Hot Bench - General Discussion

[Silver Raven]

5 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

I agree that he's probably very familiar with Tinder and other sleazy sites.

If not Grindr.

[AngelaHunter]

Hey, what about Jerome? Women, when are you going to learn that when you have a man as sexy, handsome, articulate, intelligent and successful as Jerome, other women are going to want him too? So plaintiff gave him 3,000$ because she wanted so badly to live with him, in spite of her now complaining he was doing drugs and cheating on her (well, of course he was! All those other women who want him, remember?) but that wasn't enough and he kicked her butt out and now she wants her money back. Lady, maybe you should have thought about 5,000$, maybe. That might have kept you in GQ's Man of the Year's graces a few more months. 

Judges give plaintiff her 3K back, along with a short lecture about being smarter. Not happening. It goes so much deeper than being smarter.  I just bet after this she wrote a check to the next man who looked at her more than once. Too bad jsmall claims udges can't order psychiatric care. Sad, it is.

[SRTouch]

Just a quick note about today's rerun with two 18-19 year hoodlums in the making. Case is about future domestic abusers, plaintiff's son, 19yo Nathias and his breakup with 18yo Kia, which resulted in 3 grand worth of damages to plaintiff's car... these two both have anger management issues. Mommy dressed young Nathias up real nice, but doesn't matter much as kid is acting like a sullen little preschooler who wouldn't know the truth if it hit him up side his head. Kia is all sugar and spice, a sweet little girl, also has trouble telling the truth from fiction, who went all ghetto on plaintiff's car as the two lovebirds were fighting over each of them talking/texting to the wrong people on their respective phones. Plaintiff torpedoed her own case before they even got to court by putting in the papers that baby boy lied to her when he came home in the damaged car. In court he tells a totally implausible yarn,  contradicting himself several times as he stands pouting with crossed arms. Kia at least kept her story straight, but it was far fetched and nobody believed her. Apparently her moma, who wasn't in court, believed her daughter damaged the car, as she told plaintiff Kia would pay to get it fixed... but as judges point out, Kia is an adult, so her moma can't make that a legally binding agreement. I already wrote more than the case warrants. Really, just writing about young Nathias' reaction when decision was announced... outstanding young man gives the judges the middle finger.

[Hellohappylife]

Just recently started watching HB out of the 3 judges Acker annoys me the most.

I don’t know if it’s the editing but it’s like she always starts of angry yelling at the people,calling them liars with no back story. It’s confusing cause I have no idea why she has all of this anger & it leaves a bad impression.

Sure Judge Judy does it too,but it’s her clever thing,it’s how she gets to the truth, with Acker it just makes her look like a Bitch (sorry not sorry) 

[SRTouch]

Just watched today's new cases (haven't watched second 1/2 hour, but lately they've been reruns). Wow, two quick cases both easily settled by actual evidence. 1st case girl lives in bff's mom's house with promise that she'll pay rent with money from new job - mom sells her old car and let's her take possession immediately even though she has no money. Defendant even signs a promissary note. Ah, then she decides she paid too much, so stops payment. Her other defences - she paid $400 (by putting cash under the doormat - cash which no one else ever saw) ; defence 2 - yes she signed the IOU, but the witness didn't sign the same day... doesn't deny she signed, but says witness signing a couple days later invalidates the IOU. easy verdict for plaintiff  SECOND CASE dude claims the two loans were gifts. Says they did things all the time for each other - she'd make his car payment or pay his rent, he'd buy her a drink. Yeah, we hear that all the time, but this plaintiff has texts asking for loans, along with texts with payments plans. Guess dude thought she'd have dropped her old phone in the toilet or just upgraded to latest does everything modrl - but no, she has the texts. Guy caves pretty fast and admits he owes the money, judges rule from the bench.

[Silver Raven]

"We live in a cuddle sack."

