All Episodes Talk: All Rise

[funky-rat]

RE: Bobo Sisters:

I remarked at first that they were calm while the Plaintiff was in hysterics, but as the ep went on, it became more clear to me that the Bobo sisters are good gaslighters.  However, I find it hard to believe that the Plaintiffs had their foster license revoked for one incident - there had to be more to it.

[CrazyInAlabama]

I think the license to foster was suspended during the investigation, and won't be permanently gone, or reinstated until the investigation is completed.    I really feel sorry for the neighbors of both sets, because I really can't imagine how awful it is to have this feud going on, complete with CPS visits, police visits, and everything else going on.    I bet the fence completion never happened either. 

The ex-bf and bail case for the heroin person was ludicrous.   I bet the plaintiff is a permanent victim, and hope she never gets custody of those children.    She was shacking up with that loser, who has a lengthy prison record, probably has a ton of outstanding charges pending, and had a kid with him, to add to her brood of three others.  

Edited October 2, 2018 by CrazyInAlabama

[KittyMom4]

17 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Trespassing neighbor who chopped down bougainvillea, and a dead palm tree, and both were on the defendant's property.      The plaintiff is another idiot who thinks this is a show where you can chime in any time you want to.       I feel sorry for the defendant, because living next to that loon of a defendant must be terrible, and it's been 18 years of this garbage.       I bet codes enforcement, police, and anyone else the plaintiff can contact have regular complaints about the defendant

I felt bad for the defendant neighbor as well, from the looks of the plaintiff's "garden" it was just an overgrown mess encroaching on to the defendant's property. Maybe his landscaper did get a little crazy chopping it to the roots but if for 18 years I'd had to deal with that guy I might let my gardener loose with a chain saw and clear the whole bunch of it. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

In the neighbor's case, I would see if the guy from Texas Chainsaw Massacre would make a house call.     I bet the plaintiff spends all of his time monitoring everything anyone in the neighborhood does, and makes constant complaints to any regulatory agencies that haven't put him on the nut case list yet.      That 'garden' looked like an overgrown mess, and I bet there are all kinds of critters living in that.    If the plaintiff ever sells, I bet he won't get top dollar, and I bet the neighbors have an epic party as the moving van moves away.  

[funky-rat]

54 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I think the license to foster was suspended during the investigation, and won't be permanently gone, or reinstated until the investigation is completed.    I really feel sorry for the neighbors of both sets, because I really can't imagine how awful it is to have this feud going on, complete with CPS visits, police visits, and everything else going on.    I bet the fence completion never happened either. 

The way they made it sound, CPS "Took the kids" on a permanent and I thought the graphics said they "lost their license", and that they couldn't have any more foster kids.  But it could have been histrionics too.

[CrazyInAlabama]

I think the second the license was suspended, the kids were placed elsewhere, and won't be coming back to this foster house.       

I'm sure since the foster system in California has had a lot of bad press, that they're very quick to suspend licenses.    

Edited October 2, 2018 by CrazyInAlabama

[CrazyInAlabama]

Today's new one-Stupid 33 year old grandson borrowed $1,500 from Grandpa for a lawyer for the custody case for the 4 year old son of grandson.    Custody is still in limbo, even though grandson has always been custodial parent, and mommy of the year only sees the child with a few supervised visits.    Grandson never paid money back, and keeps trying to say step-Grandma is behind the money demands.    Apparently, Grandpa gets hit up for loans by at least one other grandchild.     I want to slap the grandson into the next zip code, and wonder how awful his ex is to not have custody of the child.    Grandpa gets his $1,500 back.

P. Mom went on cruise with D. daughter, daughter made the reservations for a family cruise trip.  Daughter made reservations for both for cruise, and mother changed her mind, but wanted to take the the 15 year old daughter of the plaintiff, and she coulldn't take kid with her because kid didn't have passport.  Mother would have to prove full custody to get passport, and take kid out of the country, and she still hasn't done this.     I suspect Mom p. doesn't legally have custody.         Mother cancelled, p. daughter got a refund and spent the money for another trip for p. daughter.   Daughter p. booked another cruise.     How do these people take so much time for cruises, and pay for them?   Today is nothing but people who try to rip off their relatives apparently.    In this case I'm sure came on the show so mom could get her money back at all on Byrd's dime.    I'm sure anyone on the cruise they missed are very happy these whiny idiots weren't on the same cruise.   Mommy got her money back.     

Rerun-Neuter Puppy or Else-P. wasn't so offended by the number and condition of the defendant's animals that she didn't sell him a helpless Pomeranian puppy was she?    Breeder p. tried to repo puppy, which required a six hour round trip drive.      She has five Poms herself, and was breeding, and sold puppy for $500 to d.   Creepy defendant has 8 dogs in  the house, and 30 outside, I guess all Poms.    He still owes $300.    He refuses to give back the dog, and obviously came on the show to get the dog paid off.    When p. breeder came for the puppy, d. offered her a check, and she still wanted the puppy back.     The D. is a professional breeder of all types of breeds, and claims he won't breed the Pom, and that's his only income.   I suspect his tug boat engineer career went bye-bye at 43 from something besides a layoff.     I bet he tried for disability, and failed.   D. isn't going to spay female Pom, even though he claims he won't breed her.  He breeds 28 breeds of dog, according to the plaintiff.    JJ said that if he doesn't spay Pom. within six weeks, then d. gets dog back.   

 I freaking hate puppy mill breeders, and the p. isn't much better, because she apparently didn't do research on him before she sold her puppy.  Since when is a well bred Pom. puppy only $500?       The only difference between the defendants and the plaintiff is that the defendants officially run a huge puppy mill, and the plaintiff ran a smaller scale one.    That Pom didn't look all that well bred to me either, and there were obvious mats forming near the ears.       The d.s wife is as bad as he is.   This case makes me sick.  

