The People's Court - General Discussion

[AngelaHunter]

13 hours ago, NYGirl said:

the bitchface told her YOU TRAIN YOUR DOG!!

I remember that vile witch and her weirdo misfit sonny boy. Skipped this time. Ugh. Too bad JM can't do what a judge did this week and that was order a def's mouth taped up after he would not shut up. 

 I had never seen the first case of the def landlord who refuses to pay a penny to the plaintiff who fixed the furnaces in her rental property. The furnaces were over 25 years old and rather than buy new ones, she wanted him to just patch them up. He did, but they kept breaking down, leaving her tenants in the cold in January so she had to buy new ones. She felt plaintiff shouldn't be paid since he could not miraculously make these dinosaurs new again. He tried to contact her constantly, asking for his 500$ and she completely ignored him.

"I had no problem paying him", she said even after stiffing him and making him drag her to court to get paid.

[bettername2come]

Today we have the 21-year-old model who tried to sue for $9,932 for lost modeling jobs after getting scratched during her manicure. Then the mom goes on a rant about how bad Judge Milian is at her job. 

[Cobalt Stargazer]

I've been enjoying how much yelling JM has been doing this week. I'm pretty sure she wants to cuss this defendant in the case where she got a restraining order  against the guy who was minding her Florida property, and it got damaged in Hurricane Irma.

[zillabreeze]

10 minutes ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

I've been enjoying how much yelling JM has been doing this week. I'm pretty sure she wants to cuss this defendant in the case where she got a restraining order  against the guy who was minding her Florida property, and it got damaged in Hurricane Irma.

You could almost see JM trying to choke back the bile while ruling.  That nasty old bitch needed her ass kicked.  

If the previous judge had not issued that ridiculous RO,  JM would have given P the max.  She was following the letter of the law, but sure didn't want to!

[AngelaHunter]

15 hours ago, zillabreeze said:

That nasty old bitch needed her ass kicked.  

She was magnificent! Plaintiff took care of her property for two summers for 10 dollars a week but this time he had a psychotic break and cut all her wires, smashed her cable box, scraped the finish off her siding, pushed over all her landscaping bricks and then took a hammer and broke some of her tiles. It was obvious to CSI hag. She just knew he did it all. Yes, there was a hurricane with 95mph winds, but that didn't do any damage! No, plaintiff did it all. Such a horrific, evil hag that even JM couldn't scrape up any kindness for her even though she was old.  Another judge believed every word she said. Wow.

16 hours ago, bettername2come said:

Today we have the 21-year-old model who tried to sue for $9,932 for lost modeling jobs

You just know insolent dragon mom told her daughter, "Baby, we're going for the lottery with this one!"  Yeah, JM doesn't know what she's doing and is incompetent, but who is walking away with 32$ in her pocket instead of nearly 10K? 😁 Not JM!

Best part: Doug in the Hall tells her, "You better leave."

Edited August 3, 2019 by AngelaHunter

[zillabreeze]

1 hour ago, AngelaHunter said:

"Baby, we're going for the lottery with this one!"  Yeah, JM doesn't know what she's doing and is incompetent, but who is walking away with 32$ in her pocket instead of nearly 10K? 

$32.00 is more insulting than Zero IMO, making it a delicious verdict!  

The $10,000 was really only a drop in the bucket doncha' know?   Her oh so, lucrative "modeling career" was disrupted by the near amputation of three fingers.  "Casting calls" my plus sized hiney!  I missed several last week, too!  

"Modeling" appears to be a euphemism for "I don't contribute anything to society, but spend my time getting beauty treatments at cut rate salons".

[AngelaHunter]

32 minutes ago, zillabreeze said:

The $10,000 was really only a drop in the bucket doncha' know?

She didn't really look like a model to my untrained eye. Do models answer "casting calls"? I thought that was for actors, but I'm unsure. Proof she was going to be paid 10K? We don't have any but I swear my baby definitely would have been chosen from the cattle call and been paid the big bucks for sure if only she hadn't had her hand permanently mangled by those evil defs. 

37 minutes ago, zillabreeze said:

"Modeling" appears to be a euphemism for "I don't contribute anything to society, but spend my time getting beauty treatments at cut rate salons".

Even worse: "Influencers" on YouTube. Is there a more useless and meaningless "career"?

[Florinaldo]

I felt ashamed because of the plaintiff in the electric bicycle case, which I had not seen before. My countrymen are not supposed to behave that way!

Too thick to understand that the terms of a warranty are binding; dishonest enough to disregard obvious facts that go against his claim; and so spiteful that he blamed the solidarity of New Yorkers for the verdict going against them (even though JM lives in Florida). He even seemed ready to spit on the free bike that the defendant was very graciously offering him in the hallterview. (A smart PR move on the part of a dealer who had already gone out of his way to accommodate the customer, even though the latter was not the least bit grateful for it.)

