All Episodes Talk: All Rise

[jilliannatalia]

On 7/17/2017 at 0:22 PM, Brattinella said:

WHAT?!  She has turned into a real loon.

Her judgment does seem to be slipping.

[jilliannatalia]

On 7/17/2017 at 3:32 PM, suomi said:

I was a home hospice CNA for many years and I did it for the love of the vocation. One time I, uh, lingered at the copy machine and saw some billing submissions. Our CNAs were being paid $10-$13 hourly while the agency was billing $35-$45 hourly. The doctor visited every 6 months to re-certify that care was needed; the nurses visited once or twice a week until death watch began and then they visited daily. The CNAs are the ones who (are supposed to) work their guts out 24/7 to ensure that patients are safe, clean, hydrated, fed, comfortable, etc.  Cleaning up after and bathing those in adult diapers is surely worth more to society than what is paid in wages to those who do the cleaning and bathing! The Profit Motive Has No Place In Health Care as far as I am concerned. I am still in shock over the RN billing, which was $140 hourly.  I cringe every time I see a cretin CNA on TV representing a meaningful vocation but, sadly, you get what you are willing to pay for.

CNAs who are like you and do their jobs well have wings and halos.  We had one who helped with my Godmother (and aunt) for approximately ten hours per day five days a week for the final month of her life, The woman was worth her weight in gold every hour in my opinion.  When I see the toothless wonders on the judge programs who also call themselves CNAs, I, too, cringe. They are not worthy to inhabit the same planet as Bridget (my Godmother's CNA) or you, much less to give themselves the same job description.

Edited July 18, 2017 by jilliannatalia

[TresGatos]

22 hours ago, stewedsquash said:

Is this what our courts have become? Animal Court?

I miss Animal Court!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judge_Wapner's_Animal_Court

[Hockeymom]

I miss Animal Court too! RIP Judge Wagner!

[Brattinella]

Oh My GOD.  The daughter who kept her mother's $18,000 cashier check!  What a rotten bitch!

Penny Webb, Shelby Webb.  That was her mother's disability back payment.

Edited July 19, 2017 by Brattinella

[Cobalt Stargazer]

The mother-daughter disability check case just ended, and wow but that daughter was a treat, wasn't she? Nasty wench.

[Mondrianyone]

I was initially inclined to hate on the daughter in the disability case, but that was before we got to see the mother reveal herself.  And then I felt sorry for the daughter, having to deal with that for a mother, her whole life.

I was also puzzled by a couple of things, though.  The daughter had the $10K cashier's check with her in the courtroom, so I wondered why JJ didn't just have her hand it over to her mother.  The daughter readily acknowledged getting $4K of the total sum to pay for her wedding, and she didn't seem adamant about keeping the remaining $10K.  If the mother drinks it up in the next month or two . . . well, she was insistent about getting it back.

Also surprised that JJ didn't object when the mom said, "That's my money!"  I was waiting for, "That's Byrd's money!"  When I didn't hear it, I said, "No, that's my money!"  Just to keep the earth on its proper axis.

[AZChristian]

1 hour ago, Mondrianyone said:

I was initially inclined to hate on the daughter in the disability case, but that was before we got to see the mother reveal herself.  And then I felt sorry for the daughter, having to deal with that for a mother, her whole life.

I was also puzzled by a couple of things, though.  The daughter had the $10K cashier's check with her in the courtroom, so I wondered why JJ didn't just have her hand it over to her mother.  The daughter readily acknowledged getting $4K of the total sum to pay for her wedding, and she didn't seem adamant about keeping the remaining $10K.  If the mother drinks it up in the next month or two . . . well, she was insistent about getting it back.

Also surprised that JJ didn't object when the mom said, "That's my money!"  I was waiting for, "That's Byrd's money!"  When I didn't hear it, I said, "No, that's my money!"  Just to keep the earth on its proper axis.

I agree with you.  Having had a less-than-ideal maternal birth vessel, I felt compassion for the daughter.

One possible answer for the cashier's check:  It could have been scanned in and a remote deposit done.  Hubby found a check in a file drawer the other day and asked why we'd never deposited it . . . "It's endorsed and everything."  I had remote-deposited it.  I usually shred them after they clear the bank, but had just put that one into the file.