Deer Hunting Lease-D. owns ranch, and caught p. and hubby hunting, and killing and wasting deer, turkey, and hog.   Halfway through the second lease year, p. told her and hubby to hit the road, and cancelled their hunting lease.   You can't convince me that the plaintiffs weren't doing exactly what other hunters said they did.    The defendant contacted Mr. Bowers, and Mr. Bowers admitted having arguments with other hunters, and wholesale slaughter of hogs, leaving the hogs to rot.   Village idiot plaintiff admits to JJ on national TV to violating Texas hunting laws, by "harvesting" (it's only harvesting if you use the meat, and don't leave them to rot, and do it legally by tagging the deer).   I bet the plaintiffs did exactly what the defendant was told they did with wholesale slaughter, and it was very telling when the plaintiff said it was his land, and that they virtually lived there.        The plaintiffs get $1,250 back, but I'm sure they slaughtered a ton of animals, and I hope the game wardens were on their doorstep when Mr. and Mrs. Bowers got back to Texas.    If found guilty of breaking hunting laws, they lose the rifles or shotguns, the meat, and their licenses for a year or longer, and could have hefty fines, and maybe jail time.  

I hope the Texas Game Wardens were notified too, because I'm sure they violated state laws on tagging kills, and wasting animals you kill, and I bet a background check on either of the plaintiffs would be very interesting.        I hope that everyone with hunting leases now know about the plaintiffs.    

Edited October 3, 2018 by CrazyInAlabama

[Pondlass1]

Hunting is a sick horrible business.  There's no skill involved.  They lure the animal to an area then shoot it. And probably do exactly what this couple did - just leave it there to rot.  The thrill of the kill.  It's sickening.

Puppy mills should be outlawed in all States.  Lots of lovely dogs at the local Humane Society just waiting for a home.

I really detested this episode.  

[lovesnark]

Before the power went out yesterday, I got the repeat of the farmers suing the asshole who let his livestock killing dogs run loose. I think I hated him more the second time around. He was such an arrogant piece of crap! He tried to blame the attacks on coyotes even though the plaintiffs had pictures of his dogs in the act. In his hallterview, he said he hoped the plaintiffs burned in hell. I wish JJ could have awarded both sets of plaintiffs the maximum.

A couple months ago, I had three jumbo, king size pit bulls in my pasture chasing my sheep. After I chased them off, I did a little digging and found out who they belong to. I called the guy and let him know his dogs were on the loose and he tried to blame it on his daughter's dog (the largest of the three). He said it "led his perfectly sweet dogs astray" and he was sure his well behaved dogs would never run off by themselves or hurt livestock. I let him know I'd shoot the dogs if I found them on my property again and he still didn't get it and told me to call him first or, better yet, keep my sheep in the barn so his dogs couldn't get them! Sure. I'm going to keep my animals on lockdown and have to feed them hay instead of letting them graze or call you while your 100 pound dogs are killing them. People just don't understand that their beloved pet turns into a thrill killing predator when they run in a pack.

[funky-rat]

35 minutes ago, Pondlass1 said:

Hunting is a sick horrible business.  There's no skill involved.  They lure the animal to an area then shoot it. And probably do exactly what this couple did - just leave it there to rot.  The thrill of the kill.  It's sickening.

There are varying degrees of hunting.  I have zero use for canned/ranch/trophy hunting whatsoever.  I dislike hunting in general, but I know it does help control the deer population here, and many people I know rely on what they hunt in the fall to eat all winter - unemployment is very high here, and a lot of people work seasonal jobs.  Any true hunter will not shoot something he won't eat, or take the horns and leave the rest.  A true hunter also would never bait animals - another disgusting habit (put food out all year so they'll come back to the property and be used to humans so they can be shot during hunting season).  I would never hunt - I couldn't do it - but I don't begrudge those who do it to feed their families.  The Humane Society has been trying to get canned/ranch hunts banned for a long time, but it hasn't worked so far.

[jilliannatalia]

On 10/2/2018 at 1:42 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

 

I'm sure since the foster system in California has had a lot of bad press, that they're very quick to suspend licenses.    

Yes, but from what I've seen here, they're a bit quick to re-issue licenses.  Foster care licensure is entirely too easy to obtain here.

[CrazyInAlabama]

Some states pay a ton of money to people willing to foster kids that are designated special needs, and even if they're adopted the parent gets full aid, medical, and all kinds of benefits until the kid is 18 or older in some cases.   I knew a man who always had four fosters, boys, and if they could get designated special needs, then he kept them.   If they didn't get certified, they were sent back for another placement, and if they needed too much of his time, then he sent them back.     For some it's a money maker, not benevolence, or wanting to care for kids. 

California, Florida, New York City, are some of the worst for 'losing' fosters, or sending them back to parents who kill them.    There have also been cases of visits by social workers for the state or city that were never made.     Maybe a decent, well monitored orphanage would be a better idea.     

Today's Rerun-How many idiots can you cram into a tiny apartment?   The loser p.'s, Byrd's dependents of course, and a woman on the forever plan for an associate's degree, bring home a puppy, when the apartment resident already had a dog, were smoking in their room, and I bet it wasn't tobacco either,   The man p. had a verbal argument, and later head butted the d.     I'm not even sure about the outcome, because I was sad I didn't get to see the video of the fight between the two wimpy guys.  

Rerun #2-Why did anyone hire that loon to watch someone who needed a health assistant?    The p. went to 'dental' school for four years, later worked as a care assistant for fifteen years, so I guess she didn't finish dental school?     P. got hired through Care . com, d. didn't show for first day of work on the 12th, because the p.'s mother went in the hospital on the 10th.    The p.'s sister was with the mother, and on the 12th p. said she shouldn't come to job to take care of the d.'s father.     So it took the p. two days to mention she wasn't showing up on the 12th?     Then when d. squealed on her on Care . com, p. sued.      P. could need a really good hair conditioner, and a nice blow dry on that mop.     I loved the D's lavender hair.    The only listing I could find was for a counselor (drug and alcohol) by that name, and I think that scares me much more that the home health care does.   

