The People's Court - General Discussion

[CrazyInAlabama]

Since the new show is syndicated, who knows what stations will run it, and which ones won't.    If it's a s scripted and phony as others by the production company it's under, then I'm not interested.  They also do Lauren Lake's Paternity Court, a good example of their scripted shows. 

The current show might keep going in reruns too, I heard speculation about that.   

I'm wondering if stations will want to show TPC in reruns, the way they do with Judge Judy? The commercials are Plexiderm, senior everything, and obviously skewed older than the viewers that advertisers want.   

Edited July 22, 2023 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

10 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

If it's a s scripted and phony as others by the production company it's under, then I'm not interested.  

I caught a few minutes of "Divorce Court" once. Some of the litigants and witnesses are actors and it's glaringly obvious, since no tsunamis of 'like like like", "basically", or mangled grammar are heard. Not in the clip I saw, anyway.

I don't know about any other shows.

[Maverick]

On 7/21/2023 at 10:53 PM, DoctorK said:

I think JM lately has come across as more arbitrary and less balanced than she usually was before the last couple of years.

I always liked JM because she was always direct with litigants but I didn't feel like she was doing it to make good TV.  But there's definitely a change in her post-covid.  When they were running older episodes earlier this year, there is a very noticeable difference in her demeanor.   As you point out, she also seems to make some WTF decisions.  I didn't watch as regularly before covid so maybe she's always been like that but I feel like it a change.   My biggest annoyance has been how in a case involving a man vs.. woman her default is the man is the problem and is taking advantage of the woman.   I don't have a problem with her tearing into anyone if their actions deserve it but she's supposed to be impartial as a judge and her being so obviously biased takes away from her credibility.    I don't mind her side trips about her daughters but she does annoy me when says "my children" when she's having a one-on-one conversation with her husband.   Is she trying to tell us he's not the father?  Were they conceived by immaculate conception?

 TPC is still the only court show I can watch (never made it through a single episode of JJ) so I'll give her new show a try.   I just hope it's a straightforward show without a bunch of manufactured drama and campy production values.   There was a time where I would say JM cares enough about the law and takes her role in arbitrating these cases too seriously to do some fake schlocky show but who knows.   I was taken aback both she and Judge John think every should fork over a DNA sample for the government to keep on file so it would be easy to solve crimes and you shouldn't complain if you're not doing anything wrong. 

[AngelaHunter]

15 hours ago, Maverick said:

My biggest annoyance has been how in a case involving a man vs.. woman her default is the man is the problem and is taking advantage of the woman. 

She never used to be that way. I think the maturing of the Daughters has made her biased like that. Thus, any time the Angels mess up (which I'm sure they won't, but IF ) it will never be their fault, but the fault of some dastardly man.

JM used to come down very hard on pathetic women buying the love of losers, i.e., "Why are you so desperate?", "You're a fool" and scold them for giving money to some worthless POS instead of using it for the children.  However, I do not recall her ever taking issue with the breeder females, the SSMs, but has asked the baby daddies if they were done pollinating. JM, you do realize they couldn't pollinate if these sad, desperate women didn't mindlessly spread as easily as warm margarine for virtual strangers and without birth control.

15 hours ago, Maverick said:

she does annoy me when says "my children" when she's having a one-on-one conversation with her husband.

I mentioned the "MY daughters" from the other day. 😄

16 hours ago, Maverick said:

I was taken aback both she and Judge John think every should fork over a DNA sample for the government to keep on file so it would be easy to solve crimes and you shouldn't complain if you're not doing anything wrong.

I missed that. Does she think the huge criminal element is going to line up to give these samples? They even refuse to give them when they are suspects in some crime.

15 hours ago, Maverick said:

Is she trying to tell us he's not the father?  Were they conceived by immaculate conception?

Okay, I needed this laugh today. 🤣

15 hours ago, Maverick said:

  I just hope it's a straightforward show without a bunch of manufactured drama and campy production values. 

Well, for a show without stupid clowning, TMZ sensationalism, and Vaudeville-era idiotic jokes ("Who's the Italian meatball?", "He hardly knew 'er!), The Levin will have to be disposed of. I don't mean that the way it sounds. Really, I don't.

