December 5, 2022 • 24 mins
Caelynn does a deep dive into the dramatic fall from grace of Reality TV Royalty, the Chrisley family. With the help of special guests she digs into the ego and greed that lead such highly publicized figures to commit these crimes. They look into the crime itself, the punishment and how being on television all but ensured their downfall.
It’s True, it’s crime and unfortunately for the Chrisley family, it’s very much a reality.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to True Crime Reality with host Caitlin Miller Keys.
Things are about to get real. Let's talk about Todd
and Julie Chrisley, reality stars known for their humor, Southern hospitality,
and very wealthy lifestyle. While we watch their fame and
fortune grow exponentially on their TV show. The world is
(00:22):
witnessing the downfall of a family accused of financial crimes,
from tax evasion to bank fraud to a hefty jail sentence.
When it comes to Chrisly knows best, the question is
does he? Calin Miller Keys investigates on True Crime Reality.
Hello everyone, and welcome back to the True Crime Reality podcast.
(00:44):
I'm your host Kaylan Miller Keys, and this week we
are talking about the Chrislies along with everyone else. So,
Todd Chrisley and Julie Chrisley were sentenced collectively to nineteen
years of prison for bank fraud for defrauding the I
R s um. There are a couple of things going
on here and it is a pretty crazy story. So
(01:06):
we are bringing in a celebrity expert and an attorney
to talk about this craziness. I personally do not understand
how this could happen. How people thirty million dollars in
fraudulent loans, so we are going to dive into all
of that. My very first guest is Sam Ruben, and Sam,
can you tell everyone a little bit about yourself? Sure,
(01:27):
I'm the entertainment reporter in Los Angeles for the KHL,
a moret news that happened for for quite some time,
and I do entertainment reports all around the world, Australia
and England, a lot of places, so I've I've been
steeped in this stuff for quite some time. So you're
pretty familiar with the Chris Luis and and the show. Yeah,
I have met Taught on several occasions and a couple
(01:48):
of the kids, so I've seen them on TV and
have experienced them in person. Yeah, I can. For those
of us who haven't watched, I've never watched the show,
but I am familiar with who they are. Can you
just explain the family for us? Well, it is called
Chrisley Knows Best and the idea is obviously a parody
off the title Father Knows Best. So so here's the
(02:10):
dad who thinks he's in control, but of course he's
really not in control at all. And you know, a
wealthy wealthy family, and you know, his wife and his
kids kind of roll their eyes and listen, uh, and
he's sort of exasperated. But I think, you know, I
tell you what, It is hard to succeed in reality TV,
(02:31):
and they really did. So there's the original show Chrystally
Knows Best, which has run for a very long time,
believe ten years or more, and then uh, several spinoffs.
So it was all going so well until it wasn't.
But basically, it's a family reality show where a dad's
kind of trying to lay down the law. Nobody else
(02:53):
is really listening, and it's under the patina of a
lot of wealth. They are very well to do. And
you mentioned that it's and so successful. What is it
about this family? Do you think that people are so
drawn too? I tell you what, I think, you know,
Kardashians are the best example. I suppose everybody loves family
because one way or another, we're all part of the family.
(03:15):
And everybody or many people have experienced kind of the
know it all dad or the know it all relative.
And you know, we listened with one ear open, so
we kind of pay attention, and we kind of don't
pay attention. And I think people enjoyed the dynamic of
him trying to corral his kids, and he also had
(03:36):
this sort of larger than life personality, you know, the
twang um and ya you know, I think he He's
not the most masculine of men, so there were sort
of the twang. There was sort of like what's really
going on with this marriage? Um? And uh and and
very telligently kids, very pretty daughters mhm um. Well, for
(04:00):
those of us who haven't watched me being one of
those people, everyone is talking about this story, whether you've
seen the show before or you haven't, everyone is talking
about this sentencing because it seems kind of crazy. Uh,
just going off of Teresa Judaicce and her sentencing. I
know that these are a little bit different, but can
you just tell me like brief thoughts on what do
(04:23):
you think about all this? I think the whole thing
was surprising to people because it came rather suddenly. I
was not aware that there were tremendous financial problems or improprieties,
and I was not aware that there was this you know,
tax evasion and bank fraud and other charges leveled against them.
(04:45):
And I think, uh, you know, this is kind of
my business to be aware. So I think the fact
of the matter is, here's this family that's been on
TV for years and years and years. They seem extraordinarily successful,
and then all of a sudden, we're nearing the end
of this trial and potentially and now, as it turns out,
you know, they could go to jail for a long
time and pay a lot of fines. And so I
(05:07):
think one reason people were surprised by this is because
there wasn't a lot of run up to it that
we were aware of. They had done a very good
job of kind of keeping the whole thing quiet. Often,
you know, you'll hear about the charges. This is certainly
the case Jen Shaw and the Royal Housewives in Salt
Lake City. We you know, heard all about that. It
was actually part of the show. Um, this all their
(05:30):
I think it's fair to say all their bad acts
were never realized on the show. I think fans were
not aware of in goals. So it's pretty surprising that
somebody watch on TV, you know, every single week for
a long long time. Whoops, Dad's going to jail and
mom is too. It's really startling. Yeah, and for a
(05:51):
long time, I'm I'm shocked by the sentencing. It seems
like there isn't a lot of accountability being had on
their part. And maybe I'm wrong in this, but it
seems like, you know, one of the quotes from this
podcast was, uh, bad things happen to good people. But
I feel like we would all respect them a lot
more if they just said, yes, we did this horrible thing.
