BREAKING NEWS Erika Jayne finally breaks silence on ex Tom Girardi's jail sentence for swindling clients out of $15million
Erika Jayne has emotionally spoken out days after ex-husband Tom Girardi was sentenced to jail after his conviction on multiple fraud charges.
Giradi, 86, faces dying behind bars with his sentence of seven years and three months in federal prison after being found guilty of swindling his horribly injured or grieving clients out of around $15 million in settlement fees.
Erika, 53, revealed she had learned Girardi's grim fate while in London on tour during a candid chat on the Friday, June 13, episode of Diamonds in the Rough with Teddi Mellencamp.
The reality star, who was wed to Girardi for 20 years, said: 'And then 10 minutes before the second show, I get the news that Tom is being sent to prison. … It just hurts.
'It reopens old healing wounds, and it is something that, you know, I had a sold-out crowd in a theater just for me, and I was so grateful. My happiest place in the whole world to be is on stage. So while I was happy … there's a little piece [of me] that was like, "Ugh."
'I was very disappointed because those people [in the audience] were there for me, and I felt like five percent of myself was feeling sorry for myself. I was 95 percent there, and five percent of myself was feeling sorry for myself.
Giradi, 86, faces dying behind bars with his sentence of seven years and three months in federal prison after being found guilty of swindling his horribly injured or grieving clients out of around $15 million in settlement fees - pictured August 2024
'This was the day that he got sentenced, my second show. My first show was flawless. And my second show was great, don't get me wrong. But there was that five percent I could have given the audience, and instead I was feeling sorry for myself.
The reality star said she struggled to 'fight back thoughts and emotions' during her performance.
Erika was herself accused alongside Girardi of embezzling money to fund their lavish lifestyles - but faced no charges.
As well as his jail time, Girardi has been ordered to pay $2,310,247 in restitution to his victims and a $35,000 fine.
Judge Josephine L. Staton, who handed down the sentencing, ordered Girardi to surrender to federal authorities by July 17. The sentencing occurred in a courthouse in downtown Los Angeles on June 3, which also happens to be Girardi's 86th birthday.
A jury found the once-powerful attorney guilty on four counts of wire fraud in August.
Girardi, who built the prestigious LA law firm Girardi & Keese after his fight against a California utility giant inspired the Oscar-winning movie Erin Brockovich, plead not guilty to the four counts (he had been indicted on five counts of wire fraud in 2023).
His high-rolling career came tumbling down in 2020 when he was accused of stealing millions in settlements he'd won for the victims of the 2018 Lion Air plane crash in Indonesia, a tragedy in which 189 people died.
The claims from that crash were also the basis of separate criminal charges against Girardi in Chicago, where he was charged with eight counts of wire fraud and four counts of criminal contempt of court. However those charges were dropped following the California conviction. He pleaded not guilty in that case.
'This self-proclaimed "champion of justice" was nothing more than a thief and a liar who conned his vulnerable clients out of the millions of dollars,' United States Attorney Bill Essayli said in a press release about the prison sentence.
'My office will vigorously prosecute corrupt lawyers and those who assist them in criminal activities.'
Lawyers for Girardi, who was diagnosed with late-onset Alzheimer's disease and dementia in 2021, had concerns about the defendant residing in prison amid his health woes.
Attorney Sam Cross, who is among Girardi's lawyers, said the defendant would probably end up spending the rest of his life in prison in light of his health troubles, according to the LA Times.
'Should Tom Girardi die in prison?' he asked the judge multiple times in remarks.
Cross also asked the judge on Monday to keep Girardi in his current assisted living facility instead sending him to federal prison, arguing he would not receive the proper care he needs in prison.
'We believe he is in need of specialized treatment,' Cross explained to the judge, according to Deadline.
He described Girardi as 'frail, elderly' and argued he would be at risk of being 'exploited or taken advantage of' in prison.
But the judge ultimately disagreed, citing testimony from a BOP forensic psychologist, a BOP neuropsychologist, and the self-awareness Girardi was apparently exhibiting.
She concluded they can safely sentence Girardi to a U.S. Bureau of Prisons facility. 'He will be designated to an appropriate facility,' she said.
