DoctorK

I don't know about the godmother/godson case. A priori, I don't find it unusual for a mother to treat her children a bit differently than a godson. Including the hallterview, the godson sounded like he had a real sense of entitlement and long standing resentment for being (as he felt) unfairly treated. He also seemd to be dodging anything related to his legal problem which may have been quite relevent - if he had unexpected legal expenses, a loan makes a lot of sense if a gift was not planned. As a totally peripheral issue, I was curious about his eyes. At first, glance I thought it might be styling, but later it looked more like an industrial accident with acid or some very hot liquid that hit him while he was wearing goggles or even glasses. I had something similar happen many years ago with extremely hot acid flux which splashed over part of my face, ruined the glasses I was wearing, and left my face with acid burns around the edge of the glasses.

Thank goodness. We saw more than enough already.

Maybe you don't have the right cookbooks.

Joining the Byrd fan club also. I get a kick out of his lack of interest in the drama, incoherence and stupidity displayed by so many of the litigants. I also agree that I believe he is extremely aware of anything going on that might require his intervention. Of all of the court bailiffs, I think grizzled old jaded Byrd would be the first to go hands-on if needed, with whatever level of force was needed. Sadly, if this ever happened I don't think we would get to see it, just hear about it on TMZ.

The check scam people were astonishing. How can anyone with an IQ above room temperature not understand that they are perpetuating a fraudulent scam? Are they that ignorant or so deep into the corrupt, scamming subculture that they see nothing wrong with what they are doing? I continue to suspect that most of the litigants we see on the court shows are dishonest scamming garbage.

speac you are not crazy (at least based on this observation). I remember the case and the participants, but not which court show they were on before. I wonder if any of JM's staff knew this?

Plus the clashing colors of the necklace. Made me nostalgic for the pre-color TV days, shades of gray could never be as painful.

The plaintiff needs to gear up to protect herself from this psycho, as does anyone else who knows him. Clean up the gene pool.

Sounds like we need to go out bar hopping some time.

Tips or mis-tips?

That bothered me, I find it hard to believe that the former tenant wanted less light in the room so they put a (cheap blue and not opaque) tarp over it on the outside, instead of tacking up a piece of opaque drape on the inside. However, it was pretty obvious and I am surprised that the plaintiff didn't notice this on a house she was going to sign a lease on.

Almost there AngelaHunter, but we still need a misuse of "presently" such as "I was presently there at the Burger King on that day."

Today I nominate the Mercedes (not really the buyer) hustler for the top ten most annoying people we have seen on PC. The actual buyer had limitations but has not been determined to be incompetent to handle his own affairs and I liked JM ending up with reassuring him that he had done nothing wrong. His "adviser" was all kinds of shady (and as obnoxious as hell) and I agree with JM that he was running some kind of scam with his "charity organization", using the actual buyer as a pawn. Plus, if an actual charity needs a seven passenger vehicle, why does it have to be $24K used Mercedes, bought by a third party? I guess a Mercedes has more style than a van.

A variety of judges might give the show more long term appeal, what we have seen so far with the original three feels like I have already seen everything thing they have to show in terms of interactions. As someone else noted, doing two cases in a half hour rushes things, more discussion among the judges would enhance the show.

Agreed. If the KBB value of the car is less than what you paid, JJ gives you KBB; if the KBB value is higher than what you paid, you get what you paid. Classic "heads I win, tails you lose. I really think it shoud be the KBB regardless, that is the actual market value.

The end of western civilisation as we know it. It has been a pretty good run for about 3,000 years.

The idiot rural dog owners irritated me but the case after that, the motorcycle accident had a plaintiff whose eye makeup was so striking (not in a good way) that I was distracted. If your eye makeup is so heavy that you have trouble keeping your eyes open, there is a problem.

Personally, I would take that as a sign that I should be a better driver.

I enjoyed the ka-BOOM case today, the pistol that "blew up" (and I put that in quotes because the evidence presented by the plaintiff did not tell us most of the pertinent information about the incident). It is unbelievable that when the plaintiff first sued the store owner, no one had the pistol examined by a gunsmith. The cause could have been a bad cartridge (too much propellant, oversize bullet, among other possibilities), it could have been the pistol (incorrectly reamed chamber, a malfunction that caused the pistol to fire out of battery), it could have been the plaintiff's negligence (maybe having the barrel blocked, firing a squib round where the bullet never left the barrel and he fired another round without clearing the barrel). So many possibilities and no one examined the pistol? The expert was only shown pictures and could not tie the accident to the defendant. Not that the defendant was any prize, I completely believe that he lied about a lot of things. The gun store executive was as bad - on the one hand, his store never sold reloaded ammo, but he produced a consignment agreement with the defendant to take and sell reloaded ammo. The plaintiff was right though after the case when said "don't buy reloaded ammo". I say that as someone who when I was competing reloaded and shot up to 5,000 rounds a year. No serious shooter I know would accept reloads unless from someone that they knew really well. There is a bit of a quibble on the terms "reloaded" versus "remanufactured"; generally remanufactured is produced commercially on automated equipment, with lot number tracking, manufacturer clearly identified, and a corporation with liability insurance. Reloaded usually means an individual using manual equipment and their ammo is as good (or as bad) as their diligence and experience.

Didn't Snow shoot the first guy who tried that?

Watch the movie "Idiocracy" to see where we are and where we are going.

I was shocked at his condesciention (sp?) when he lectured one of the other judges on circumstantial evidence. She is also a judge with presumably roughly similar experience. He does seem like a jerk.

"broughten" versus "borrowed", hard to choose which one is more illiterate. One is a non existent word, the other is a complete wrong word. The end of the world as we know it is on the horizon.

While I don't want to fall into "looks may be deceiving" mode, the court show bailiffs as a group don't look like they could deal with a real threat. Sonia doesn't look physically capable of controlling a violent incident, the skinny 150 pound red haired bailiff on another court show I can't remember at the moment doesn't look like he could handle any violent situation. Byrd on JJ though does look like a grizzled old guy who could do what needs to be done.

How about we go with borrowed-juvenile-delinquent dogs off-leash? That way we could just have the same case over and over again, and we would never have to feel bad if we miss an episode.