(06:13):
We are being punished, you know, whether they think it
should be less or longer. But it doesn't seem like
there is accountability with it. You know, a dilemma. I think.
I don't want to paint everybody with the same broad brush,
but I think one dilemma, particularly with the very wealthy,
is gee, we pay a lot of tax so I'm
(06:33):
now making these numbers up. So you know, maybe we
fudged on the half million that we should have paid,
but we already paid three dred thousand. That's more than
most people pay. You know, we pay a lot more
taxes than anyone else pays. So why should anybody begrudge
us if we used a little creative accounting to pay
less um so, and you know that, I think I
(06:55):
think people don't don't see it that way. You know.
The the idea is you know, Wen, and you pay
five thousand, that's ten percent of your income. That's that's
a lot of tax. And these guys make five million
dollars and they paid five thousand dollars. You know that
they brought detach erates actually higher, they should pay more. Um.
I think there's sort of a tabloid story of sorts
(07:18):
that they've not discussed. I don't think they've acknowledged any
of this. Is that potentially a male romantic partner for
Todd sort of turned them in essentially, you know, sort
of a scorned lover um. And so they may feel
that the source of all of this kind of came
from a bad way, like you know, we there was
somebody in our lives and you know we we disassociated ourselves,
(07:42):
and now they're that person is punishing us by doing this.
You know. The one thing that reverberates, as you know,
Al Campona is the first who can tell you, you you know,
the i r S, the Internal Revenue Serial Service is
serious and you know you don't want to break the
law in any circumstance, but you really don't want to
break the law with them, nor with banking regulators. Right,
(08:03):
And I can imagine you know, that is horrible that
someone turned them in, But also the I R S
is smart and they do have all these resources, Like
I think eventually they would have gotten caught. Yeah, I
mean you you you can't, you know. I think a
lot of people are very creative with their taxes. I
think that that is probably an American phenomenon. But I
think if you're if you're blatant about it, and you
(08:24):
not only um misbehave with regards to the I R S,
but you misbehave with banks and the to sort of
find out about each other. It's like, wait, he ripped
you off? He ripped does off too? Or the family?
Did you know? That's a bad thing. And one thing
I mean this is I'm not trying to give excuses,
but maybe as a point, I think he was successful
(08:45):
and wealthy before television. But what generally happens with TV
is when you start, it's not very much money. But
to be ten years in with all these spin offs,
they were printing money, so you know, you have a
comfortable income and then all of a sudden it doubles
or triples or quadruples very quickly, and you know, somebody suggests, well,
(09:08):
maybe you can do this, or maybe you can do this,
you know, may or may not be kosher, And probably
there are people who have done the same thing. You
haven't gotten caught. These guys did, Yeah, and it it
makes me think about Erica Jane gen Shaw now that
Chris Lee's. I don't know if people were doing this
before they gained this fame, but it seems like to me,
(09:29):
if I heard it be doing something illegal, I wouldn't
go on a show that then I would have millions
of five balls on me and suddenly I could be
caught as as they all have. Yeah. No, you you
bring up again, and that's a very very good point,
this whole idea of you know, hiding in plain sight,
you know, because all these cameras are on me, because
(09:49):
all these people are watching me, I would never do
anything wrong, you know, I'm I'm incredibly visible. Well, um,
you have three examples. Uh and people claim, you know,
various uh degrees of innocence. Um, and you know, just
to use Erica Jayne as an example. With Erica Jayne,
(10:10):
there are real victims who were truly cheated and who
you know, horrible stories of money they needed that was diverted.
You know, So she could buy jewelry. Was she aware
that you know, this plane crash victims family didn't get
the money they should have gotten because she got a necklace.
I don't know the answer to that, but I think
(10:31):
she she gets no sympathy at all because you see
the negative result. I think gen Shaw the same thing.
There were like people where money was taken in a
weird way, and maybe this is an American phenomenon. You know,
I think a lot of people might think you can't
rank these things. But you know that christally it's a
(10:51):
little less bad. I mean, it was just you know,
the I R S and you know, some rich bank.
It's not like they took it from some little old
lady or something. Obviously, legal experts would say otherwise, you know,
if you break the law, you break the law. But
not a victimless crime. But but victims that people aren't
a sympathetic about. So that that's what distinguishes is to
(11:12):
some degree right, And I am interested to see. So
they got nineteen years total between the two of them,
just to see what the sentencing will be for gent
Shaw and for Erica Jane, if she is, you know,
sentenced at all, Just because I agree I think people
want to screw the government and screw the I R S.