Man delivering medicine to house was bitten by Great Pyrenees, and p. claims the dog bit him when the door was opened.        D. claims the dog didn't bite, and I'm betting the dog has a bite history.    D. had rash, and saw dermatologist for a rash.  and arranged to have medicine delivered a few days later.  In fact the D. claims the dermatologist said the prescription would be delivered, and I wish I could do that.    The best they do here is a drive up window.        

D. left check taped to front door.    When the delivery man got the check, then wanted to put medication on the doorstep, a little kid (a grandson) opened the door, and the dog bit him.    The defendant still says the dog never bit the delivery man.     They called 911, he went to the hospital, has gory photos, and called a lawyer a week later after the d. refused to pay the hospital bills.       The defendant has no homeowner's insurance, and that makes me think that the dog wasn't covered because there's a bite history.       Considering the size of a Great Pyrenees  the delivery man is lucky he got away with a bite, not a mauling.      The defendant is another old codger who has a huge dog, in a smaller property, and lets the 4 year old open doors.  The owner didn't even know if the dog had shots.    I bet that dog has nailed a bunch of people.       The doctors and hospital get $1,800.       

Another boring case of p. suing because d. never paid for the 2000 Mercedes Benz, that wasn't even running.  It was bought at auction, by the brother, and p. bought from the brother in 2015, and put $700 into it for life threatening broken parts.     Car wasn't running, but d. bought it anyway, and d. took the non-running car, had it fixed, and the title was 'lost' (bet it was a salvage title), and they never decided on a price, and the price was supposed to be $500, paid $300, and owes $200 that's at the hotel in her car.     JJ needs her nails done, so she hustled them out, back to the loony bin they escaped from.    D. left her purse and the money at the hotel, and is nuttier than the p.     P. claims the D. forged her name on the title.   Both women yell "I love you" at JJ as she's leaving, and I guess they think this is Judge Mathis.    

[Florinaldo]

In today's case of a pharmacy delivery gone bad, I did not understand why JJ tried to minimise the plaintiff's case: "they just cleaned the bite and put a Band-Aid on it" as she said at least twice. Even if it was not a major injury, the bottom line is that he got bit and got hurt and thus deserved repayment for his medical bills (which he got). I found it amusing that this was one of those instances when JJ lets it slip that the show pays the awards, by saying the check would go directly to the hospital (I am sure the plaintiff did not care, at long as it's no longer a debt for him, and there is still some money left in the awards kitty).

The defendant had one of the usual stupid hallterview refutations, alleging that this was all a big conspiracy to scam him (which means their 4-year old grandson was in on the plot since he was the one who opened the door and let the dog out).

[jilliannatalia]

I'm watching Pendland/Marzola vs.  Holmes right now. I haven't getten to the resolution yet, but my my mind is being blown by the amount of money Ms. Pendland is being handed in the form of grants to attend community college.  One of my brothers-in-law has a truckload of siblings. One of his sisters who is no longer living produced  a daughter who is now nineteen and in her  third year of college. The girl's father still alive and has been working as a substitute teacher for the past five years. There was some life insurance from his late wife (the girl's mother), but he burned through it in record time. He can barely support himself and is not in a position to help his daughter financially. She was accepted at the University of California, Berkeley, which is far from an easy school into which to gain admission.  She received a few merit-based scholrships including a state-funded scholarship; these scholarships cover about half of her tuition and none of her living expenses.  She was able to secure student loans to cover her living expenses, but my brother-and-sister-in law picked up the costs that scholarships didn't cover for his niece because she's a hard worker who didn't have great luck when it came to parents, and he and his wife didn't want their niece to start out her professional life tens of thousands of dollars into debt. She has taken in excess of twenty credits per quarter (and is on target to graduate in three-and-one-half years) as opposed to the measly twelve and thirteen junior college semester credits the plaintiff reports having completed. 

 

I'm not originally from California and didn't complete my education here, and I had an athletic scholarship at my university, so I really don't have much experience with either federal  financial aid or with the CA state system. Is it the luck of the draw in terms of who processes one's financial aid forms and what the processor's state of mind is when granting aid, or is there actually some sort of formula that gives thousands of dollars in grants to Miss Pendland to attend JC but turns its back on my brother-in-law's niece?

I'm not meaning to be catty in saying this, and I didn't find Miss Pendland to be particularly unattractive, but she was possibly the oldest-looking eighteen-year-old I've ever seen in my life. She looked closer to forty than to eighteen.

[jilliannatalia]

14 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Some states pay a ton of money to people willing to foster kids that are designated special needs, and even if they're adopted the parent gets full aid, medical, and all kinds of benefits until the kid is 18 or older in some cases.   I knew a man who always had four fosters, boys, and if they could get designated special needs, then he kept them.   If they didn't get certified, they were sent back for another placement, and if they needed too much of his time, then he sent them back.     For some it's a money maker, not benevolence, or wanting to care for kids. 

Foster parenting of children with real or imagined disabilities is a cottage industry here in California.  Some of the foster parents here drive newer and more expensive cars than my husband and I drive despite the fact that their only employment is foster parenting.  It's quite possible that not all aspects of their lifestyles are as extravagant as is their vehicle selection, but even that by itself is a bit mind-boggling.

I don't want to paint all foster parents with the same brush,  but too many of them are well-versed in various methods of abusing the system.

[CrazyInAlabama]

I knew two people, about 20 years ago, and they were both at a very expensive college, both living with their kids in student family housing, had nice cars, vacations, were on multiple bowling leagues (and they were embezzling from all of them too), and everything was financed by student loans.   I'm sure they were the private loans too, since they must have borrowed way above the federal loan program limits.    They were total scammers too, and I doubt they ever graduated either.  