A specimen of that rare beast on US TV, the Ugly Canadian. Did they say where he was from exactly?

Edited August 6, 2019 by Florinaldo

[AngelaHunter]

21 hours ago, Florinaldo said:

A specimen of that rare beast on US TV, the Ugly Canadian. Did they say where he was from exactly?

Toronto.  I couldn't finish this but figured the plaintiff rode that thing into the ground and tried to blame the def.  I have a bike I've ridden for many years. How the hell can anyone bend the steel seat support without seriously crashing the bike?

I also watched one of the more detestable litigants, with "Michael", the blank-eyed, douchebag haired, dumbass gym rat def who backed his "huge" truck (maybe overcompensating, Mikey?) into the plaintiff's car and lied like hell about it, even lifting his arms in a grand gesture to show us his disgusting sweaty pits. He wanted to settle but the plaintiff's Latino boyfriend "don't speak proper English." JM corrected his pathetic, ignorant grammar, since Mikey don't speak too good himself, but I wish she had been a little harder on the moron even though his general stupidity is kind of sad.

I do remember the wormy, Lying Lipschitz, who brought his small daughter here to listen to him try to lie his way out responsibility for hitting plaintiff's car, hear JM conclude that he's a liar and rule against him. But hey - he's a "pickle-eating champion". Wow. Quite an impressive accomplishment, Lipschitz. You are an outstanding example of morality and honesty for your child and you made an utter fool of yourself. Congratulations.

[Florinaldo]

4 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Toronto.

More fodder for those Canadians who hate TO, AKA the center of the world to its inhabitants, with a passion. But he is not the norm for the many Torontonians I know.

[DoctorK]

1 hour ago, Florinaldo said:

But he is not the norm for the many Torontonians I know.

This is true for all of the "reality" shows. What we see are self selected players who the producers think will bring in viewers. On the court shows, what we see are only the people who decide to go on a fake TV court show for their fifteen minutes of fame, even series like Big Bang Theory are crap, I was a physics graduate student, we were (mostly) not pencil neck beta males, partied hard, got in bar fights (and mostly lost) and busted our asses off to get our research done so we could get out of academia and make a living. By the way, get off my lawn!

Edited August 7, 2019 by DoctorK
clarification

[Florinaldo]

17 hours ago, DoctorK said:

This is true for all of the "reality" shows. What we see are self selected players who the producers think will bring in viewers.

Of course, one individual is not necessarily representative of the whole species. I was just trying to put across that I am not one of those Canadians who hate verything and everyone Toronto, in spite of some insufferable specimens like that one.

Amusingly, I too graduated in physics. As the saying went: physics will get you everywhere, as long as you get out of it. (I am certain there are similar versions in other fields.)

No one in our department fit the BBT stereotype either; there were some SF readers, but no one was as compulsive about it or comics as the BBT gang, despite having read the classics like Tintin, Astérix or Blake et Mortimer.

[AngelaHunter]

All new today, right? What a bunch of unlikables.

First, we had two grown men - pink-cheeked, whiny millennial crybabies with silly beards, fighting because plaintiff gave def 11$ he found on the floor, and asked him to gamble with it for him in Vegas. Def gambles it, loses it, then wins 5K so the plaintiff, with his charts and graphs, declares he's owed 2.47% of the winnings. They work at the same place, but now with this hissy fit, they no longer speak. I hope nothing really bad ever happens to the plaintiff because he'll crumble like a week-old cookie. Watching this show makes me understand a bit better why women are so desperate these days. Plaintiff gets nothing, of course.

The rent fight: Nearly unwatchable. The plaintiff, whose name may or may not be Douglas,  says he rented an apartment - or a room depending on who you believe (and JM didn't believe either of them) from the def. Now he says she doesn't even own the place and he wants his deposit back, even though he's still squatting there and paying nothing and also the 500$ he claims he gave her for a fridge. The def, with a mouthful of... I don't know - a weird grill, gold teeth? - says the place is owned by her uncle, Mohammed. "Does your uncle live there?" JM asks. "He do", def answers.

JM wants to know why he isn't here? "He's away." "Where is he?" JM asks with a little smirk. "He's away" x 5. "Taking care of his business." After watching so many of these shows, I think we know he's not traveling as  the owner of a multinational company or doing a tour of Europe but is most likely in the slammer. He's very old - 66. That goes over well with JM.  Def admits there is 23K owed in back taxes on the place (plaintiff took the liberty of opening Mohammed's mail and found this out). Def says she's going to take care of that huge bill, starting tomorrow. She got a POA for her uncle because I guess he's going to be "away" for quite some time. She got this at a "notary publican". Maybe the notary works out of a tavern? I don't know, but her papers had JM choking because they were saturated with cigarette smoke. Zippo for both of them, but JM gives the def very valuable free advice on how to get the plaintiff out.