[Carolina Girl]

On 7/15/2023 at 10:19 AM, seacliffsal said:

JM asked how much he usually charged for a call and he said $125 but that the other $125 was for the time as he sent his employees to personally pick up the compressor rather than wait for the delivery.  JM said he couldn't charge for that time so he could only keep $125, so $125 to plaintiff. 

I completely disagreed with her assessment of damages.  He should not have had to return that other $125 either.  His employees were sent to pick up the unit and could have been on revenue-producing service calls and I'm sure the truck the took to haul the unit was the "gallons to the mile" variety.

Guy was a complete jerk.  I hope he gets taken but GOOD by the AC Company that he eventually went with.  

I have to say, that maybe the new 2.0 version will be better.  Frankly, I'm enjoying "Tribunal Justice" on FreeVee a helluva lot more than I do its "Hot Bench" progenitor.  Judge Judy's son Adam Levy is a great judge.  Does the homework and doesn't let a sob story affect his judgment.  

[badhaggis]

1 hour ago, Carolina Girl said:

I completely disagreed with her assessment of damages.  He should not have had to return that other $125 either.  His employees were sent to pick up the unit and could have been on revenue-producing service calls and I'm sure the truck the took to haul the unit was the "gallons to the mile" variety.

Guy was a complete jerk.  I hope he gets taken but GOOD by the AC Company that he eventually went with.  

I have to say, that maybe the new 2.0 version will be better.  Frankly, I'm enjoying "Tribunal Justice" on FreeVee a helluva lot more than I do its "Hot Bench" progenitor.  Judge Judy's son Adam Levy is a great judge.  Does the homework and doesn't let a sob story affect his judgment.  

I agree "Tribunal" is much, much better than "Hot Bench".

I will miss reading all of your wonderful, funny posts everyday. Where will we meet in the future?

 

[Bazinga]

Our first post new episodes rerun is from Season 22 Episode 2 aired on September 4, 2018.  Here is the direct link to the forum discussion:

Neighbor Driveway Drama.

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, Bazinga said:

Our first post new episodes rerun is from Season 22 Episode 2 aired on September 4, 2018

My DVR perjured itself, just like the P in the 2nd case by telling me this is new.

I remember the first two hustlers in the driveway case, but not the other two cases until I looked at Bazinga's link, so yes - I was entertained.

Road rage case with lying,hyperactive P vs lying Defs:

JM: "If you're in the left turning lane it means you have to turn."

Defs: Durrr... *Crickets*

 

 

[Guest]

25 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

My DVR perjured itself, just like the P in the 2nd case by telling me this is new.

I remember the first two hustlers in the driveway case, but not the other two cases until I looked at Bazinga's link, so yes - I was entertained.

Road rage case with lying,hyperactive P vs lying Defs:

JM: "If you're in the left turning lane it means you have to turn."

Defs: Durrr... *Crickets*

 

 

The lying, befuddled contestant wore much too tight clothes.  She was straining the seams of that denim frock. 

It reminded me of the saying ten pounds of baloney in a five pound bag. 

And plaintiff appeared to give his best PeeWee Herman impression.  I did laugh at JM’s comment “cars don’t go that way” 

The contestants were clearly Mensa members. 

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, PsychoKlown said:

The lying, befuddled contestant wore much too tight clothes.  She was straining the seams of that denim frock. 

We see that so often on this show, and I don't get it. I went through a period back in the 90s when I gained too much weight. Wearing tight clothes is so uncomfortable and put me in a bad mood all the time. Oh, maybe that's why so many contestants are so combative and aggressive!  Newsflash, litigants- all that bologna crammed and jammed into clothes that are several sizes too small does not make you look sylphlike.

 

1 hour ago, PsychoKlown said:

And plaintiff appeared to give his best PeeWee Herman impression.

To conjure up a word from my past: "What a dipstick".

[Bazinga]

Today's repeat originally aired on September 20, 2018.  It is the one with the lady trying to get a refund for $7 earrings that she lied about the cost in order to file and the case was quickly dismissed. 

