The People's Court - General Discussion

[teebax]

What on earth did the losing litigants say to Curt in hallterviews before the expression "It is what it is" came into vogue? 

 

I first heard the phrase myself during a fight with my husband circa 2007. He threw it out there and let's say I did not respond well. :)

I've noticed it a lot on both court shows I watch. It's one of those expressions that make me want to stab someone in the eye. I first started hearing it in corporate America (and still do from time to time.)

[AngelaHunter]

. It's one of those expressions that make me want to stab someone in the eye.

 

"It is what it is, " roughly translates into, "I'm a big loser, but I didn't learn a damned thing from it."

[knitorpurl]

JM did get a little worked up with the homeless advocate/'published' writer/not indigent guy. But it was hard to blame her. He is well spoken and also well entrenched in permanent victimhood and is never going to concede fault.

He had about as much motivation as Skipper Walker, the almost builder of the motorized bike trailer. Just couldn't quite get those parts put together. But he had the parts so he should have certainly kept the $500.

And I don't remember anyone resorting to "It is what it is" so a good day overall.

[Oinky Boinky]

You've got it quite wrong knitorpurl.

 

He does have a place in this world.  His place is to instruct others on how to permanently wallow in victimhood. 

 

The problem is the job pays nothing and achieves nothing. I know it is not popular to like Atlas Shrugged but this guy could be the poster boy for a society that kills itself and feels justified as it whimpers into non existence.  

The whiny author hit a nerve with JM when he said she couldn't understand because she has always been privileged. 

 

Us who have pulled ourselves up hate people like him.  That was why she got mean with him.

[DoctorK]

 

The whiny author hit a nerve with JM when he said she couldn't understand because she has always been privileged.

I think it hit a nerve more because (at least the way I heard it) Mr. Professional Victim Author was suggesting that because he had a parent die and had had a hard life, JM couldn't possibly understand his situation. JM responded back with something like "How dare you? You have no idea what I have gone through in my life!" I think that JM has mentioned dealing with elderly relatives (parents or grandparents?) as they deteriorated.

[DoughGirl]

As sole caregiver for my 91 year old father JM's reaction sorta bugged me for the simple reason that she's got piles of money which makes caregiving easier in many ways. Try caring for and watching an elderly relative deteriorate with no extra funds to hire competent help. The caregiver without funds rarely, if ever, gets a break. It's emotional and financial. Not saying either one is easy or pleasant but it's got to be easier with the cash.

[Rick Kitchen]

Good Lord, in the case where the lady was suing her upstairs neighbor for water damage to her apartment, what the heck was the plaintiff's witness wearing?  Huge pink ruffled shirt/jacket over big black and white cow print pants?  Eek.

[AngelaHunter]

I think it hit a nerve more because (at least the way I heard it) Mr. Professional Victim Author was suggesting that because he had a parent die and had had a hard life, JM couldn't possibly understand his situation.

 

I can't remember detesting a litigant the way I did this one. He shamelessly sponges off the taxpayers for a housing "emergency" that is going to last forever apparently, and is totally unable to work because of his "anxiety disorder". Yeah,  a middle-aged man who lost a parent - no one else could possibly know how that feels. His sad "Nobody Knows the Troubles I've Seen" schtick was sickening, and his arrogance outrageous.  I understand why JM lost it. She has two 90 year old parents to care for but manages to keep working. I've lost nearly everyone in my life, but gee, it didn't occur to me to declare myself disabled and live on other people's taxes. Silly me.

 

Both parties in the dog grooming case seemed nice, but it's getting annoying to hear, "No, I have no proof and no evidence, BUT someone told me that she heard someone else say...." Does no one realize that in a court, some sort of proof might be required?

[Oinky Boinky]

I am so sick of the phrase 'it is what it is' we should do a count or start a drinking game. 

 

Also...

Misuse of the word lemon.

A car with 180 thousand miles can not be called a lemon. It is a very old car at the end of its life. 

People throw out 'he sold us a lemon' as their plea. Some refer to a lemon law and use that as a basis for suit. 

 

Lemon law applies to new cars that have an excessive number of repairs in the first year. When the limit is hit the dealer owes you another new car. A 15 year old car sold to you by a shady guy who flips cars is caveat emptor all the way.