Girardi's mental competence had been a major issue throughout the trial, with his lawyers previously attempting to push for a new trial in addition to claiming he is unable to assist his lawyers, struggles with his memory, and is legally unfit to appear before a jury (however prosecutors claimed it was mostly an act, alleging he had been faking dementia to evade being held responsible for his crimes, according to the Los Angeles Times).
In January 2024 Girardi was cleared to stand trial with U.S. District Judge Josephine L. Staton declaring he was 'competent to stand trial', despite his Alzheimer's diagnosis.
Girardi was previously declared fit by a court-appointed psychologist in June 2023 but his attorneys presented repeated challenges.
Neuropsychologist Dr. Diana Goldstein said that she 'has concluded her examination and opined, among other things, that [Girardi] is competent to stand trial,' she wrote. It is unclear the basis for that conclusion and her full analysis.
Goldstein's report was filed under seal and partly redacted by Girardi's attorneys. The prosecutors who retained Goldstein do not have access to the complete document, Yahoo News reported.
California forensic and clinical psychiatrist, Dr. Nathan Lavid wrote in a sworn affidavit that Girardi suffered from late-onset Alzheimer's disease and dementia, the news outlet reported.
Girardi's brother, Robert, had been acting as conservator on his brother's behalf after Girardi underwent a mental evaluation in February 2021, The New York Post reported.
During the trial, the jury heard that between 2010 and 2020 the shamed attorney used his clients' settlement funds 'like a personal piggy bank.'
'Girardi Keese was a den of thieves and Tom Girardi was the thief-in-chief,' Assistant U.S. Attorney Scott Paetty previously told the court.
'Girardi Keese was a house of cards built on the lies of Tom Girardi.'
Girardi ran a massive 'Ponzi scheme,' lying to clients and using their misappropriated millions to pay for his own lavish lifestyle of private jets, luxury cars, exclusive club memberships, expensive jewelry for his third wife, ex-go-go dancer Jayne plus $20 million to fund her acting career.
The couple were together for 21 years but their divorce - filed by Jayne soon after the Lion Air allegations - has been held up since Girardi Keese filed bankruptcy in 2021 with more than $100 million in debts.
Jayne never showed up at her soon-to-be-ex husband's trial and it's unclear if she ever made an appearance to the sentencing on Tuesday, however she made no mention of her estranged husband's legal troubles on Instagram that day, with her latest Instagram Story being a shout-out to her new Vogue profile at 7:15AM PT.
Girardi - who was disbarred in 2022 following the allegations against him - was portrayed by his defense team as suffering from dementia.
'He got old, he got sick, he lost his mind,' his attorney Charles Snyder previously told the court.
'All the lights were on but there was nobody home. He lost touch with reality.'
Girardi and his legal team also pointed the finger of blame at another man, Christopher Kamon, 49, the chief financial officer of Girardi Keese who they say stole between $50 million and $100 million from the company.
Kamon plead guilty to two counts of wire fraud and was sentenced to 121 months in federal prison in April in a separate trial.
During the trial, prosecutors told jurors that Girardi preyed on clients who were 'in their darkest hours,' suffering from terrible injuries or mourning the death of loved ones.
Joe Ruigomez - who desperately needed money to pay the giant medical bills for the horrible injuries he suffered in a 2020 gas explosion at his home that killed his girlfriend - was told by Girardi that his settlement from the PG&E utility was $5 million, when it was actually $50 million.
Another Girardi client, Judy Selberg, hired the once-acclaimed lawyer to bring an unlawful death lawsuit after her husband Paul was killed in a boating accident in April 2018.
Girardi won $500,000 for her but at the time of the guilty verdict, more than four years after the settlement, she's still owed a large portion of that.
He also held up Erica Saldana's $2.5 million settlement which she needed to pay the medical bills for the devastating injuries her one-year-old son suffered in a car crash.
And Josie Hernandez had to declare bankruptcy because Girardi didn't pay her the money she was owed from a settlement over a medical device injury.
In all these cases, when the clients called or emailed Girardi to ask when they were going to get their money, he came up with excuses like there was a lien or 'holdback' on the settlement, that there was an IRS issue or a judge needed to 'sign off' before the money could be paid. All these claims were false.
'He lied to his clients over and over and over again about why they weren't being paid,' Assistant U.S. Attorney Ali Moghaddas previously told the court. 'He lied to them them because he did not want to give them their money because it was gone….it was already spent.