Veterinary case: The plaintiff - one of the most annoying people ever - wants his vet bill refunded. He let his dog suffer from a huge tumour on his leg for months, because the dog was limping and the plaintiff thought it was a "concussion" or maybe it would go away. The def vet told him he would need to anesthetize the dog for x-rays and would have to do blood tests first because of the dog's age. The plaintiff agreed to this, but later that day found a vet who would just hold the dog down for the x-rays, so now plaintiff wants back the 375$ he paid the def, plus another couple grand for his aggravation or whatever. The plaintiff is the type who is impossible to talk to because he never shuts up and just kept talking over the judge. He agreed to the fee and gets nothing back. He attempts to retry the case to Doug-in-the-Hall, who has to practically throw him out to make him STFU.  The dog lost a leg, but is otherwise okay now.

[Katy M]

1 hour ago, AngelaHunter said:

First, we had two grown men - pink-cheeked, whiny millennial crybabies with silly beards, fighting because plaintiff gave def 11$ he found on the floor, and asked him to gamble with it for him in Vegas. Def gambles it, loses it, then wins 5K so the plaintiff, with his charts and graphs, declares he's owed 2.47% of the winnings. They work at the same place, but now with this hissy fit, they no longer speak. I hope nothing really bad ever happens to the plaintiff because he'll crumble like a week-old cookie. Watching this show makes me understand a bit better why women are so desperate these days. Plaintiff gets nothing, of course.

A long time ago I went to Las Vegas and someone I worked with gave me a quarter to throw in a slot machine.  Someone else said to me, I would never give someone money to gamble with because they won't do it, or keep it, whatever.  I said, I wouldn't do that.  She said, actually you're probably the only person I would trust.  LOL.  I have a reputation for being very honest.  Probably not the worst thing in the world.  IIRC, the quarter won another quarter, so I gave her the whole whopping 50 cents when I got back.  She said I should have put the quarter back in to see if it made more.  Those weren't my original instructions:)    

But yeah, what a petty suit.  If he found the money on the floor, it's not like he was every out anything in the first place.

[AngelaHunter]

24 minutes ago, Katy M said:

  IIRC, the quarter won another quarter, so I gave her the whole whopping 50 cents when I got back.  She said I should have put the quarter back in to see if it made more.

See. You can't win doing that, no matter the outcome. Even if you had given her 50$ she probably would have been unhappy because you could have made it more. Some people take on a whole new monstrous persona when money is involved, as we see all the time on this show.

However, I'm sure all the people who work with those two twits found their appearance here and watching them snub each other like mean high school girls amusing, so it's not a total loss.

[Katy M]

49 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

See. You can't win doing that, no matter the outcome. Even if you had given her 50$ she probably would have been unhappy because you could have made it more. Some people take on a whole new monstrous persona when money is involved, as we see all the time on this show.

She just said it in a matter-of-fact tone.  I didn't get the impression that she was mad about it.

[AngelaHunter]

Today featured a parade of the Desperate and the Clueless.

But damn - first plaintiff is a homely, short, bald, chinless and submissive beta who has had at least 3 women (one who wanted to procreate with him) and the other two who are here are not even pathetic little mutts, but reasonably attractive, seemingly intelligent women. Did they want him because if some girlfriend tells him, "Put my name on your bank account, okay?" he does it? "We were living together", he says to excuse his laziness and gullibility. Yeah, so what? Even so, I have a hard time believing that was the attraction since I doubt he's wealthy. He also never ever bothers checking his statements because he has yet another new girlfriend willing to do that for him and in fact, she's the one who discovered the debits. Why should he be responsible for keeping track of his own finances? His women will do it. What am I missing here? Granted, his relationships don't last long (I guess when the well dries up the women are out of there in double-quick time) but still, Casanova just doesn't seem capable of learning from his mistakes.

Def, who kept her CC charges on his account to be paid by him each month, doesn't see what the problem is. They were PAPERLESS bills, so how could she know anything about it? She just automatically assumed some benevolent entity was taking care of her charges. My bills are all paperless too but somehow I manage to check my account now and then. Whatever.  Doug in the Hall asks def if she learned anything. "No," she says, quite rightly. She got all those bills paid and is going to get a few dollars from this show, so what does she care?