[Taeolas]

Wow, this was an interesting trio of cases today. I'm forgetting the first one, but it was fairly straightforward I think, but the former tenant was quite the character. I wonder what that paper the plaintiff handed over before teh verdict was; looked like a list of receipts from what we saw.

 

The second one, that was a surprisingly functional disfunctional family. The plaintiff was quite the talker, and was louder than the Judge without shouting. The defendant, wow, I don't know what to make of him.

 

And that final case, all over a fallen basketball hoop, but man, that defendant, I don't know what was up with him. You could tell every word out of his mouth was a lie, and you could see the wheels turning trying to track what he said and how to spin it right (to no avail). It was telling they had no halterview after the case. The old guy won rightfully and was good to keep his temper; I think he could tell he had the case. They even went to the trouble of setting up the magnet board, but the liar just wasn't worth it it seems.

[knitorpurl]

Basketball goal guy was a slimeball covered in slime. He refused any knowledge of a single thing- ownership of the goal, whether he was playing, what the landlord said to him, there was not a thing he was going to answer. The best was his refusal of recognition of his own apartment building after the plaintiff pointed out where their apartments were. Glad it ended with the plaintiff getting his car fixed and slimeball is in the process of moving so he wins both ways.

[WhitneyWhit]

Don't you guys just hate when phantom sports equipment shows up in your driveway and damages your neighbor's car?

[teebax]

Basketball goal guy was a slimeball covered in slime. He refused any knowledge of a single thing- ownership of the goal, whether he was playing, what the landlord said to him, there was not a thing he was going to answer. The best was his refusal of recognition of his own apartment building after the plaintiff pointed out where their apartments were. Glad it ended with the plaintiff getting his car fixed and slimeball is in the process of moving so he wins both ways.

They must have either an absentee landlord or one who just doesn't care, because I can't imagine someone being able to install a freaking basketball hoop at an apartment, especially next to where people park. I guess the plaintiff couldn't just remove the thing, but I probably would have demanded it be moved or parked somewhere else. I'm paranoid about people playing sports around my car. 

 

I was surprised the defendant didn't get the wrath of MM, considering how blatantly he was lying.

[Taeolas]

It was one of those portable hoops that take 15 minutes to set up. Basically a weighted bottom, a pole, and the hoop and backboard. And the landlord DID tell him to remove it, but he said it wasn't his. It did migrate over to the lawn on the edge of the parking lot after the incident. Likely the guy set it up and started using it before hte plaintiff realized it was next to his car.

 

The defendant seems to be the type that denies everything. If you ask him the colour of a clear sunlit sky, he'd probably say anything but blue. He seems to  be the type that feels that as long as he ignores something, it won't affect him. That goes along with how he hid in his apartment and wouldn't answer the door when the plaintiff accused him initially. I just wish the Judge could have slapped him harder, but I think she could tell nothing would get through to him. 

Edited March 17, 2015 by Taeolas

[zillabreeze]

Basketball boy was just pure weirdness! He seemed like he was trying to invoke

the " I can't recall" method of defense, but was too stupid to even pull that off. God help his new neighbors, because he is clearly all about hisself and to hell with trying to live in a world where other folks reside. Yech. And YAY! For the little old guy that stuck to his guns. I was hoping for a good MM smack down of B-Ball Ass.

I just don't get most of these litigants. In my zilliondy years on earth, I have accidentally bumped someone else's car, spilled a glass of wine on a friends carpet and had a dog that dug in a neighbors flower bed. Life is so much easier with a prompt heartfelt apology, a plate of cookies and an instant reimbursement. It's not that hard to say "I'm sorry, I was wrong." It's not that I am a saint- Karma scares the shit outta of me and so far, I have managed to stay on her good side.

We sure didn't get the full story on the fence cutting seniors. Something else had clearly gone south before the fence. Neighbors don't go from borrowing sugar to WW3 overnight. Both parties had too much "courtroom innocence"going on. Not fully trusting either side.

[Pepper the Cat]

Great smack down in the distracted driver! Judge Marilyn was on fire!

[teebax]

Basketball boy was just pure weirdness! He seemed like he was trying to invoke

the " I can't recall" method of defense, but was too stupid to even pull that off. God help his new neighbors, because he is clearly all about hisself and to hell with trying to live in a world where other folks reside. Yech. And YAY! For the little old guy that stuck to his guns. I was hoping for a good MM smack down of B-Ball Ass.