I yelled "That's MY money" too!!!

[Brattinella]

I guess I didn't see the "reveal" of the mother.  Can you tell me what she did?

[Cobalt Stargazer]

2 hours ago, Brattinella said:

I guess I didn't see the "reveal" of the mother.  Can you tell me what she did?

Disability!Mom admitted that she was (had been? I dunno) an alcoholic, and so she entrusted the check to her daughter because it was for so much money, and in that sense I could see where the daughter would be sympathetic. OTOH, I'm not sure the mom said she didn't have to pay back the money for her wedding, which she took out of the amount of the check somehow. Four grand is a lot of money, and what happens when the funds from the check runs out?

[AZChristian]

52 minutes ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

Disability!Mom admitted that she was (had been? I dunno) an alcoholic, and so she entrusted the check to her daughter because it was for so much money, and in that sense I could see where the daughter would be sympathetic. OTOH, I'm not sure the mom said she didn't have to pay back the money for her wedding, which she took out of the amount of the check somehow. Four grand is a lot of money, and what happens when the funds from the check runs out?

It was probably a lump sum retroactive from the time she qualified for disability.  From here on out, she said she'll get something like $1,110 per month.

[Taffy]

The county also paid for her rehab. JJ fished that out of her because if she had that amount of money in her account they would not have paid. I wonder if she was still collecting welfare when she got that "retirement" check. Or was her reason for applying for disability because welfare told her to get a job. 

[AZChristian]

9 minutes ago, Taffy said:

The county also paid for her rehab. JJ fished that out of her because if she had that amount of money in her account they would not have paid. I wonder if she was still collecting welfare when she got that "retirement" check. Or was her reason for applying for disability because welfare told her to get a job. 

Maybe she found out that disability gave her more money and perks than straight welfare.  It's the American way.

[Florinaldo]

I thought that the daughter definitely diverted that money for her own purposes and invented that story about the pathetic mother telling her she could pay for her wedding from that sum. Even if she entrusted the money to her daughter for hiding it, it was still her money.

Yes, her money.

I don't subscribe to JJ's usual canard about it being Byrd's money. Once someone receives money from a public program, it becomes theirs and they can do what they want with it, despite what a judgmental privileged old lady like JJ who begrudges people every penny they get from the public purse may think. If they received it fraudulently, it's up to the department in question to collect it back. But of course, JJ had to act in the name of truth, justice and the Sheindlin way.

In the process, she implicitely condoned the daughter's nefarious behaviour just because she took an almost dislike to the plaintiff; a strange use of  the "clean hands" doctrine.

Edited July 20, 2017 by Florinaldo
It's bad form to mispell and mangle JJ's family name

[Brattinella]

I'm sorry but my opinion of the daughter has not changed a whit.

[WaitForMe]

45 minutes ago, Florinaldo said:

I thought that the daughter definitely diverted that money for her own purposes and invented that story about the pathetic mother telling her she could pay for her wedding from that sum. Even if she entrusted the money to her daughter for hiding it, it was still her money.

Yes, her money.

I don't subscribe to JJ's usual canard about it being Byrd's money. Once someone receives money from a public program, it becomes theirs and they can do what they want with it, despite what a judgmental privileged old lady like JJ who begrudges people every penny they get from the public purse may think. If they received it fraudulently, it's up to the department in question to collect it back. But of course, JJ had to act in the name of truth, justice and the Seinfeld way.

In the process, she implicitely condoned the daughter's nefarious behaviour just because she took an almost dislike to the plaintiff; a strange use of  the "clean hands" doctrine.

THIS.

[Mondrianyone]

By her own admission, the mother has been a lifelong alcoholic.  She gave the settlement money for the daughter to hold because she couldn't trust herself not to blow it all with her bad choices, also by her own admission.  Daughter obviously to some extent had to parent her own mother for most of her life, continuing into the present.  If she got $4K for her troubles, I'm okay with that.  Some of those hard-eyed looks the mother was giving JJ were scary to see.  I wouldn't want to be a little girl targeted with that potential rage.  And I wouldn't want to be spending my childhood picking up and cleaning up my drunken mother.  That girl has my sympathy.  Makes me feel grateful for my own relatively carefree youth.  Sorry yours was harder, AZChristian.

