SandyToes

Is it a crime to promote oneself as a lawyer? (Like impersonating an officer?) Judy kept asking the plaintiffs if they had anything showing he promoted himself as a lawyer - I think she was trying to find a way to nail the defendant. But a photo of someone in a judge's robe isn't a crime ("Puffery!!") and they seemed to only have found that after the fact. I got the impression that if there had been something that said "I am an attorney" then she would have lowered the boom on him, and the plaintiffs may have prevailed.

I agree with a lot of that, 27bored. But I think the two key points were that the plaintiffs had all the "evidence" of the def's fakery AFTER the fact, and that they had a signed contract. The plaintiffs could have dug all that evidence up before they signed the contract. It's about doing due diligence before you hire someone. And then once the contact is signed, they are bound by that document. JJ even said if there had been clauses about dates or deadlines, then they'd have something. But if they got snookered by a scam artist, that sort of falls into the "buyer beware" category. It must be frustrating sometimes as a judge (here, or anywhere) when you have to decide a case in favor of the bad guys.

Redemption! Case with two near-teens about a drunken skateboarding ex-boyfriend. Yes, he's responsible for damage to her car, and JJ suggested sweet girl NOT go through her insurance since her rates might go up, so stuck him with entire repair bill. Woo hoo! Every once in a while we see a very compassionate judge. Well-played. Seriously bummed it wasn't the afore-mentioned Rocco case!

Oh, ladies and germs you are in fine form today! Good to see some of our more irregular(!) posters jumping into the fray! teebax, there are not enough words. I don't have any money, but I got my sister's FEMA check here I could borrow you, I guess. Great way to recap the entire week in one post, too! I have learned far more about horses than I ever needed to know. Heading to Kentucky Derby country this weekend, so it's good that I have all this new info so I can really conversate with the locals, now. Can't believe I sat through the entire wedding planner case. Blech. And because my system STILL only shows the same two ep. descriptions (even though at different times on different stations), it only recorded 2 of today's 4 episodes. Even after I go back in and set it to "record anyway, dammit!" And one of them was the wedding mess? The old ones I get are usually ones I haven't seen, but have no idea when they originally aired, since the descriptions don't match. Grrrrr.

Between that case and the repeat of the "pony" case, if I never hear the word pony again it will be too soon. Thought it interesting that when the case was recalled (after the criminal case was resolved,) everyone had on the same clothes. My descriptions still don't match the episodes. Is there just one new episode a day? We used to get two.

I think it was an old episode. Young Asian woman with brightly eye-shadowed eyes (electric blue and pink) sued because she had signed (co-signed?) for a car loan for smarmy boyfriend. Car was supposed to be in his name, but he never filed the title (or something), never paid any payments (surprise!), so SHE somehow had the car repossessed, and retitled in her name. Supposedly. JJ laughed at her and asked how she could possibly convince a repo company to repossess a car she did not own, and the DMV would never allow her to do that. Her case was thrown out. Girl really thought she had a case, and was startled when she lost. Don't think she ever understood.

So we've got "kerfuffle," we've got "He said it was a loan", wev'e got whenever anyone drinks the water, and we've got "Sushi for lunch", but what on earth can we possibly do when a litigant WINKS at the judge?! I nearly had a fit when I saw Smarmy Joe wink at the judge today during the ColorfulEyesGal sues SuaveSmarmyJoe about a repo'd car case. Seriously? I know it's TV, but seriously? I don't even think chugging covers this one. When JJ told him to wink at Byrd instead, Byrd nearly had a fit, too.

I think sometimes there is one of two things at work. One, is that the Snidley is so scummy that she wants to make sure HE pays the "fine", rather than the show's coffers. As I understand it, any awards won are paid by the show. Maybe why she also threw Brunilda's case out. Daughter figured she'd rack up the charges, Mommy would pay, and when Mommy didn't, "Let's go on JJ and let them pay the bill." So by tossing it back, the loser really has to cough up the funds. Hopefully. The other one, and maybe this is what happened with Ms. Collagen, is to give her time to pull the documents together so she COULD prove/win her case. Like Angela said above, just showing I took the money out of my account in no way proves what happened to it. If Snidely had admitted that he took the cash, that would work, but it is her burden to prove, and she couldn't. So rather than end it with an outright dismissal, JJ let her have another chance back home. I also wonder how long the cases actually take, and how much is edited out. I would guess, too, that the parties are pretty well vetted by production, based on some of the questions she often asks. "When was the last time you were incarcerated, sir?" always surprises me when it is the first thing out of her mouth.

