Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
Toaster Strudel

All Episodes Talk: All Rise

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, BusyOctober said:

Wowza!  The defendant in the cat case looked like a complete mess!  From her tragic hair “style” to her coordinating tats and top, she looked like one of those “re-enactors” on an ID Channel “Swamp Murders” episode.

casting agent: “we’re looking for a stereotypical Kentucky holler meth addict...she’s in her late 20’s, but looks 45.  You know the type...bleached, over processed hair. Badly done, highly visible tattoos....

actress reading for part: “blank stare, bad teeth. High school dropout?”

casting agent: “more like 3rd grade education. Let’s try a line...How would you respond if I ask you ‘so, what happened to the cat, Stephanie?”

actress:  dead eyed, slack jawed. “it got ranned over.”

casting agent: “NAILED IT!”

bwahahahahahaha!! YES!!!

3 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Just as I said - when their pricey status symbol starts getting on their nerves, they dump them and don't care if they cost 2K.

I don't understand how that pile o'poo could afford a $2,000 cat! She couldn't even afford teeth!

3 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Yes, but some ordinary tabby is not going to impress anyone.

Silly me, I get a cat because I love them and want to provide a save and happy home for them, I guess I'm missing the point of having a pet, it should be  a showpiece! Who knew??? 

Edited by GoodieGirl
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Vandalism and Theft Caught on Video-Man moves into woman's house, rents room for $500 a month, didn't pay one month rent.     Landlady alleges all kinds of physical house damage, and has police reports where he admits much of the damage.    She changed the locks to get rid of him, without evicting him legally.   Video from security cameras show his girlfriend stealing landlady's necklace, and brought in all kinds of other people in the house, when the lease said no visitors.    There is a video of tenant breaking her security cameras.   There are numerous scenes of defendant stealing a ton of the woman's stuff, and damaging her property.   Officer Byrd has his glare of death focused on the defendant, and I'm hoping for a beat down.   Defendant claims it wasn't him on camera, and that's why using drugs ruin your brain.    

Landlady plaintiff gets $5,000, and man says he left the state because of her harassment.   I wonder how many warrants are out for him?

 

Don't Call My Antiques Junk-(Storage Fail)-Plaintiff suing for fence demo and trespassing, by guardian for aged relative.     Defendant is swilling the water that must not be drunk, so he's already on my bad side.  Defendant is a neighbor, and looks like a nut case.    Defendant stored his 'valuable antiques' on the aunt's property, and the plaintiff/guardian for aunt who owns property wants it all gone, so she can rehab the property, and I'm assuming sell it eventually to help support her aunt.    Plaintiff suing for demolition of fence, trespassing, and wants neighbor's/defendants junk gone.        The defendant also put up temporary fences on the plaintiff's property.  He is a total nutso, and a 'performance artist', and I want to punch him in the face very badly.     Officer Byrd has that look again too, the one where he hopes the judge will let him pound on someone.     The defendant keeps asking to show the judge his diagram, and I really want to hit him even more.       JJ gives loony toons neighbor three days to get his stuff off of the plaintiff's property, and after that Judge Judy will authorize a dumpster, and workers to get rid of his garbage, and the court will pay the bill, and Judge Judy is crafting an order for the Sheriff's office to supervise the removal.     The defendant actually stored all of his junk inside one part of the aunt's property for three years, before moving in to the alley/side yard.       By the way, 'it's not junk' is the justification for every hoarder I've ever watched on TV, so we all know what he's really like.   I hope the local fire marshal is watching this show, and drops in on his house, because I bet it's a full hoard.   The defendant took on the wrong person, since she's a realtor, and knows the law.    

On the first one - the camera destroying guy - he actually paid all but one month rent - he had proof, amazingly.  But yeah, he's a piece of trash.

Speaking of trash, hoarder artist dude said he's a "visual artist", meaning he makes stuff out of junk, and so to him, everything has value, and he hoards it.  And just like hoarders, he values his stuff so highly that he lets it sit out and get rained on, etc.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, funky-rat said:

Speaking of trash, hoarder artist dude said he's a "visual artist", meaning he makes stuff out of junk, and so to him, everything has value, and he hoards it.  And just like hoarders, he values his stuff so highly that he lets it sit out and get rained on, etc.

As an American Pickers viewer, I know that just adds to the patina - Rusty Gold, don'cha know..... no, I'm not a hoarder - I'm a collector ?

Watching the case, I was wondering if it was something JJ should even have been deciding. Unless I missed it, it was never established who owned the property this valuable junk was on. Without a survey of the property line, I don't think JJ should have ordered D to move his junk.... although I suppose the way she worded her order was he had to remove it from P's property - so if he doesn't move it within JJ's time frame, but gets a survey showing it was in fact removed from his property, does he sue P for trashing his stuff - or JJ for issuing the order -- and who gets to set the value on the stuff, some architectural salvage - like those windows he mentioned - are worth big bucks, way more than the 5 grand max on most court tv cases. Hmmmm, maybe that blanket statement that the litigants have agreed to let JJ have the final say would protect both P and the show from a future lawsuit. Instead of a small claims case, I think P should have been referred to Code Enforcement - assuming there is such an office in their jurisdiction...

let's just add this to another type case no one should let JJ rule on - antiques, firearms, classic cars, and who knows what all else - JJ is going to wing it and not even let the litigant tell us why his/her  ar-15 rifle is worth what he claims - despite fact that the ar-15 style is available in multiple calibers, and can be purchased for anywhere from a hundred bucks up to several thousand depending on a multitude of factors and options - heck a really good scope could cost more than the rifle.

Edited by SRTouch
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

Watching the case, I was wondering if it was something JJ should even have been deciding. Unless I missed it, it was never established who owned the property this valuable junk was on. Without a survey of the property line, I don't think JJ should have ordered D to move his junk.... although I suppose the way she worded her order was he had to remove it from P's property - so if he doesn't move it within JJ's time frame, but gets a survey showing it was in fact removed from his property, does he sue P for trashing his stuff - or JJ for issuing the order -- and who gets to set the value on the stuff, some architectural salvage - like those windows he mentioned - are worth big bucks, way more than the 5 grand max on most court tv cases. Hmmmm, maybe that blanket statement that the litigants have agreed to let JJ have the final say would protect both P and the show from a future lawsuit. Instead of a small claims case, I think P should have been referred to Code Enforcement - assuming there is such an office in their jurisdiction..

Since he thinks his junk is so precious, he should move it now and sort out the property line later. 