[AZChristian]

11 minutes ago, Mondrianyone said:

By her own admission, the mother has been a lifelong alcoholic.  She gave the settlement money for the daughter to hold because she couldn't trust herself not to blow it all with her bad choices, also by her own admission.  Daughter obviously to some extent had to parent her own mother for most of her life, continuing into the present.  If she got $4K for her troubles, I'm okay with that.  Some of those hard-eyed looks the mother was giving JJ were scary to see.  I wouldn't want to be a little girl targeted with that potential rage.  And I wouldn't want to be spending my childhood picking up and cleaning up my drunken mother.  That girl has my sympathy.  Makes me feel grateful for my own relatively carefree youth.  Sorry yours was harder, AZChristian.

I actually got the feeling that Mama might have asked the daughter to hold the $18,000 so she wouldn't have it in her own account when she was applying for benefits.  It's a common scam that is played to enhance benefits.

Thanks for your kindness, MONDRIANANYONE.  My maternal birth vessel allowed her live-in boyfriend free access to me from the time I was 4 until I was 16.  If she had given me $18,000 to hold, I might have considered it mine to keep.  She got her "pimp" fees (a home, food, etc.) for 12 years, and I might have considered the money to be my fair share.  All I know for sure is that our opinions are formed by our experiences.  

[shksabelle]

The woman suing a 19-year old for a couple of hundred bucks because her precious little  over-made-up snowflake had her little feelers hurt was a beyotch. She looked like she could afford $250 a lot more than a 19-year-old student. I understand the girl said she would be responsible, but you know that if her Precious had not been "unfriended", she never would have pursued it. 

[AZChristian]

Just now, shksabelle said:

The woman suing a 19-year old for a couple of hundred bucks because her precious little  over-made-up snowflake had her little feelers hurt was a beyotch. She looked like she could afford $250 a lot more than a 19-year-old student. I understand the girl said she would be responsible, but you know that if her Precious had not been "unfriended", she never would have pursued it. 

Once I realized these folks were from the same city where I live, I started looking them up.  Mama used to work as a dancer at a cabaret.  She probably made more than that in one night of tips.

[Mondrianyone]

1 hour ago, AZChristian said:

I actually got the feeling that Mama might have asked the daughter to hold the $18,000 so she wouldn't have it in her own account when she was applying for benefits.  It's a common scam that is played to enhance benefits.

Thanks for your kindness, MONDRIANANYONE.  My maternal birth vessel allowed her live-in boyfriend free access to me from the time I was 4 until I was 16.  If she had given me $18,000 to hold, I might have considered it mine to keep.  She got her "pimp" fees (a home, food, etc.) for 12 years, and I might have considered the money to be my fair share.  All I know for sure is that our opinions are formed by our experiences.  

I agree with the bolded.  I also believed that it was a scam to conceal funds when applying for disability.  So by having the daughter take the money, the $18K was protected from both legitimate government scrutiny and from Mom's own well-founded fear of drinking it away.  Keep making your kid parent you.  When does she get to step down off that particular crazy train?

I can't imagine what you must have gone through, AZ.  There are never the right words to magically erase someone's pain.  I hope things are so much better for you now.

[AZChristian]

3 minutes ago, Mondrianyone said:

I can't imagine what you must have gone through, AZ.  There are never the right words to magically erase someone's pain.  I hope things are so much better for you now.

I still describe my relationship with my husband of 53 years, "I'm married to the nicest person I've ever met."  I'm good, thanks!

[Taffy]

This is what I got out of the Webb episode. Momma got $18,000. Put $10,000 in a cashiers check for daughter to hold onto. Of the $8,000 mom kept, she gave $4,000 for the wedding. Did anyone else hear her say that?  In the end the daughter had $14,000 of the $18,000. Did she get married? I didn't see hubby with her and  they both went by Webb. 