Then we had the two old duffers - tenant and landlord. Neither of them has a clue about much of anything. Plaintiff wants his deposit back, but never bothered to give the def landlord notice he was moving. The lease said it had to be in writing, but plaintiff claims he told the def he was leaving during a conversation in the driveway. JM wants to know why he wouldn't send a letter,  text, email, etc about his intentions? "We had a friendly relationship," the plaintiff says and then immediately talks about how "contentious" their dealings were.  The landlord has no idea he had to send a written notice about why he was keeping the security deposit but tries to wrangle a new carpet out of this even though he admits the carpet in this rental unit was 21 years old. Plaintiff also smoked like a chimney in the apt and turned all the walls brown. The lease states "No smoking" but he says the landlord told him to go ahead and smoke as much as he liked. Plaintiff has zero proof of anything he said yet in the hall relates that he's shocked he didn't get his money back.

Finally is the not-overly bright guy who bought an old beater van for 1400$ from the slick, fugazi car-flipping defs and now wants double that back. It never occurred to him to take the thing to get checked out before buying it or to even take it for a test drive. (Gee, I even take the brand new cars I buy for a test drive)The def told him it was reliable. That's all the proof he needed,  so why bother spending the 100$ to check it out? Turns out parts of the undercarriage were so rotted that a mechanic told him it wasn't worth fixing.  There is no bill of sale or even receipt and the plaintiff was fine with that, until now. Defs claim he didn't even buy it from them but from someone named "John Edwards" who dumped it at a lot down the street and told defs to get whatever they could for it. Plaintiff doesn't bother taking it back to the defs, but has it towed to a junkyard where he was given 366$ for it. He now has nothing to return to the defs in exchange for a refund. JM awards zero to the plaintiff.

Edited August 8, 2019 by AngelaHunter

[AngelaHunter]

Oh, Mr. Hamilton - you are such a nice person but you refer to the def, your ex-employee, as a "good guy"? Yeah, I guess so, if your idea of "good" is a loser who doesn't support his own kids, rips off his employer for 500$ on the trucks, gets into bar fights at 34 years old, brags about this on FB, and then lies/scams and says he injured his wrist on the job so wants compensation - luckily the compensation board figured he's trying to commit a fraud - and quits without informing Mr. Hamilton. He also never put the trucks in his name for a year, racks up tickets because he's not too bright (or maybe he IS bright and knows if he drives drunk after bar night and kills someone, guess who is getting sued?), and won't pay them.

I would hate to see what Mr. Hamilton considers a "bad guy." 🙄

[sonder]

Today it said it was a new episode 9/2/2019. It was people who were already on before. Harvey mentioned it being the start of the 23rd season I think. What season is it because it was an old episode? 

[aemom]

16 hours ago, sonder said:

Today it said it was a new episode 9/2/2019. It was people who were already on before. Harvey mentioned it being the start of the 23rd season I think. What season is it because it was an old episode? 

I just checked the schedule and they have nothing listed past September 6 so far.  Everything scheduled this week is a repeat. 😞 

[AngelaHunter]

Definitely not new eps. We recently mentioned the despicable, pansy-assed, douchebag-haired hipster idiot who parked in a handicapped space because of his raging desire for his douchebag drink, Arizona Sweet Tea. Those tow guys must be ultra-speedy, since they managed to drive up, get out of the truck, hook up DoucheBoy's car and tow it away all within the space of one minute. 

Then the repeat of "Me and my fiance was overseas on vacation." " I give toys and furniture to the Salvation Army." ("Me and my fiance are two big healthy young people and I'm on Sec08. Let Byrd pay our rent so we can take trips overseas!) The literally clueless landlord  - JM asks him if he knew these tenant/landlord laws to which he answers, "I don't have a clue" - had the audacity to expect her and her fiance to paint the place in "mutual" colours after she let her kid slap paint all over the place and after she gets some shitty paint which peels off. The entitlement boggles the mind.  I can just picture these litigants on JJ: "What were you doing going off on overseas trips when Byrd is paying your rent?"

[aemom]

New episodes start Monday! 😀

[zillabreeze]

On 9/4/2019 at 4:25 PM, AngelaHunter said:

"What were you doing going off on overseas trips when Byrd is paying your rent?"

Oh I remember that doozy from first run.  She's on Section 8 (and probably the other assorted accrutremonts).  Giving away furniture, (guessing rent to own) being "overseas"....  JJ would've tore her ass up. 

When am I ever gonna learn?  I'm so stupid.  Go to work, pay for my shit and then shuffle credit card miles and budgets just to go to Chicago for a few days?  Where's the "overseas dole"?  I just Googled.  I can't find my Free dream trip to London ANYWHERE!

I'm convinced.  There's a Secret Google.  Later, I'll try "sit on my ass, live for nothing and live high on the hog".  Perhaps if I stick "Byrd" in the keywords, I'll get a hit.

Will keep y'all posted.