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

I've seen some horrific San Francisco area hoarder houses on the two TV shows, so I don't think the authorities enforce zoning, and junk accumulation that much.   I think they have so many other issues to attend to that I'm betting the fact this man's stuff is way over the 3' of property he owns next to his house, and onto the aunt's property is way down the list.    He also built temporary gates to block the area off too.   If any of his 'valuable antiques' catch fire, then both buildings may go.    I totally loathed his over acting, and gasps of astonishment that he wasn't being treated as the famous artist he thinks he is, when he's had his stuff in the plaintiff's property for years, and finally moved to the space between the two properties and had it there for three years, I think they said three years.   If his stuff is so valuable, then I can't believe it all sitting out in the weather for years is increasing the value of it either.  I bet a dumpster is the right place for it, and I'm betting he moved virtually nothing either, because I bet his house is floor to ceiling hoard.   I hate hoarders, for the way they endanger others with their junk, and for the vermin that move into junk piles.      I'm hoping this case brought the fire marshal's attention to this property, and that the way he's piling up stuff inside his house is a fire hazard to houses that are so close together.  

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, GoodieGirl said:

Since he thinks his junk is so precious, he should move it now and sort out the property line later. 

To me, it would be same to assume that since the P was a real estate agent, and getting permits, etc, to do work on the building, she would have had a survey done.  It almost sounded like she was saying three INCHES and he was saying three FEET.  I didn't see or hear anything from the P that would indicate she wasn't operating in a way she should not.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I think the plaintiff said he only owned three feet from the side of his house, and he had totally blocked the space between the aunt's house, and his house, with his junk, and had built temporary gates front and back to protect his stuff.    He tried to claim he owned more land, and that's the point of the diagram he made, and I'm sure that showed a jog in the property line in his favor.         I'm just glad he had to get it out of the former barber shop on the bottom of the aunt's house, because I'm sure all of that flammable, rotting stuff was stuffed full in the old store, and that's a huge fire hazard.      And the valuable stuff had been out there for years, so he certainly wasn't doing anything but piling up stuff, and more junk there either.      How valuable is your stuff, when you don't touch it for three years, sitting outside, and stuffed in an old building before that?     

Were there old vehicles in the hoard too?   Because once they leave there, they have to be either junked, or registered, and since it was California, they have to be running and able to pass the smog test.     I'm guessing their future is either stored in some garage, or turned into scrap.   

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I bet a dumpster is the right place for it, and I'm betting he moved virtually nothing either, because I bet his house is floor to ceiling hoard.   I hate hoarders, for the way they endanger others with their junk, and for the vermin that move into junk piles.      I'm hoping this case brought the fire marshal's attention to this property, and that the way he's piling up stuff inside his house is a fire hazard to houses that are so close together.  

Sing it! 

 

20 minutes ago, funky-rat said:

To me, it would be same to assume that since the P was a real estate agent, and getting permits, etc, to do work on the building, she would have had a survey done.  It almost sounded like she was saying three INCHES and he was saying three FEET.  I didn't see or hear anything from the P that would indicate she wasn't operating in a way she should not.

I thought the same thing, the only thing that worried me is I was afraid there would be a law similar to what I've seen with land property line issues. Something along the lines of if you let someone use a portion of your property after so long said area becomes the ownership of the user, or some such nonsense. I think there may have been a case on JJ years ago but my memory isn't what it used to be. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

"Adverse Possession" is where (depending on the state) you can use and maintain a property, and eventually claim it.     I think that's one reason the niece really pushed the junk removal, and so she could start rehabbing the property for eventual sale, at over three times the current value.     That was why the agreement with the aunt that had expired so long ago entered into it.   Apparently, if I have this correct (and I'm not betting of that either), the man had his junk in the old downstairs former barber shop for a few years, and then he was told to get it out of there, so there was an oral agreement with the aunt that he could have the stuff in the property alley between the buildings, but as the real estate agent niece said, oral agreements are only good for one year, and then have to be written, and are only good for what is written in the contract, and signed by both parties.   

 

 I'm sure if the loony defendant had kept stuff in the barber shop until the aunt died, he might have just tried to use the building for illegal storage, but with the niece in the picture he couldn't, because she knows the law, and she wants him off the property.  I think it was said that the junk on the property line, and over on the aunt's had been there three years, and that's way too short for adverse possession.      I feel sorry for the people who had to load the dumpster, because I'm sure that there were all kinds of creatures living in the pile.   I'm positive he didn't move his junk, and hope we someday get a follow up to this story.   

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
26 minutes ago, GoodieGirl said:

I thought the same thing, the only thing that worried me is I was afraid there would be a law similar to what I've seen with land property line issues. Something along the lines of if you let someone use a portion of your property after so long said area becomes the ownership of the user, or some such nonsense. I think there may have been a case on JJ years ago but my memory isn't what it used to be. 

 

20 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

"Adverse Possession" is where (depending on the state) you can use and maintain a property, and eventually claim it.     I think that's one reason the niece really pushed the junk removal, and so she could start rehabbing the property for eventual sale, at over three times the current value.     That was why the agreement with the aunt that had expired so long ago entered into it.   Apparently, if I have this correct (and I'm not betting of that either), the man had his junk in the old downstairs former barber shop for a few years, and then he was told to get it out of there, so there was an oral agreement with the aunt that he could have the stuff in the property alley between the buildings, but as the real estate agent niece said, oral agreements are only good for one year, and then have to be written, and are only good for what is written in the contract, and signed by both parties.     I'm sure if the loony defendant had kept stuff in the barber shop until the aunt died, he might have just tried to use the building for illegal storage, but with the niece in the picture he couldn't, because she knows the law, and she wants him off the property.  I think it was said that the junk on the property line, and over on the aunt's had been there three years, and that's way too short for adverse possession.      I feel sorry for the people who had to load the dumpster, because I'm sure that there were all kinds of creatures living in the pile.   I'm positive he didn't move his junk, and hope we someday get a follow up to this story.   

Adverse possession takes years (I know someone trying to get a small strip of land behind their house that no one seems to know who it belongs to).  This wouldn't have been long enough (yet), but I can't blame the niece for wanting his crap off of there.  If it starts a fire, or harbors vermin, she's stuck with it.  Plus he'd be the kind to want to fight for squatter's rights or something similar.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

I looked, and thanks to Nolo Law, in California the adverse possession statute is you have to openly use the property for five years, but the big gotcha is you have to pay the taxes on the piece of property for five years also.     I think the agreement with the aunt would preclude a successful adverse possession by the loon next door, but it could certainly tie things up in court for endless hearings, and big legal bills, so the woman was very smart to do this now.    

I was shocked at the five years, most places I've heard of make you maintain, and use the property for 10 years or more.

I remember Judge Judy had a true story, her neighbor kept cutting the lawn on a big part of the property that was hers, and next to his property.   She told the man that he had no right to do this, and he claimed he was just being a good neighbor.   She told him that he could keep doing it, but only if they had a written agreement that he had no claim to the property, the man refused, and she put up a fence.     