[configdotsys]

I'm still confused about the $18,000 case. If mom got retroactive disability, it would have been either direct deposited into her bank account or she would get a paper check. If DD, there would be a record if the county or welfare looked her up. In the case of the paper check, did she cash the check in the bank and then ask for a cashier's check for $10k? Isn't there some trigger that the IRS is notified if you cash a check that is worth more than $10k?

I thought from the jump that mom wanted to conceal the money from welfare or disability or whomever, but why not just give the whole check to the daughter, have the daughter cash it and dispense money to mom as needed and use some for the wedding. Both mother and daughter said they got a cashier's check and gave it to the daughter "until they decided what to do with it." What's to decide?

I get that daughter had a crappy mom but there was something arrogant about her that just pissed me off. Mom obviously doesn't have a pot to piss in except for her monthly check and the arrogant daughter thinks it's a-ok to just keep the money. There's something not right there. I highly doubt that no money mom would say, "Use as much as you want for your wedding and don't worry about paying it back." It just doesn't make sense.

Edited July 20, 2017 by configdotsys
turned two spaces into one.

[Brattinella]

41 minutes ago, configdotsys said:

I get that daughter had a crappy mom but there was something arrogant about her that just pissed me off. Mom obviously doesn't have a pot to piss in except for her monthly check and the arrogant daughter thinks it's a-ok to just keep the money. There's something not right there. I highly doubt that no money mom would say, "Use as much as you want for your wedding and don't worry about paying it back." It just doesn't make sense.

THIS.  I assign MUCH greater blame and shame on the daughter.  Alcoholism is nothing nice, but it is a disease, and Mom admitted it.  I think she was pretty perspicacious to have her ungrateful daughter hang on to it for her; little did she know that she would keep it ALL.

[Florinaldo]

5 hours ago, Brattinella said:

I'm sorry but my opinion of the daughter has not changed a whit.

Yes, she is a thieving little sod, putting on an angelic and innocent face. However crappy her childhod may have been, it does not give her the right to perform self-justice and raid her mother's very small honey pot. But JJ fell for it.

 

2 minutes ago, Brattinella said:

I highly doubt that no money mom would say, "Use as much as you want for your wedding and don't worry about paying it back." It just doesn't make sense.

Exactly. Considering her tight circumstances, and general personality, such a story of unprompted generosity is extremely difficult to swallow. JJ simply disregarded logic and common sense because she did not like the plaintiff and her behaviour.

[Bobby88]

6 hours ago, shksabelle said:

The woman suing a 19-year old for a couple of hundred bucks because her precious little  over-made-up snowflake had her little feelers hurt was a beyotch. She looked like she could afford $250 a lot more than a 19-year-old student. I understand the girl said she would be responsible, but you know that if her Precious had not been "unfriended", she never would have pursued it. 

The mother and her special snowflake struck me as rich snobs from the very beginning. When mom mentioned about paying for the defendant's food or something on the trip, making a point to tell JJ "I knew she [defendant] was having money problems", I have little doubt that they spent most of the trip rubbing her nose in her financial situation and generally being passive-aggressive toward her. I have a feeling that's why the friendship ended, and for good reason.

[configdotsys]

11 minutes ago, Bobby88 said:

The mother and her special snowflake struck me as rich snobs from the very beginning. When mom mentioned about paying for the defendant's food or something on the trip, making a point to tell JJ "I knew she [defendant] was having money problems", I have little doubt that they spent most of the trip rubbing her nose in her financial situation and generally being passive-aggressive toward her. I have a feeling that's why the friendship ended, and for good reason.

Yep. Mom said something like, "She was the only one having financial problems." Then the defendant, when asked why she didn't want to be friends anymore said something on the order of the plaintiffs saying things about her lifestyle, about her family. I got the vibe that they gave her shit because she was not well off but the girl was trying not to use those words on television and embarrass her parents. Had I been in that position and the parents were able to swing the airline ticket and my daughter's best friend wanted to come on the trip, I'd have eaten the $25 here and there for dinner or an aquarium show or what have you. No reason to humiliate the girl over a couple hundred bucks. She's better off not being involved with those arrogant snobs.