[AngelaHunter]

Either it's a new epidemic or I haven't been paying attention. Today's little teary-eyed, sadsack woman, "Yes we had an abusive relationship for three years. Finally he assaulted me. I had to go the hospital and get stitches but wouldn't press charges against him because I LOVE HIM! Not long after, I started giving him money, hanging out with him and going gambling with him." This is not some idealistic young girl, but a woman who appears to be near middle-age. So desperate is she for the company of some fugly, short-assed dork who beats up women to make himself feel like a big man that she just can't give him up. So many women who seem addicted to the drama of a violent relationship. I'm glad Judge Dimango gave her a talking to, for all the good it will do. I agreed with J.Acker that she shouldn't get all the money she wanted, since she was a willing participant in this stupidity for years. It's not like they were married, had kids or other entanglements. He was just some boyfriend. Def - said short-assed creep - has a new girlfriend. Of course he does. There's no shortage of women who feel that any man - no matter how marginal or revolting- is better than no man. How embarassing.

[Silver Raven]

Wow, that defendant/lawyer "This is not an appellate court" is lucky for that, because if it had been a real court, she would have been held in contempt.  What a bitch.

[TresGatos]

1 hour ago, Silver Raven said:

Wow, that defendant/lawyer "This is not an appellate court" is lucky for that, because if it had been a real court, she would have been held in contempt.  What a bitch.

Delusional bitch at that.

[SRTouch]

2 hours ago, Silver Raven said:

Wow, that defendant/lawyer "This is not an appellate court" is lucky for that, because if it had been a real court, she would have been held in contempt.  What a bitch.

Ok, as a lay person without knowledge of legalese... did any of her opening statement make a lick of sense? Her defense against the eyewitness testimony also made no sense to me. And, her contention that somehow her husband, who has had a brain injury and can only deal with one thing at a time... does it sound right that he drove to the old neighborhood get the chihuahua and later came to get her at the ER. If he's so impaired that communicating with him is akin to charades, why is he driving... wouldn't a cab or Uber make more sense. Driving safely requires multitasking and the ability to handle more than one idea at a time. Apparently these people have a long history of their dogs getting loose.... as I was saying in another thread earlier today.... irresponsible human are almost always at the root of the problem in these cases. If her husband truly has these problems concentrating, these people are also irresponsible every time he gets behind the wheel.

Edited January 30, 2018 by SRTouch

[Florinaldo]

That lawyer litigant is the perfect confirmation of the popular saying that lawyers make the worst clients in a legal dispute. Just as MDs are supposed to be the worst patients.

1 hour ago, SRTouch said:

Her defense against the eyewitness testimony also made no sense to me. And, her contention that somehow her husband, who has had a brain injury and can only deal with one thing at a time... does it sound right that he drove to the old neighborhood get the chihuahua and later came to get her at the ER. If he's so impaired that communicating with him is akin to charades, why is he driving... wouldn't a cab or Uber make more sense.

Nothing made sense in her little speeches from a strict dialectic and syntaxic point of view. Never mind the legalese.

I was surprised that none of the judges challenged as to how her supposedly brain-damaged husband was allowed to drive but was not functional enough for more mundane taks and interactions. Her mama's boy of a son has been trained to behave as arrogantly and superior as his mother.

[DoctorK]

I missed most of Hot Benches today because my provider's (Cox) program listing said that HB (and PC for that matter) were pre-emtped by Mardi Gras coverage. When I tuned in while channel surfing, I hit yet another "My Prom dress was totally terrible and I should get $5000 in emotional damage" case. I'm probably just a grumpy old guy, but to me almost every custom made dress (especially prom dresses) here and on PC and JJ the dress looks ghastly and trashy, but worst of all completely wrong and unflattering to the wearers. Mom did annoy me by loudly proclaiming that daughter's boob was hanging out - not so, her bra was exposed but very little more so than before since the top was tight very open lace. Oh well, now to see if JJ is also pre-empted. (Yes I know "preempted" is correct but I refuse to leave out the hyphen which I think is essential for correct pronunciation).

[Silver Raven]

How does one earn a living as a self-employed missionary?