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post

Came here to see if anyone noticed what I did and...

23 hours ago, Brattinella said:

Oh boy, the brunette with the LIPS is back sitting behind the plaintiff.  I finally figured out who she looks like:  Emmet Kelly!

 

 

 

471px-Ringling_Circus_clown_Emmett_Kelly_in_a_bubble_bath_Sarasota,_Florida.jpg

...thread does not disappoint!

I'm still having nightmares about the criminal who rented a room from the recently divorced woman. How did she not take one look at that guy and check off a "Shady AF" box in her mind?!

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Just as I said - when their pricey status symbol starts getting on their nerves, they dump them and don't care if they cost 2K.


Yes, but some ordinary tabby is not going to impress anyone.

Never had a Bengal  (or for that matter a purebred anything cat) but just reading the temperament and traits of the breed has me thinking of a Peter Pan kitten who is never going to grow up and will be causing mischief for next 20 years... I get enough of that from my 1 domestic short hair tuxedo kitten and 5 adult cat-mutts (and I have some cuddle bug/foot warmers - something Bengals are not noted for)

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

Note to Crazy Cat Lady who is Max’s Mom: you are wrong. The “state” of Austin does have a leash law. And why did she present a stock photo of a black and white cat? So glad we don’t have this nut in my neighborhood. I bet everyone has a problem with her, not just the lady who responded to plaintiff’s Next Door post. 

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post

I missed the drone taken down by the Disc Player case, and I hope someone fills me in. 

Cat attacks puppy- I'm glad that old hag doesn't live in my neighborhood, with her pooping dogs, and her attack cat.   The plaintiff was walking his puppy, not sure what breed, when the cat attacked the dog.      When he got home and looked closer, he discovered the puppy's eye was badly injured.    The plaintiff deserved every penny of the $400 + he received for his dog's eye injury, and hope the poor puppy is OK.     I'm only sorry attack cat Max didn't get a huge kick from the dog owner, instead of nudged away (actually I'm really hoping that it was a lot harder than he said in court).      So the woman's defense is, it isn't really my cat, and even if it is, Max wouldn't hurt anyone.       The witness for the defense was totally a liar, and buddies with the old bat.     I think it's wonderful that the neighbor ratted out who the cat's owner is, and I don't care why she did it.      I can just imagine that old bat is probably walking her dogs on that woman's lawn twice a day now, even though she picks up the poop, that's still obnoxious.    And I'm sure that cat is still using everyone else's yard as a litter box, and attacking anything he feels like going after.  

STD Drama-Plaintiff loaned money to the loser defendant, for a key fob, and she gets that back.    Then he told her he had the gift that keeps on giving, gonorrhea, and she probably did too, fortunately she didn't have gonorrhea, but he did tell her he actually didn't have it, and she's a ho.      Plaintiff gets $312 (?) , and I'm sure she really wishes she hadn't been that desperate to have a boyfriend like the user defendant.  $1,250 to the plaintiff, because of emotional distress, and because the ex is a first class jerk. 

Dog Destroys $3k Mattress-Plaintiff suing ex roommate for damage to her $3k mattress by the defendant's dog.   Defendant brought mattress photos, and claims it was throw up, not another kind of accident on the mattress, and that makes zero difference to me, the mattress is still unsalvageable.    The defendant has a big rack, and a very low v-neck dress, did she think she's going to a club?     Both d. and p. had dogs.    Plaintiff says d.'s dog ruined her expensive mattress.     Defendant is still living in the apartment, alone.     Plaintiff claims when she came back to the apartment, her mattress had dog poop on it, and the mess had leaked into the mattress.    The plaintiff's dog wasn't even in the apartment when the dirty deed happened.  The plaintiff received the mattress as a gift, and no proof of what it costs, so she's not getting $3k, but $600.  The plaintiff and defendant have a lease until May of 2019, and plaintiff has been paying her half, and will continue to do so, but isn't moving back with nutso defendant.  

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/15/2018 at 5:59 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

I missed the drone taken down by the Disc Player case, and I hope someone fills me in. 

Easy - two early teens... oh, wait, my bad, these two were mid-20s who act like 13-16 year olds... are outside with a bunch of their friends playing Frisbee golf - they're all in a league, don'cha know. Mommy of the 13 23yo (may have been 24yo) messes up early in her testimony cuz she can't remember story she put in the court papers. In the papers she writes her little boy tells her about the drone crash - but now claims to have witnessed the whole thing watching out the window. (Oh, and baby boy is mid-20s student still living at home - geez, would have sounded better if he and his buds were at some fraternity instead of saying he had to go ask mommy for permission to play with the drone.) JJ tells Mommy to sit and brings up darling baby boy to testify for the plaintiff side. Silly boy trips all over himself trying to blame D for everything when he was just one of almost a dozen boys throwing discs - Mommy waving her hand - either wants to help baby with his story or needs to go to the bathroom - really bad - JJ tells mommy she had her chance, now JJ isn't interested in more lies - baby decided it'd be really neat if he goes and gets the "family drone" and takes video of the kids throwing the discs - tries to revise his story when JJ says he's partially responsible - more hand waving from Mommy - baby calls D a knucklehead and JJ says no you're the knucklehead - JJ declares D was 75% responsible and tells him to pay $750 towards replacement value of drone. (Big reason JJ assigned 75% liability to D was texts where he offers to pay even if he has to - gasp - get a JOB and EARN the money.)

Quote

Cat attacks puppy- I'm glad that old hag doesn't live in my neighborhood, with her pooping dogs, and her attack cat.     The plaintiff deserved every penny of the $400 + he received for his dog's eye injury, and hope the poor puppy is OK.     I'm only sorry Max didn't get a huge kick from the dog owner, instead of nudged away (actually I'm really hoping that it was a lot harder than he said in court).      So the woman's defense is, it isn't really my cat, and even if it is, Max wouldn't hurt anyone.       The witness for the defense was totally a liar, and buddies with the old bat.     I think it's wonderful that the neighbor ratted out who the cat's owner is, and I don't care why she did it.      I can just imagine that old bat is probably walking her dogs on that woman's lawn twice a day now, even though she picks up the poop, that's still obnoxious. 

Skipped case - but 40 odd years ago we had an attack kitty - she was an over protective first time momma kitty who was still trying to chase away dogs long after the kittens were grown and rehomed. It actually killed her - she ran across the street to chase a dog and was hit by a car. 