The part that stunned me about the dog bite case today was the idiot plaintiff's insistence that the bite never happened, and he claimed not to know if the dog had shots.   If I was bitten by a strange dog, and no one knew if it had shots or not, I would have called 911, and a lawyer also.    The delivery man was lucky the dog only nailed his hand.  

[AngelaHunter]

Deleted all animal cases.

On 10/2/2018 at 6:58 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

Today's new one-Stupid 33 year old grandson borrowed $1,500 from Grandpa for a lawyer for the custody case for the 4 year old son of grandson. 

Honestly, here's a 33-year old man and father, who talks and acts like a 12-year old,  ends his sentences with "an' stuff",  trying worm his way off the hook with his "grandpa." All I can say is that he better do something about his morbid obesity or he won't be around much longer and the only parent that kid will have is a mother who seldom visits and the few times she does, those visits are supervised.  Mother of the Year. I guess "Grandpa" and his wife will have to raise the child, if they're still around in another 8 or 9 years and not driven to their graves by their mooching grandsons/nephews.

 

2 hours ago, jilliannatalia said:

I'm watching Pendland/Marzola vs.  Holmes right now. I haven't getten to the resolution yet, but my my mind is being blown by the amount of money Ms. Pendland is being handed in the form of grants to attend community college.

Those two? Goofball boyfriend works part-time at Cole's (Yeah, we know already! Why can't "Skylar" work full-time?) and the girlfriend shocked me when we found out she's 18. She looks 30 at least. Idiots can't come close to supporting themselves, so what they decided was the best idea was to get a puppy. I guess they can pay for all the shots, food etc. it needs with her student loans. Def. was a mouthy asshole and why he thought having those stupid nitwits living with him would work out just fine is a mystery.

[NYCFree]

In the case with the money loaning grandpa, I have to say that grandpa, step grandma, and even the defendant grandson all had amazing skin. Grandpa has to at least be in his seventies (grandson in in his thirties) nd stepgrandma is probably in her sixties. There was nary a wrinkle between the two of them

[Toaster Strudel]

3 hours ago, Florinaldo said:

In today's case of a pharmacy delivery gone bad, I did not understand why JJ tried to minimise the plaintiff's case: "they just cleaned the bite and put a Band-Aid on it" as she said at least twice. Even if it was not a major injury, the bottom line is that he got bit and got hurt and thus deserved repayment for his medical bills (which he got). I found it amusing that this was one of those instances when JJ lets it slip that the show pays the awards, by saying the check would go directly to the hospital (I am sure the plaintiff did not care, at long as it's no longer a debt for him, and there is still some money left in the awards kitty).

The defendant had one of the usual stupid hallterview refutations, alleging that this was all a big conspiracy to scam him (which means their 4-year old grandson was in on the plot since he was the one who opened the door and let the dog out).

JJ dropped the ball, she usually asks if the dog had his shots, and she didn't. We found out in the hallterview that the owner "didn't know" if he had his shots, meaning that the dog wasn't vaccinated.

[AngelaHunter]

14 hours ago, Florinaldo said:

The defendant had one of the usual stupid hallterview refutations, alleging that this was all a big conspiracy to scam him (which means their 4-year old grandson was in on the plot since he was the one who opened the door and let the dog out).

Yet another one cut from the "Archie Bunker" mold. Who knew there were still so many of them hanging around?

[Zahdii]

1 hour ago, AngelaHunter said:

Yet another one cut from the "Archie Bunker" mold. Who knew there were still so many of them hanging around?

They're still around.  Case in point:
https://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2018/01/chilling_video_fisherman_jumps.html

If you don't want to read the article or watch the video, the upshot is this:

A 75 year old man driving a motorboat is sitting when he should be standing so he can see over the bow.  This is because he needs a motorized scooter to get around on land, so if he can sit on land, he seems to think he can sit while driving a boat.  His son in law, who was on board at the time, admits to police that his FIL had to be cautioned several times to pay attention and was on and off his cell phone all morning, although he doesn't seem to know if his FIL was on his cell phone at the time of the accident.

So, the older man is speeding along and drives directly into a fishing boat.  The three people on the fishing boat can be seen yelling and waving their arms in an attempt to warn the older man to veer off.  They end up having to jump in the water a split second before their boat is struck and demolished.  All are injured to varying degrees.

County sheriff's determine the older man to be the cause of the accident.  He has pleaded not guilty to the misdemeanor crimes of reckless operation of a boat, fourth-degree assault and recklessly endangering the lives of others.  He also says that he shouldn't be sued because those other people weren't hurt all that bad.  And the suggestion that he was on his cell phone at the time of the accident?  He fairly bristles as he declares that to be "fake news".

[bad things are bad]

Quote

In today's case of a pharmacy delivery gone bad, I did not understand why JJ tried to minimise the plaintiff's case

We didn't get it either. She treated this differently than any other dog bite case I can recall, and the guy was one of the more blameless bite victims, with an utterly plausible story. And the defendant was not remotely credible. 

[funky-rat]

14 minutes ago, bad things are bad said:

We didn't get it either. She treated this differently than any other dog bite case I can recall, and the guy was one of the more blameless bite victims, with an utterly plausible story. And the defendant was not remotely credible. 

She just seemed annoyed with the whole thing.  I think she may have thought that the P was being a tad overly dramatic, then she seemed to backpedal on that a bit.

[Brattinella]

I would have been scared out of my mind being confronted with a Great Pyrenees bite!  That is a monstrously huge dog!  I know it was just a nip, but I don't blame him for being frightened.

[Florinaldo]

2 hours ago, bad things are bad said:

We didn't get it either. She treated this differently than any other dog bite case I can recall, and the guy was one of the more blameless bite victims, with an utterly plausible story.