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, configdotsys said:

No reason to humiliate the girl over a couple hundred bucks. She's better off not being involved with those arrogant snobs

Looked like darling daughter got her makeup lessons from mom. "Unfriending!" God, just kill me now. Oh, the heartbreak, the shock, the despair.

[ZoloftBlob]

Quote

The county also paid for her rehab. JJ fished that out of her because if she had that amount of money in her account they would not have paid.

Yeah, this is the part where I lost sympathy for the mom. Essentially, she got her rehab paid for with OUR money, because she handed the back disability check (which is also OUR money)  to her daughter "to hold" so that the rehab folks didn't know she had some money.

I'm not without sympathy - a lot of the rules around disability/welfare/etc encourage people to do things like this because if you get one windfall like back disability, you're basically required to spend it quickly or do something like what this woman did in order to continue to qualify for other programs that insist you have an almost empty bank.

That said, that's why Judge Judy didn't fall for the tears or the story. Alcoholic mom was knowingly gaming the system by giving the money to the daughter "to hold" so that mom could do rehab on OUR dime AND keep the back disability for herself instead of using HER money for needed health care. Mom was running a scam to keep the money for herself and to milk the system for free rehab because she didn't have any money. Made all the more amusing that it was her own daughter who basically screwed her. 

Long story short - Mom was hiding the money in order to keep it when she wasn't supposed to. That the daughter was an utter bitch is sad but somewhat amusing and maybe she should have been a better parent.

[SandyToes]

I can handle the animal/dog bite cases much better than I can the family (parent-child, usually) suits.  There are always two sides to the cases, and it's often hard to tell which is the "right" side.  And it seems in most cases, there's also a lot of sadness involved.  Scammy bits in this case, but also unfortunate circumstances.  And I also agree the daughter was a piece of work.

Saw the case today off the woman suing for a condemned shed, or some such nonsense.  When JJ outlined the case, the audience just laughed. Not a good sign., Toots!  And it was kind of stupid, anyway.

[AZChristian]

Just now, SandyToes said:

Saw the case today off the woman suing for a condemned shed, or some such nonsense.  When JJ outlined the case, the audience just laughed. Not a good sign., Toots!  And it was kind of stupid, anyway.

What a hoot.  Woman moves out of house belonging to late mother.  "I couldn't live there because of the memories."  Oh, and the fact that the house had been condemned.  They bring it up close enough to code to rent it out.  Meanwhile adult druggie daughter (who appeared to be on meth during the taping) sold a broken down abandoned shed that was in Grandma's yard for $75. (I think they actually said she needed the money because she was going through the DTs.)  Mama gets incensed because they damaged the shed and (according to Mama) the concrete base on which the shed was sitting.  She was suing for $4,000!!!!

No wonder the audience was laughing - as was Judge Judy.  Sweetest part - she gave the defendant back her $75.

[Brattinella]

I was very surprised that adult druggie daughter was not thrown out of court. 

It was another case, I think, where the woman was raising her hand WHILE JJ WAS SPEAKING!  I was aghast!

[bad things are bad]

Adult druggie daughter mom in the hallterview: "my child! Nobody takes advantage of my CHILD! She's MY CHILD! Why would you take advantage of my CHILD!" If you took a drink every time she said MY CHILD, you'd be hammered to the gills. 

As soon as I saw the daughter, I said "That one's trouble".  And she was. 

I envision the condemned house as like something you'd see on Hoarders. 

[Florinaldo]

13 hours ago, stewedsquash said:

I think that the defendant started to become defensive about the situation, to start down that path of taking the kindness towards you, from someone who has more than you, and twisting it into You can afford it, I am bitter that I can't afford it, so I am not paying you back mentality. 

I believe that the defendant were also responsible for the bad situation in that they agreed to send their daughter on this trip witout providing her with sufficient funds and resources for sustenance and unforeseen expenses. And then got defensive when the plaintiff mentioned what she had to do for their daughter. Which escalated her anger because her actions were not being appreciated. Kindness does not always pay, especially when both parties take affront much too easily.

2 hours ago, bad things are bad said:

Adult druggie daughter mom in the hallterview: "my child! Nobody takes advantage of my CHILD! She's MY CHILD! Why would you take advantage of my CHILD!" If you took a drink every time she said MY CHILD, you'd be hammered to the gills. 