Also skipped poopy mattress case cuz I really couldn't care less about which dog pooped on the bed (or puked for that matter)

Quote

STD Drama-Plaintiff loaned money to the loser defendant, for a key fob, and she gets that back.    Then he told her he had the gift that keeps on giving, gonorrhea, and she probably did too, fortunately she didn't have gonorrhea, but he did tell her he actually didn't have it, and she's a ho.      Plaintiff gets $312 (?) , and I'm sure she really wishes she hadn't been that desperate to have a boyfriend like the user defendant.  $1,250 to the plaintiff, because of emotional distress, and because the ex is a first class jerk. 

New low for scummy dirt bag trying to hurt an ex.... didn't watch this either

Edited by SRTouch
  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for the recap.   Too bad I missed the crime of the century with the drone destruction, it certainly was more interesting than the STD story between Miss Desperate for a boyfriend, and the STD king of where ever they were from.   

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

STD Drama-Plaintiff loaned money to the loser defendant, for a key fob, and she gets that back.    Then he told her he had the gift that keeps on giving, gonorrhea, and she probably did too, fortunately she didn't have gonorrhea, but he did tell her he actually didn't have it, and she's a ho.      Plaintiff gets $312 (?) , and I'm sure she really wishes she hadn't been that desperate to have a boyfriend like the user defendant.  $1,250 to the plaintiff, because of emotional distress, and because the ex is a first class jerk. 

I am very glad this amoral, POS defendant was shown to the world as he truly is.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Thanks for the recap.   Too bad I missed the crime of the century with the drone destruction, it certainly was more interesting than the STD story between Miss Desperate for a boyfriend, and the STD king of where ever they were from.   

Yeah, that's how I feel about the TPC's "Funeral Home Rumble" - which makes me think of old time professional wrestler  Freddie Blassie from the 60s, guy who some credit with coming up with "pencil neck geek" insult. Reason I thought of Freddie was the boob biter - cuz "Classy" Freddie Blassie was a known biter in the ring and one of his trademarks stunts was to pretend to sharpen his teeth with a file during interviews.

Edited by SRTouch
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

New low for scummy dirt bag trying to hurt an ex.... didn't watch this either

This gave me a much-needed laugh. Ms.Boatright decides she really needs to get it on. She's terminally desperate and doesn't much care with whom, so cruises FB, sees the magnificent Jonell Brown and thinks, "Gotta get me some of that!" A little barebacking from the stud, Jonell, and she gladly loans him 360$(?) because he can't pay for a key for his Mercedes, I guess. Jonell threatens to inform the upstanding FB community he got an STD from her, cuz I guess neither of them believe in safe sex (UGH UGH). He knows about such things, because he has a team of SPECIALIALISTS who go over his hunky body with a microscope! Odd, since he can't pay for own car key. Anyway, I would have enjoyed this a lot more had we not learned that plaintiff has kids who are being subjected to her FB hookups. I'm sorry she got a penny back.

So now 24 - 26-year old men are classified as "kids"?  They're all outside playing with their toys, when oops, def. kid breaks Mommy and Daddy's toy after their son, the dweeby 24-year old "kid" who of course lives with Mommy and Daddy and drops all the "g" endings on his words - "playin', goin', comin' and sounds brain-damaged - asks if he and his friends can play with it. Please, Mommy, can we? Mommy allows it, but someone broke it, and that caused a fit of giggles for def. baby. Yes, a 26 year old man "giggles" like a school girl. I have never been so glad to not be young and looking for love as I am now.  Every time I see these pampered millennial baby-guys, I always think of this:

 

 

25yroldree-PSD-6.jpg

  • Like 20

Share this post


Link to post

You know, I kind of had to hand it to the plaintiff in the gonorrhea case. She didn't try to apologize for her behavior, make excuses, or pretend their relationship was something it wasn't. I mean, I probably wouldn't go around broadcasting my two- or three-night-stands on JJ, but on the other hand, she did have proof. And! She might be the first person to actually win something for "emotional distress"! I did enjoy JJ telling her that she would have given her more for it, because the defendant was vile. And since I'm feeling so damn generous tonight (might be the wine), I'll even give her props for heading right out to the doctor to get checked as soon as that idiot told her she gave him an STD, when so many people would have just stuck their heads in the sand and ignored any problems.

 

From yesterday, the real estate niece plaintiff suing hipster hoarder artist was also one of the rare litigants who had her shit together. Good for her. See, I told you I was being nice tonight.

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

 

So now 24 - 26-year old men are classified as "kids"?  They're all outside playing with their toys, when oops, def. kid breaks Mommy and Daddy's toy after their son, the dweeby 24-year old "kid" who of course lives with Mommy and Daddy and drops all the "g" endings on his words - "playin', goin', comin' and sounds brain-damaged - asks if he and his friends can play with it. Please, Mommy, can we? Mommy allows it, but someone broke it, and that caused a fit of giggles for def. baby. Yes, a 26 year old man "giggles" like a school girl. I have never been so glad to not be young and looking for love as I am now.  Every time I see these pampered millennial baby-guys, I always think of this:

 

 

25yroldree-PSD-6.jpg

Yep, I was so hoping to hear JJ yell at mommy for continually referring to these spoiled brats as kids. Hopefully, all concerned will see the tape and realize just how silly they look and sound (both the "kids" and mommy).

I remember graduating high school and looking forward to getting out into the world. Maybe, had I opted for college instead joining the Army, I would have postponed growing up a little. But, heck, at their ages I had been an NCO and Section/Squad Leader for years after becoming a Sergeant at 22yo. 

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Spunkygal said:

Note to Crazy Cat Lady who is Max’s Mom: you are wrong. The “state” of Austin does have a leash law. And why did she present a stock photo of a black and white cat? So glad we don’t have this nut in my neighborhood. I bet everyone has a problem with her, not just the lady who responded to plaintiff’s Next Door post. 

Going to have to check Raven's GPS records - she looks suspiciously like the photo of the mad dog slashing cat

20180902_tiny-raven.jpg

Edited by SRTouch
  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, SRTouch said:

Going to have to check Raven's GPS records - she looks suspiciously like the photo of the mad dog slashing cat

20180902_tiny-raven.jpg

"Who? Me?" What a cutie!

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Spunkygal said:

"Who? Me?" What a cutie!

Yes, you! Your collar may be green, but one of your tags is red. And you're always blaming one of the other cats for your mischief, so it would be just like you to blame poor Max. You're probably off the hook this time - as it would be quite a hike down to the great State of Austin.

I actually went back and watched this case last night (well, early this morning) hoping it would put me to sleep.

Good grief, what was with the defendant and her multiple choice defense strategy? Seemed to me the much better plan would have been to show up with pictures of the other neighborhood b&w cats - not stock pictures of tuxedos kitty from around the world. The whole 'not my cat' plan was a bust as soon as she told the story of how she asked neighbor to stop feeding Max so he'd come home to her.