[DoctorK]

Disappointment! According to Cox, today we have new episodes. However, the first case is the very memorable one with the jackass father defending his pinhead (as per JM) son who was shooting bow and arrows in the back yard, through the fence and damaging the commercial building on the other side. In spite of the security camera footage, good ole dad (and even worse mom) was denying, throwing out red herrings (like it is against the law for the commercial property to have cameras that include a part of his adjacent property), and just being a complete jerk.

[Florinaldo]

We got new cases here (at least they were new to me). Including one that will join the category of the memorable ones, as the one where JM's judicial world intersected with her husband's! I was surprised they did not bleep the name of the judge in the case which had been decided when the plaintiff mentioned it, and immediately got an explanation thanks to JM's reaction. I think there is a very good chance that the staffer who was preparing the file and briefed the guy on procedures suggested that it would be a good idea to mention that name and that it might impress her, not necessarily saying why.

The case was already interesting and a departure from the usual fare; defendant is a slimy spineless creature, who either is totally dumb and does not understand basic legal facts or is putting on an act to try and elude responsibility. When you knowingly take part in making false public accusations, you are as guilty as the person who instigates it; since he had full knowledge of what he was doing when he "edited" the picture, he had no leg to stand on by pleading ignorance.

As for the rest, a typical dog fight case where the defendants flap their gums in trying to argue every flimsy reason why theiy are not liable for their dog's actions, and an "as is" car sale case where the idiot buyer did not bother to have a mechanic give it a look before the buy, and now wants to wiggle out of the loan agreement he duly signed.

[SRTouch]

3 hours ago, DoctorK said:

Disappointment! According to Cox, today we have new episodes. However, the first case is the very memorable one

Awwww, you got cheated! I did get a new episode, though I only watched 1 case before having to get ready for work - and it was something new and unusual. Haven't watched rest of episode, but first case worth the watch to see someone actually win an internet defamation case.

[DoctorK]

1 minute ago, SRTouch said:

Awwww, you got cheated!

Absolutely, but I always feel that way whenever I pay my Cox bill, in spite of all TV channels occasionally going "unavailable" for no apparent reason and the internet gateway going off line now and then. I would consider cutting the cable but I would hate to lose access to TCM and MeTV.

[CrazyInAlabama]

My local rerun was the case where the woman bought, and fixed up a store, and the son of the people who live next door (one was 19), and I think a friend, put some basketballs between the fences (chain link with aluminum or vinyl slats in it).    They shot at the basketballs, and put a bunch of holes in the fence slats (just under 20), and holes in the stucco of the plaintiff's building.    All of this was caught on video cameras that protect the plaintiff's building, including the two young men coming on her property, yanking the arrows out of the wall, and continuing to shoot the same way.     Defendant father claimed plaintiff's video cameras were a violation of his privacy, because he can't walk in his yard in his underwear.     $200 to plaintiff, and I bet this never ends either.    

The father says the vandal son wasn't in court because he's working, and my guess is his parole or bail won't allow him to leave the state.  

Edited September 11, 2019 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, Florinaldo said:

We got new cases here (at least they were new to me). Including one that will join the category of the memorable ones,

It was absolutely fascinating and I swear I was on the edge of my seat, although it took quite a bit of clarification by JM for me to understand the plaintiff's case. It was  good look at what can happen when you post things online and think you're above it all or too removed to be called on it. JM's husband is mentioned! Def. photoshopped pics to make plaintiff appear to be a pedophile! I guess he really wanted the 3700$ he was paid for this. He was asked to do this by a lawyer - one of the lawyers I'm assuming was caught by plaintiff being a pedophile! This was all kinds of awesome, except for the pedophile part. There is no punishment severe enough for them. 5K to the plaintiff. 

The dog case - skipped.

Last case, and we're back to the usual. Plaintiff buys a 15 year old NIssan for 1999$, then when it breaks down he just sends it off to the junkyard even though he doesn't even own it and still owes money on the POS. It was on Tremont Ave(!!), so of course, the junkyard was his only option. JM wants to know if he bothered reading the contract he signed. Absolutely not - not a word of it! Why would he? Even so, although the ancient car is gone to Beater Heaven, he wants all his money back. Def car dealer, who was ignored by plaintiff when he asked him to bring the car in, is awarded the money he's owed on the hoopty.

[Broderbits]

4 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

There is no punishment severe enough for them. 5K to the plaintiff. 

I hope there is some kind of criminal case pending against that moron defendant and the shyster lawyers who hired him. What a nightmare!

[DoctorK]

7 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Def. photoshopped pics to make plaintiff appear to be a pedophile!

Hmmm, I wonder if some of us got reruns because the local station decided this was too adult of an issue for afternoon TV?

[AngelaHunter]

19 minutes ago, DoctorK said:

I wonder if some of us got reruns because the local station decided this was too adult of an issue for afternoon TV?