And so there a little bit more empathetic towards the
Christy is maybe not fully empathetic, but more understanding than
(11:35):
these other two situations. So it'll be interesting to see
no I and a lot of people will be watching.
And then one thing that that that's funny is that
I think depending on you know, your satellite system, they
immediately canceled new production of their shows and there was
a spin off with the Kids that I think is
off the air, but much to my surprise, I think
(11:55):
the original Cristally Knows Best of which there is a
huge number of episodes. Think some of those are still running,
which sort of stuns me. Uh, you know, I would
think they would immediately yank everything off there, and maybe
that will come once jail starts. But you know, Teresa
is an example of people shockingly survived this stuff that
that uh, we kind of live in this no shame
(12:19):
um culture that you know, you can do bad things
and it's you know, still I guess, Okay, yeah, it
is shocking, and it I feel like these stories are
going to become more and more common. Um, And yeah,
I mean We've got two more at least to go
through to figure out those sentencing. But I wanted to
thank you so much and thank you for coming on
(12:39):
giving your insight. Where can people follow you and find you? Oh?
Thanks for asking. I'm on all the socials Sam on
TV because when I started doing this, that was the
big thing. But now of course it's cool to be
Instagram and Twitter and TikTok. Mind is at Sam Sam
on TV. Perfect. Thank you so much, Sam m yea.
(13:09):
And our next guest is Michelle. Michelle, thank you so
much for joining us. Can you tell us a little
bit about yourself? Sure, thanks so much for having me.
I am a divorce and trial lawyer in the Washington,
D c. Area. I've had my own firm now for
over fifteen years, and I provide legal analysis on various cases,
trial work and things like that. Well, it's perfect for today.
(13:32):
We are talking about the Chris LA's and between the
two of them, they have nineteen years in prison. And
I think a lot of people are shocked by the sentencing.
Were you shocked at all? Not necessarily because this was
such a significant um crime for talking about thirty million
dollars upwards um that was at issue. I think they
weren't able to prove all of that, um, but the
(13:53):
depth of the crime, the tangled web, if you will,
of this crime, it did not surprise me at all
and quite frankly, Um, the sentence came out within the
sentencing guidelines. So that's what I would have expected. So
this is typical nineteen years is it? Do you usually
see less or more? Or is this pretty much the average?
Well it's remember it's twelve years for Mr Chrisley and
(14:15):
about seven years or so for Ms Chrisley, So what
to combine nineteen years? Um? But it's basically it's it's
judges have discretion. But in federal court, they have federal
sentencing guidelines and essentially the courts plug in the the
crimes into sort of agrid to determine what that scale
should be and what the ranges, and a lot of
(14:37):
times to avoid being challenged that the courts will fall
within that realm, within that range. I'm just confused by this. Like,
the more I understand this case, the more I am
just unfounded. What I mean, we're just you know, trying
to get inside their brains now, But what was there? Like,
what did they think would happen. What they were they
(14:58):
intending on paying it back? Do we? I don't know.
This is just very confusing, so I absolutely agree with you.
It's like, first of all, one of the first things
you tell your clients is stay off social media. And
here these two went on TV not just social media,
knowing most likely that they hadn't pay taxes, that there
were some untoward behaviors going on in the background, and
(15:21):
bragging about all of their their lifestyle, their cost of living,
and how much money they spend. I think in one episode,
Mr Chrisley said that they spent about three hundred dollars
per year on close Like, you don't do that. And
at the same time, oh, the I r s money,
moving money around, falsifying documents to entities like It's just
(15:43):
it makes no sense. But I think what happens is
people think that they are above the law. When you
become rich, you become famous, you think that the laws
do not apply to you, and that you're gonna just
float through with impunity. But we've seen enough of these
cases where you would think they would have known that
they'd get caught. It's on point, but that's they didn't.
So and there's still i think, proclaiming they're innocence. So
(16:06):
it's really interesting. Yeah, that's what I was about to
ask you if this is common, because I'm a little
frustrated that, not that I'm involved in this case at all,
but that they're not taking accountability, which I guess maybe
from alayer standpoint, you would advise them not to because
that's an admission of guilt. Well, I probably would have
advised them to stop talking, right like they just they
(16:27):
then went on I think Mrs Chrisley went on her
daughter's podcast to talk about what happened prior to the sentence,
saying like no what no, no, no, no no, So
that that would be the first piece of advice is
just to stop. But people they just they believe they're innocent,
I suppose, and they're that's their story. They're going to
(16:50):
stick to it. And also, in this case, you're going
to see an appeal, so they're preparing, most likely for
an appeal, and that's why they're probably going to continue
proclaiming their innocence on the hope and expectation that they
ultimately get off and that the decisions overturned. Yeah, I
guess that makes sense. So do you think it just
boils down to greed at the end of the day, Yeah,
(17:13):
I do. I mean that is it's it's amazing what
people do for money and for the fame and the
power and the lifestyle. When people have significant wealth, it's like,
you can afford to pay your taxes. Just pay them,
you know, just pay your taxes. Try to There are
loopholes sometimes that people utilize, of course, but try to
(17:36):
stay within the realm of reason to avoid being in
this situation. But again, when egos get involved and people's
you know, self perception becomes inflated, they literally believe that
the law does not apply to them. And that is
what we've seen in this case. And I feel like
this is going to become more and more common as
(17:57):
we've seen it had have already. Um, we just talked
about this previously. But there's gen Shaw, there's Erica Jane.