Edited by SRTouch
  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, augmentedfourth said:

And since I'm feeling so damn generous tonight (might be the wine), I'll even give her props for heading right out to the doctor to get checked as soon as that idiot told her she gave him an STD, when so many people would have just stuck their heads in the sand and ignored any problems.

It must be the wine. I found her loathesome. When you have kids, you don't reel in some POS from FB and start banging him with no protection. What kind of behavior is that for some Sainted Single Mother? I have a hard time believing she's capable of "emotional distress." Or shame. Maybe she's just distressed that the rumour of the STD might hamper her future one night stands. One insane mother on TPC bought this huge sex machine. It was terrifying, but Ms.Boatright might want to look into that. No STDs, it won't hit you up for money and it won't talk about you on FB. Stupid cow.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post

Don't these desperate women realize that there are predators out there, and if she's not a target, her kids might be?      

By the way, the Maestro sex machine on that episode had to be repaired.   Apparently it overheats after hours of continuous use, according to online reviews.  

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, augmentedfourth said:

You know, I kind of had to hand it to the plaintiff in the gonorrhea case. She didn't try to apologize for her behavior, make excuses, or pretend their relationship was something it wasn't.

Me too, I'm hoping this was a one-time stupid move, because she did actually seem put together emotionally, not making excuses, not being dramatic. 

 

16 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Jonell threatens to inform the upstanding FB community he got an STD from her, cuz I guess neither of them believe in safe sex (UGH UGH). He knows about such things, because he has a team of SPECIALIALISTS who go over his hunky body with a microscope! Odd, since he can't pay for own car key

Jonell, on the other hand, probably makes a habit of trolling FB groups for ugly, needy women who will want to pay anything to have his attentions....ick....

 

16 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

So now 24 - 26-year old men are classified as "kids"?  They're all outside playing with their toys, when oops, def. kid breaks Mommy and Daddy's toy after their son, the dweeby 24-year old "kid" who of course lives with Mommy and Daddy and drops all the "g" endings on his words - "playin', goin', comin' and sounds brain-damaged - asks if he and his friends can play with it. Please, Mommy, can we? Mommy allows it, but someone broke it, and that caused a fit of giggles for def. baby.

This. My god, what a shit show. Mommy must be so proud of her baby boy for standing up to that mean Judge! I'm sure he was given some milk & cookies and a warm blanket when they got home. Ugh. Stupid 24 year old playing with a $999.99 fucking toy! And I have no doubt they were all equally liable, just lucky the dumbass 26 year old sent a text saying he'd pay.  

 

@SRTouch, I had a very territorial tomcat many years ago, (he was the last cat I allowed outside). My neighbor's german shepherd decided to come into our yard one day and my 16lb. boy went after him and clawed the shit out of his snout. He never came back into the yard. 

 

 

21 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I remember Judge Judy had a true story, her neighbor kept cutting the lawn on a big part of the property that was hers, and next to his property.   She told the man that he had no right to do this, and he claimed he was just being a good neighbor.   She told him that he could keep doing it, but only if they had a written agreement that he had no claim to the property, the man refused, and she put up a fence.   

Yes, this is the case I remembered (barely)!!

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, GoodieGirl said:

This. My god, what a shit show. Mommy must be so proud of her baby boy for standing up to that mean Judge! I'm sure he was given some milk & cookies and a warm blanket when they got home. Ugh. Stupid 24 year old playing with a $999.99 fucking toy! And I have no doubt they were all equally liable, just lucky the dumbass 26 year old sent a text saying he'd pay.  

What got me with this one that made me not believe baby boy Plaintiff was that he claimed the camera was not on.  So what was the purpose of using the drone, then?  I know he claimed he was "looking for the perfect angle" but without the camera on and recording, how could he tell?  I think he was recording and the video showed something and he deleted it, because he started to say something about "You could see all the way down" or something like that, then stopped himself.

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, GoodieGirl said:

Jonell, on the other hand, probably makes a habit of trolling FB groups for ugly, needy women who will want to pay anything to have his attentions....ick....

There are scores of them out there, and the scammers - no matter how ugly, or broke, or worthless they are, always find them. Social media has improved the lives of scammers everywhere as no longer do they need to get off their asses to find women who will do anything to keep them around and who will often start sending money before they've even met their Sir Lancelot. This will never not stun me.

(Quote thingy is broken)

CrazyInAlabama said:

Quote

By the way, the Maestro sex machine on that episode had to be repaired.   Apparently it overheats after hours of continuous use, according to online reviews.  

I read that! All I could think was "HOURS"?! *gulp*

Edited by AngelaHunter
  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, GoodieGirl said:

@SRTouch, I had a very territorial tomcat many years ago, (he was the last cat I allowed outside). My neighbor's german shepherd decided to come into our yard one day and my 16lb. boy went after him and clawed the shit out of his snout. He never came back into the yard. remembered (barely)!!

Poor puppy - but yeah, cats first instinct may be to run away.... but watch out if they decide to turn around and fight

8 hours ago, funky-rat said:

What got me with this one that made me not believe baby boy Plaintiff was that he claimed the camera was not on.  So what was the purpose of using the drone, then?  I know he claimed he was "looking for the perfect angle" but without the camera on and recording, how could he tell?  I think he was recording and the video showed something and he deleted it, because he started to say something about "You could see all the way down" or something like that, then stopped himself.

Yep, I noticed how he said the camera was not on, then a second later mentioned seeing something on video

Edited by SRTouch
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Every time I see these pampered millennial baby-guys, I always think of this:

 

 

25yroldree-PSD-6.jpg

That's Phil, not Dan and he makes thousands of dollars a year. He's an entertainer.  How is he worth any more scorn than any actor or singer or athlete?

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

Poor puppy - but yeah, cats first instinct is to escape.... but watch out if they decide to turn around and fight

The dog was fine, some scratches that thankfully did not hit his eyes, unlike the defendant's cat. I think the plaintiff would have let it go if it hadn't injured the puppy's eye. And I wasn't advocating for attack cats, my cat was on my property, for that case the cat had free range and was attacking random animals who were not in his yard and had apparently been doing so for a long time. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
44 minutes ago, Silver Raven said:

That's Phil, not Dan and he makes thousands of dollars a year. He's an entertainer. 

I am sure I have no idea who he is. When I saw that meme, I thought it the perfect visual representation of the droves of millennial males we see on this show and elsewhere. I'm glad he makes thousands of dollars a year.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Silver Raven said:

That's Phil, not Dan and he makes thousands of dollars a year. He's an entertainer.  How is he worth any more scorn than any actor or singer or athlete?

Because he looks like an idiot living in his parents’ house sucking up money from other idiots online via a flash-in-the-pan “ internet venue that’s elevated watching people open presents and play video games to “entertainment”.  Eeesh.