Yet during the hearing, she never mentioned the harm done to her CHILD! and the trauma that the poor CHILD!! suffered as a consequence. Meanwhile, said CHILD!!! sits there smirking and looking quite pleased with herself, sporting a look that must have been inspired by every stereotypical Jersey girl character in movies and reality TV. That dumb woman truly deserves to be saddled with such a troublesome CHILD!!!! (who in fact is an adult, but some people have no concept of reality when their OFFSPRING! is involved).

[configdotsys]

Just watched the ep with the condemned house and am left with a burning question...

Does the plaintiff have a CHILD? 

[AZChristian]

1 hour ago, configdotsys said:

Does the plaintiff have a CHILD? 

Now that you mention it, I believe she does.  She has a CHIIIIIILD!!!!!!!!!

Edited July 22, 2017 by AZChristian

[Florinaldo]

2 hours ago, configdotsys said:

Just watched the ep with the condemned house and am left with a burning question...

Does the plaintiff have a CHILD? 

I think that is destined to remain as one of our uncaring universe's intractable mysteries.

Edited July 22, 2017 by Florinaldo

[Schnickelfritz]

5 hours ago, Florinaldo said:

Yet during the hearing, she never mentioned the harm done to her CHILD! and the trauma that the poor CHILD!! suffered as a consequence. Meanwhile, said CHILD!!! sits there smirking and looking quite pleased with herself, sporting a look that must have been inspired by every stereotypical Jersey girl character in movies and reality TV. That dumb woman truly deserves to be saddled with such a troublesome CHILD!!!! (who in fact is an adult, but some people have no concept of reality when their OFFSPRING! is involved).

The really funny part is that the "child" is not the only one with drug problems.... Let's hear it for Mommy D!

https://www.theet.com/news/free/four-arrested-three-more-sought-by-scad-supreme-court-reverses/article_64b25968-501c-5bc1-b904-8bf26aad13e9.html

[AngelaHunter]

The competition was tough and it took quite awhile, but we now have the winner of the latest "Dumbest Man in America " title with Joshua Haga. Ryan Baker may take his well-earned retirement and pass on the crown to this befuzzled nitwit who yet did find a woman who wanted to give him money. Oy vey!

 

Jzertia (?)Copes: I wish we had some "War of the Worlds" type poof guns that would  vaporize this shit-stain on the fabric of humanity. Sorry, but unrepentant, vicious cretins who scam and steal from their own kids (kids they didn't bother to raise) make me crazy.

Edited July 25, 2017 by AngelaHunter
Edited because Ryan was the previous title holder, not "Adam."

[Mondrianyone]

Jzenita, I think.  It's a pretty good Scrabble score, if nothing else.

You got all the rest of it right, though.  ;o)

[configdotsys]

Okay, so I was searching YouTube yesterday to see if there were some classic episodes to watch, found this brief clip and nearly fell off my chair. Now I am sure that I've seen every episode of this show but don't remember this, which is definitely something I would not have forgotten. Does anyone recognize this?

Judge Judy Sex Toys

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, configdotsys said:

Does anyone recognize this?

Sadly, I've seen only that clip, not hte whole espisde. I'ts hilarious. Plaintiff, looking all wholesome, rattling off lists of things like bullwhips,  C-rings and a diving dolphin (which I may have looked up the first time I saw this clip but have completely forgotten, for which I am thankful.) Wish I could see the whole case.

The fact that the "Eager Beaver" was given back used got this reaction:

 

[Phoebe70]

Here's what confuses me:  Any time a plaintiff or defendant is talking about a 3rd party, Judge Judy yells out, "Stop!  You can't talk about that.  That person is not here.  It's hearsay!"  Yet on all the Judge Alex, People's Court, Divorce Court shows, the judges allow it.  I was watching a JJ episode yesterday and JJ asked the defendant for his side of the story.  Every time the guy tried to explain, she'd interrupt him with that hearsay crap.  He had difficulty explaining because his side of the story involved what someone told him.

