Richard Guerci

Richard Guerci testified for the prosecution on Day 21 and Day 22 about financial records concerning Pamela Cafritz's estate, spending after her death, and a defense legal-expense trust. He calculated approximately $135,000 in charges to Cafritz's American Express account between her death on November 7, 2016, and February 8, 2018. He said the statements and information obtained from American Express identified Cafritz as an authorized user and identified no others.

Guerci reviewed estate documents identifying Raniere as sole beneficiary through Cafritz's living trust, checks bearing Raniere's signature, and emails routing payment requests through Clare Bronfman, including an approval from Raniere. He said the bank information did not appear to establish Raniere's signing authority, and he could not identify who actually used the debit card. On cross-examination, he agreed that Raniere had resigned as executor without relinquishing his beneficial interest, that travel charges for Raniere and Marianna preceded Cafritz's death, and that some merchants appeared both before and after her death. He also agreed that Raniere signed his own name on the checks and that, to his knowledge, the bank processed them.

On redirect, Guerci said that, based on his knowledge, a $4,457 cashmere sweater and Donegal blazer purchase and chiropractic treatments were not allowable executor expenses. On recross, he did not know whether Marianna made purchases on Cafritz's card. The court sustained an objection to asking whether Cafritz would have objected to the purchases.

Guerci also reviewed death and identification records for Ashana Chenoa and a later border encounter recorded under Lisa Chenoa's name with the same birth date. During cross-examination, he said he had neither prepared nor previously seen additional border records presented by the defense. The court deferred a decision while prosecutors reviewed those records.

His trust testimony described approximately $14 million in deposits, mostly from Bronfman, used to pay defense counsel and consultants. Cross-examination established that numerous firms and individual lawyers received payments; redirect clarified that most funds went to very few firms. Asked by the court, Guerci confirmed that he was not offering an opinion on whether payments to lawyers were appropriate or legal. The court subsequently instructed jurors that paying another person's legal fees was not improper and that they could consider the arrangement only as evidence bearing on whether an enterprise existed.