I have come to the conclusion that the most plausible explanation for her behaviour is that this was just one of those days when JJ woke up wishing to act like a dick.

[CrazyInAlabama]

I wonder if the p. and certainly the d. in the Great Pyrenees case forgot to mention the lack of shot record, which means lack of shots in my book. 

 And I'm betting the lack of homeowner's insurance means, the insurance was cancelled because of the dog.    

Not meaning to post a spoiler, but animal people might want to skip tonight's new case, and tomorrow's new case too.     Or at least keep the mute button handy.   

[AngelaHunter]

Great Pyrenees dogs are a guardian breed, bred to make independant decisions on what needs action and what doesn't. You just know the idiot def. went and got one from some puppymill or BYB, not knowing or caring about the breed characteristics. If the 4-year old who is allowed to open the door to anyone gave any indication of fear or excitement, it can cause the dog to react. You want a giant guardian breed, you better be informed and determined to keep both dog and people safe.

Edited October 4, 2018 by AngelaHunter

[CrazyInAlabama]

Disgusting idiot who shouldn't own a stuffed Chihuahua-Idiot woman, just divorced, moves to be near BF, who got a clue and dumped her.     She moves horse and 2 dogs to boarding facility, pays for horse for one month, and boards dogs for one month, but takes the dogs without paying.    Boarding stable person didn't get a reply until January after horse got injured, and d. owed five months board, and boarding barn owner told d. horse was injured.     D. finally agreed to come back to Idaho from Vegas (she moved in July), and didn't meet vet there, because she took a long lunch break, and was hours late.   And d. says she  wanted horse taken 90 minutes away to vet school treatment center, and refused to pay board or anything else, including farrier.   The only money the p. got from d. was a bad check, and she should have called the police and district attorney to press charges.      D. putzed around until horse was untreatable, at which point he was put down, and she's whining about him being her baby, and how much he was worth.     P. gets $1786, not the $2500 plus that she was actually owed.    I really wish I knew where the defendant lived, so I could kick her in the butt repeatedly.    She abandoned the horse, blames everything on the boarding barn owner, and then expects someone to front the money for expensive vet care and transportation after not seeing the animal for six months.      I guess the d. thought the boarding facility owner would pay the vet and everything else.      If the horse was her baby, then why didn't she see him for five months?     

Man gets deported, d. owes $2,000.   D. has to pay p. $500 she owes her.    D. repo'd the car, after non-payment for car.   Everyone involved is nuts.    A nothing case.    I want to know how someone who's not illegal, gets deported, and hasn't come back?     D. is a total liar.

P. lets three cats run,and still does,  and neighbor d. put up spikes on his fence to keep them out of his yard.   P. just won't shut up, and  is obviously a PITA neighbor.      The P. also claim that the d. poisoned them with Malathion insecticide use on the d. tree to get rid of aphids.     The d. is a former deputy sheriff, and was a pest control guy before that.     The 'crime' was spraying, and the p. had the windows open, they called the city haz mat people.    The p. had to get air conditioner cleaned out,  drama queen wife called 911 claiming they were poisoned, so the haz mat team showed up.    The p.'s are another set of nutso neighbors, and the entire family is loony.   Then they're complaining about workers trimming resin countertops without warning them.     P. woman apparently didn't like new wife (who has lived there 10 years longer than the p. thinks she has), and the trouble started when the d. remarried.     

 JJ suggests if the p.'s were injured, that they sue Home Depot, and Ortho.    And the Ortho they used is the big white jug of spray.     I bet living next to the plaintiffs is zero fun, and the chance of the defendants every being able to sell and move is probably zero.    The d.'s should sell to the Bobo sisters from the syringe fence case, and they can torture each other, or the former foster parents who are probably no fun either.    People like the plaintiff family should live very far out in the countryside, and on a lot of land, so the neighbors don't have to put up with them.   

Edited October 4, 2018 by CrazyInAlabama

[AuntiePam]

It's too bad that the horse boarder didn't pay for vet care for that gorgeous horse.  I get that she was already out-of-pocket for the boarding fees, but maybe she could have gotten her money back.  Contractors who don't get paid for their work can file a lien on the property.  Could the boarder have filed a lien on the horse?  Or just refuse to give the horse back until the bills were paid?  Or check around for a charity that helps with vet care -- Humane Society or something.

Because it seems like that horse died because of both those women, not just the neglectful owner.   I got a "Well, I'll show YOU" vibe from the boarder. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

The chances of a boarding barn owner getting full money for boarding, farrier, vet care, and everything else is about zero.   In this case she only got some back board, a little more for the dogs, and didn't even get farrier and other fees.     I'm sorry to say I wouldn't have paid for the vet either.   Vet care is in the contracts as an owner responsibility, and I doubt a barn owner would have legal authority to call the vet.   Most boarding barns I know of have a credit card on file, or the vet does, to authorize treatment if the owner can't be reached.     They often have a letter with the vet authorizing treatment up to a certain amount, and what procedures they will and won't do.      The sad truth is if the owner had contacted the vet, and arranged payment when the barn owner contacted her at first, then the injury should have been treated before it became life threatening.        

Many boarding barn owners would have filed a stableman's lien according to their state rules, after a certain number of certified letters, etc., and then in most states either have to sell the horse at public auction, or a private one, and any funds over the lien price would go to the owner, and shortfall of funds owed might be able to go to small claims court, but it depends on the jurisdiction.    And there is probably no reserve, so almost anyone could have bought the horse, and there is no guarantee that it would be a good situation for the horse either.       There is no way the boarding barn owner would get dog boarding that way either, except by refusing to release the dogs to the owner, and suing for that too.       