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post

Drug Bust and Jail Time-Woman sells 2008 BMW that is wrecked to Damaged Cars . com, and they resell the salvage titled car to idiot defendant.  I wonder why the damaged cars place didn't transfer the title before they sold it?   When I trade a car in, the dealership has title in hand, and gets legal title on the spot, so they can resell it.     Plaintiff buys car in September 2017, never registers it, then goes to prison for 90 days, and car gets impounded in a drug bust.   Former owner gets letter from impound lot, because they're going to charge the real owner for storage and auction shortfall, so they pay to get it out, husband starts working on it, and in June defendant comes for the car.      They gave it back to her, and she took it, not sure of the money involved, and plaintiff wants to be reimbursed for damage to car, and still has it.   Defendant will sign car title for plaintiff (I think).   The defendant says that the drug bust in the car was one of the largest ever in North Carolina, with  5,000 bindles of heroin and cocaine (my spell check doesn't understand drug amounts, or I misspelled 'bindle') seized.     At least the dealer had class, and drove the drugs in a BMW.     Plaintiff is still pissed she didn't get money for a car that was ripped apart by the DEA, and leaves in a huff, and I hope the car falls apart the first time she sits in it.    And I'm guessing that if she actually registers it, that the local police will be pulling her over regularly, since their drug sniffing dogs will smell the residue at a hundred paces.   

Roof Falls on Daughter's Head-Section 8 tenant (don't know why the plaintiff keeps emphasizing the Section 8 part, don't know why).    She says the roof leaked, and before the repair she had roof leaks, and she has a picture of the damaged, expensive electronics she was keeping in a big box.     Damaged was a white Wii, play piano, Samsung camera, Samsung tablet, and apparently many other emails full of damaged stuff.   The stuff was in a box, because they had newer versions of it too.   

 Love the landlord saying he didn't have to go over, since she could send him pictures and messages about the damages, and I like that.    Roof gets replaced, and landlord claims the roofers were supposed to clean up after the roof was done.   Plaintiff tries to get all of her violations, and everything else fixed too.    When JJ says the plaintiff will not be getting $5k, she starts pouting like a little kid.    Landlord/defendant says roofers paid to clean the apartment, and gave tenant plaintiff $100 for laundry.  Plaintiff gets $300, and is still looking for the other money.   

Pit Bull Dog Attack-  Plaintiff suing neighbor and former tenant for fence damage, vet bills, because he had two pit/boxer crosses who attacked plaintiff's dog, and destroyed fence between houses.     The plaintiff also told the landlady that the fence was being destroyed by the pits, and that's when the landlady talked to the tenant about the dogs being a lease violation.         Idiot granddaughter lived there with her kids, and says the dogs were loving, and harmless.     If there is any boxer in either animal, then I don't see it.    After this attack the defendant landlady evicted him (he was month-by-month).  Former  landlady said tenant violated the lease by having massive numbers of family living there, including small kids , and the dogs were not legally in the lease, and a week before the attack the landlady called the tenant, and he claimed the dogs were gone.      The dogs ripped the plaintiff's dog up, there were over 40 punctures plaintiff's witness (her daughter) saw the attack, and knew the dogs were the tenant next door's animals.   I hope the current landlord of the defendant check up on how he's violating their lease, and that the dogs have a history of brutal attacks.     When they pass the pictures over to the defendants, none of them seem to care at all.        $5k to plaintiff, and JJ says Pit Bull lovers should not write to her about their loving animals.

Man Can't Get Ex-wife Out of House Fast Enough-Plaintiff claims wrongful eviction, she only stayed 9 days or so.     Since when does being in an abusive relationship mean you dump your kid on grandma permanently?   Plaintiff claims she gave him $350, but defendant claims he received nothing.     Plaintiff was apparently using the kids as leverage.     $300 to plaintiff, and I hate everyone in this case.    I love how the Sainted Single Mother who doesn't even have custody, claims her life is so hard.

Painful Tooth Extraction Payback-Defendant is daughter of plaintiff.    Plaintiff bought car for defendant and registered it (I'm in shock, I think she's the first in a while that actually registered the car), d. moved in with mommy, and Mom loaned defendant money for the dental work she needed.   Defendant was supposed to pay mother/plaintiff back for registration and insurance on car, and according to Mom, were supposed to share the car.      Defendant claims the grandma paid for the registration, inspection, and other car fees, and plaintiff/mom says no.    Defendant needed tooth pulled, and plaintiff paid for it.    Defendant claims mom wanted her to take out title loan on car and give mom the money, title loan exists, but mother says she didn't get a penny of it.    Nobody gets anything.     Defendant has never paid on the title loan, and seems to think someone else is going to pay for this, and it's not happening.    I hope we get the video of the Thanksgiving brawl at that house.  

Next week because of the holiday, seem to be reruns, but maybe they'll be some recent ones, or really fun ones.  The local guide says there is one new one Wednesday, but I'm not sure that's right, followed by two days of sports on Thursday and Friday.     

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I know there are good pit bulls out there.  I know there are good pit bull owners out there.  But why, oh WHY do these bozos on JJ insist that their pits are loving, gentle and wouldn’t hurt a fly, after KNOWING that they have brutally attacked an animal or person??  Clearly your animal isn’t all that “gentle”.

Every time JJ reads that letter on her desk, I want to cheer.  Of course the defendants seemed unconcerned.  I hope their kids never disturb those dogs while they are sleeping or eating...

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Next week because of the holiday, seem to be reruns, but maybe they'll be some recent ones, or really fun ones.  The local guide says there is one new one Wednesday, but I'm not sure that's right, followed by two days of sports on Thursday and Friday.     

My schedule shows new episodes for Monday - Wednesday and no show on Thursday and Friday.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Schnickelfritz said:

My schedule shows new episodes for Monday - Wednesday and no show on Thursday and Friday.

I have new episodes Monday - Wednesday and repeats Thursday and Friday. The channel that runs our area rarely plays sports. They might play the Territorial Cup ( UofA - ASU go cats!), that is generally much earlier in the day.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

What amazes me about cases like the pit bull attack on Friday's episode is that the owners keep trying to claim they're another breed, and they obviously aren't. 

  I looked at the JJ website, and for the viewers that aren't getting Thursday and Friday episodes, they aren't the most exciting reruns.      Monday through Wednesday look pretty good though.    

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

What amazes me about cases like the pit bull attack on Friday's episode is that the owners keep trying to claim they're another breed, and they obviously aren't. 

  I looked at the JJ website, and for the viewers that aren't getting Thursday and Friday episodes, they aren't the most exciting reruns.      Monday through Wednesday look pretty good though.    