These people are going on television, they're exposing their lives
and then they're put under this microscope where then maybe
they wouldn't be found out, maybe in gen Shaw's case,
maybe in Erica Jane's case. But it does seem like
it's becoming more common. They want to fame, they want
the money and they also want to do these illegal things. Yeah. Yeah,
(18:20):
it is a common theme. And the problem is as
we all now live in this life, we live under
a bubble. We're all on video almost at all times.
You know, you have every social media platform there is.
There's not much that people can do with all those
outlets that is going to not be exposed right at
some point. So it's really weird how people still think
(18:43):
that they can escape and slip through when so many
people are watching and so many people are involved. When
you have a case like this where you've got tax
fraud and bank fraud and why fraud, um tax evasion,
there's a lot of people involved, accountant, c pas, bookkeepers.
Do you really believe that all of these people are
going to either live for you and risk their own
(19:05):
liberties or keep hush hush as to what they don't know.
Someone's going to disclose this so that the higher if
you go in terms of publicity and fame, the more
really above board. It seems like you need to be
we should be above board all the time, but it
really doesn't make sense when you have the public eye.
(19:34):
Do you think that in these three cases that chrystally specifically,
do you think, because so many people have eyes on
this case, that the judge would be harsher? Do you
think it doesn't matter? There are times I think we've
seen that where the court may utilized a celebrity or
someone with influence to sort of make a point or
(19:56):
drive the point home. Um So that's a possibility. I
don't see that having happened in this particular case. Um.
The rulings, the sentences were within guidelines as I understand
them to be federal sentences and guidelines, and they were
not at the highest end. It's from what I understand it.
It wasn't the maximum amount that was given. Um So,
I don't think that that was the case here. But
(20:17):
you do see that at sometimes that the course will
make an example out of some of the great influence
and their accountant to um, they got three years. Do
you think that was fair? You know, it depends on
the role that each person played. The accountant is a
key figure when you're talking about financial crimes, white color crimes, UM,
(20:39):
tax evasion, UM and fraud. So to the extent that
he participated on some level or even participated by omission,
let's say, or you know, following the instructions. There's culpability there,
and yes, that's that's what we saw with him being
sentenced as well. I thought he would get more time. Personally,
(21:01):
he thought he should have got more time. Yeah, but
I also don't know a lot in this case. That's
just like you know, reading headlines, which can be misleading
at times. Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's a it's a hard one.
I mean, if he was just following orders and had
some sort of explanation as to why he did what
he did, you know that maybe the bulk of it
falls on the key actors here, which are the Chris Lands.
(21:23):
So but yeah, I can definitely see your point too.
And I guess my last question for you again, just
because I'm so shocked by this case. Do you see
this often where people take out loans, maybe not of
this amount, where they never intend to pay them back. Yeah,
I mean I think that the concept of taking up money,
taking a loan, filing for bankruptcy, that is a frequent
(21:46):
occurrence in our society. So the issue becomes whether you
had that intent right, like, whether you were intending to
not pay it back at the time that you applied
for the loan. Did you falsify your financial records in
order to obtain the loan? Those are sort of the
issues that you know vary from person to person. But
does it happen that people take out loans and don't
(22:07):
pay them back. Yes, there are many bankruptcy lawyers who
have a lot of business for that reason. But when
we get into the fraudulent aspects of it, you know,
that's when it becomes a little more sticky. And to me,
again not knowing anything, it seems like if they weren't
intending to pay it back simply because they were defrauding banks,
and I don't know, it's crazy. Yeah, No, on this one,
(22:30):
I think it was pretty clear that there was something
to not necessarily pay the millions and millions back based
about all the circumstances so um. And you know why
they would go on television and broadcast their lifestyle and wealth,
because that's really what happened here is is that I
think whoever was within the I arrest of the government
(22:52):
said their lifestyle is not adding up to what they're
reporting and what they're paying and some things off here.
Had they not been on television bragging a about it,
this may not have ever even come to light right,
So basically they should have hired you as their attorney
probably from the get go, and they would have been
in a lesser sicky situation. You know, it's it's it's crazy.
(23:12):
This one is really interesting. Yeah, it is mind boggling. Well,
thank you for coming on. And where can people follow you?
Where can they find you? Sure, you can find you
on Instagram at Michelle see Thomas E. S Q for
amazing tips, inspiration and legal information. You can find me
online www dot Thomas Law DC dot com, particularly if
you're in the d C Washington, d C metry area. Vertyfect,
(23:35):
Thank you so much, thank you, thank you for having me.
So I think the lesson we learned here one, don't
commit the crime, don't commit crimes against the I R s,
don't try to defraud banks, but also don't go on
reality television where then you will be exposed even further.