 Since it's the horse owner's responsibility, and her consent is required for treatment, and assuming financial responsibility, then the boarding owner could only tell the owner to call a vet, and if she declined, call the humane society or animal control about neglect, but the vets don't have to treat a horse that the owner will not pay for.   The barn owner couldn't authorize treatment unless she wanted to foot the bill, and could have been sued by the owner for treating the horse without her consent, and endangered the vet's license. 

 There's a reason the vet, the dentist, and doctor have requirements that you either pay for treatment before leaving, or make financial arrangements.     Providers are the first people to get stiffed by deadbeat clients.    

Taking the horse to the equine specialty clinic ninety minutes away would require a paid hauler, or someone willing to trailer the horse to the vet school, or clinic the owner demanded the boarding owner take him to.     They don't work for free either, are hideously expensive, and since the boarder was out of communication, and five months behind on boarding fees, no one would agree to take the horse.   I'm surprised the equine vet even agreed to meet the owner at the barn on the day she didn't show for the appointment, if the vet knew she was a deadbeat client.       If she couldn't afford to keep him, she should have sold him, and he'd probably be alive today.  

Edited October 5, 2018 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

 JJ suggests if the p.'s were injured, that they sue Home Depot, and Ortho.

I hate people who indescriminately blast poison all over the place, not caring if they kill birds, beneficial insects or other animals as long as they don't have aphids on their bushes or roses. Anyone who sets out spikes to impale animals is disgusting. You don't want possums - which are mainly inoffensive animals who don't attack and eat dogs and who do eat harmful insect pests -  to hurt your tiny dogs, even if in self-defense, don't leave the dogs outside alone after dark. I never let my dogs go out in my large wooded yard at night, due to raccoons and skunks being around. I would never, ever put out spikes to seriously injure any creature and anyone who does is a creep. Those animals were here before I was and if you live in an area that contains wild animals, take precautions to protect your pets.

I don't think highly toxic chemicals should be sold this way to just anyone who thinks it's okay to spray it all over, but that's just me. Before spraying lawns was banned here, I'd walk my dog and be choking from the poison blowing around in the air. I have ants and aphids and slugs who eat my hostas and Japanese beetles who decimate my Asiatic lillies, but tough for me. Saving my flowers is not a good enough reason to soak the earth with poison, have birds eating poisoned insects and have toxins leach down into the ground water.

That being said, if people want to let their cats outside, anything that happens to them is the fault of the owners. The plaintiffs were insufferable and need to move someplace where neighbours are not close enough to bother them. Their silly, overly-bleached witness was equally annoying with her extremely low-cut top. JJ does not want to see ur boobs! Neither do I.

Opinions expressed are mine alone.

*steps off soap box*

[CrazyInAlabama]

That top looked like a tube top to me, not just low cut.     The whole family of plaintiffs were jerks.   I love how they claim someone trimming countert tops and using masks means that they're poisoning the neighbors.     

If they moved to the country, I'm sure the plaintiffs would be shocked when the coyotes make lunch out of their wandering cats.           I bet the spikes were to keep the cats out of the yard, and not possums.       So the neighbor plaintiffs thought it was funny that their cats roam the defendant's yard, probably use their yard as a litter box, and the cats wander and sun themselves on their roof?      I'm sure when the cats get sick, then the plaintiffs will try to blame that on  someone else too, and claim it was poisoned.      

I feel for the defendants, because their major offense to the plaintiffs seemed to start when the defendant remarried, and continues over everything.  I bet the p. wife thought the d. remarried too quickly, or was finding 'companionship' before his wife died, and was mad about who he married.     I bet the plaintiff's have rotten relationships with the other neighbors too.   

The possums I've seen may act tough, or as tough as an animal that looks like Friar Tuck from Robin Hood can, but they are passive.  I think the spikes were to keep the cats out of the yard, and I suspect that their chosen litter box is the plaintiff's yard.   

Off topic I know, but I've had great success making my own aphid spray years ago out of regular household items, that hurt nothing but discouraged aphids.       I also make my own weed killer out of lots of salt, and a little dish detergent, and it takes care of the few tough grasses that grow in my tiny flower bed, since they refuse to get pulled out.   

Edited October 5, 2018 by CrazyInAlabama

[Brattinella]

20 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

I hate people who indescriminately blast poison all over the place, not caring if they kill birds, beneficial insects or other animals as long as they don't have aphids on their bushes or roses. Anyone who sets out spikes to impale animals is disgusting. You don't want possums - which are mainly inoffensive animals who don't attack and eat dogs and who do eat harmful insect pests -  to hurt your tiny dogs, even if in self-defense, don't leave the dogs outside alone after dark. I never let my dogs go out in my large wooded yard at night, due to raccoons and skunks being around. I would never, ever put out spikes to seriously injure any creature and anyone who does is a creep. Those animals were here before I was and if you live in an area that contains wild animals, take precautions to protect your pets.

I don't think highly toxic chemicals should be sold this way to just anyone who thinks it's okay to spray it all over, but that's just me. Before spraying lawns was banned here, I'd walk my dog and be choking from the poison blowing around in the air. I have ants and aphids and slugs who eat my hostas and Japanese beetles who decimate my Asiatic lillies, but tough for me. Saving my flowers is not a good enough reason to soak the earth with poison, have birds eating poisoned insects and have toxins leach down into the ground water.

That being said, if people want to let their cats outside, anything that happens to them is the fault of the owners. The plaintiffs were insufferable and need to move someplace where neighbours are not close enough to bother them. Their silly, overly-bleached witness was equally annoying with her extremely low-cut top. JJ does not want to see ur boobs! Neither do I.

Opinions expressed are mine alone.

*steps off soap box*

Amen, Sister!

[DoctorK]

56 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

JJ does not want to see ur boobs! Neither do I

Speak for yourself, boobs were nice LOL, testimony was crap.