[Florinaldo]

17 hours ago, Silver Raven said:

How does one earn a living as a self-employed missionary?

I believe you may be referring to yesterday's case in which a guy was refusing to pay the insurance co-pay to the doctor who saved his leg (a repeat?). His position was that since he is covered by a health benefits plan, he does not have to pay another dime. The co-pay which the insurance does not reimburse? "That's not my problem".

I think his wife mentioned that she is a missionary in an effort to establish how morally unassailable her character and her husband's were, Since she joined him in his absurd position it failed and they both came across as despicable.

The judges could have cut proccedings short instead of uselessly filling out a whole episode by going straight to the legal matters. Instead, they spent all their time blasting the guy for being ungrateful to the doctor who saved his leg and possibly his life. I don't believe that there is some statute for "insufficient display of gratitude" that would cover the case. Instead, it fell under insurance law and regulations. If the judges had asked him how he thinks co-pays and deductibles work and then explained it to him, the matter would have been resolved quickly instead of having defendants repeating their idiotic story over and over and finding new reasons not to pay ("he wasn't man enough to come out and confront me").

But these three like to muster the moral outrage and amp it up a few notches. I feel they sometimes see themselves as the Justice Leage of Justices of America and thus have a duty to swoop down hard on morally deficient litigants as is the task of any superhero. The do wear a cape-like robes after all.

Edited February 15, 2018 by Florinaldo

[DoctorK]

2 hours ago, Florinaldo said:

If the judges had asked him how he thinks co-pays and deductibles work and then explained it to him, the matter would have been resolved quickly instead of having defendants repeating their idiotic story over and over and finding new reasons not to pay

I don't know about this, the defendants seemed like people who are so convinced of their correctness that they never hear and understand anything contradicting their position. None so blind as those who will not see; not the first time we have seen this.

[Florinaldo]

I am not saying that they would have convinced the defendants or led them to change their story if it was a made-up one; but it would have ended the pleading phase of the case and they could have gone on to a second one, instead of futilely lashing out at the defendant's lack of gratitude.

[SRTouch]

42 minutes ago, Florinaldo said:

I am not saying that they would have convinced the defendants or led them to change their story if it was a made-up one; but it would have ended the pleading phase of the case and they could have gone on to a second one, instead of futilely lashing out at the defendant's lack of gratitude.

Didn't watch this time around. Soon as I show they preview clips I remember what a waste of time the first airing was. Sometimes it's entertaining to watch blockheads who are convinced they're right despite any evidence to the contrary. Sometimes all you can do is shake your head. Occasionally, it's just sad. Then there are times when I shake my head, say whatever, this is a waste of time, and move on to something else - this case was the later.

[patty1h]

I'm not a fan of Judge Dimango's new hair.  If it's her real hair, it is really fake looking - it looks like a wig.  If it's a wig, it's looks like a cheap synthetic knockoff.  

[patty1h]

Judge Dimango has a new look.  It may take a little while to get used to the new color, but what bugs me is that I can't tell if that is her real hair or a wig.  I'm leaning towards wig cause it's so shiny and fake.  But, there is a two-tone thing going on; there is a layer of hair close to her face that looks like the blond color she used to wear, which makes me more confused. 

Edited February 19, 2018 by patty1h

[Silver Raven]

Is "You don't know my life" supposed to be a universal get out of jail free card?

[AngelaHunter]

19 hours ago, Silver Raven said:

Is "You don't know my life" supposed to be a universal get out of jail free card?

"He/she had an unhappy childhood"  seems to work for a lot of people, especially those accused of really serious crimes.

What a circus this case was, between the singing and praying and the all-important 3$! Judge DiMango is right - plaintiff SHOULD work in a room all by herself. I did enjoy when she squeezed out some crocodile tears and JD told her, "Don't even start with that." Tears evaporated.

On ‎2‎/‎19‎/‎2018 at 9:44 AM, patty1h said:

Judge Dimango has a new look.