I wanted to thank our guests again for coming on
to this special episode. Thank you so much for listening,
(23:58):
and be sure to follow us on its Stagram at
True Crime Reality. Until next time, h
Welcome to True Crime Reality with host Caitlin Miller Keys.
Things are about to get real. Let's talk about Todd
and Julie Chrisley, reality stars known for their humor, Southern hospitality,
and very wealthy lifestyle. While we watch their fame and
fortune grow exponentially on their TV show. The world is
(00:22):
witnessing the downfall of a family accused of financial crimes,
from tax evasion to bank fraud to a hefty jail sentence.
When it comes to Chrisly knows best, the question is
does he? Calin Miller Keys investigates on True Crime Reality.
Hello everyone, and welcome back to the True Crime Reality podcast.
(00:44):
I'm your host Kaylan Miller Keys, and this week we
are talking about the Chrislies along with everyone else. So,
Todd Chrisley and Julie Chrisley were sentenced collectively to nineteen
years of prison for bank fraud for defrauding the I
R s um. There are a couple of things going
on here and it is a pretty crazy story. So
(01:06):
we are bringing in a celebrity expert and an attorney
to talk about this craziness. I personally do not understand
how this could happen. How people thirty million dollars in
fraudulent loans, so we are going to dive into all
of that. My very first guest is Sam Ruben, and Sam,
can you tell everyone a little bit about yourself? Sure,
(01:27):
I'm the entertainment reporter in Los Angeles for the KHL,
a moret news that happened for for quite some time,
and I do entertainment reports all around the world, Australia
and England, a lot of places, so I've I've been
steeped in this stuff for quite some time. So you're
pretty familiar with the Chris Luis and and the show. Yeah,
I have met Taught on several occasions and a couple
(01:48):
of the kids, so I've seen them on TV and
have experienced them in person. Yeah, I can. For those
of us who haven't watched, I've never watched the show,
but I am familiar with who they are. Can you
just explain the family for us? Well, it is called
Chrisley Knows Best and the idea is obviously a parody
off the title Father Knows Best. So so here's the
(02:10):
dad who thinks he's in control, but of course he's
really not in control at all. And you know, a
wealthy wealthy family, and you know, his wife and his
kids kind of roll their eyes and listen, uh, and
he's sort of exasperated. But I think, you know, I
tell you what, It is hard to succeed in reality TV,
(02:31):
and they really did. So there's the original show Chrystally
Knows Best, which has run for a very long time,
believe ten years or more, and then uh, several spinoffs.
So it was all going so well until it wasn't.
But basically, it's a family reality show where a dad's
kind of trying to lay down the law. Nobody else
(02:53):
is really listening, and it's under the patina of a
lot of wealth. They are very well to do. And
you mentioned that it's and so successful. What is it
about this family? Do you think that people are so
drawn too? I tell you what, I think, you know,
Kardashians are the best example. I suppose everybody loves family
because one way or another, we're all part of the family.
(03:15):
And everybody or many people have experienced kind of the
know it all dad or the know it all relative.
And you know, we listened with one ear open, so
we kind of pay attention, and we kind of don't
pay attention. And I think people enjoyed the dynamic of
him trying to corral his kids, and he also had
(03:36):
this sort of larger than life personality, you know, the
twang um and ya you know, I think he He's
not the most masculine of men, so there were sort
of the twang. There was sort of like what's really
going on with this marriage? Um? And uh and and
very telligently kids, very pretty daughters mhm um. Well, for
(04:00):
those of us who haven't watched me being one of
those people, everyone is talking about this story, whether you've
seen the show before or you haven't, everyone is talking
about this sentencing because it seems kind of crazy. Uh,
just going off of Teresa Judaicce and her sentencing. I
know that these are a little bit different, but can
you just tell me like brief thoughts on what do
(04:23):
you think about all this? I think the whole thing
was surprising to people because it came rather suddenly. I
was not aware that there were tremendous financial problems or improprieties,
and I was not aware that there was this you know,
tax evasion and bank fraud and other charges leveled against them.
(04:45):
And I think, uh, you know, this is kind of
my business to be aware. So I think the fact
of the matter is, here's this family that's been on
TV for years and years and years. They seem extraordinarily successful,
and then all of a sudden, we're nearing the end
of this trial and potentially and now, as it turns out,
you know, they could go to jail for a long
time and pay a lot of fines. And so I
(05:07):
think one reason people were surprised by this is because
there wasn't a lot of run up to it that
we were aware of. They had done a very good
job of kind of keeping the whole thing quiet. Often,
you know, you'll hear about the charges. This is certainly
the case Jen Shaw and the Royal Housewives in Salt
Lake City. We you know, heard all about that. It
was actually part of the show. Um, this all their
(05:30):
I think it's fair to say all their bad acts
were never realized on the show. I think fans were
not aware of in goals. So it's pretty surprising that
somebody watch on TV, you know, every single week for
a long long time. Whoops, Dad's going to jail and
mom is too. It's really startling. Yeah, and for a
(05:51):
long time, I'm I'm shocked by the sentencing. It seems
like there isn't a lot of accountability being had on
their part. And maybe I'm wrong in this, but it
seems like, you know, one of the quotes from this
podcast was, uh, bad things happen to good people. But
I feel like we would all respect them a lot
more if they just said, yes, we did this horrible thing.