Edited October 5, 2018 by DoctorK

[lovesnark]

The deadbeat horse owner was a truly horrible human being and should never be allowed to have an animal of any sort. I felt really bad for the plaintiff. She tried to do what she could without spending a mint and it probably killed her to watch the horse deteriorate.  I would have called animal control of it I was in her situation to try to have the horse seized so it would get veterinary care.

[CrazyInAlabama]

Some places animal control doesn't handle livestock, and that's what horses are considered.    Livestock complaints might be handled by the Sheriff's office, the state Veterinarian, and might not be handled at all since the horse had food, water, and shelter.      I feel sorry for the horse, and think the barn owner did everything she could.   If the horse owner cared about the animal, she wouldn't have dumped it, stopped paying, and refused to talk, email, or text the barn owner.   

[KittyMom4]

12 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

That being said, if people want to let their cats outside, anything that happens to them is the fault of the owners.

I'll join you on the soapbox for this one rant: I have 3 indoor-only cats. Every day on FB there is another lost cat (and dog) post from some nimwit who says "kitty always comes home but we haven't seen him in a couple days!" WTF??? To anyone who says they should be set free to hunt because it's their nature, baloney, they are domesticated animals who face many more dangers outdoors than they are prepared for. 

 

12 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Their silly, overly-bleached witness was equally annoying with her extremely low-cut top. JJ does not want to see ur boobs! Neither do I.

Amen sister.

[funky-rat]

13 hours ago, AuntiePam said:

It's too bad that the horse boarder didn't pay for vet care for that gorgeous horse.  I get that she was already out-of-pocket for the boarding fees, but maybe she could have gotten her money back.  Contractors who don't get paid for their work can file a lien on the property.  Could the boarder have filed a lien on the horse?  Or just refuse to give the horse back until the bills were paid?  Or check around for a charity that helps with vet care -- Humane Society or something.

Because it seems like that horse died because of both those women, not just the neglectful owner.   I got a "Well, I'll show YOU" vibe from the boarder. 

The boarder was truly in a no-win.  If she'd have called the vet, she wouldn't have gotten paid for that either, and she'd have to assume liability for anything that may have gone wrong, as she was acting as the owner's agent, of sorts.  Had the horse died anyway, she'd have gotten sued for that.  Like I said, no-win.  I had zero sympathy for the Defendant and her "prize show jumper".  If the horse was truly that important to her, she wouldn't have boarded (abandoned) him for months, only visited a handful of times, and wouldn't have skipped out on the bill.  She knows she did wrong, and is looking to blame everyone and anyone but the person she should be blaming.  Putting the defendant's face on TV was the best possible thing - the horse community needs to know about her.

9 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Some places animal control doesn't handle livestock, and that's what horses are considered.    Livestock complaints might be handled by the Sheriff's office, the state Veterinarian, and might not be handled at all since the horse had food, water, and shelter.      I feel sorry for the horse, and think the barn owner did everything she could.   If the horse owner cared about the animal, she wouldn't have dumped it, stopped paying, and refused to talk, email, or text the barn owner.   

Animal control does here, but this is a rural area, so there is more of a chance someone will be needed to check farm animals.  As you said, in non-rural areas, there might not be anyone qualified to help, except maybe a private rescue (we have a few here too), but many times they're tapped out on resources, time, space for more animals, and/or money.

6 minutes ago, GoodieGirl said:

I'll join you on the soapbox for this one rant: I have 3 indoor-only cats. Every day on FB there is another lost cat (and dog) post from some nimwit who says "kitty always comes home but we haven't seen him in a couple days!" WTF??? To anyone who says they should be set free to hunt because it's their nature, baloney, they are domesticated animals who face many more dangers outdoors than they are prepared for. 

I have 2 indoor cats.  It does burn me that people let cats run.  The only time I get upset with someone railing against that is the local wildlife rescue.  I understand their point of view, that cats kill songbirds and other small wildlife, but they will send around newsletters that have headlines like "Cats: Nature's Cutest Killers" or "Keep Your Bird Murderers Inside".  I finally wrote to her and told her I support her mission, and I keep my cats inside, and I also care about birds and put feeders out, but I fear that by her saying things like that, people who already hate cats will become emboldened to cause harm to the ones that have shitty owners who allow them to roam, or to strays/ferals who have no say in the matter.  She finally stopped using incendiary terminology, and I thanked her.

[Pondlass1]

Cats are perfectly happy to remain indoors all their lives.  However, if you allow your cat to roam outside and then after a while decided to make kitty an indoor cat, the cat will be miserable and wail to go out.

From kittenhood keep your kitties inside. Give them toys to chase and a window to look out of and they'll live long happy lives.

Edited October 5, 2018 by Pondlass1

[Brattinella]

3 minutes ago, Pondlass1 said:

Cats are perfectly happy to remain indoors all their lives.  However, if you allow your cat to roam outside and then after a while decided to make kitty an indoor cat, the cat will be miserable and wail to go out.

From kittenhood keep your kitties inside. Give them toys to chase and a window to look out of and they'll live long happy lives.

Absolutely. My cats live long wonderful lives with no chance of ticks or fleas or raccoons or dogs or vehicles.  As long as they have a window and a perch, they're good.

[AngelaHunter]

32 minutes ago, funky-rat said:

they will send around newsletters that have headlines like "Cats: Nature's Cutest Killers" or "Keep Your Bird Murderers Inside".

Hysterical loonies abound. Has she ever considered that the most prolific and efficient murderers ever to roam the earth are the two-legged ones?

I just glanced over the posts about the horse so as not to get any details, and I'm glad I skipped that case.

13 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

That top looked like a tube top to me, not just low cut. 

  You're right. I remember those from the Long-Ago time. I'd wear them on a summer weekend, maybe for a picnic or to the beach, but never to work or a tea dance and certainly not to court, even a TV court.