Here is the link to the original forum discussion:

"Return Policy Problems."

If the episode seems familiar, it should, as it was reran March 1, 2023.  This is my comment then (March 1st Link): "Continuing the rerun pattern of showing episodes from approximately the same time period (why???) but not in order and not all episodes, today we will turn to an episode from September 20, 2018.  Discussion is on Page 116...AngelaHunter's comment about the first case sums it up pretty well, "Is this the dumbest case ever?".  I'll leave it at that."

If they are just going to rerun the same (bad) episodes from 2018 and 2019 again, I am not watching!

Edited July 25, 2023 by Bazinga

[Paperclips]

8 hours ago, Bazinga said:

Today's repeat originally aired on September 20, 2018.  It is the one with the lady trying to get a refund for $7 earrings that she lied about the cost in order to file and the case was quickly dismissed. 

Here is the link to the original forum discussion:

"Return Policy Problems."

If the episode seems familiar, it should, as it was reran March 1, 2023.  This is my comment then (March 1st Link): "Continuing the rerun pattern of showing episodes from approximately the same time period (why???) but not in order and not all episodes, today we will turn to an episode from September 20, 2018.  Discussion is on Page 116...AngelaHunter's comment about the first case sums it up pretty well, "Is this the dumbest case ever?".  I'll leave it at that."

If they are just going to rerun the same (bad) episodes from 2018 and 2019 again, I am not watching!

I also wonder why if they have 35 years of episodes they play the most recent ones?  Why not start at the beginning and go forward from there?  Judge Judy does the same thing - will re-run the same tired episodes over and over instead of going back to earliers ones.

Awhile back someone asked Levin about it and he said he didn't know why they don't repeat early episodes.

[CrazyInAlabama]

Where I live, the local Fox channel airs two hours of TPC.  The 2023 reruns at 10 a.m., but the 3 p.m. reruns are the 2018 that everyone else seems to be getting. 

I'm wondering what will happen in September, when that channel reworks their lineup? 

The earring case was ridiculous, plaintiff should be ashamed of suing over those $7.00 earrings. 

Edited July 25, 2023 by CrazyInAlabama

[ItsHelloPattiagain]

"My husband did not beep-bop down the church aisle.  If he had, he wouldn’t be identified today as my husband. 

As I said.  Ancient. "

PsychoClown, all I could think about when the groom was doing his groove thang was when American Bandstand or Soul Town would line people up on either side and the couple would make up some random half-matching dance as they boogie-sashayed down toward the camera (joining you with my walker and Werther's in the Ancient Society).

I love reading all the lovable snarky-snark y'all have been putting out.  I hope we shall meet again when JMM resurrects herself on whatever syndicated station she pops up on. 

 

[Carolina Girl]

On 7/24/2023 at 12:08 PM, badhaggis said:

I agree "Tribunal" is much, much better than "Hot Bench".

I will miss reading all of your wonderful, funny posts everyday. Where will we meet in the future?

 

Thank you!  How sweet of you.  I can be found at Hot Bench from time to tim and I'm hoping that comment business at the "Tribunal Justice" and "Judy Justice" picks up.  And as soon as Judge Marilyn's new series is up and running, I'll be there.  

I hope she brings Doug with her.  No one else.  Just Douglas.  

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, Carolina Girl said:

I hope she brings Doug with her.  No one else.  Just Douglas. 

I want Doug-in-the-Hall too, just for the way he politely rips lowdown litigants a second new one. Probably not, though, since I think he's 85 and has had enough of this.

I missed so many of JM's TPC that I'll keep watching repeats for now, with the occasional foray over to Hot Bench.

3 hours ago, ItsHelloPattiagain said:

PsychoClown, all I could think about when the groom was doing his groove thang was when American Bandstand or Soul Town would line people up on either side and the couple would make up some random half-matching dance as they boogie-sashayed down toward the camera

American Bandstand! Yes. Hey, I did the Boogaloo (and the Swim, the Jerk, and the Monkey) back in the day but admit the idea of doing any of those as I walked down the aisle towards my betrothed never occurred to me.  Missed opportunity, I guess. Think of the "Likes" on my social media! Well, if I were ON any social media, that is.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, ItsHelloPattiagain said:

PsychoClown, all I could think about when the groom was doing his groove thang was when American Bandstand or Soul Town would line people up on either side and the couple would make up some random half-matching dance as they boogie-sashayed down toward the camera (joining you with my walker and Werther's in the Ancient Society).