For a minute I thought she had borrowed one of Judge Acker's wigs.

[patty1h]

Wow, Ketessa Palmer needed to go to Youtube and watch some wig tutorials.  That was one of the poorest examples of gluing a lace-front that I've seen in a long time.  She was a mess from the floor up.  Those dumb glasses didn't enhance her "look" either; she looked like a cartoon character -- "Crazy Aunt Ketessa". 

This case is another example of HB istarting to make me side-eye the folks who show up with lawsuits.  I see more and more that make me wonder if they're going the hired actor route.

[AngelaHunter]

Who saw William Trott - pig-faced, creepy, lying mutant ("I was just the contact point" x 10) and his "wife"? She or he apparently came dressed to go to a "Rocky Horror Picture Show" as Dr. Frank-N-Furter later that day? It was all so horrific I couldn't even finish it.

[stitcher73]

On 2/20/2018 at 5:57 PM, AngelaHunter said:

Who saw William Trott - pig-faced, creepy, lying mutant ("I was just the contact point" x 10) and his "wife"? She or he apparently came dressed to go to a "Rocky Horror Picture Show" as Dr. Frank-N-Furter later that day? It was all so horrific I couldn't even finish it.

OMG!!!!!!   I also thought his "wife" might be a man.!  He was a tool.

[TresGatos]

I don't like the new color on Judge DiMango either. Plus it looks like they are doing her make-up differently and it's not flattering. The rouge is really red and not blended and the whole look makes her look 15 years older.

[patty1h]

The Hunley family suing each other today over wall maps, reflector jackets and broken washing machines was beyond hope; the judges were wasting their breath telling these folks to get counseling.  These people were just so petty, especially the sister -- how much anger and resentment does it take for a 50+ woman to write hateful notes on shells, etc. and send them to her brother.  And the mother seemed shady too - I believe she hid the jacket to give to her son, but daughter was even more childish to go on the warpath over such a trifling thing.

The hallterview was where they showed more resentment, spilling the tea on each other regarding their various crimes and jail stays - after she tried to present herself as a God-fearing, loving uber-Mom, we find out that sweet old Mother Hunley was just in jail over the Xmas holidays.

[AngelaHunter]

5 hours ago, patty1h said:

God-fearing, loving uber-Mom, we find out that sweet old Mother Hunley was just in jail over the Xmas holidays.

I always find it hilarious yet appaling when litigants talk about going to jail the way I might mention I was at the grocery store. No biggie. Haven't seen this case but did watch the uber-stoned, scam-artist "Brook'Lynne" (wonder what letter the apostrophe is replacing) and plaintiff, not exactly an innocent herself for all her mental anguish since she thought taking 300$ to cash a check for her dear friend was just fine. How do people so young get to be so hardened and amoral?

[patty1h]

Poor delusional, love-sick Mr TJ Hopper picks up Joseph Caspar on a dating site and takes him on vacation.  He thinks he has met the man of his dreams, but finds out that Joseph believes he's just along as a traveling companion.  His case is on the basis that he didn't get sex from the guy he chose from a hook-up site.  Yeesh.

I feel kind of bad for TJ - this grown man is so desperate for love that he thinks he's in a relationship with a stranger from day two and willing to spend thousands on a European trip, almost like a honeymoon.  Not sure if I believe that Joseph thought he was just to be a tag-along buddy for a guy dropping that kind of money, but really, he didn't tell Hopper it was a love match.  Total lack of communication with these two.  I hope that the judges words are a wake up call to TJ and that he doesn't do something so foolish again.

Edited March 12, 2018 by patty1h

[Silver Raven]

The ex sitting over by the plaintiff and smirking through the whole thing was disgusting.

[Florinaldo]

The saddest part was that the plaintiff agreed to the case being part of a TV court show, displaying publicly to national audience how he behaved like a needy fool. I hope his new friend gives him useful counsel in he future on how not to get caught up in runaway feelings.