'Behind the curtain he was pilfering his clients' funds. It was just cruel to treat victims in this manner.
'He was buying two private jets while his clients weren't getting paid…. This this case is a simple and sad story of trust violated and greed.'
It took the jury of seven men and five women only four and a half hours of deliberation to reach their guilty verdicts - two hours the first day and two-and-a-half hours the following day.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
37 minutes ago
- BBC News
East of England news quiz of the week 7-13 June
From a runaway bull retiring to pastures new to a circus act with a twist, how much East of England news can you remember from the past seven days? Follow East of England news on X, Instagram and Facebook: BBC Beds, Herts & Bucks, BBC Cambridgeshire, BBC Essex, BBC Norfolk, BBC Northamptonshire or BBC Suffolk.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Dominic Cummings may have just blown the grooming gangs scandal wide open
All progressives solemnly honour LGBTQIA+ Pride Month. And Islamophobia Awareness Month. And Black History Month. Plus many other such events. This is because they're passionately committed to 'raising awareness' of social injustice. So why not the grooming gangs scandal? For some reason, this is one example of social injustice which has failed to grip progressives' attention. To rectify this, I suggest we introduce Grooming Gangs Awareness Month. Fly an official Grooming Gangs Scandal flag from all public buildings. Get civil servants to wear Grooming Gangs Scandal lanyards. Then perhaps these people might finally take an interest. Then again, we may be wasting our time. In all likelihood, progressives have never lacked 'awareness' of the grooming gangs. They just didn't want anyone else to be aware of them. Which brings me to the explosive allegations made on Thursday by Dominic Cummings. In an interview with GB News, he claimed that, when he was working at the Department for Education in the early 2010s, there were 'mass cover-ups of the whole thing in Whitehall'. Are Mr Cummings's allegations true? I don't know. But then, that's why we need the full national inquiry that Labour continues to deny us. A handful of mere 'local inquiries' won't do – not least because it wouldn't be within their scope to investigate Mr Cummings's claims about what went on in Whitehall. Yesterday, incidentally, seven members of yet another grooming gang were found guilty of raping two teenage girls in Rochdale. Labour may not like Mr Cummings. But this time I think it should listen to him. And, for that matter, to the increasingly furious public. Talking Bull Personally, I was somewhat taken aback when, on Tuesday, the new chairman of Nigel Farage's Reform UK told voters that 'immigration is the lifeblood of this country, and it always has been'. I was even more surprised when, on Wednesday, he told Richard Madeley on ITV's Good Morning Britain that he was once strangled by an evil spirit masquerading as the ghost of his late grandmother. To my mind, though, Dr David Bull's most intriguing comment of the week was this. Asked whether he supports calls to ban the burqa in this country, he replied: 'I'm very anxious about the rise in people that think it is OK to hide their faces. We had a conversation yesterday about whether that was the burqa, crash helmets, scarves or whatever.' Hang on. Crash helmets? I for one have always admired Reform's bracingly no-nonsense attitude towards health-and-safety-gone-mad. But a ban on crash helmets, I feel, might be taking it a touch too far. In any case, I'm not convinced that there's a huge public clamour for such a ban. There are plenty of people who want to ban the burqa, and they have strong arguments for doing so. But I've never heard a voter say: 'I'm sorry, but I'm sick of seeing all these women walking around the streets in crash helmets. It's not as if it's their choice, either. Their husbands force them to do it. The crash helmet is a disgusting symbol of misogyny and patriarchal oppression. 'Also, crash helmets make normal human interaction impossible. When a motorcyclist zooms past me at 70mph, I expect to be able to see his face. 'Anyway, it's just not British. If motorcyclists want to wear crash helmets, they can go and do it in their own country.' Remarks like those, I would guess, aren't heard all that often in focus groups. So why Dr Bull raised the idea, entirely unprompted, in reply to a question about banning the burqa, I don't know. Still, I'm not complaining. Far from it. When I stepped down as this newspaper's parliamentary sketch writer in 2021, after 10 years, I felt that politics was in danger of becoming dull. The previous decade had teemed with the most glorious eccentrics, on Left and Right alike. Increasingly, however, they seemed to be fading from view, to be replaced by robotic regiments of Starmers and Sunaks. How wonderful it is to see a new generation coming through. Violence: a Left-wing guide I don't know whether you ever read Left-wing news outlets. But if you do, this week you'll probably have noticed something peculiar. In such outlets, the violence in Ballymena is always described