 

That dope was just one example of how people view weddings today.  Circus. Carnival. Side Show.  Amusement Park. 

I will never understand it.  Never.  To repeat my mantra "I'm glad I'm on my way out than coming in." 

Karl Lagerfeld made a comment about all the changes in society and that if one does not accept the changes it's time for them to die.

Okay Karl.  I get it.  I'm not completely ready yet but my one request is that my surviving family does not implode nor bring a lawsuit agains the funeral home because my drawers were incinerated with me.  Let me go and let me go with my underwear.  I do not want to leave this world thinking my sister will be on some court show crying that she has none of my underwear to grieve over.  

She can grieve over the Barry Cowsill parka.  I'm willin' it to her.  

 

[Bazinga]

Today's episode was originally aired September 17, 2018. 

Here is the direct link to the forum discussion on page 115:

"Teeth Trouble."

AngelaHunter's comment about the episode: "Lunatic freak show today."

Edited July 26, 2023 by Bazinga

[DoctorK]

"Teeth Trouble" was sort of entertainingly bizarre to be worth watching again. This time around I am convinced that the plaintiff is an addle-pated (lovely old fashioned term) old bat who has little connection with reality instead of a deliberate lying hustler. I felt sorry for the dentist who had to deal with her and I was very offended that the plaintiff stated that the dentist didn't really graduate from NYU Dental and needs to go back as a student (although the dentist said that he was about to join the NYU faculty). In our earlier round of snark on this case, there was a comment that the dentist's lab coat was inappropriate for court (I agree) and that from the side view the lab coat looked dirty (I looked and didn't see that, to me it looked like brand new, washed once no starch and ironed).

In the used car case. the defendant ex-cop was foolish, as was made clear by JM and the plaintiff was just a complete dimwit, and, according to the defendant, a total slob who trashed the car. All's well that ends well, the plaintiff got some of her money back and the defendant kept an appropriate amount to make him whole plus a little for the bad behavior of the plaintiff.

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, DoctorK said:

This time around I am convinced that the plaintiff is an addle-pated (lovely old fashioned term) old bat who has little connection with reality instead of a deliberate lying hustler.

Agree. I had forgotten most of this so was mildly entertained by this nonsense. She was too humiliated to go to a Christmas dinner with family, but not too humiliated to appear on national TeeVee, as JM noted. I did think that was a money grab.

1 hour ago, DoctorK said:

the defendant ex-cop was foolish,

"Foolish" doesn't cover it. No cop, or even ex-cop could be this dumb and naive. The only conclusion I could come to, although he protested his kindness to her was fatherly, is that he was hoping for some whoopees somewhere along the way with the air-headed pot fancier who stood there chewing her lips off.

ETA: I was wrong last time in thinking his silent companion was his wife. Definitely his matronly-looking daughter in her black chiffon outfit. Why was she there?

Edited July 26, 2023 by AngelaHunter

[Bazinga]

Today's episode is Season 22, Episode 16, and originally aired September 24, 2018.

Link to SRTouch's recap: 

"You Stole My Car!"

meowmommy, a few posts down, had this to say about this episode and the next: "Thanks for the great recaps, SRTouch, but it's two days in a row where the cases are too boring even to snark about."  Makes this episode a perfect choice to be reaired, don't you think?

[AngelaHunter]

9 hours ago, Bazinga said:

meowmommy, a few posts down, had this to say about this episode and the next: "Thanks for the great recaps, SRTouch, but it's two days in a row where the cases are too boring even to snark about." 

She had this to say as well and I need to make an internet bumper sticker with it:

Quote

Levin was never interesting, talented, attractive, charming, witty, or funny on the best day he ever had.

Perfect!

[Bazinga]

Today's episode, Season 22, Episode 22, was originally aired October 2, 2018.