A to the MEN! I love how 27bored is ballsy enough to say everything I'm thinking.

I realize that the folks we see on this show are in on way representative of the "general population." (Lordy, I hope not, anyway!) But in today's assortment, man, there were a BUNCH of people with absolutely NO concept of money! A mix of new and repeats, I think. First, no job, but let's get a "bungalow" with boyfriend who also has no job, and then clear out 401K to pay for "stuff." Huh? And she was no spring chicken, so may be needing said 401K in the very near future! Or maybe she was eligible to take it out, but to then spend it on do nothing boyfriend? Then the teenager who moved to Wisconsin from New Mexico to live with (creepy) online-boyfriend of 2 months. Again, no jobs, no income, but a disputed laptop and requisite protective orders. And the goofball who let her friend put a $600 birthday present for a boyfriend on goofball's credit card. Why would anyone (even a JJ-type) think giving a $600 gift was appropriate when you are unemployed, and couldn't put it on your own credit card? I appreciate wanting to help out a friend, and these two girls seemed very young, but wow. Then there was Brunilda and her daughter. I have no doubt that the daughter opened all those credit cards, and in the hallterview, nearly admitted as much, but again, just open a card in every store with no concept (or intention?) of paying it back? Auntie Pam, I think you hit the nail on the head - Mom spent 2 or 3 months nagging the daughter to pay up, she refused, so now she's trying small claims court. Almost like daughter figured they'd just come on the show and Mom would win, she'd get to keep all the goodies from Macy's and everybody would be happy. Glad Judy said, "NO!" Don't figure mom will follow through, though. Hope she learned a lesson. If I was loaning a friend $100, I could see handing it over in cash, or a check since I'm still into those. But if it was $3600 for Snidely Whiplash's mortgage payments, I hope I'd have the sense to get a cashier's check payable to the bank. But I don't think I'd hand over a wad of cash like that. Thus endeth the daily rant.

So I DVRd four episodes today and saw neither of these. Totally unfair!! Did see one with a guy wanting to install a dog shock fence device to keep the neighboring pit bull from climbing over the fence (complete with video!). JJ threw out the idiot son of the def. Drinking game bonanza. Then a sad, pathetic tire slashing/future baby daddy case. Maybe Mallissa will show up tomorrow.

Can you imagine a case where Rebecca "Pussy Cat Doll" (Hee!) and Shannon Five-Shots were the litigants?! I think my head would explode. She was exhausting. JJ may have earned her $$ on that one. The plaintiff should have gotten some of her money back, in my opinion, just for having to have put up with Rebecca. Free Bruce!

I think she smelled something fishy (sorry) in that they both came with an entourage and a relatively bogus case. Free trip to LA anyone? Cool! Nice dinner, too! The homeless woman case was odd, too. Can't afford rent, but has a pricey gaming computer, and a houseful of stuff? I think they were both a little off.

I wondered what exactly the defendant's mom's needs were that she needed a dog that he admitted would kill as an emotional support animal. My thought that you'd want a soft, cushy, cuddler for "emotional support." But, maybe Norman Bates' mom would go another direction. We have an extendable leash, but when we approach another dog, we reel her in and lock it. Loved the repeat of the dad/daughter repossessed car. "No, I didn't have a loan." "No, it wasn't financed." "No, I didn't pay for the whole thing. I was making payments." Sigh. Byrd: "Patience, patience." And then the capper: JJ: "Who's name was the loan in?" And you could SEE the wheels turning and her trying to not say, "But I didn't have a loan!" Good times. Sad and crazy case, but that part cracks me up.