(06:13):
We are being punished, you know, whether they think it
should be less or longer. But it doesn't seem like
there is accountability with it. You know, a dilemma. I think.
I don't want to paint everybody with the same broad brush,
but I think one dilemma, particularly with the very wealthy,
is gee, we pay a lot of tax so I'm
(06:33):
now making these numbers up. So you know, maybe we
fudged on the half million that we should have paid,
but we already paid three dred thousand. That's more than
most people pay. You know, we pay a lot more
taxes than anyone else pays. So why should anybody begrudge
us if we used a little creative accounting to pay
less um so, and you know that, I think I
(06:55):
think people don't don't see it that way. You know.
The the idea is you know, Wen, and you pay
five thousand, that's ten percent of your income. That's that's
a lot of tax. And these guys make five million
dollars and they paid five thousand dollars. You know that
they brought detach erates actually higher, they should pay more. Um.
I think there's sort of a tabloid story of sorts
(07:18):
that they've not discussed. I don't think they've acknowledged any
of this. Is that potentially a male romantic partner for
Todd sort of turned them in essentially, you know, sort
of a scorned lover um. And so they may feel
that the source of all of this kind of came
from a bad way, like you know, we there was
somebody in our lives and you know we we disassociated ourselves,
(07:42):
and now they're that person is punishing us by doing this.
You know. The one thing that reverberates, as you know,
Al Campona is the first who can tell you, you you know,
the i r S, the Internal Revenue Serial Service is
serious and you know you don't want to break the
law in any circumstance, but you really don't want to
break the law with them, nor with banking regulators. Right,
(08:03):
And I can imagine you know, that is horrible that
someone turned them in, But also the I R S
is smart and they do have all these resources, Like
I think eventually they would have gotten caught. Yeah, I
mean you you you can't, you know. I think a
lot of people are very creative with their taxes. I
think that that is probably an American phenomenon. But I
think if you're if you're blatant about it, and you
(08:24):
not only um misbehave with regards to the I R S,
but you misbehave with banks and the to sort of
find out about each other. It's like, wait, he ripped
you off? He ripped does off too? Or the family?
Did you know? That's a bad thing. And one thing
I mean this is I'm not trying to give excuses,
but maybe as a point, I think he was successful
(08:45):
and wealthy before television. But what generally happens with TV
is when you start, it's not very much money. But
to be ten years in with all these spin offs,
they were printing money, so you know, you have a
comfortable income and then all of a sudden it doubles
or triples or quadruples very quickly, and you know, somebody suggests, well,
(09:08):
maybe you can do this, or maybe you can do this,
you know, may or may not be kosher, And probably
there are people who have done the same thing. You
haven't gotten caught. These guys did, Yeah, and it it
makes me think about Erica Jane gen Shaw now that
Chris Lee's. I don't know if people were doing this
before they gained this fame, but it seems like to me,
(09:29):
if I heard it be doing something illegal, I wouldn't
go on a show that then I would have millions
of five balls on me and suddenly I could be
caught as as they all have. Yeah. No, you you
bring up again, and that's a very very good point,
this whole idea of you know, hiding in plain sight,
you know, because all these cameras are on me, because
(09:49):
all these people are watching me, I would never do
anything wrong, you know, I'm I'm incredibly visible. Well, um,
you have three examples. Uh and people claim, you know,
various uh degrees of innocence. Um, and you know, just
to use Erica Jayne as an example. With Erica Jayne,
(10:10):
there are real victims who were truly cheated and who
you know, horrible stories of money they needed that was diverted.
You know, So she could buy jewelry. Was she aware
that you know, this plane crash victims family didn't get
the money they should have gotten because she got a necklace.
I don't know the answer to that, but I think
(10:31):
she she gets no sympathy at all because you see
the negative result. I think gen Shaw the same thing.
There were like people where money was taken in a
weird way, and maybe this is an American phenomenon. You know,
I think a lot of people might think you can't
rank these things. But you know that christally it's a
(10:51):
little less bad. I mean, it was just you know,
the I R S and you know, some rich bank.
It's not like they took it from some little old
lady or something. Obviously, legal experts would say otherwise, you know,
if you break the law, you break the law. But
not a victimless crime. But but victims that people aren't
a sympathetic about. So that that's what distinguishes is to
(11:12):
some degree right, And I am interested to see. So
they got nineteen years total between the two of them,
just to see what the sentencing will be for gent
Shaw and for Erica Jane, if she is, you know,
sentenced at all, Just because I agree I think people
want to screw the government and screw the I R S.
And so there a little bit more empathetic towards the
Christy is maybe not fully empathetic, but more understanding than
(11:35):
these other two situations. So it'll be interesting to see
no I and a lot of people will be watching.