The discussion, with a number of posts, is on page 117/118:

"Rental Ruckus."

Edited July 28, 2023 by Bazinga

[CrazyInAlabama]

The fool in the uninsured rental car bashing is ridiculous.    Judge M liking the fool defendant is even more ridiculous. 

[AngelaHunter]

I really enjoyed the repeat featuring Brian Taylor "who says he's a screenwriter with over 40 screenplays" and who was channeling Mother Hubbard x George Washington.

I tried looking him up, but could only find another Brian Taylor - writer/producer/director and he's not the same one.  I couldn't even find his most well-known movie, "Nine" either. My searches are often flawed, however.

I re-enjoyed the unrepentant, honest, unapologetic landlady who didn't give a rat's patootie if she got arrested or fined for throwing out all the junk of the squatting plaintiff who proudly admits she  "knows the system". Yes, she did it and she makes no excuses!😄

P wanted 4K for all the stuff that she put into her cousin's yard where it got ruined or some shit like that. She ends up owing Def 500$.

I had forgotten how much I loved and missed The Levin on the street, playing Big Shot with the Q&A of his little duhh fan club. Wow. Had I been there I would have definitely asked for his autograph.  I'm sure it will be very valuable one day.

[rcc]

22 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

I really enjoyed the repeat featuring Brian Taylor "who says he's a screenwriter with over 40 screenplays" and who was channeling Mother Hubbard x George Washington.

I tried looking him up, but could only find another Brian Taylor - writer/producer/director and he's not the same one.  I couldn't even find his most well-known movie, "Nine" either. My searches are often flawed, however.

I re-enjoyed the unrepentant, honest, unapologetic landlady who didn't give a rat's patootie if she got arrested or fined for throwing out all the junk of the squatting plaintiff who proudly admits she  "knows the system". Yes, she did it and she makes no excuses!😄

P wanted 4K for all the stuff that she put into her cousin's yard where it got ruined or some shit like that. She ends up owing Def 500$.

I had forgotten how much I loved and missed The Levin on the street, playing Big Shot with the Q&A of his little duhh fan club. Wow. Had I been there I would have definitely asked for his autograph.  I'm sure it will be very valuable one day.

That landlady was the best litigant on this show ever! 

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, rcc said:

That landlady was the best litigant on this show ever! 

I think JM was a little lost for words and ended up admiring the chutzpah. I'm sure she was expecting a litany of excuses, doctored documents, shifting blame, and lies as per usual. What could she say when all she got was a, 'Yep, I did it. I know it's illegal and I don't care." ?

Even in the hall when Doug asks, "Didn't you feel guilty for throwing her stuff out on the street?"

"Absolutely not!" 😄

He turns to the daughter: "Did you?"

Daughter: "No".

Such an uplifting case. I guess knowing how to work the system doesn't always give you rewards.

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Such an uplifting case. I guess knowing how to work the system doesn't always give you rewards.

Sometimes a girls gotta do what a girls gotta do.  

Meaning not giving a damn, accepting the consequences and actually feeling a little better afterwards. 

And chuckling about it years down the road. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

I loved the landlady who threw the professional tenant scammer stuff out.   It's the only way she could get rid of her unless she wanted to pay her to leave, or have her squatting in the rental forever.   

[Bazinga]

Today's repeat of the Season 22, Episode 18 originally aired September 26, 2018, was recently repeated on March 6th. 

Here is the link to the original discussion:

"Terrible Training."

Is there a reason for repeating the same repeats repeatedly?  (See I can repeatedly repeat repeat, too.)

Edited July 31, 2023 by Bazinga

[CrazyInAlabama]

Yes, the show is out of production, and I suspect will be ending soon for reruns, and why put effort into it when they make the same money whether they change up episodes, or send out the same ones over and over?   It's just sheer laziness. 

Today's rerun was truly epic in the rent-to-own case.  I've never seen two litigants who were so blantant about their felonious behavior.   The realtor was sleazy, the plaintiff was worse, and I only regret that we didn't see mug shots of both at the end.     The plaintiff getting her money back was ridiculous, she and the defendant came to court with very unclean hands, and deserved nothing. 

