The People's Court - General Discussion

[AngelaHunter]

I got a different repeat, but that's okay. At least it wasn't "Ellen".

I got the plaintiff who bashed up his rented Lexus and tried to pin the damage on the tow company. Everyone from the homeowners who called the cops because P's car was blocking their driveway, the cops who came and ticketed the car, to the tow company who hauled it away were all involved in a big racist conspiracy. JM might not have found his accusations so endearing and charming - she even smiled at the recorded threats he made to the tow owner -  if she had known that in the hall the plaintiff was going to inform Doug that she(JM) and the whole TPC crew are also racists who decided the outcome of this case (he got zero for his attempted little scam because JM called the insurance company and found out he had called them days before the tow to ask about the exact damage he was claiming the tow co. did)before he even got there.

[CrazyInAlabama]

I saw the tow case, and enjoyed it so much, even though it was a rerun.   I really got a kick out of Judge Marilyn's phone call to the insurance company about the damage the plaintiff tried to put on the tow company.   

The plaintiff's racist conspiracy claims were wild, and I really think he showed the type of person he is with that display.   

[AngelaHunter]

Yesterday's lying, broke-ass playboy: "Hi, Ms. Milian." 🙄

[AZChristian]

28 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Yesterday's lying, broke-ass playboy: "Hi, Ms. Milian." 🙄

I think most of humanity found him as charming as "Miss Milian."  In other words, NOT AT ALL.

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, AZChristian said:

I think most of humanity found him as charming as "Miss Milian."  In other words, NOT AT ALL.

Her hatred of him was rolling off in waves so strong they rocked my TV. I think it was so extreme it dulled the hatred she felt for the nasty, lowdown, vicious, drunken skank defendant who, in her supreme battle for the exclusive stud services of the low IQ, drunken, moronic playboy, crashed the sister's car into the car of her rival. She did emerge victorious. 

So today I got "Hot Bench" instead of TPC. It's a huge improvement over "Ellen" but I was bummed anyway.

In other news, I love how my CC now puts all the horrible grammar in quotation marks - It was "tooken" -  so no one will blame the illiteracy on CC. "It's not my fault!" exclaims CC.

[Ashforth]

Is it a requirement of this show now that the women wear horrendous wigs?

[AZChristian]

30 minutes ago, Ashforth said:

Is it a requirement of this show now that the women wear horrendous wigs?

In my imagination, the makeup rooms for ALL "reality" shows have a whole shelf of ugly wigs.  Court shows, Maury, Dr. Phil, etc.  In lieu of cash bonuses for their work, makeup staff people get to pick out ugly wigs for people on the show.

[CrazyInAlabama]

Today was the hysterical rerun where the plaintiff's car was parked.   At 5:30 a.m., the defendant (Harold I think, but I don't believe that's his real name either) is a car salesman, driving to work, rear ends and smashes the living hell out of plaintiff's car.    Plaintiff wants almost $5k for his car and contents (up to and including a piece of jewelry for his girlfriend) of the trunk.    The defendant is a total loser.   The 'driving to work' remark defendant makes is because the loser hasn't had a valid license in many years, (he claims for back child support), claims this was his first arrest for possession of a controlled substance (Suboxone?), and driving on a suspended license.      

Then Judge Marilyn, who would like to have Doug and Douglas team up and run over the defendant with matching monster trucks) pulls out the defendant's driving record.   He's been nailed over six times for driving without a license (that's why this time it was called aggrevated driving while suspended), drugs out of prescription bottles (he claims he had a prescription).   So the plaintiff gets a reasonable amount for his car deductible, and property, but not almost $5k.      

The defendant's license is conditional, only to go to and from work, or other necessary trips, so why was he going to work at 5:30 a.m.?     He really thought he was cute.   

I haven't wanted to punch anyone so much in recent memory (negligent dog owners are excluded from that).  

So this afternoon's rerun is some internet celebrity named Mickey Story,with the worst fashion sense I've seen on this show.   Purple hair, matching purple lipstick, huge breast implants (that's very relevant to the case).     

Plaintiff Tracy Unique Alexander suing for defendant stealing her medications, wigs, etc. , damage to a truck she loaned to the defendant.     Tracy's camo. outfit must be seen to be believed.     Tracy says after chest surgery, the defendant did come over and helped her, but claims the defendant ripped off everything she could get.  Apparently they each helped each other after surgery.     Unfortunately, Mickey stayed at the plaintiff's place long enough to become a legal tenant, so she had to get a restraining order against her, and she finally moved out, but Tracy claims before she left Mickey stole lots of her medications.     However, plaintiff coughs up the medications defendant claims plaintiff stole from her. 

There is a video submitted by plaintiff, showing the defendant wearing her wig, and jewelry.   Defendant can't sing at all, or else she's being attacked by the creature from Alien.   The end of a 20 year friendship is so sad.   

Plaintiff gets some stuff back, and plaintiff receives $316.   

Both litigants claim the other is jealous of their number of social media followers.   