I just don't get most of these litigants. In my zilliondy years on earth, I have accidentally bumped someone else's car, spilled a glass of wine on a friends carpet and had a dog that dug in a neighbors flower bed. Life is so much easier with a prompt heartfelt apology, a plate of cookies and an instant reimbursement. It's not that hard to say "I'm sorry, I was wrong." It's not that I am a saint- Karma scares the shit outta of me and so far, I have managed to stay on her good side.

We sure didn't get the full story on the fence cutting seniors. Something else had clearly gone south before the fence. Neighbors don't go from borrowing sugar to WW3 overnight. Both parties had too much "courtroom innocence"going on. Not fully trusting either side.

My car was struck in the parking lot of my office building by someone who couldn't be bothered to leave a note. This is in the employee parking area, so whoever it was works in my building. I turned into Columbo for a while, looking all over the parking lot for signs of the paint transfer from my car, to no avail. A lot of people are living in a bubble in which they're the only ones who matter, which brings me to the distracted driver...

 

She got MM's ire partly because one of their staffers had a child killed by a driver who was texting. This problem has gotten completely out of control. I can't tell you how many times I miss a green light because the jackass in front of me doesn't realize the light has changed because they've got their head buried in their phone. They've made texting while driving illegal where I live, but it hasn't changed anyone's behavior. Of course, the self-absorbed assholes who do this don't give a shit about laws anyway. It's only illegal if they get caught.

 

The case of the fence damage reinforced my feeling that I hit the neighbor jackpot. The ones on my right live in Mexico most of the time and are only here once every month or so. The ones on my left are an Air Force couple who purchased it as their very first home they owned. They have so much pride in that house and are amazingly quiet and respectful. I came out to my yard one evening and the husband asked me if his dogs were bothering me. I told him, with all honesty, that I didn't even know they had dogs. He's paranoid about them barking so he keeps them in the house most of the time, but this particular evening they were in the yard. Imagine that: a neighbor who worries about others' peaceful enjoyment!

[zillabreeze]

 

I can't tell you how many times I miss a green light because the jackass in front of me doesn't realize the light has changed because they've got their head buried in their phone.

Don't even get me started.  Yesterday, some texting bitch started drifting into my lane and I am up next to a frigging concrete barrier!

I remember when they told the story of the staffer's child being killed.  The texting ass hit a utility or light pole which then fell onto the kid.  IIRC, the clild was in a stroller?

[Rick Kitchen]

The staffer's child's death is the reason the show ends with "DON'T TEXT AND DRIVE".

[seacliffsal]

I had not heard about the staffer's child before.  Just so sad and so infuriating that people continue to drive distracted.  And then this defendant doesn't think she's responsible for the van after she clearly states that she was 'changing the radio'.  Sure.

 

Today' s case about the woman who took the plaintiff's dog at 4:00 a.m. to a 'shelter' was an eye opener.  It continues to amaze me how people just lie and even when caught in a lie continue to lie even more.  I'm glad that the Judge spoke her mind to this woman.  I actually really liked the plaintiff-he seemed kind.  I'm so sure she stole his teacup yorkie so that she would have free stud service for her two females.  

[wallysmommy]

I wanted to slap that smirk right off that fake redhead's face in the teacup Yorkie case.  Even when she was being yelled at, she had that s*hit-eatin grin.  

[zillabreeze]

I don't understand why MM didn't state the obvious in the yorkie thief case.  When she read the middle of the night texts they were clearly written by someone drunk or high.  

[lisageezlouise]

The accident where the distracted driver killed the child happened in my town. It was a bus driver (not the regular bus driver but a driver of a jitney bus or something like that) and I believe he went to look at his cell phone. He hit a light pole and it struck the baby in her stroller.

Distracted driving gets me so mad especially when it's some BS with a cellphone. Nothing is that important that it can't wait!

[bref]

Judge MM was spectacular in her contempt for the red-haired, dog-stealing defendant. "I am furious that I have to walk the earth with people like you."

 

I liked the plaintiff a lot too, but he lost most of my goodwill when he plugged his website, where he apparently sells pets, in the hallterview. Tacky.