12 hours ago, DoctorK said:

Speak for yourself, boobs were nice LOL,

Ah, I see - you watch this show for the boobage and there's plenty of that although the vast majority is more horror movie than erotica. :p

[funky-rat]

39 minutes ago, Pondlass1 said:

Cats are perfectly happy to remain indoors all their lives.  However, if you allow your cat to roam outside and then after a while decided to make kitty an indoor cat, the cat will be miserable and wail to go out.

From kittenhood keep your kitties inside. Give them toys to chase and a window to look out of and they'll live long happy lives.

Mine have lots of windows to lounge in, and squirrel/bird feeders (plus the neighbor's cats - also indoor cats) who provide hours of viewing entertainment for them.

17 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Hysterical loonies abound. Has she ever considered that the most prolific and efficient murderers ever to roam the earth are the two-legged ones?

She's very passionate about wildlife rescue/rehabilitation, and she does good work.  She's also passionate about non-cute animals, like possums (she will come and pick-up dead possums in case they have babies in their pouch who can be saved) but she doesn't always take two seconds to pause and question whether she's going a little over the top or not.  And to be fair, if she gets wind of missing dogs/cats, she will post alerts to be on the look out.  I'm hoping my note to her gave her some pause to think.

[CrazyInAlabama]

Also, most of the larger boobies have bizarre, unreadable huge titty tats on them, and I find that ugly, especially when gravity takes it course over the years.  

There are also cat perches that have a cat bed, and attach to the glass for looking out the windows in comfort.  

[DoctorK]

2 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Ah, I see - you watch this show for the boobage and there's plenty of that

Actually most of the boobage we see on these shows is an incentive for celibacy and bachelorhood.

[SRTouch]

2 hours ago, Brattinella said:

Absolutely. My cats live long wonderful lives with no chance of ticks or fleas or raccoons or dogs or vehicles.  As long as they have a window and a perch, they're good.

Yep, I'll chime in - even though we're straying off topic. Of my 6 cats (where the HELL did they all come from?) only 1 has lived his whole life in a loving home - now about 2-3yo -- he still goes out on a harness, but 5 minutes, two or three times a week now and he's happy (unless there are leaves or grasshopper to chase). My older male, around 16, was rescued from neglectful folks - not abusive, but they ignored a bad abcess. Vet said was close to costing him a leg when I paid to have treated. They couldn'the afford the bill and they gave me Frank. Frankie must be part Maine C*** - who are known as big cats with almost canine need to be around their people. I take him out sometimes, but he stays right with me and more often as not he's ready to go inside before I am. Of my females, only the kitten wants to goes out - and I let her out on her harness. The other girls - nope, not even my semi feral Furby, who never knew a human's touch until she was a couple months old, will go out if the door is left open. 

Note: that said, I know that even though it's 99% true, I still have to watch because you never really know when somebody might get a wild hair and go walk about. Even Frankie has been know to catch a scent and want to leave the yard.

2nd note: big part of why my gang are happy indoors - they are all neutered/spayed. Not only does it stop them from adding to the tragic companion animal population explosion, it reduces the chance of many diseases and adds years to their lives, and reduces the urge to roam and protect a territory (and fight for breeding rights).... what it does NOT DO is keep them from being playful and happy.

[Brattinella]

7 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

2nd note: big part of why my gang are happy indoors - they are all neutered/spayed. Not only does it stop them from adding to the tragic companion animal population explosion, it reduces the chance of many diseases and adds years to their lives, and reduces the urge to roam and protect a territory (and fight for breeding rights).... what it does NOT DO is keep them from being playful and happy.

I would never not spay/neuter my animals.  They have such peaceful happy lives, it is a kindness I believe.

On-Topic.  Those loathsome creatures who put spikes up are the dregs of humanity.

Edited October 5, 2018 by Brattinella

[CrazyInAlabama]

If the plaintiffs wanted to let the cats outdoors, they do make fence attachments that keep the cat in their yard, and they showed them on the Jackson Galaxy show.      However, I sincerely doubt the plaintiffs would do that, because they're the type of people who enjoy their animals irritating others.       Also, when your cat roams, who says a puncture mark isn't from wandering and running into something else?    A wandering animal can run into all kinds of hazards on other people's property.     

[AngelaHunter]

36 minutes ago, DoctorK said:

Actually most of the boobage we see on these shows is an incentive for celibacy and bachelorhood.

Maybe we need a warning at the start: "Viewer discretion is advised. Displayed boobage seen here may cause adverse reactions and possible impotence in viewers."

[zillabreeze]

16 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I also make my own weed killer out of lots of salt, and a little dish detergent, and it takes care of the few tough grasses that grow in my tiny flower bed, since they refuse to get pulled out.   

Vinegar is a fantastic weed killer, coffee grounds a lovely soil nutrient.   I detest all chemicals in yards and haven't used them in decades.  People think I have a green thumb, but I really just respect nature and the favor is returned.

 

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Also, most of the larger boobies have bizarre, unreadable huge titty tats on them, and I find that ugly, especially when gravity takes it course over the years.  

We see way too much of this on the court shows and it NEVER looks remotely attractive.  Here I am spending a fortune on lotions & potions trying to regain the fair unblemished chest of my youth.  Sigh.

On the first showing of tree nukers, did defendant say something about Mrs Plaintiff being a heavy smoker?  She sure had the Marlboro voice.  Maybe I'm mixing up cases? 

[CrazyInAlabama]

In my personal opinion, I bet Mrs. Plaintiff spends her time monitoring the neighborhood for possible poisonings, alien invasions, and someone like the neighbor remarrying, and she's probably doing it while chain smoking, and having an endless cocktail hour too right in the front window.     I haven't heard a voice like that since they stopped showing old movies on TV, with those hard living ladies with gravel voices.     

I think the defendant did say something about her smoking.   

Edited October 5, 2018 by CrazyInAlabama