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Today's rerun was truly epic in the rent-to-own case.

That was so epic I had to watch it yet again. Two not-bright scammers with the titty-tatted, squatting P scammer admitting she lied to the police and seemed almost proud of it. The Def told her to do it. AND she admits she rushed to the bank to withdraw her late momma's money before the bank caught on that Mom was deceased.  But the def told her to do that too. Not her fault! The so-called real estate broker sounded utterly stoopid and ridiculous trying to justify and make excuses for HIS shady underhanded scamming. I wonder what his business card says? "I'll Do Anything for a Commission, Legal or Not!"? The best part is that these "Who, me? What did I do??" fools had no clue how laughably dumb they sounded.

She's in "home care". What a surprise.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

That was so epic I had to watch it yet again. Two not-bright scammers with the titty-tatted, squatting P scammer admitting she lied to the police and seemed almost proud of it. The Def told her to do it. AND she admits she rushed to the bank to withdraw her late momma's money before the bank caught on that Mom was deceased.  But the def told her to do that too. Not her fault! The so-called real estate broker sounded utterly stoopid and ridiculous trying to justify and make excuses for HIS shady underhanded scamming. I wonder what his business card says? "I'll Do Anything for a Commission, Legal or Not!"? The best part is that these "Who, me? What did I do??" fools had no clue how laughably dumb they sounded.

She's in "home care". What a surprise.

I really, really hate people.  Particularly and especially those who knowingly scam society and could not care less. 

Bottom feeders. 

[Bazinga]

Today's repeat originally aired October 4, 2018.

Here is the discussion:

"Tantrum Over a Television."

[Bazinga]

Today's episode originally aired on October 9, 2018.

Discussion on Page 118. 

Link: "Bitter Bride."

[AngelaHunter]

15 hours ago, Bazinga said:

Today's episode originally aired on October 9, 2018.

Discussion on Page 118. 

Link: "Bitter Bride."

I re-enjoyed the bride, trying to score 5K because of the trauma caused when her pics were a couple of weeks late and she didn't like two or three of the 470 shots. I think she should include a clip of this to put in her album or video, "Oh, and here's me in court trying to scam and weasel my way out of paying anything for this shitload of pictures!"

[Bazinga]

Today's repeat was originally aired October 24, 2018.

SRTouch's recap and poster comments here:

"Transmission Tantrum."

Just like AngelaHunter below, my viewing was preempted by the indictment of the ex-president.  Tune in tomorrow.

Edited August 3, 2023 by Bazinga

[AngelaHunter]

19 hours ago, Bazinga said:

Today's repeat was originally aired October 24, 2018.

SRTouch's recap and poster comments here:

"Transmission Tantrum."

Thanks. My viewing got butted into right at the beginning for an urgernt  "SPECIAL REPORT" so I wasn't sure if I had seen it or not.

[Bazinga]

Today's scheduled episode was originally aired October 30, 2018. 

Episode includes the case where God drove the defendant's shopping cart into the plaintiff's car, so why should the defendant pay for this act of god, as she doesn't have the time for this, these things happen and plaintiff's car is old already, so who knows if God's chosen cart even caused the damage?

Here's the discussion:

"Shopping-Cart Catastrophe."

[Guest]

On 8/2/2023 at 5:03 PM, AngelaHunter said:

I re-enjoyed the bride, trying to score 5K because of the trauma caused when her pics were a couple of weeks late and she didn't like two or three of the 470 shots. I think she should include a clip of this to put in her album or video, "Oh, and here's me in court trying to scam and weasel my way out of paying anything for this shitload of pictures!"

I watched this episode again while trying to wrangle a box of beads (that were smaller than the head of a pin) from my top desk drawer. The beads were used for the holidays and then shoved in the back. I flipped it over getting my scissor and voila!  My top drawer looks like Mardi Gras!!!

Anyway, I listened closely and my opinion is that she only brought the case to court to show off her wedding pictures and significant weight loss. The photographer did drag his feet but to the tune of a grand?  Nonsense.

