erika Jayne is a key figure.

Staton said the questionnaires are necessary in part because Girardi is linked to his ex-wife’s fame.

The case is USA v. Girardi, C.D. Cal., No. 2:23-cr-00047, 6/20/24.