I doubt it. I still remember the episode where a guy was suing for construction he did on a bondage dungeon. One of the defs was the dominatrix. I recall being shocked that BDSM was now a topic for afternoon viewing.

[patty1h]

1 hour ago, DoctorK said:

Hmmm, I wonder if some of us got reruns because the local station decided this was too adult of an issue for afternoon TV?

I also doubt it - didn't TPC once have the case with a woman who had the local handyman fix her gigantic electric sex machine while her husband was overseas in the military?

[AngelaHunter]

39 minutes ago, patty1h said:

fix her gigantic electric sex machine while her husband was overseas in the military?

YES! 🤣 I had never heard of such a thing. I think my eyes nearly popped out when I looked it up, after hearing her complaining it conked out after AN HOUR or so. Poor JM. She thought they were talking about some little vibrator, not some humongous Terminator of Sex Machines.

[Brattinella]

57 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

YES! 🤣 I had never heard of such a thing. I think my eyes nearly popped out when I looked it up, after hearing her complaining it conked out after AN HOUR or so. Poor JM. She thought they were talking about some little vibrator, not some humongous Terminator of Sex Machines.

Oh dear, was it a Sybian?  I always wondered about those things...

[meowmommy]

2 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

JM's husband is mentioned! Def. photoshopped pics to make plaintiff appear to be a pedophile! I guess he really wanted the 3700$ he was paid for this. He was asked to do this by a lawyer - one of the lawyers I'm assuming was caught by plaintiff being a pedophile! This was all kinds of awesome, except for the pedophile part. There is no punishment severe enough for them. 5K to the plaintiff. 

Wow, the plaintiff decided he was the internet's Chris Hanson doing To Catch a Predator.  Lucky he didn't get in trouble himself with the constabulary for pretending to be a teenage girl.  Interesting topic of who's ultimately responsible when a website developer uploads libelous material at the behest of his client.  Seems like it was the Photoshopping that really got him in hot water.

That is wow about MM's husband.  I'll bet they had an interesting chat when MM got home.

My CC called the defendant "Eve."  Hee.

MM's glasses look exactly like a pair I have that I never wear.  Everyone likes how I look in them; I just can't see out of them and never could despite three trips to the optician.

Skipped the dog case.  Some things never change.

Didn't you know that if you say you're buying a car to visit your sainted mother's grave, that constitutes a warranty that includes the dealership going to pick up the car at a junkyard on Tremont Ave.  Plaintiff still had a stupid gaping look when MM pronounced her verdict.  No clues in his cluebag.

Sad that I haven't watched in a year and nothing has changed; the set is still hideous, the cases are still bullshit, and Levin is still an abomination.  Oh, and MM's face looks even more stretched than I remember.

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, Brattinella said:

Oh dear, was it a Sybian? 

Just looked that up. NO, not that. This:🤣

https://www.amazon.ca/Maestro-Multi-Faceted-Machine-Universal-Adapter/dp/B00EQDVHWC/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=maestro&qid=1568080579&s=hpc&sr=1-2

1 hour ago, meowmommy said:

Levin is still an abomination. 

Yes. Yes, he is.

[Brattinella]

1 hour ago, AngelaHunter said:

Just looked that up. NO, not that. This:🤣

https://www.amazon.ca/Maestro-Multi-Faceted-Machine-Universal-Adapter/dp/B00EQDVHWC/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=maestro&qid=1568080579&s=hpc&sr=1-2

Yes. Yes, he is.

Seven HUNDRED dollars??  Yeesh!

[AngelaHunter]

25 minutes ago, Brattinella said:

Seven HUNDRED dollars??  Yeesh!

Maybe a little expensive, but wait - there's more!

Quote

"Take this powerful, versatile, multi-position sex machine with you, wherever you go!"

😀 It's portable!

[PrincessPurrsALot]

[DoctorK]

Alas, another rerun for me today, the fabulous $15 (actually $7 but the small claims court told her the minimum to file was $15 so she changed to that) hoop earrings. Not a classic episode, but entertainingly stupid. JM's reaction to the plaintiff admitting that she lied about the $7/$15 when she filed the claim was golden.

[SRTouch]

First up is couple who belong on Springer. P suing ex bf for trashing her new old ride and sending her baby daddy intimate pix/video of the new ex couple doing it. In filing paper D denies sending any pix/video, then during testimony admits to one pic, which quickly becomes two pix but no videos - then MM finds multiple pix and video. OTOH, P admits she used D's phone to log onto his FB account to pretend to be him threatening to suicide because of their big fight. Oh yeah, big fight at 3 am which resulted in him being kicked out of her apartment, and he goes back with police to get his phone which was left in her bedroom, she denies to police having the phone, but she does and that's when she makes her posts pretending to be him.... I'm just wondering what her son was thinking while all this was going on. Oh, and MM is wondering how it was that P welcomed D back into her home (and bed) in April when he posted the intimate pix/videos back in February. Anyway, MM is disgusted with both and awards damages to both - but neither get any money since amount she awards offset.... oh, except D has to pay P's deductible for the car damage.