Edited March 19, 2015 by bref

[DoctorK]

 

udge MM was spectacular in her contempt for the red-haired, dog-stealing defendant

Definitely, a soul cleansing case. Did I actually hear JM get an unbleeped "What the HELL" in when she was berating the defendant?

[teebax]

Definitely, a soul cleansing case. Did I actually hear JM get an unbleeped "What the HELL" in when she was berating the defendant?

I've heard her use "hell" and "damn" quite a few times on the show.

 

As a viewer who grew up in the late 70s and early 80s, it still surprises me when I hear swearing on regular TV. It doesn't bother me in the least, but it's one of those things that still surprises me.

[momtoall]

As a viewer who grew up in the late 70s and early 80s, it still surprises me when I hear swearing on regular TV.

 

As a person who grew up watching TV in the 50s and 60s, when husbands and wives weren't allowed to share a bed on TV, I've discussed often with my siblings and friends what our parents would think of what is allowed to be shown and said on TV nowadays.  The consensus is they wouldn't believe what they were seeing and hearing.  lol

Edited March 20, 2015 by momtoall

[Oinky Boinky]

I don't understand why MM didn't state the obvious in the yorkie thief case.  When she read the middle of the night texts they were clearly written by someone drunk or high.  

She did at the end she yelled at her 'were you high when you wrote this' or something like that.

[AKA...CJ86]

I wanted to slap that smirk right off that fake redhead's face in the teacup Yorkie case.  Even when she was being yelled at, she had that s*hit-eatin grin.  

...Her grin when she was asked if she was sorry during the hallterview and then offered her apologies, worst litigant to me in a long time...

Edited March 23, 2015 by CyberJawa1986

[AngelaHunter]

The consensus is they wouldn't believe what they were seeing and hearing.

 

I sometimes don't believe what I'm seeing and hearing. Who remembers the case of the bondage freaks being sued over the cost of building a dungeon? The dominatrix was there as well. I watched in befuddlement, wondering when BDSM became a casual topic of afternoon television.

[Rick Kitchen]

They reran the case today of the woman suing her friend because the friend's mother with Alzheimer's urinated on the plaintiff's couch.  I just wonder why that defendant  would allow this case to come to the People's Court and embarrass her mother on national television.

[Intocats]

I am a regular Judge Judy watcher who just started watching The People's Court. I *heart* Judge Marilyn! It is clear that she has a great sense of humor and her tough love approach is very refreshing.

 

The case from yesterday (I think -- I DVRed it) about the young lady with three children (one of whom has Down's syndrome) who loaned her Lothario can't-keep-it-in-his-pants BF thousands of dollars…Marilyn's observation was right on. Why would an attractive young woman with three kids who need her have such low self-esteem that she needs to hang out with (and loan money to) such a loser?? "Who raised you to think you are worth nothing?" Pure gold.

 

I do wish that JJ would make such observations, not just for the litigants, but for the people watching at home.

 

ETA..it's great to see familiar "faces" from the Judge Judy board!

Edited April 1, 2015 by Intocats

[teebax]

I am a regular Judge Judy watcher who just started watching The People's Court. I *heart* Judge Marilyn! It is clear that she has a great sense of humor and her tough love approach is very refreshing.

 

The case from yesterday (I think -- I DVRed it) about the young lady with three children (one of whom has Down's syndrome) who loaned her Lothario can't-keep-it-in-his-pants BF thousands of dollars…Marilyn's observation was right on. Why would an attractive young woman with three kids who need her have such low self-esteem that she needs to hang out with (and loan money to) such a loser?? "Who raised you to think you are worth nothing?" Pure gold.

 

I do wish that JJ would make such observations, not just for the litigants, but for the people watching at home.

 

ETA..it's great to see familiar "faces" from the Judge Judy board!

I prefer MM to JJ, although I watch both shows. My problem with TPC is it doesn't have nearly as many new episodes as JJ. We'll get a week of new episodes, and then it's back to reruns. But if I have a choice between a new episode of TPC and a new episode of JJ, I watch TPC first.

 

I particularly love when MM loses her cool and goes off on an idiot litigant. Because she doesn't do it as often as JJ does, I think it's more effective when she does.