The contestants can’t be more obvious in their money grabs, quest for a reality show, music promotion videos or websites to tout their vitally important role as an Influencer. 

One word. Tedious. 
 

[Paperclips]

On 7/31/2023 at 5:13 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

Yes, the show is out of production, and I suspect will be ending soon for reruns, and why put effort into it when they make the same money whether they change up episodes, or send out the same ones over and over?   It's just sheer laziness. 

Today's rerun was truly epic in the rent-to-own case.  I've never seen two litigants who were so blantant about their felonious behavior.   The realtor was sleazy, the plaintiff was worse, and I only regret that we didn't see mug shots of both at the end.     The plaintiff getting her money back was ridiculous, she and the defendant came to court with very unclean hands, and deserved nothing. 

I said before  - Old Hot Bench Judges and Judge Judy ran right to Amazon/Freebee.  I don't know who watches.  

I work at home, I just usually watch it the back-ground and the Judge Judy repeats are getting old.

At least Hot Bench is Throwing out new episodes.

I'll never understand it - Judge Judy has 30+ years of repeats and they run the same old episodes time after time.

Edited August 4, 2023 by Paperclips

[CrazyInAlabama]

Today's hideous defendant who pushed her grocery cart across the parking lane, cart slams into plaintiff's parked car, and then defendant has a bunch of ridiculous reasons she's not paying was epic.   

The defendant was so awful that Douglas is standing behind Judge M while she's looking at the diagram with defendant, and he's watching defendant and her witnesses (her husband and son) like a hawk.    Douglas is prepared for everything.   I love Douglas, and snarky Doug in the hall. 

The audience members are smirking at every statement Judge M says, while she's ripping defendant's stupid story to pieces.   The defendant's husband is as big a jerk as his wife.   Doug in the hall really tells defendant and husband how ridiculous their views about not being responsible for the plaintiff's damages are. 

Edited August 4, 2023 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Today's hideous defendant who pushed her grocery cart across the parking lane, cart slams into plaintiff's parked car, and then defendant has a bunch of ridiculous reasons she's not paying was epic. 

I forgot this particular Crazy Cart bitch. They're all horrid and this one had an exceptionally punchable face, as did her weaselly little POS hubby and her goofy-looking son.

I will dearly miss Doug in the Hall, and his throwing of shade at these miscreants.

[Guest]

11 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

I forgot this particular Crazy Cart bitch. They're all horrid and this one had an exceptionally punchable face, as did her weaselly little POS hubby and her goofy-looking son.

I will dearly miss Doug in the Hall, and his throwing of shade at these miscreants.

Business ventures are not my forte but imagine if our Doug and Douglas did a tour of all stories from TPC. 

And I’m not talking the nonsense those two judges did during the final years…I mean a real Q/A with the Dougs on stage in a dignified setting spilling the dirt on all that went on lo these many years. 

And sans Harvey.  No Harvey.  And no mention of the Holy Trinity. Annoying useless brats. 

If nothing else it would make a great YouTube channel. 

[AngelaHunter]

3 hours ago, PsychoKlown said:

If nothing else it would make a great YouTube channel. 

Now there's a great idea! At his age, Doug wouldn't be traveling around but could tell all from the comfort of his home, the way Judge Wapner ratted out The Levin standing on his little box "because he's short, and he didn't like to be seen as short".

I would so watch the Doug 'n Douglas channel!

[Bazinga]

The last two episodes have been preempted for me by news events (ex-president indictment on Thursday and Friday there was a riot in NYC).  Hopefully upcoming storms don't cause preemption for any of us.

Getting ahead of things, Monday's episode was originally aired November 8, 2018.  Took a few days to engender poster comments. 

Direct link: "Funeral Feud." 

[CrazyInAlabama]

On 7/10/2023 at 4:24 PM, AngelaHunter said:

I wrote this about a plaintiff the other day who sold her 60K Audi to some punk-ass kid.

Litigants just keep proving me dead wrong. Corrine Bradley, who got totally snowed in a 3 MILLION dollar deal, you rise to the top of the list. The best part was her smirking attitude to JM as if to insinuate that JM just didn't GET it.