as 'rioting' – yet the violence in LA is always described as 'protests'. You may well have wondered why this is. After all, both Ballymena and LA have seen cars set on fire, missiles thrown, and police officers injured. These are all very bad things. So why don't Left-wing news outlets refer to both as 'rioting'? The answer is simple. The violence in Ballymena is being perpetrated by people who are against mass immigration. The violence in LA, in contrast, is being perpetrated by people who are in favour not only of mass immigration, but of 'irregular' (i.e., illegal) immigration. And, just as importantly, they hate Donald Trump. Therefore, their actions must be made to sound understandable and legitimate. In other words: sometimes setting people's cars on fire is nasty and frightening. And sometimes it's noble and compassionate. Please update your records accordingly.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Earl and Countess of Sandwich: We could teach the National Trust a thing or two
At Mapperton House, a Jacobean manor in west Dorset, Luke Montagu, 12 th Earl of Sandwich and his American wife, Julie, Countess of Sandwich, are engaging in the most un-British of behaviour: asking for money. They've set up a camera on a tripod in the mustard-painted library, a light-filled room with a grand piano and mullion windows overlooking the walled garden, and are filming themselves launching a YouTube crowdfunder. The Earl, 55, in an untucked pink shirt and grey trousers, lifts two threadbare manuscripts from one of the bookcases and passes them to the Countess, 51, who is also casually dressed in a striped top, blonde hair tied in a messy bun. She places them carefully onto a cushion on a table. 'I had no idea that they're the Fourth Earl's handwritten journals from his Grand Tour,' she excitedly tells viewers. 'We're going to get them restored, so we're starting a fundraiser – I've found an expert to resew and rebind them in an 18th-century way.' The Montagus hope to raise £3,000 – and given the success of their previous crowdfunding requests, they should smash this target in a few weeks. When one of their eagle figurines, which have adorned the pillars at the front of the house for 300 years, fell off its perch last year, they quickly raised £23,000 to get them restored. Donors also paid £18,500 for the archive room to be overhauled with scanners, archive supplies and a fireproof safe. Then there are the family Coronation robes, which have been conserved at the Royal School of Needlework thanks to a £1,500 crowdfunder; and the 18th-century Peacock Tapestries, which are being restored by celebrated conservator Emma Telford, after £20,000 of donations. Last year alone, the estate raised £70,000 for restoration from online benefactors gifting up to £1,500 at a time. Donors come across the Earl and Countess on Mapperton Live, the couple's YouTube channel, which documents the highs and lows of running the house, five farms and 1,900 acres of pasture and woodlands. In return for their gift, they receive a certificate for making the project happen and – depending on the level of their contribution – a postcard of the project, a limited edition print and their name on a plaque on the estate. The Earl, however, who inherited the estate in February this year on the death of his father, John Montagu, 11th Earl of Sandwich, admits that he finds asking for money deeply uncomfortable. 'I don't do it. I pass it over to Julie,' he says. 'Americans don't have any awkwardness about it.' 'I love it,' the Countess confirms. 'Fundraising is a skill. You have to have created a community in order to do it, and you have to keep reminding them how much you appreciate what they do.' Today, all stately home owners face running and restoration costs so high that innovation is vital just to keep afloat. Hosting music festivals, corporate shoots or film crews (often all three) has become the norm. But on my trip to Mapperton, it became clear the Montagus have happened upon something unique: a paying audience that doesn't need to visit the house. At least not in person. Rather, the couple are letting a growing online audience in on the secrets of their world. It's working. As well as generous donors who want to be involved in restoration projects, the Earl and Countess have amassed more than 500 fee-paying super fans who pay between $5 (£4) and $500 (£368) per month for exclusive videos, handwritten thank you cards, free visits to the house and discounts on stays on the estate. That's bolstered by the advertising revenue that Mapperton Live channel raises on YouTube (its most popular video, featuring the Countess in a swimsuit and bath hat taking a dip in the vast and decrepit 18th-century swimming pool, has garnered 1.6 million views). And while new online fans don't have to visit the house, many inevitably do. These days, more than 10 per cent of Mapperton's 15,000 annual in-person visitors, who pay £20 to visit the house and gardens, have heard about the estate on YouTube, with some followers flying across the Atlantic to see it in real life. Twice a year, the Montagus welcome 12 guests for an exclusive five-night stay at the estate: this year's