[AngelaHunter]

I particularly love when MM loses her cool and goes off on an idiot litigant. Because she doesn't do it as often as JJ does

 

When she does, she's way more virulent than JJ. "I need to take a shower after dealing with you two!" "I hate that I have to live on the same planet as you."  Her smackdowns are like poisoned darts.

 

I loved her little convo with a silly cougar who had of course showered money on some vapid, oily boy. She wanted to know why this woman wanted a boy (yeah, we all want to know too!) and stated that she " doesn't like young guys." She's the only reason I continue to watch this show which has been twisted into a sleazy tabloid production.

[Rick Kitchen]

I don't understand why the judge ruled against the guy who posted TRUE information on facebook about the plaintiff?  Though his repeatedly calling her "ghetto fabulous" was more than a little racist.

[WhitneyWhit]

I don't understand why the judge ruled against the guy who posted TRUE information on facebook about the plaintiff?  Though his repeatedly calling her "ghetto fabulous" was more than a little racist.

While it was true, the information involving her DCS case was suppose to be confidential. He tried to say it was some random caseworker that gave him the information, when it was actually the woman's ex doing it.

[silverspoons]

I prefer MM to JJ, although I watch both shows. My problem with TPC is it doesn't have nearly as many new episodes as JJ. We'll get a week of new episodes, and then it's back to reruns. But if I have a choice between a new episode of TPC and a new episode of JJ, I watch TPC first.

 

I particularly love when MM loses her cool and goes off on an idiot litigant. Because she doesn't do it as often as JJ does, I think it's more effective when she does.

If you look at the people's court website you can tell when new episodes will be on. MM tapes them in blocks and has odd breaks, I guess because she commutes to FL-CT to be with her family.

I prefer MM to JJ because of the type of cases. I used to live in NY/MA and I love that she has such a variety of cases and people of all sorts of backgrounds. I like seeing a rich CT businessman suing about his boat repair and then a case of a NY women bringing jewelry in a neighborhood shop for repair.

I realize MM and JJ both read the cases beforehand and have some idea of the ruling but MM hides it better. Sometimes after 15 seconds JJ already has called the case.

Of course I miss Judge Pierro and her "big book of jobs".

[teebax]

If you look at the people's court website you can tell when new episodes will be on. MM tapes them in blocks and has odd breaks, I guess because she commutes to FL-CT to be with her family.

I prefer MM to JJ because of the type of cases. I used to live in NY/MA and I love that she has such a variety of cases and people of all sorts of backgrounds. I like seeing a rich CT businessman suing about his boat repair and then a case of a NY women bringing jewelry in a neighborhood shop for repair.

I realize MM and JJ both read the cases beforehand and have some idea of the ruling but MM hides it better. Sometimes after 15 seconds JJ already has called the case.

Of course I miss Judge Pierro and her "big book of jobs".

I've seen MM admit that she had pre-judged a case but changed her mind after hearing the testimony. I'm sure JJ has done that as well,but damned if I can think of an instance! I think litigants get a fairer shake with MM.

[momtoall]

I think litigants get a fairer shake with MM.

 

The litigants definitely fair better with MM.  MM will take testimony and listen to both sides.  On the other hand once JJ has made up her mind, she rarely allows the litigant she's going to rule against to complete a sentence and if she does let them speak it is only to call them a liar. 

[Chellichik]

I think it was a repeat, but I hadn't seen yesterday's episode with the girl whose horse fell in the hole and died.  OMG.  That was simply horrific.  Yes, it was a freak accident, but the defendants were beyond negligent for not confining the other horses.  I felt so bad for the plaintiff.

[AZChristian]

This may sound cold, but I got the feeling that the plaintiff in the horse case was a drama queen who also saw a chance to make a lot of money off her horse's death.  I do agree that the defendants should have fenced the other horses away, but really . . . the plaintiff's other horse was traumatized?  It was screaming and crying for its best friend?  She attends an animal grief class every week?  She had the horse for just over a year, during which time she also had a very young child at home.  How much time did she really have to spend with the horse? 

 

And I appreciated Judge Marilyn's tact in dealing with her, but she did pretty much tell the woman to get a grip.  Yes, I have lost a pet that I loved dearly.  I still tear up when I see pictures of her.  But the plaintiff's reaction was just over the top.