She's suing the Def, a foolish, dopey, 33-year-old man-child loser with douchebag facial hair, and his ex-wife(?) who were in a dire financial situation for 5K for scamming her.

Corrine was trying to sell her parents' 600-acre farm for 3 million dollars. The man-child, along with P's "rillator" and her caretaker, viewed the property and was very enthusiastic about it. He was going to build a cabin and the farm purchase was to be in cash.  There was some sort of half-assed contract, not signed and no deposit was given.

Seems that the boy and his ex were preying on her Auntie, who is 71 and very ill with either dementia or Parkinson's, and who told them to go ahead and it didn't matter how much it cost.

Corrine gets a letter from Auntie's bank - a letter full of errors in grammar and punctuation that wouldn't fool a child. The rillator and the caretaker agree that it's legit, so Corrine buys it too. On the strength of that, Corrine gives the boot to the tenants who have lived there for 5 years, so now there is no monthly rent coming in and that's where her 5K suit comes in. 

I'm always interested in the people who fall for the most obvious scams. Corrine is one of them. Yes, she has that janky "bank" letter and saw nothing wrong with it.

JM is incensed at the Defs who were preying on this aunty as is the rest of the family who have cut off the boy and his erstwhile lady love.

I've had better and more official-looking documents from Nigerian scammers. Oh, but Corrine was sure it was real! She called this bank and it actually exists. That alone was good enough for her. She keeps that irritating smirk on even as JM is throwing them all out, because, in addition to all her other gross stupidities, Corrine is suing the wrong person.

The letter from the bank: 😄 Looks legit to me!

 

They reran this hysterically ridiculous episode this morning (I get 2023 reruns in the a.m., and 2018 or so in the p.m.).    Corinne the clueless claimed her realtor was getting fired by their broker after this.   However, the defendant's realtor was involved too.    It's sad to realize that people this greedy and clueless exist, and that applies to all three litigants.   

I'm guessing the ex claiming the aunt had Parkinson's was because someone with diagnosed dementia, isn't going to be signing authorizations for anything.  That's why when male defendant said 'dementia' was the aunt's diagnosis, the woman defendant chimed in and claimed Parkinson's, and aunt was still competent to make the deal. 

 

[AngelaHunter]

I know I saw the funeral cost case, but have no memory of it. It's bizarre to me that P says he and his girlfriend were "dating" for 15 years and engaged for three. You have to wonder what the hell they were waiting for. If those daughters don't want to worry about the premature death their mother had, I suggest they take drastic steps to remedy the condition they're in at their very young ages.

I sort of recalled the P in the security dep. case. I'm so tired of hearing the idiotic excuses of litigants for just about everything. This great big mature, super-mouthy woman whines that she was "bullied". Oh, please! She didn't seem particularly fearful in that video where she was flapping her gums non-stop. I loved that she ended up owing some 1500$ to the def.

No memory of the car case. Another grown woman making her own decisions but saying she shouldn't be held to them, nor should be held to an agreement she made because she's just a poor little helpless woman who never bought a car and doesn't know anything about it. She sure knew how to find her way to court and sue for a ridiculous amount, after she agreed not to do so.

[Guest]

Grifters.  The whole lot of them.

Taking advantage of a declining aunt.  Go get a job you bloated, doughy losers 

And the plaintiff contestant looked like she was missing several brain cells to even entertain these two lowlifes fantasy of owing a 600 acre farm in Connecticut.  

I’d bet money the grifters were living in a  camper shell or in a car with no motor or seats. 

Animals. 

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, PsychoKlown said:

Taking advantage of a declining aunt.  Go get a job you bloated, doughy losers 

But... but - Doughboy was going to build a cabin on his new acreage and play Lord of the Manor, as soon as he figured out where to buy nails and which end of a hammer to grip!

Auntie didn't care what anything cost. She just wanted these two fine people to have everything they wanted - only the best - since they are well over 30 but can't take care of themselves.

And why not? After all, "Lynn wilson had a checking and savings account that both total together with the balance of $34,000,000."

I would have so enjoyed a video of those bloated losers sitting on their big butts and putting all their severely limited brain power toward writing that laughable letter.