Next case was tenants suing ex-landlady for triple the security which they claim was wrongfully withheld. Place sounds like a flop house where tenants come and go. Older house where bedrooms are rented and everyone shares common areas. Instead of new leases new tenants just sign an addendum when they move in and none of the tenants are actually on the lease - tenants on lease are long gone. I guess flop house is quite of misleading, as it doesn't look bad in pix and videos. Anyway, numerous flaws in plaintiffs' case. First, they're asking for triple amount of entire deposit even though a good chunk was returned. The killer though is that landlady had evidence of damages that actually exceed what she withheld - even after MM denies a couple items on her itemized list the pictures show damage in excess of what she withheld. Litigants are from California so they get to ask for more than the normal max of 5 grand - doesn't matter as they get nothing

Almost gave up on last case after preview clip. This one has to do with P suing her tax preparer because she feels he charged to much. Preview clip suggest she signed contract agreeing to terms/fees, got her refund, then decided she was overcharged. Ah, but soon as case starts MM is questioning tax guy about questionable/misleading ads. Ad promises a hundred bucks if you let him do your taxes, but actually that $100 is an advance which he deducts from your refund. MM hammers guy on his misleading ad, he spouts bunch of double talk..... ok, don't like this guy as he sounds like a scam artist to me. Liberal use of zip button, but I slow down and watch as D passes up the signed contract. Oh my, getting interesting again, Douglas carries the contract which supposedly has her signature and she denies signing it. Oh, and she tells us she told tax man she was waiting for documents from her school which would give her a credit/deduction for education expenses..... over to D and more doubletalk - MM asks if he filed without waiting for these forms, he says no he can't file without all the forms, then he turns around and says he filed without the forms - huh? Not sure what he's saying, but not willing to rewind and give another listen.... ok, as we go to break D again claiming P signed, P saying no she didn't, and MM holding the questionable document and P's drivers license saying "this doesn't look at all like her signature".... after break I zip ahead to judgement time. D still with the doubletalk..... ah, but I missed a switcheroo as MM calls Douglas over and they're in agreement that P is providing some funky evidence which casts doubt on her claim - ok, MM again hammers D on the misleading ad, but ends up tossing P case because, while the signatures don't appear to match, it sure looks like P dated the signature as her '2's' and '9's are pretty uniquely written..... P does sort of win, she gets $100 which the ad sort of promised, but doesn't get whatever else she wanted

Edited September 10, 2019 by SRTouch

[DoctorK]

1 hour ago, SRTouch said:

First up is couple who belong on Springer. P suing ex bf for trashing her new old ride and sending her baby daddy intimate pix/video of the new ex couple doing it.

Thanks SRTOUCH, This let me figure out that the station I get PC from for years has swapped the "new" episodes at 11:00 AM and reruns at 2:00 PM so I have been seeing reruns at the time I have always gotten new episodes. Speaking of Springer, I watched one case of Judge Jerry and it was pretty bad.

[meowmommy]

4 hours ago, SRTouch said:

First up is couple who belong on Springer.

Always so grateful for SRTouch's wonderful recaps.

They deserved each other.  Right off the bat, what kind of judgment are we expecting from someone who ditches her apparently serviceable vehicle for a newer hoopty because her BF disses how it looks?

But he's not a super sharp knife, either.  When I think my phone is somewhere beyond my eyesight, I have someone dial my phone number, and magically, it rings and I hear it.  

Here's a hint--if you don't want revenge porn, don't let anyone take dirty pictures of you, including yourself.

My car was vandalized.  I knew exactly who did it, but because I didn't witness it, the police said they could do exactly nothing.  

Did plaintiff #2 just finish up at the prom?

Defendant #3 said the $100 was just a marketing tool.  That fits since he was a complete tool.

4 hours ago, SRTouch said:

MM asks if he filed without waiting for these forms, he says no he can't file without all the forms, then he turns around and says he filed without the forms - huh?

If you don't have all the documents you need to file your tax return, why are you rushing off to a tax preparer?  The government shutdown ended on February 15.  She was obviously in a damn hurry.  But yes, you can always file an amended return if you're in such a damn hurry to get your taxes filed.  He was sleazy, but he wasn't wrong on that.

[AngelaHunter]

7 hours ago, SRTouch said:

First up is couple who belong on Springer.