[Chellichik]

Yes, she does need to move on...but, as a fellow horse person, I can say there is something very special about a bond between a horse and rider that is different than how a person bonds with a cat or dog.  Yes, she only had the horse for a year and I can't speak to their bond.  I can't say anything about the "trauma" her other horse suffered.  I only know how I grieved (and continue to grieve) when I lost my horse.  It's not like her horse died of old age or an illness.  She died at a very young age in a traumatic accident.  I lost my horse at a young age to an unexplained illness.  I still can't talk about him without crying...and he died over 20 years ago.  It's just a pain that, unless you have had and cared for a horse, you will never know and that's ok.  I just had to cut her some slack because of what I went through with my loss.  She didn't say how long ago the accident happened, did she? 

[Jamoche]

Yes, it was a freak accident, but the defendants were beyond negligent for not confining the other horses.  I felt so bad for the plaintiff.

And every time they were asked if they would pen horses up in the future, they weaseled out of a yes. "That would be a good idea" or "We'll consider it". Which is to say, no.

[JBC344]

The litigants definitely fair better with MM.  MM will take testimony and listen to both sides.  On the other hand once JJ has made up her mind, she rarely allows the litigant she's going to rule against to complete a sentence and if she does let them speak it is only to call them a liar. 

I agree, one thing that I appreciate with MM is she is so much better at hiding the direction she is going in from just reading the cases before she comes out.  I also love that she always asks to see the litigants paperwork, even though she has all the copies in front of her to keep the illusion going.  I love when a litigant says "you have the copy" and she replies "I would like to see yours". 

 

One thing that PC/MM does that I really appreciate is when she is unfamiliar with a subject and will take a recess to either look it up or have her staff look up something so that she makes a fair ruling.  JJ can be a bit of a "know it all" sometimes and it certainly effects her rulings.

[BubblingKettle]

Today's rerun is one of my most hated... high-strung, angry road-rager Mr. Collazzo (or whatever his name was) with his pompous, lispy interruptions and statements about "explicatives." That guy is so freaking obnoxious, and he really wanted MM to think that he didn't bring the police report because the authorities had blacked out the relevant details? I'm glad she told the plaintiff that he was foolish to stick around for the rage -- he needed to know that, despite his former combat activities, he should have just stepped on the gas and gotten away from that bug-eyed freak.

[Pepper the Cat]

But on the other hand, we had the awesomeness of the first case with the painter that painted the wrong house! And wanted the plaintiff to pay for his mistake.

[Jamoche]

Dude! Just paint the house! You're getting new business out of it, so obviously all your brain capacity has gone to being able to paint.

 

And the unpainted homeowner just cracks me up.

[AngelaHunter]

Today's rerun is one of my most hated... high-strung, angry road-rager Mr. Collazzo (or whatever his name was) with his pompous, lispy interruptions and statements about "explicatives."

 

Thank you. Hate him. A lot. Little overly-gelled, pansy-assed 34 year old man acting like a big stupid baby only after he ascertained the target of his tantrum was a much older man. You could see he was getting a little hot under the collar when Judge M was reaming him out, but but she smacked him down nicely. And yeah, his lispy lies bugged the hell out of me. You have to wonder what kind of woman would choose to have three kids with that schmuck.

[WhitneyWhit]

I couldn't stand the plaintiff in today's first case, what a complete ass. He scams and defrauds people, then claims racism when people call him on his shit.

 

As for the plaintiff in the second case complaining about her heft boyfriend, what size does she see when she looks in the mirror?

[AngelaHunter]

I couldn't stand the plaintiff in today's first case, what a complete ass. He scams and defrauds people, then claims racism when people call him on his shit.

 

How surreal was that? He has convictions for scamming, passing bad checks and who knows what else in his long history, but crying "racism" should negate all that and give him a big payday? I was really glad Judge M spanked him and awarded the defendants extra money for his disgusting behavior. He's a "disabled" veteran who never saw combat, yet wants the perks awarded to those who did?

 

As for the plaintiff in the second case complaining about her heft boyfriend, what size does she see when she looks in the mirror?

 

I guess she didn't notice his size while she was living with and making babies with him. And yeah - the nasty orange vinyl wig, the eyelashes that look as though she smashed a couple of tarantulas and stuck them on her eyelids, the tongue piercing - I guess she thinks she's so hot she deserves better than a man who busts up her cheap furniture.