I'm relatively new to Survivor -- loved both Spencer and Kass on their seasons. I was glad he made it through. Most of the early season people are unknowns to me, so it is interesting to see the interactions. I understand wanting to keep the goats around, but this early in the game, don't teams need some brute strength? Voting out Vytas last week, and almost Spencer this week undermines the physical strength of the team. And since they've lost both immunity challenges, I thought that strategy was odd. How did Abi make it back on the show? Weren't these people all voted on by fans? Is she adored by some faction out there in Survivorland? Or did she make it in just for the drama? I was hoping she'd be gone last week.

I am soooo not seeing the same episodes y'all are seeing. Ack!

"I loved her very hard and completely." Ewwwww.

"Snookered with benefits." Yowza. The things people are willing to air on TV. Clearing out the DVR - must be the late night weekend shows. A wacky case with two professionals arguing over a Disney trip? 7 kids between them, job, no job, house, no house, money, no money, but a couple of legal settlements, and a cleared out 401K for said Disney trip. Toss in a protective order and an anonymous assault. Holey moley. Pretty much everything but the kitchen sink (and a pit bull). Both were complete idiots and the baby daddy (a lawyer, no less) one of them smarmiest I've seen. Just all kinds of "what the heck." Even JJ's patient, considered, generous mind was blown.

We've had to do this only twice, in a lot of years. Most recently last summer. She was,of course, incredulous: "If you'd told us you wanted us out, we'd have left." As the sheriff's moving company was loading the van, "Give me a minute and I'll call someone with a truck." Um, no. Oddly, they are able to come up with $5k to get their stuff back from the sheriff (none of which comes to the landlord) but couldn't manage to pay rent. Typical JJ fodder. On the upside, we just had a couple move out after 11 years, and the place was in better shape than when they moved in (relatives of yours, Teebax?) The good ones are really good, and the bad ones are awful. Just like landlords. No comments on today's cases? I've been out all day so haven't watched yet. Me thinks maybe they were not the stellar shows we've been treated to of late!

Those are the same two I have, they just show up for the second batch of eps, too. Judge Judy Surpise! What episodes will actually air, and when? Gives me time to get a bottle of wine ready for today's nutjobs. Interesting point about the credit histories. And I agree, probably not a huge factor.

Strong feelings there, Brattinella?! I am soo right there with you. Criminy! What a piece of work. I'll tell ya', based on what I've seen this week, I wonder if we have, in fact, slipped in to the "actor portrayal" zone. Do we still have real people and real cases? There have been some certifiable wackos on this show, but it seems like we've really hit the big time. And it's not even sweeps! I wonder if she's still living there with her principles. Can you imagine working with or employing her? Oh, never mind... If Toaster recaps this, she needs to assign it blood pressure pills instead of gavels. Or margaritas. ETA: Hang on. Rewatching. They wrote up the rent free agreement so Nasty Nadya wouldn't sue the homeowner? Isn't that extortion? Or Blackmail? And yet, here she is suing the owner! There are just not enough words!

Interesting brother sister case. Idiot brother totals a car in sister's name, but thinks only the OWNER is responsible. How many times did he say that? If it was part of the drinking game we'd all be three sheets to the wind. Another cretin. Both early shows were new to me, but unremarkable. Lots of "Good-Bye!" cases. And well-deserved. DVR caught several eps yesterday, but NOT the dog (or shawl!) case. I will be glad when it all gets straightened out. Will have to wait for reruns, I guess.

" I. DON'T. KNOW!" Thought Judy was going to blow a gasket the way she kept hollering that at the sister! Sister did appear to be quite clairvoyant. Good thing, since she's probably the one picking up the tab for her miscreant brother now.

Teebax, I know! I get 4 a day, dates and descriptions (courtesy Dish) match none of the four, but at least they are eps I usually haven't seen. One of today's "new" eps references events from 2011, so who knows. Took your advice, and now record everything and sort it out later. If the bike and dog cases are new today, get ready. Would love to hear ToasterStrudel's take on those two. Very appreciative for Dish network for rearranging the rerun (maybe) eps for later in the day, when I'm home from work. Now if I could just get the rest of the family out of the house I could enjoy my guilty pleasure all by my ownself.

"I wouldn't have borrowed it (the money) if I knew I had to pay it back!" Ha! You think?