I just skimmed. Back to the same ol' - naked pics and baby daddy and vandalized car and police calls and "altercations" and mangled English. Ugh. Disgusting. This just left me wondering: How did I ever have a sex life when I couldn't film it and take pics of it? It's like a tree falling in the forest. If I have no media to prove it really happened, and couldn't send it to various people or post it online, did it ever really happen?

7 hours ago, SRTouch said:

Next case was tenants suing ex-landlady for triple the security which they claim was wrongfully withheld.

If you want to quote California law to JM, improve your reading comprehension first. You don't get treble damages on the money you DIDN'T pay. duh. So I need to know, because I missed the beginning, was the plaintiff Calvin's mom? Was Calvin wearing a tux? Was he going to a wedding directly from the show or to perform on "America's Got Talent", maybe playing the kazoo?

2 hours ago, meowmommy said:

If you don't have all the documents you need to file your tax return, why are you rushing off to a tax preparer? 

My tax preparer won't send the forms in if I didn't provide her with all the documents needed. Due to my scatterbrain, this has resulted  in a few extra trips to her place. Anyway, the tax guy here deliberately made that "Get 100$" hook not just misleading, but fake.

[aemom]

On 9/9/2019 at 4:02 PM, Florinaldo said:

The case was already interesting and a departure from the usual fare; defendant is a slimy spineless creature, who either is totally dumb and does not understand basic legal facts or is putting on an act to try and elude responsibility. When you knowingly take part in making false public accusations, you are as guilty as the person who instigates it; since he had full knowledge of what he was doing when he "edited" the picture, he had no leg to stand on by pleading ignorance.

The D's name was Yves which is a francophone name, and his accent sounded Quebecois as opposed to France, so I couldn't help but wonder if perhaps he was in the States, but not legally allowed to work there and he took this job because it paid a fair bit under the table and he needed the cash - no matter how distasteful the work was.  He knew the whole thing was a sham, but he did it anyway.  Honte à toi Yves!  (Shame on you Yves!)

On 9/9/2019 at 7:12 PM, AngelaHunter said:

YES! 🤣 I had never heard of such a thing. I think my eyes nearly popped out when I looked it up, after hearing her complaining it conked out after AN HOUR or so. Poor JM. She thought they were talking about some little vibrator, not some humongous Terminator of Sex Machines.

I remember that case very well and I also looked it up at the time out of curiosity and was also rather surprised.  I don't recall it being quite so pricey, so I think that it's a discontinued model that someone is just trying to offload.  I once read that one out of every 10 Amazon orders is for some kind of sex toy.

13 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

So I need to know, because I missed the beginning, was the plaintiff Calvin's mom? Was Calvin wearing a tux? Was he going to a wedding directly from the show or to perform on "America's Got Talent", maybe playing the kazoo?

They were roommates.  I also originally thought she was his mom, but upon closer inspection, I think she was younger than I initially thought.  Calvin was indeed wearing some kind of tux.  Not sure why - but I did not get the impression that he was the sharpest knife in that roommate drawer.

Edited September 11, 2019 by aemom
Forgot something

[meowmommy]

-

Edited September 11, 2019 by meowmommy
Changed my mind about what I wrote

[DoctorK]

44 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

So I need to know, because I missed the beginning, was the plaintiff Calvin's mom? Was Calvin wearing a tux? Was he going to a wedding directly from the show or to perform on "America's Got Talent", maybe playing the kazoo?

Yeah, he really creeped me out, without even going to whether the plaintiff was his mom, girlfriend or caretaker.

Edited September 11, 2019 by DoctorK
spell checkers are fallible

[AngelaHunter]

11 hours ago, aemom said:

They were roommates.

Thanks. This roommate thing just gets curiouser and curiouser.  Where these people find each other? OddballRoommate.com?

11 hours ago, aemom said:

I once read that one out of every 10 Amazon orders is for some kind of sex toy.

In all the years I used Amazon I had no idea they sold such things, until one day someone online mentioned a particular heinous book and I looked it up. What to my wondering eyes did appear? Bondage gear (including the kind that collapses so you can take it to your hotel with you in case you're in the mood to be trussed up!), sex machines, dildos and all sorts of things I had never heard of and wish I still hadn't.

[VartanFan]

Quote

The case was already interesting and a departure from the usual fare; defendant is a slimy spineless creature, who either is totally dumb and does not understand basic legal facts or is putting on an act to try and elude responsibility. 

Honestly, my jaw literally dropped and stayed there when we found out that the D did the photoshopping to make a man look like a pedophile.  And while he acted contrite and looked about to cry in the courtroom when he got his (TOTALLY JUSTIFIED) reaming, his hallterview was like 'meh, dindu nothin'.  Man - then the whole name drop of her husband.  Crazy crazy crazy.