Oinky Boinky

Regarding the lady who had her car repossessed because she missed a payment. Is that not a huge bonus for the guy who gets the whole car back even tho she has been paying hundreds a month for it. Is it never considered equity what you put into the car? I know JJ likes to say consider you rented the car - but 400 a month is a lot of rent on an older car. So he gets the car back plus damage recovery because she wrecked the seat and the carpets. Seems to me like he got a BO-Nanza!! My other point is he claimed the car seat got chewed up by her dogs (she had 4 in that vehicle I believe) but she insisted it was not her dogs it was her sliding her arse in and out as she said because of her size - it ripped the seat. So it is her sliding her very big arse in and out of the ve-hickle that caused the damage. Why does she thinks that mitigates the damage? Arse or dog teeth - it is her damage. I wasn't sure about this ruling at all. In the halterview the plaintiff said she was using the promise of her potential 1.8 million dollar settlement to milk people. Is it possible he was one of the people in line to milk her?

Remote control for your Christmas tree lights? Just attach a clapper to the wall receptacle. Easy old technology and kids like clapping the tree off and on. Free from me to you - Merry Christmas.

I noticed the fellow in the audience behind the plaintiff telling his story was laughing so hard he was crying. Fun case. I wonder how long JJ would have let him talk- I think we miss a lot of good stuff that way. The explicatives bugged me too. The thing about that case was that the old guy seemed to be given a pass just because he was older. I know there was hard evidence of the punched door but do you think the old guys wife would admit in court if her husband had spit on the younger man? And I don't care what type of lapel pin you have. Colonel Russell Williams used to have lots of stuff on his lapel also.

Thanks Gussie, I myself have used the term the whole 'megillah' to mean the 'whole ball of wax' but never knew it was Yiddish.

Hi Into cats... Like kerfuffle she has used that word a few times in the previous weeks. 'Metzia is Yiddish for a bargain, a real find, or a lucky break. The word originally comes from Hebrew, and it means "a find." She seems to be using it slightly incorrectly. Maybe schemozzle - 'a confused situation or affair; a mess.' is the word she wants.

Quite often the closed captioning is wrong. Often it is laughably wrong. I am not sure who does the closed captioning but I know the cc on The People's Court is very funny. I still have the kitten ep so I will listen to it again.

And in the exploding air bag case... Now Judge Acker says she has previously represented car manufacturers and she knows, she knows that if something is defective in a car the company recalls the cars because they don't want lawsuits. No Tanya they don't -if the recall is more expensive than just awarding millions of dollars for death claims - they opt for just paying out the claims. In a recent Fifth Estate exposee it turns out as in the case of a small ignition piece in (maybe the Cobalt?) the dollar amount that puts it over into the 'not worth a recall' territory is about 2 bucks.

Super slimy Bernard Baron thought he was so smart. He thought that this reasonably attractive younger woman had the hots for him so he grabbed her and kissed her on the job. Equally slimy he then insults her by saying here is a woman 11 years in an entry level job - what is she mentally deficient? Top 4 reasons he is mentally deficient himself: 4. He works the same type of job 3. He does not know what the word NO means 2. He thinks women want him even though he is a repulsive creep And the number one reason he is mentally deficient himself... 1. He has spray on hair. He bought that infomercial stuff at 3 in the morning and sprayed a black circular slick where his hair used to be and doesn't realize the glare off of the paint is ridiculous. I wonder if everyone got sexual sensitivity training when he was in the service or he was the only person commanded to be in the class. Too bad he missed the point of the lessons.

I mentioned this on the main JJ page. This is not the first occurrence of 'escape goat' on JJ In the older case I believe the litigant said 'escape goat' in the true sense of being a scape goat but just not knowing what the correct word was- she knew the meaning but not the words. The kitten litigant was wrong in every sense. And this reminds me of daffy duck teachers where one of them used the 'allowed speaker' to call out the other. Why did she do that? Obviously because it was allowed. It boggles when teachers don't know their own language.

I am pretty sure she said 'escapegoat' and who can blame her: 1. He was escaping all the time and her word has 'escape' in it. 2. The word is vintage JJ lexicon.

CWL I started a forum for Divorce Court maybe back in July. No one responded to it and I can't find it anymore. I love what Lynn Toler has to say to the people in her court: 'Control your fertility' 'Never make a man tell you more than once he doesn't want you' You roll I love how she proceeds with caution if people are wanting to discuss sexual topics and thanks them for keeping it not icky. I can't remember what it was the other day - probably something sexual and she said 'now Mr.... you are backstroking down a river I don't want to be in'

I thought he had a look of disbelief that she went there. Isn't that the definition of gratuitious - it wasn't brought up during the case, it was thrown out randomly after she ruled and was leaving. She must be privy to a lot of other details about the cases from complaints or random rants of both sides. Is it all fair game if she doesn't like you?