[Silver Raven]

2 minutes ago, Florinaldo said:

The saddest part was that the plaintiff agreed to the case being part of a TV court show, displaying publicly to national audience how he behaved like a needy fool. I hope his new friend gives him useful counsel in he future on how not to get caught up in runaway feelings.

He also felt it was necessary to tell the world that the defendant was unable to perform sexually.

[AngelaHunter]

7 hours ago, patty1h said:

I feel kind of bad for TJ - this grown man is so desperate for love that he thinks he's in a relationship with a stranger from day two and willing to spend thousands on a European trip, almost like a honeymoon.

I don't feel bad for him. He's way too old to be doing what the young'uns these days do - hook up with someone who posts a picture of their genitals (sometimes without even a face pic!) and that should be a basis for a relationship and true love. When this is what passes for romance and you accept that after a day or two, you get what you deserve.

[Silver Raven]

Just now, AngelaHunter said:

I don't feel bad for him. He's way too old to be doing what the young'uns these days do - hook up with someone who posts a picture of their genitals (sometimes without even a face pic!) and that should be a basis for a relationship and true love. When this is what passes for romance and you accept that after a day or two, you get what you deserve.

The defendant claimed that he did not post a genital pic.

[AngelaHunter]

1 minute ago, Silver Raven said:

The defendant claimed that he did not post a genital pic.

Yeah, I know. He's also the guy who claimed he couldn't have sexual contact of any kind because of his hernia surgery and who claimed he got a free trip to Europe for his photography skills with a camera phone even though he's not a photographer, but a waiter.

[jilliannatalia]

On 2/20/2018 at 7:29 AM, AngelaHunter said:

 

For a minute I thought she had borrowed one of Judge Acker's wigs.

Too funny.

On 3/12/2018 at 4:23 PM, AngelaHunter said:

Yeah, I know. He's also the guy who claimed he couldn't have sexual contact of any kind because of his hernia surgery and who claimed he got a free trip to Europe for his photography skills with a camera phone even though he's not a photographer, but a waiter.

I was sorry to have missed this episode.

[SRTouch]

Whoa, just watched yesterday's bar hopping/drunks/drug deal gone bad/tire slashing case. Even back in the day when I was known to down a few, this hard drinking woman would have drank me under the table. Good grief, starts out with a couple whiskeys, then started doing tequila shots, and finished the night throwing back a couple long island iced teas - don't worry - she assures us she'd never drink and drive - yet tells us that after she had a couple whiskeys at the first bar she was good to drive to the other "fun" bar as she drank the whiskey so fast they hadn't hit her yet. At one point in her testimony she works hard to squeeze out tears as she crys about being a poor woman. Yeah, I'd be poor, too, trying to pay her bar tab (ok, maybe she has other ways to pay - did she really say she wanted $20 after some dude fondled her.) Two things struck me during the episode - three if you count her alcohol tolerance. Part of her claim was for someone taking care of her service animal (a cat) because it took it a couple days to get home after her tires were slashed. Ah, but the biggy! After the suit and countersuit are tossed, she says the dude - who she admits she didn't see near her car the night her tires were slashed - is going to get his. "Other" people will take care of him - he's got a beat down coming... yep, right there with a national audience she announced he'll pay one way or another.

Edited March 20, 2018 by SRTouch

[DoctorK]

52 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

"Other" people will take of him - he's got a beat down coming... yep, right there with a national audience she announced he'll pay one way or another.

Yep, trashy is as trashy does. I hope the guy took the tape to court to get a restraining order, or even charges for terroristic threats. I did not like the way all three judges took every damaging thing she said about the defendant at face value (drug deal, tire slashing) with absolutely no evidence. I think it is just as likely that the whole drug thing was a complete fabrication by the plaintiff who was furious that the defendant was not interested in hooking up with her, and paid more attention to the plaintiff's woman friend. The threats at the end make it clear that she is nasty and vindictive.