Grand Historic Tours are sold out, despite costing £8,000 per person. Sourcing relatively small cash gifts from many donors like this is a new tactic. The grandest historic houses – Blenheim Palace, for example – often rely on wealthy individuals to help fund multi-million pound restoration projects. At Mapperton, by contrast, crowdfunding and digital revenues now constitute more than 25 per cent of the estate's annual income. The family has been struggling to get Mapperton out of the red since the Earl's grandfather, Victor Montagu, fell on hard times and downsized to the estate in 1962, having been forced to sell Hitchingbrooke, the family's seat near Cambridge. But the Earl and Countess, who have four children aged from 19 to 26 (the older two from the Countess's previous marriage) believe that if they keep doing what they're doing it's only a matter of time before Mapperton is financially sustainable – which in the world of historic houses is almost unheard of. 'I don't want to jinx it, but by the time we hand it over to the next generation, it should be making money,' the Earl confirms. It's notoriously difficult to gain any kind of following on YouTube, but the Montagus both had a background in media, which helped. The Earl had been running a film school, MetFilm School, which he founded in London before he took over the estate in 2016, and the Countess had TV presenting experience, having been signed up by both the BBC and CNN to be at Windsor Castle for the 2018 wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan (as a divorced American married to an aristocrat, she made an ideal commentator). It's clear as they chat to the camera for their latest crowdfunding video that they're also a winning double act: Julie the headstrong and impressively unsqueamish American Countess who will try her hand at anything, and Luke, the gentle, reserved Earl who is so awestruck by his wife's devotion to his crumbling pile that he loyally supports every one of her projects – with just the right amount of scepticism to build drama. 'You touching that book is almost too terrifying to watch,' he winces, as she flicks through the 4th Earl's journals. She ignores him and keeps flicking, explaining that she's not wearing gloves, as if you can feel the pages, you're less likely to rip them. The Earl begins to read from the journals too: 'He made it as far as Constantinople – and he describes his cavorting, which gets quite racy … He was shipwrecked on the [Sicilian] island of Lampedusa, where he was taken in by a hermit.' The Countess puts up her hand. 'Can I speak? Because you're going on.' The Earl explains, as we sit around the farmhouse table in their kitchen before filming, that viewers like to see the dynamics of their relationship onscreen. They remark on it in the comments beneath each video: 'When Luke sang your praises, it made me cry,' writes one; 'I love how unapologetically American you are,' observes another. The Countess gets emotional sometimes; she once cried on camera when they had a flood. 'She can turn it on. I take a much more British approach,' the Earl says. He has no shame in admitting that these new income streams are mainly down to her. 'The fact is, she's an absolute natural. She has no issue being almost anywhere and putting up the camera and filming. And she also does a lot of the complex stuff on YouTube.' 'I'm obsessed with it,' the Countess agrees. 'I look at all the analytics and make sure I'm up to date with all the techniques.' They met through friends in 2003 at a drinks party in London; she was working for a marketing company, which was setting up offices in the UK. Unlike her husband's grandmother, Alberta Sturges Montagu, 9 th Countess of Sandwich, who was one of the gilded American heiresses who came across the Atlantic to be part of the British aristocracy more than a century ago, the Countess says her own upbringing in Chicago was not laced with dreams of castles and blue British blood. On her one visit to London before she met the Earl, Julie Fisher (as she was then) found Britain decidedly unimpressive. 'The food was awful and it was really rainy and cold,' she says. 'People at home talked about the Royal family, particularly Charles and Diana, but I didn't know those titles still passed along until I met Luke.' In fact, it was the Earl who seemed more attracted to the American way of life. Having studied liberal arts in New York at Columbia University and worked there during his 20s, when he returned to the UK in 2003, he was disappointed not to have found an American bride. 'I love the States, I love the energy of the people – it represents something completely different from the environment I'd grown up in. There's something about the energy and the can-do spirit of Americans.' Was he excited for Prince Harry when he, too, found an American wife? 'Their wedding was a period of real optimism, and there was a sense that things were being shaken up and modernised and it's so sad that it hasn't worked out.' The Countess' own experience was very different to that of the Duchess of Sussex, she says, as she was marrying into the aristocracy rather than the Royal family. 