And then one thing that that that's funny is that
I think depending on you know, your satellite system, they
immediately canceled new production of their shows and there was
a spin off with the Kids that I think is
off the air, but much to my surprise, I think
(11:55):
the original Cristally Knows Best of which there is a
huge number of episodes. Think some of those are still running,
which sort of stuns me. Uh, you know, I would
think they would immediately yank everything off there, and maybe
that will come once jail starts. But you know, Teresa
is an example of people shockingly survived this stuff that
that uh, we kind of live in this no shame
(12:19):
um culture that you know, you can do bad things
and it's you know, still I guess, Okay, yeah, it
is shocking, and it I feel like these stories are
going to become more and more common. Um, And yeah,
I mean We've got two more at least to go
through to figure out those sentencing. But I wanted to
thank you so much and thank you for coming on
(12:39):
giving your insight. Where can people follow you and find you? Oh?
Thanks for asking. I'm on all the socials Sam on
TV because when I started doing this, that was the
big thing. But now of course it's cool to be
Instagram and Twitter and TikTok. Mind is at Sam Sam
on TV. Perfect. Thank you so much, Sam m yea.
(13:09):
And our next guest is Michelle. Michelle, thank you so
much for joining us. Can you tell us a little
bit about yourself? Sure, thanks so much for having me.
I am a divorce and trial lawyer in the Washington,
D c. Area. I've had my own firm now for
over fifteen years, and I provide legal analysis on various cases,
trial work and things like that. Well, it's perfect for today.
(13:32):
We are talking about the Chris LA's and between the
two of them, they have nineteen years in prison. And
I think a lot of people are shocked by the sentencing.
Were you shocked at all? Not necessarily because this was
such a significant um crime for talking about thirty million
dollars upwards um that was at issue. I think they
weren't able to prove all of that, um, but the
(13:53):
depth of the crime, the tangled web, if you will,
of this crime, it did not surprise me at all
and quite frankly, Um, the sentence came out within the
sentencing guidelines. So that's what I would have expected. So
this is typical nineteen years is it? Do you usually
see less or more? Or is this pretty much the average?
Well it's remember it's twelve years for Mr Chrisley and
(14:15):
about seven years or so for Ms Chrisley, So what
to combine nineteen years? Um? But it's basically it's it's
judges have discretion. But in federal court, they have federal
sentencing guidelines and essentially the courts plug in the the
crimes into sort of agrid to determine what that scale
should be and what the ranges, and a lot of
(14:37):
times to avoid being challenged that the courts will fall
within that realm, within that range. I'm just confused by this. Like,
the more I understand this case, the more I am
just unfounded. What I mean, we're just you know, trying
to get inside their brains now, But what was there? Like,
what did they think would happen. What they were they
(14:58):
intending on paying it back? Do we? I don't know.
This is just very confusing, so I absolutely agree with you.
It's like, first of all, one of the first things
you tell your clients is stay off social media. And
here these two went on TV not just social media,
knowing most likely that they hadn't pay taxes, that there
were some untoward behaviors going on in the background, and
(15:21):
bragging about all of their their lifestyle, their cost of living,
and how much money they spend. I think in one episode,
Mr Chrisley said that they spent about three hundred dollars
per year on close Like, you don't do that. And
at the same time, oh, the I r s money,
moving money around, falsifying documents to entities like It's just
(15:43):
it makes no sense. But I think what happens is
people think that they are above the law. When you
become rich, you become famous, you think that the laws
do not apply to you, and that you're gonna just
float through with impunity. But we've seen enough of these
cases where you would think they would have known that
they'd get caught. It's on point, but that's they didn't.
So and there's still i think, proclaiming they're innocence. So
(16:06):
it's really interesting. Yeah, that's what I was about to
ask you if this is common, because I'm a little
frustrated that, not that I'm involved in this case at all,
but that they're not taking accountability, which I guess maybe
from alayer standpoint, you would advise them not to because
that's an admission of guilt. Well, I probably would have
advised them to stop talking, right like they just they
(16:27):
then went on I think Mrs Chrisley went on her
daughter's podcast to talk about what happened prior to the sentence,
saying like no what no, no, no, no no, So
that that would be the first piece of advice is
just to stop. But people they just they believe they're innocent,
I suppose, and they're that's their story. They're going to
(16:50):
stick to it. And also, in this case, you're going
to see an appeal, so they're preparing, most likely for
an appeal, and that's why they're probably going to continue
proclaiming their innocence on the hope and expectation that they
ultimately get off and that the decisions overturned. Yeah, I
guess that makes sense. So do you think it just
boils down to greed at the end of the day, Yeah,
(17:13):
I do. I mean that is it's it's amazing what
people do for money and for the fame and the
power and the lifestyle. When people have significant wealth, it's like,
you can afford to pay your taxes. Just pay them,
you know, just pay your taxes. Try to There are
loopholes sometimes that people utilize, of course, but try to
(17:36):
stay within the realm of reason to avoid being in
this situation. But again, when egos get involved and people's
you know, self perception becomes inflated, they literally believe that
the law does not apply to them. And that is
what we've seen in this case. And I feel like
this is going to become more and more common as
(17:57):
we've seen it had have already. Um, we just talked
about this previously. But there's gen Shaw, there's Erica Jane.