Seriously.  “Boxer mix” my Aunt Fanny...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
22 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Drug Bust and Jail Time-Woman sells 2008 BMW that is wrecked to Damaged Cars . com

Ms. Froggy buys the an old BMW for an exorbitant markup in Sep. but can't register it then because in January she goes to prison for 90 days. I guess four months wasn't enough time for her.  She mentions her jail time as though it's no big deal. Her friend, Jerome the Genius, uses the car for major drug dealing, gets busted and car goes to impound. Naturally, the registered owner, Ms. Chesney, the def. is called to come get the thing. Of course none of this is Froggy's fault and other people should pay for her stupidity and her messing up over and over. She gets zilch and is still croaking loudly and waving papers as JJ leaves the bench.

 

22 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Roof Falls on Daughter's Head-Section 8 tenant (don't know why the plaintiff keeps emphasizing the Section 8 part, don't know why). 

Since she says she's a "Tax Preparation Administrator" I'm not sure why the public is forced to pay her rent? Why did I always have to pay my own rent? So yeah, she wants 5K from her landlord, since she kept a WII, a cell phone, a keyboard, a camera and a tablet all in one box - as I'm sure we all do -  that got water damage from a leaking roof. Those items total exactly the maxium in small claims. What a coincidence. Sorry, Rhonica, you get enough money you didn't earn. 300$ is generous.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

There was a horrific attack in Atlanta, several children were shredded by wandering pits, one little kid died.   The owner claimed that the black and white coated dog was a border collie, and the animal control actually agreed with that at first.   I saw a picture of the animals, and they were giant pits, so I'm assuming crossed with something else.    Animal control in Atlanta is useless, there had been numerous complaints about the dogs wandering and being aggressive, and the owner thought he could get the dogs back.   

Love the reference to Froggy, that's exactly what she sounded like.     I loved the plaintiff, and her halterview of "one of the biggest drug busts in North Carolina, ever".   I still think she has a course of action against the website that bought her car, because they sold a car that wasn't technically their property, unless they're just a consignment site.    The state attorney general's office in NC might have a consumer section the seller of the car could contact about the website's failure to do their job. 

My assumption in the apartment case, is "Tax Preparation Administrator" is the person that greets people at the tax center a few hours a day, during tax season.  

 

My guess is that they come on JJ, or TPC or other court shows that pay (and aren't actors) is because they get a free trip to L.A., a dinner and the judgement is paid by the show.     So embarrassment is a small price to pay for a vacation, and not having to pay.  

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

Why would anyone owning a pit bull ever agree to appear on JJ?  Double stupid, starting with having those monsters in the first place.

I have always claimed that any owner whose pit injures an animal or human needs to be stripped naked, have their gonads coated with gravy, and then RELEASE THE HOUNDS and wait for that satisfying sound 'CHOMP!"

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
On 14/11/2018 at 11:59 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

Vandalism and Theft Caught on Video-Man moves into woman's house, rents room for $500 a month, didn't pay one month rent.     Landlady alleges all kinds of physical house damage, and has police reports where he admits much of the damage.    She changed the locks to get rid of him, without evicting him legally.   Video from security cameras show his girlfriend stealing landlady's necklace, and brought in all kinds of other people in the house, when the lease said no visitors.    There is a video of tenant breaking her security cameras.   There are numerous scenes of defendant stealing a ton of the woman's stuff, and damaging her property.   Officer Byrd has his glare of death focused on the defendant, and I'm hoping for a beat down.   Defendant claims it wasn't him on camera, and that's why using drugs ruin your brain.    

Landlady plaintiff gets $5,000, and man says he left the state because of her harassment.   I wonder how many warrants are out for him?

 

Don't Call My Antiques Junk-(Storage Fail)-Plaintiff suing for fence demo and trespassing, by guardian for aged relative.     Defendant is swilling the water that must not be drunk, so he's already on my bad side.  Defendant is a neighbor, and looks like a nut case.    Defendant stored his 'valuable antiques' on the aunt's property, and the plaintiff/guardian for aunt who owns property wants it all gone, so she can rehab the property, and I'm assuming sell it eventually to help support her aunt.    Plaintiff suing for demolition of fence, trespassing, and wants neighbor's/defendants junk gone.        The defendant also put up temporary fences on the plaintiff's property.  He is a total nutso, and a 'performance artist', and I want to punch him in the face very badly.     Officer Byrd has that look again too, the one where he hopes the judge will let him pound on someone.     The defendant keeps asking to show the judge his diagram, and I really want to hit him even more.       JJ gives loony toons neighbor three days to get his stuff off of the plaintiff's property, and after that Judge Judy will authorize a dumpster, and workers to get rid of his garbage, and the court will pay the bill, and Judge Judy is crafting an order for the Sheriff's office to supervise the removal.     The defendant actually stored all of his junk inside one part of the aunt's property for three years, before moving in to the alley/side yard.       By the way, 'it's not junk' is the justification for every hoarder I've ever watched on TV, so we all know what he's really like.   I hope the local fire marshal is watching this show, and drops in on his house, because I bet it's a full hoard.   The defendant took on the wrong person, since she's a realtor, and knows the law.    

Just seen this episode. The most shocking thing about the first case was certainly that the defendant actually had proof of having paid all but one month's rent. Also, it appears that JJ bought his excuse about his "buddy helping him out" with the month he didn't pay (hence why it didn't show on his bank statements) because she never said he owed that month's rent.

The defendant's pathetic 'it wasn't me in the video' claim was quickly proven to be wrong, but what was he thinking? Not that JJ had any respect for him after seeing the footage for the first time anyway.

In the second case, the defendant certainly was an oddball. He tried to pull the old "it's valuable... to me" line, but JJ was having none of it. Interesting to see Byrd visibly sighing as he trudged to and from the defendant repeatedly to hand JJ various photos. And JJ's dismissal of his supposed 'diagram' was bang on the money.

 

 

On 15/11/2018 at 1:34 AM, AngelaHunter said:

Well, I actually enjoyed this. I sat open-mouthed in astonishment that a woman Lisa's age, who got divorced, thought the best next step in her life was to invite Michael Murphy, evil goblin, to come and LIVE WITH HER. Can anyone believe this? Is he a murderer, an ex-con, a rapist, a drug addict, a thief? I guess Lisa never thought about that. I wouldn't really enjoy having my friends come live with me, but sure - some guy who looks like he got out of prison yesterday? Why not? And he can bring all his hoes and ex-cell mates over to go through my stuff. Lisa should just count herself lucky she didn't end up dead and buried in her backyard. If I decided to move alone into a place I couldn't afford (which I wouldn't) and needed a room mate, I think I might pick another woman similar to me, and then grill her and get an investigation on her first. But not Lisa. She thought Michael was just a charming lad.