Sorry Mindy disagree - put money up your nose always means cocaine and really if it did mean shove it up your ass I am not sure what is more offensive. Now if she said 'up your nose with a rubber hose' nyah nyah that would be funny.

Quote is not working for me... Regarding the 44 year old gigolo Timothy. Does anyone think JJ went too far in her comments and may in fact have opened herself up to slander litigation? Her comment at the end (something like) 'you lived rent free for 7 months... you put the money you saved up your nose... or whatever orifice you prefer... On what basis did she make that statement? If it was in the plaintiffs statement it was 'heresay' and not substantiated. Did she break HIPPA laws? This was not discussed during the case. Is it because it was unsubstantiated or because it was irrelevant to the case? Either reason should mean that JJ can't parting shot it when it was just nasty. She wants to get after the VP of the credit union for knowing her bank did not carry the other ladie's car loan - JJ 'up your nose' comments to me were far more heinous and perhaps actionable. Thoughts...

I forgot to remember which case it was but one defendant yesterday huffed out so fast that Byrd didn't have time to make them drop their paperwork. While Byrd was then shuffling over to the plaintiff they left with their papers also. Is this a first? I was ... wait a minute, wait a minute 'THE PAPERS, WTF!! BYRD THEY'VE STILL GOT THE PAPERS!!'

The two business majors should have spent some of their education money buying a clue. I didn't think what they were selling was that special - maybe I didn't get it. Is this like my fitness pal but you hook it up and it counts reps? Their biggest delusion was thinking how much they had spent collectively on their education was value added to whatever they were shilling.

D'Arcy knew of the sister because apparently (and he states it) she was involved in the seduction of Georgina by Wickham. She delivered her up or something. Or do you mean prior to the Georgina seduction he didn't know about the sister. Who the heck was Julia - the babies mother? Missed that. This type of ending and shoehorning in the obvious fringe character to be the murderer is the reason I won't read murder mysteries.

The answer is yes. Brain injury in the form of trauma or invasive surgery can have the same effect as having a lobotomy. A person who has had a lobotomy is childlike, more carefree and emotionally labile. Twitches or tics would also not be uncommon as a result of brain injury.

I believe that girl should have filed criminal charges otherwise this guy is just never going to get it. His sentence -a few days in jail, probation and make him work on a crisis hotline with supervision of course!

Great posts today, very entertaining. I should learn not to delete viewed episodes from my PVR until I have read the snark on them. And not to make any of you feel 'less than', I have drool worthy veins. Phrebotomists love me and compliment my veins which is dumb because that is not something I had a hand in. I have never experienced a single more than one try stick and I believe I would be vomitting too- probably after 3.

Hmmmm so you mean when he was 17 and she was 13? 16 and 12? Trust me if you knew me you would know I am not being judgemental and Canadian law is pretty forgiving on this. I just remember seeing a whole documentary about a young black man being in prison for having sex with his girlfriend and it makes me wonder. I can't remember which state he was from - he was like 17, she was 15 or 16 and her father had him charged.

AngelaHunter beat me to this one... My favourite litigant was the very nice gentleman who rescued a very young kitten from a drainpipe and got put in handcuffs., removed from his job, and arrested for stealing it. Unfortunately he had no case against the defendant. She reported her kitten missing and the prosecutor’s office is the one he should have sued for abuse of process. And of course Baby Boy’s dad. Does anyone remember the 17th child, a daughter, of the very religious, pompous, pontificating parents. They took her money to 'teach her a lesson'. Horrible people. My heart went out to her.

I was surprised in this case that her being 15 and alleged baby daddy being 19 - isn't that statutory rape?

I am enjoying the types of cases they are doing. You must admit the one about the toilet was pretty amusing. Ironically that deliberation that some of you don't like is very much like the rehash we do of all of the court cases. It is like they are anticipating the questions we are going to have regarding the judgements.

A very good example of why we love Judge Milian was the lady with the water damage from condo air conditioning. She listened so patiently to the ladies story, realized she didn't have the answer and then researched the issue. Genuine caring about the plaintiff's problem. The other thought on this case is when the lady went to the Rabbi and said she had damage from his AC water he made no attempt to help her. He said he used to be on the Condo board. He very well could have told the lady her options. He was probably afraid a judgement would come out of the condo owners funds. Kind of an uncaring attitude for a Rabbi.