These people are going on television, they're exposing their lives
and then they're put under this microscope where then maybe
they wouldn't be found out, maybe in gen Shaw's case,
maybe in Erica Jane's case. But it does seem like
it's becoming more common. They want to fame, they want
the money and they also want to do these illegal things. Yeah. Yeah,
(18:20):
it is a common theme. And the problem is as
we all now live in this life, we live under
a bubble. We're all on video almost at all times.
You know, you have every social media platform there is.
There's not much that people can do with all those
outlets that is going to not be exposed right at
some point. So it's really weird how people still think
(18:43):
that they can escape and slip through when so many
people are watching and so many people are involved. When
you have a case like this where you've got tax
fraud and bank fraud and why fraud, um tax evasion,
there's a lot of people involved, accountant, c pas, bookkeepers.
Do you really believe that all of these people are
going to either live for you and risk their own
(19:05):
liberties or keep hush hush as to what they don't know.
Someone's going to disclose this so that the higher if
you go in terms of publicity and fame, the more
really above board. It seems like you need to be
we should be above board all the time, but it
really doesn't make sense when you have the public eye.
(19:34):
Do you think that in these three cases that chrystally specifically,
do you think, because so many people have eyes on
this case, that the judge would be harsher? Do you
think it doesn't matter? There are times I think we've
seen that where the court may utilized a celebrity or
someone with influence to sort of make a point or
(19:56):
drive the point home. Um So that's a possibility. I
don't see that having happened in this particular case. Um.
The rulings, the sentences were within guidelines as I understand
them to be federal sentences and guidelines, and they were
not at the highest end. It's from what I understand it.
It wasn't the maximum amount that was given. Um So,
I don't think that that was the case here. But
(20:17):
you do see that at sometimes that the course will
make an example out of some of the great influence
and their accountant to um, they got three years. Do
you think that was fair? You know, it depends on
the role that each person played. The accountant is a
key figure when you're talking about financial crimes, white color crimes, UM,
(20:39):
tax evasion, UM and fraud. So to the extent that
he participated on some level or even participated by omission,
let's say, or you know, following the instructions. There's culpability there,
and yes, that's that's what we saw with him being
sentenced as well. I thought he would get more time. Personally,
(21:01):
he thought he should have got more time. Yeah, but
I also don't know a lot in this case. That's
just like you know, reading headlines, which can be misleading
at times. Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's a it's a hard one.
I mean, if he was just following orders and had
some sort of explanation as to why he did what
he did, you know that maybe the bulk of it
falls on the key actors here, which are the Chris Lands.
(21:23):
So but yeah, I can definitely see your point too.
And I guess my last question for you again, just
because I'm so shocked by this case. Do you see
this often where people take out loans, maybe not of
this amount, where they never intend to pay them back. Yeah,
I mean I think that the concept of taking up money,
taking a loan, filing for bankruptcy, that is a frequent
(21:46):
occurrence in our society. So the issue becomes whether you
had that intent right, like, whether you were intending to
not pay it back at the time that you applied
for the loan. Did you falsify your financial records in
order to obtain the loan? Those are sort of the
issues that you know vary from person to person. But
does it happen that people take out loans and don't
(22:07):
pay them back. Yes, there are many bankruptcy lawyers who
have a lot of business for that reason. But when
we get into the fraudulent aspects of it, you know,
that's when it becomes a little more sticky. And to me,
again not knowing anything, it seems like if they weren't
intending to pay it back simply because they were defrauding banks,
and I don't know, it's crazy. Yeah, No, on this one,
(22:30):
I think it was pretty clear that there was something
to not necessarily pay the millions and millions back based
about all the circumstances so um. And you know why
they would go on television and broadcast their lifestyle and wealth,
because that's really what happened here is is that I
think whoever was within the I arrest of the government
(22:52):
said their lifestyle is not adding up to what they're
reporting and what they're paying and some things off here.
Had they not been on television bragging a about it,
this may not have ever even come to light right,
So basically they should have hired you as their attorney
probably from the get go, and they would have been
in a lesser sicky situation. You know, it's it's it's crazy.
(23:12):
This one is really interesting. Yeah, it is mind boggling. Well,
thank you for coming on. And where can people follow you?
Where can they find you? Sure, you can find you
on Instagram at Michelle see Thomas E. S Q for
amazing tips, inspiration and legal information. You can find me
online www dot Thomas Law DC dot com, particularly if
you're in the d C Washington, d C metry area. Vertyfect,
(23:35):
Thank you so much, thank you, thank you for having me.
So I think the lesson we learned here one, don't
commit the crime, don't commit crimes against the I R s,
don't try to defraud banks, but also don't go on
reality television where then you will be exposed even further.
I wanted to thank our guests again for coming on
to this special episode. Thank you so much for listening,
(23:58):
and be sure to follow us on its Stagram at
True Crime Reality. Until next time, h
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
40s and Free Agents: NFL Draft Season
Daniel Jeremiah of Move the Sticks and Gregg Rosenthal of NFL Daily join forces to break down every team's needs this offseason.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.