More weirdos, but no violent physical attacks and no abused/neglected kids, so I liked this one too. Plaintiff had a hard time giving straight answers, but her being a real estate agent makes that understandable. Def, who calls himself a "visual artist"(is that another name for "hoarder"?) which he believes gives him leave to pile up his 5K of junk on someone else's property, starts backing up in shock and horror from the podium when realizes he's losing and I was afraid he was going to to go ass over heels and end up in an audience member's lap.

He did seem to be playing a game of 'grandma's footsteps' with JJ towards the end of the case. Every time she glanced at him, he had shuffled backwards a little bit more! A sure sign that a case has been won and lost.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

My guess is the thieving caught on video case defendant was well versed in keeping records, and preying on landlords.    JJ didn't bother about any past rent, because she already knew the landlady would get $5k, and couldn't give her any more money.      The landlady is lucky she didn't end up on a documentary about a murder on the  I.D. channel, or Dateline as a victim.  

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

Skateboard Boy Wonder-  Woman's garage door gets whacked by kid on skateboard, costs $800 to fix, and JJ gives her every penny.     Kid has all kinds of excuses, and claims the homeowner harasses kids by things like videoing kids in the park (public place kid), and has some security cameras.   So supposedly the homeowner is some neighborhood grouch who terrorizes everyone, and the kid is still trespassing on her property?    Not real scared of her is he?    Kid claims when door was hit that he was in school, so how could he tell his mother when she got home hours later that the woman wants to see her?     Mother keeps talking about how brilliant the kid is, and how mean the neighbor is, but if someone trespasses repeatedly on my property, doesn't keep their kids out of my hair, then I'm not going to want to see them around either.     And my understanding is that if someone is injured on your property, you are legally liable, so if I tell you to stay off my property, don't think I won't call someone to enforce that.    When JJ asked the kid why he didn't tell his father what happened when he got home (Dad was already there), but waited hours to tell his mother, that told me everything I needed to know about the family dynamics.   I bet dad doesn't think junior is as angelic as mom does, and he's probably told the kid to stop bothering the woman.  The mother of skateboard kid is a total pain, and all she has to do is get her son to stop trespassing, and apparently that's too difficult a concept for her.

Mud Dragging Big TIpper-Idiot who has zero clue about hair, wants her color stripped, ombre or baliage (spelling), or something else, goes to hairdresser for eight months, and is now dissatisfied, and taking to the internet to make trouble for the man's business.    Former client reversed charges for services rendered, on the fifth salon visit.    I would like to say the woman's dye job is not the best I've ever seen, so I suspect she's going to a cheaper place now.      The defendant/client over-tipped, and the hairdresser reversed that the same day, and the defendant then reversed the $230 legit charge (for those who think that's a lot, not for the level, and variety of services that she received).     Judge Judy needs someone to explain that in today's world a bad Yelp, or Facebook review can kill your business, and this woman was totally unjustified in what she did.     Too bad she didn't write a check instead, because check kiting is a big time crime now, and that includes stopping payment.   Plaintiff gets his $230, and publicity showing everyone who the bad person is. 

Husband in Prison, Lover on the Side-On a shallow note, the defendant's eyebrows are hideous.     Woman with husband in prison, dates plaintiff who gave her a Kia Optima, he loaned it to her to go to work.    Defendant helps mentally ill people, and that scares the stuffing out of me.   Husband in prison for stealing and using credit cards, and they married while he was in the trial process.   Hubby has been in jail for two years, and who knows how much longer, because the defendant and her husband are liars.     Plaintiff bought car for defendant to use for work, in September before they were in a relationship.     Plaintiff wants the car back, and swears bimbo defendant said she was dumping prison husband when he gets out.     Plaintiff bought car, then they were going to Vegas on vacation, until her stepdad died, and they went to Vegas after seeing the relative dead on the floor at the relative's house.     The day they came back from Vegas, plaintiff drove to construction job, came back early, and was the last day he saw his car and the defendant.     

The defendant and plaintiff had a tiff, over the car title not being in her name.     Plaintiff realized she was playing him for a fool, she disappeared with the car, the car she paid nothing for, and somehow had it reregistered in her name after forging his name on the title.    When he went to her apartment the temporary plates, were now permanent plates on the car, and title and registration were in her name.  Defendant is not only a thief, but a liar, and I see being married to her prison husband has been a learning experience for her.   Apparently plaintiff was shocked to find out the prisoner husband is back.      JJ issued an order to get car back from defendant bimbo, and she's back with ex-con hubby, and defendant Charteena Walker also has a few DUI's, the last in July 2018.

Stealing From Little Old Lady-Plaintiff, Little old lady (LOL for this case works) suing defendant for stealing from her.   His roommate couldn't make the rent, and so LOL plaintiff loaned him $ for rent.   The defendant should be horse whipped, and I believe Byrd would like to do that, and I know I would like to do this also.        $780 was the loan amount from LOL plaintiff, and she's getting that back.      Plaintiff had to go back to work to pay her bills.    The defendant is the dumbest person on the either episode today, and I hope someone permanently, and forcefully persuades him to stop bothering little old ladies for their last penny.    

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Skateboard Boy Wonder-  Woman's garage door gets whacked by kid on skateboard, costs $800 to fix, and JJ gives her every penny.     Kid has all kinds of excuses, and claims the homeowner harasses kids by things like videoing kids in the park (public place kid), and has some security cameras.   So supposedly the homeowner is some neighborhood grouch who terrorizes everyone, and the kid is still trespassing on her property?    Not real scared of her is he?    Kid claims when door was hit that he was in school, so how could he tell his mother when she got home hours later that the woman wants to see her?     Mother keeps talking about how brilliant the kid is, and how mean the neighbor is, but if someone trespasses repeatedly on my property, doesn't keep their kids out of my hair, then I'm not going to want to see them around either.     And my understanding is that if someone is injured on your property, you are legally liable, so if I tell you to stay off my property, don't think I won't call someone to enforce that. 

 

Yeah - mom was clueless.  "I know all my kids' vices and he's so honest."  I guess she's saying she knows everything about her kids and lying is not one of his...but the way she said it made it sound like when an interviewer asks "What's something about yourself you'd like to change" and the person says "I'm just TOO committed to my job.  I give so much." Or some such BS.  That boy's answers were so  rehearsed...I think that family needs to "A-MOVE!". 

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
SilverStormm

Community Manager Note

Official notice that the topic of Sean DeMarco is off limits. If you have 1-on-1 thoughts to complete please take it to PM with each other.

If you have questions, contact the forum moderator @PrincessPurrsALot.  Do not discuss this limit to this discussion in here. Doing so will result in a warning. 

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×