Thomas Girardi, a former California plaintiff’s attorney, has pleaded not guilty to wire fraud and criminal contempt charges in connection with accusations that he stole millions of dollars from his clients. At the same time, the state bar ignored warning signs. The charges were brought in an indictment on February 1, more than two years after Girardi acknowledged in civil proceedings that his firm used millions of dollars of client settlement funds that belonged to the families of those who died in the crash of Lion Air Flight 610 in October 2018.
Girardi’s legal team has until March 8 to file a motion requesting a competency hearing to determine whether Girardi can stand trial. Girardi’s brother, Robert, has claimed that Girardi has dementia, but other attorneys have challenged his claim in the plaintiffs’ community and the California state bar. Whether Girardi is competent to stand trial will depend on whether he can “consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding” and whether he has a “factual understanding of the proceedings against him.”
The Supreme Court established that the right to due process includes the right to a competency determination before a defendant stands trial in the 1960s case of Dusky v. United States. This principle is codified in 18 USC § 4241. Determining a defendant’s competence to stand trial is not a defense. Even if a defendant is deemed unfit to stand trial, criminal charges may still be filed against them. If the defendant is later found capable of standing trial, they may still be tried.
When defendants are found incompetent to stand trial, they are usually placed in federal custody and sent to a facility where they can receive treatment.
Girardi’s former CFO, Christopher Kamon, and his former colleague and son-in-law, David Lira, also pleaded not guilty to similar charges in federal court in California. Kamon and Girardi also face criminal charges related to client fund mismanagement and other misconduct. Judge Ronald A. Guzman is presiding over Girardi’s case.
The accusations against Girardi have sent shockwaves through the legal community, with some calling for greater scrutiny of law firms and their handling of client funds. The California state bar has also faced criticism for handling the case, with some suggesting that it failed to act on warning signs that Girardi was mismanaging funds.
The case against Girardi and his co-defendants is still ongoing, and it remains to be seen what the outcome will be. However, the case has highlighted the importance of ethical conduct in the legal profession and the need for greater transparency and accountability in handling client funds.