[AngelaHunter]

May be a repeat, but today's case with the diminutive, wizened conglomeration of Andrew Dice Clay, Hellboy and a tiny, rotund troll all rolled up in the form of Mr. Gebhardt had me again stunned at the desperation of so many women these days. So dazzled by his charms was the plaintiff she was happy to shower thousands of dollars on him. He rides a Harley! He has tats! He dyes his hair! I can't believe his smarmy ass-kissing, "I'm in love with YOU, Patricia," got him no reprimand of any kind. Time to sic the "Beast" on him.

[AlleC17]

On 3/26/2018 at 11:31 AM, AngelaHunter said:

May be a repeat, but today's case with the diminutive, wizened conglomeration of Andrew Dice Clay, Hellboy and a tiny, rotund troll all rolled up in the form of Mr. Gebhardt had me again stunned at the desperation of so many women these days. So dazzled by his charms was the plaintiff she was happy to shower thousands of dollars on him. He rides a Harley! He has tats! He dyes his hair! I can't believe his smarmy ass-kissing, "I'm in love with YOU, Patricia," got him no reprimand of any kind. Time to sic the "Beast" on him.

I was hoping she would give him a nasty slap down, but she smiled and joked instead.  Very disappointing!

[SRTouch]

Whoa, was just joking about a pekingese getting attacked by a pit bull over in JJ forum, and what should appear on today's rerun.... ?  truly despicable pit caretaker - his whole defense was that it wasn't his dog - he was just dog sitting for a few days.

Edited April 4, 2018 by SRTouch

[jilliannatalia]

22 hours ago, SRTouch said:

Whoa, was just joking about a pekingese getting attacked by a pit bull over in JJ forum, and what should appear on today's rerun.... ?  truly despicable pit caretaker - his whole defense was that it wasn't his dog - he was just dog sitting for a few days.

The pit bull owner didn't look exactly "neurotypical"  (which is a euphemism for "normal" in educational circles) to me.

[patty1h]

I felt a little bad for the man who was being sued because his pit/lab mix attacked a smaller dog and they wanted $4K in vet bills.  He obviously had a medical condition (Parkinson's?) and it looked like he had some bruising on his temple like he had an accident or a recent fall, but he loses points for making up excuses that it wasn't his dog/it was his son's dog, the realtor left the door open, etc.  Not taking responsibility is not a good look.

Edited April 6, 2018 by patty1h

[AngelaHunter]

Today's Gleason siblings, who looked like they were from the "Addam's Family" auditions? Alicia (was that her name?)grinning away,  needs to give up the Veronica Lake look. It's just weird, but I guess ex-boyfriend, the Something-or-Other III, thought she was just fine for 10 years.

We had a plaintiff named "Veranda." Made me wonder if her siblings were Porch, Gallery and maybe Balcony?

[DoctorK]

52 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Made me wonder if her siblings were Porch, Gallery and maybe Balcony?

Perhaps a sister named Bay Window? With insufficient support.

[jilliannatalia]

3 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

 

We had a plaintiff named "Veranda." Made me wonder if her siblings were Porch, Gallery and maybe Balcony?

It's almost (but not quite) a pretty name in its own white-trash sort of way. Maybe she's related to Jesco White.

Edited April 7, 2018 by jilliannatalia

[jilliannatalia]

On 2/14/2018 at 12:54 PM, Silver Raven said:

How does one earn a living as a self-employed missionary?

The Duggar offsrping got sponsors.

[SRTouch]

On 4/6/2018 at 10:47 AM, patty1h said:

I felt a little bad for the man who was being sued because his pit/lab mix attacked a smaller dog and they wanted $4K in vet bills.  He obviously had a medical condition (Parkinson's?) and it looked like he had some bruising on his temple like he had an accident or a recent fall, but he loses points for making up excuses that it wasn't his dog/it was his son's dog, the realtor left the door open, etc.  Not taking responsibility is not a good look.