'We're in a different league. There would have been more rules and protocols that she had to follow. I've always felt the freedom to be able to do things and perhaps she didn't. Luke and his parents were incredibly warm and welcoming – I never felt excluded. I wasn't ashamed of my nasal accent.' It was an ominous start, though. When, three months after their first meeting, the Earl invited Julie to Mapperton, she had no idea what to expect. 'We hadn't talked about my family or the house very much,' the Earl says. 'That same evening, we got a call saying three wild boars had escaped from the neighbouring farm and needed hunting before they took out some poor unsuspecting walker. So I grabbed my rifle and headed off with Julie to the woods.' The Countess: 'I was holding a light.' Was she okay about blood sports? 'No!' 'I shot three wild boar, including a huge sow weighing 400lb. These animals were lying dead, and we had to get them out. It was going to be absolutely impossible with just the two of us. So I called my parents.' 'They'd just arrived back from holiday,' the Countess continues. 'Julie and my parents' first experience of each other was each holding a paw.' 'We were carrying the animals, and they were like: 'So Julie, where are you from?' And I was like: 'I'm from Chicago.'' The Earl's parents stayed at the helm of the estate until 2016. 'They saved it from ruin,' he says. Even so, 'I knew that when I took over, it would be a financial challenge.' It was in lockdown that the Countess first became involved in the future of the estate, and Mapperton found a new audience. 'We lost all our income in terms of visitors, so we thought perhaps there was an opportunity to replicate tours on the internet,' the Earl explains. 'We'd film my parents taking their usual tours of the house.' With the Countess as presenter, the Earl as producer and Nestor, 19, their youngest son, as sound man, they created their first crowdfunding video. They were touring All Saints, the estate's church, in June 2020, when the Countess first asked the public for donations to repoint the stonework, which was coming apart and donations – mainly from Americans – began to flood in: £1,500 in total. Did the in-laws hide their heads in shame? Not at all, the Countess says. 'We'd read out the donors' names, which they loved,' she explains. 'I'd say, thank you so much, George, from Sacramento, California, who has just given $50 (£42.50) and my mother-in-law would say, 'Fantastic! We'll even take your dimes.' Soon, the Montagus were producing a regular Saturday night show, Mapperton Live, which continues to this day. 'We over-engineered it to begin with,' the Earl says. 'These days, we never do a second take. Your audience buys into you as people – they find they share your values and interests.' Not many followers will have titles and live in a stately home, though. Do they ever get trolled? 'People are mostly incredibly nice, although we used to get some nasty comments,' the Earl says. The Countess is nodding. 'They said, Julie, do you ever comb your hair?' Did she find that hurtful? 'Never. I don't take it personally. Some people find that hard. For me, it's not hard at all.' Does she not feel she has to make an effort for the camera, though? 'Oh my God, no. That's not me. I'd rather spend my time doing something else than putting on make-up and doing my hair.' It all sounds jolly good fun, but the reality is that it's a scary time for historic houses; an effective 20 per cent rate of inheritance tax (IHT) for both farmland and family-owned businesses is going to be disastrous for many, the Earl explains. 'Some will be able to apply for conditional exemption but many will not.' Recent figures from Historic Houses suggest a third of members will have to sell chattels in order to pay IHT liabilities, but this won't always cover the bill. 'It's going to mean that many more are sold. I can tell you that when they get into public hands, their stories are less interesting. They're much more expensive to run. We run this at a fraction of the cost of a National Trust property. We are the right people to be in place,' he says. The Earl and Countess are aware, though, that they cannot focus purely on digital revenue, not least because the next generation might be camera-shy. Yet without the head of steam created by YouTube, they admit the estate would be struggling, largely because Mapperton is an hour and a half from any major city or town. 'We just don't have the population density to get people to come. We've recognised that problem and removed it by saying you don't have to come in person.' Some 62 per cent of their audience are American – as are 99 per cent of their donors. When the Montagus were invited to speak at a conservation society in Alabama last year, they were treated like royalty by fans. 'They all wanted to have their photograph taken with us,' he says. 'We were very impressed by the Royal family at that point. If we had to do that every day, we'd be exhausted. 'This is what historic houses are about – connection,' he continues. 'We're all looking for connection in our lives. It's important that these estates are shared and understood and relevant – that's how they will survive.'