Edited July 25, 2017 by Phoebe70

[ElleMo]

1 hour ago, Phoebe70 said:

Here's what confuses me:  Any time a plaintiff or defendant is talking about a 3rd party, Judge Judy yells out, "Stop!  You can't talk about that.  That person is not here.  It's hearsay!"  Yet on all the Judge Alex, People's Court, Divorce Court shows, the judges allow it.  I was watching a JJ episode yesterday and JJ asked the defendant for his side of the story.  Every time the guy tried to explain, she'd interrupt him with that hearsay crap.  He had difficulty explaining because his side of the story involved what someone told him.

Yeah, she has a very strange view on hearsay.  If you think someone stole something from you because your friend told you so, there is no way you can answer the question ":why do you think.." without hearsay.  Now, just because you say it , it doesn't mean it is true.  Maybe the person was lying, maybe you are lying and the judge shouldn't use the fact to make a decision, but at least she knows your motivations.  But, most judges at least allow you to talk about it.  It drive me nuts that she doesn't.

Edited July 25, 2017 by ElleMo

[SandyToes]

21 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

The competition was tough and it took quite awhile, but we now have the winner of the latest "Dumbest Man in America " title with Joshua Haga. Ryan Baker may take his well-earned retirement and pass on the crown to this befuzzled nitwit who yet did find a woman who wanted to give him money. Oy vey!

 

Jzertia (?)Copes: I wish we had some "War of the Worlds" type poof guns that would  vaporize this shit-stain on the fabric of humanity. Sorry, but unrepentant, vicious cretins who scam and steal from their own kids (kids they didn't bother to raise) make me crazy.

Okay, Mr. Toes needs to forgo retirement and go back to work, and Junior Toes needs to go back to school.  Having them loitering around the house all the time interferes with my Judge Judy time!  Dammit!  Gotta set the DVR, I guess, and watch on my phone or iPad under the covers at night. 

Sounds like an entertaining couple of episodes. 

As for the Scrabble score comment, @Mondrianyone, I've often said that was some people's  method of choosing a name.  Throw the Scrabble tiles on the floor, and whichever ones land face up make the name.  Blank tile?  Apostrophe!    (I think I Love Lucy did an episode where she used this method to decide which bills to pay, by only paying the ones that landed face up. Not a bad plan.)

[Quof]

Hearsay is a statement made by a non-party, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the statement.  Not allowed

Non-hearsay is offering a statement to prove that it was said, or to establish the foundation for subsequent events: " I hit him because I heard he was sleeping with my girlfriend."  Doesn't mean he was, only that you heard it.  

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, Quof said:

Hearsay is a statement made by a non-party, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the statement.  Not allowed

Makes sense to me. I could go to court and say, "My neighbour told me he saw my ex-boyfriend drive up, take an axe and smash my car to pieces." Why on earth would anyone be willing to take that as fact? It gets worse with these litigants: "I heard from people around the neighbourhood that she's a prostitute." Okay, we'll take that as gospel, because never do we see litigants whose every word is a lie. "Yes, I lwas lying before, your honour, but now I"m telling the truth. Why won't you believe me?"

[jilliannatalia]

Wendy Whatker, the foster mother plaintiff in today's cas had a bizarre clockwise and almost cud-chewing circular motion going on with her mouth.  

If Judge Judy mentioned turning the  plaintiff in for voter fraud, I missed it, but that would seem like a logical thing to do.

[augmentedfourth]

Yeah, sometimes JJ goes waaaaaaaay overboard with the hearsay stuff. Sometimes it's understandable, like if your friend/neighbor/whoever is the only person who actually witnessed whatever you're suing for, I can see why she needs that person there. Other times, it just makes the testimony choppy and ridiculous. Like say a plaintiff is at work, and the neighbor calls him to tell him someone's smashing out all the windows of his house with a bat, and he rushes that home and catches that person in the act. JJ sometimes gets all hearsay-happy when the plaintiff says something like "my neighbor called and told me XYZ, so I rushed home". I mean, I get that it's technically hearsay, but at the same time, it's not like the plaintiff just decided to go home on a whim and just so happened to catch someone smashing windows. If she would just let little things like that go, she could get to her sushi lunch much faster.