 

Just getting around to watching. Yes, at first, I felt sorry for old dude who couldn't decide what defense to go with to dodge responsibility... OTOH, he came up with just about the lamest excuses I've heard in awhile. Not his dog - Viking belongs to his son, Jason.... yet he regularly refers to Viking as "my dog" - did he even once say "my son's dog." Oh, and the proof he produces to prove he isn't the owner is the paperwork for the dog's license which lists son Jason as Viking's owner.... Viking was unlicensed and behind in his shots until 5 days after the incident - if I heard correctly Animal Control forced Mister "Not my dog!" to get Viking current on his shots and license. His other lame defense is that he was selling his house, a realtor was showing it, and the realtor left the door and gate open... which left the way open for Viking to leave the property and attack Plaintiff's smaller dog. One of the judges suggests that he, the defendant, may have a case against the realtor... I don't see it. I've had many pets over the years who would bolt out the door if they saw the chance (usually just for the fun of getting over on me, as often they would stop to admire the view from the porch). If I knew a realtor was coming over to show my place, I'd figure it's my responsibility to secure my critters - and if one DOES get out, the fault is mine, not the realtor who may or may not know I have a furry escape artist. Nah, when realtor showed up, Viking should have been crated or locked away with a note on the door saying that door needs to stay closed to keep furry one safe and secured.

Side note: anybody else peeved with the way case was advertised? As seems all to common with the way the media hypes these cases, they just had to call Viking a "PIT BULL mix." When asked Mr. NOT MY DOG describes Viking as a Lab with maybe some pit bull mix, and plaintiff doesn't mention the "pit" word, just calls him a Lab. At least these judges didn't make a big thing of it.... but I can just imagine MM saying, of course, always a pit bull! or JJ with her tired question would you even keep such a dangerous breed - is it a rescue?

Way I see it, Viking was just being a dog - in his little canine view intruders were traipsing through his house/yard and he went into full "guard dog" mode... just lucky he went after innocent little pooch sniffing around on HIS sidewalk instead of any of the two legged intruders... Course, that's just me thinking he was probably having a fit all along with strangers in the house and going ballistic when he saw the little dog.

Edited April 7, 2018 by SRTouch

[SRTouch]

Ah, quite the charmer today. I think Sonya was the only woman he didn't smart off too - even cross aisle snark to plaintiff's mommy when she was testifying as she witness (though not exactly sure what part of her testimony was relevant). Course - he back talked Corriero. Did Charmer actually think DiMango was saying anything he should be thanking her for. Also, perfect example of someone who should NOT have a credit card.... really four grand in charges to stay in an extended stay motel?! While unemployed and on disability (her) and he's a gold miner who can't pay his own rent.

[AngelaHunter]

On 4/9/2018 at 5:41 PM, SRTouch said:

 Did Charmer actually think DiMango was saying anything he should be thanking her for.

I think he thought he - someone who appeared to have not a single redeeming feature - was being clever and ironic. Plaintiff obviously thought he was irrisistable and worth any price to keep around. Judge DiMango doesn't "do" the tears, so turn off the waterworks, miss, and stop being so pathetic and desperate. Aren't you a little old to have your Mommy clean up your messes? You wanted him. You got him, but couldn't even keep that lowdown, fugly loser. Personally, I would have eaten the loss rather than have millions of people see what I fell for. A gold miner? Heee!

[AlleC17]

regarding the horse case from last week:  lady buys horse as a show jump horse for $1,200.  No vet check of course.  Father says he bought the horse for his daughter so she could do fun shows while her eventing horse rested up from the season.  I don't really think he was trying to pull a fast one, and the lady took a gamble.  Her vet now says the horse has possible navicular issues, and she must 'get rid of' asap.  All sympathy I had for her left in a hurry.  I hate, hate, HATE that phrase when pertaining to a living, breathing creature.  My dislike of her dissipated a little when she said she was looking for a good retirement home for him.  Sure hope she follows up on that.  Poor horse.  :-(  Reason 1,998,509 why I still own my retired mare...once you sell, you have NO control over what new owner can do, and many horses with lameness issues end up badly.  Don't buy if you cannot keep your pony.  :-(