Edited August 13, 2020 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

I finally got the show today, but cannot say I'm happy about it. How the hell do people live this way, and seem fine with it? Okay, just a few words: JM to the unearthly Purple People Eater def in regards to a video: "I can't take my eyes off you." Def preens and smiles, not realizing JM didn't mean that the way def though she did.

Well, I also have to say I was crushed - just crushed - to find out that the much-in-demand hunk, that god among men, Carlos, "don't want no serious relationships." He goes from woman to woman, toying with their affections and leaving a trail of broken hearts in his wake, including that of the rough, hatchet-faced plaintiff with the ungodly platinum dyed hair. Carlos, please! I promise I'll give you more money than any of your other girlfriends, past, present or future.

Oh, and "Allen", suing the smirking, revolting mountain of doodoo def. for rear-ending him, looked so much like a boyfriend I once had that I was a little discombobulated.

5 hours ago, AZChristian said:

n my imagination, the makeup rooms for ALL "reality" shows have a whole shelf of ugly wigs.  Court shows, Maury, Dr. Phil, etc.  In lieu of cash bonuses for their work, makeup staff people get to pick out ugly wigs for people on the show.

I wish that were the case, but I'm pretty sure litigants choose their own wigs (outfits, nails, fake lashes, etc) and sport them proudly here.

[AngelaHunter]

12 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

 At 5:30 a.m., the defendant (Harold I think, but I don't believe that's his real name either) is a car salesman, driving to work, rear ends and smashes the living hell out of plaintiff's car. 

Yes, we were just discussing Harold and the seductive, "come-on" winks he was giving JM:

 

[AngelaHunter]

Okay, so I forgot I had seen the dog attack case before, until I was well into it. One thing I don't understand: As soon as gross plaintiff's gross daughter said she was walking the dog in the lane "so he wouldn't get run over" I immediately wondered how he could get run over if on leash. Def brought up the same point later on, but JM ignored it both from P's idiot daughter and from Def. and awarded plaintiff 197$ for their dog's injuries. I'm pretty sure we've heard before that if both dogs are off-leash no one will be awarded money. We know very well lazy plaintiff just let the little dog off-leash to run around. Both dogs were not leashed so why did JM find in favour of the asshole plaintiffs? Plaintiff's stupid little/big/middleaged princess daughter found something terribly amusing about all this. Plaintiff, who seemed to think he was Perry Mason, offered up "Exhibit A".

 

[Pepper the Cat]

I am certain that the creepy Plantiff was stalking the defendant just like she claimed. And I really felt for her over the loss of her dog. Poor thing 

[AZChristian]

58 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Plaintiff, who seemed to think he was Perry Mason, offered up "Exhibit A".

Kind of gives a little credence to the defendant's comment that the plaintiff did stuff like this all the time.  How many litigants have asked for "treble damages" instead of "pain and suffering" (regardless of the case)?

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, AZChristian said:

Kind of gives a little credence to the defendant's comment that the plaintiff did stuff like this all the time.  How many litigants have asked for "treble damages" instead of "pain and suffering" (regardless of the case)?

Yes, that too. That weasel was trying to profit from the little dog's injuries. Those two were repugnant in the extreme, both too lazy to actually walk the dog then blaming someone else if it got hurt.

[AZChristian]

Did anyone else notice the long white hair growing from his cheek to the side of his nose on the left side of his face?  

We - two old people with old eyes - occasionally will find a chin hair that neither of us saw, but this thing was SO thick and long that it was visible on television.  Production must have seen it . . . but I guess when they see the weird "hairdon'ts" and makeup on the litigants, one long hair growing out of the face isn't worth dealing with.

[AngelaHunter]

8 hours ago, AZChristian said:

Did anyone else notice the long white hair growing from his cheek to the side of his nose on the left side of his face? 

I did not and I refuse to go back and check.

People? Next time you shop for an 18-year-old beater car, just remember these words of wisdom spouted from the def., Jabba the Shameless Amoral Scammer, spoken in a bid to not pay the 700$ still owed for the old hoopty:

"How can you basically sell a car without rolling a window down knowing it doesn't work?" Basically, how CAN you??

But that's not all. When plaintiff offered to fix the thing, def. refused, because even though she does admit he was more than kind to her:

"I honestly didn't trust the source of the fact." Whatever the hell that means, she is all about trust. And facts. Plaintiff learned a hard lesson about letting hustling deadbeats drive off in your car before it's paid for.

Who says this show is not educational?

The financially savvy loan officer making six figures:
Buys a timeshare

Buys it with a boyfriend, who works at Walgreens

Uses 6K on her credit card@24% interest for down payment

Finances the relationship with boyfriend for 4 years

Runs out of money. Borrows money from a lending joint where you can get 5700$ and pay back 7000$

Agrees with b/f that with his 30K settlement, a 4K water filter system is a good and necessary buy. Can't expect them to drink unfiltered water.

Has a joint checking account with b/f

 A loan officer she is. You cannot make this up, but yes, I know - she may be a clueless financial mess herself but it could be "Do as I say, not as I do." Still, I would hesitate to use her services. Oh, and boyfriend thinks that if your girlfriend cheats on you, that absolves you from paying back a loan.

 

Edited August 14, 2020 by AngelaHunter

[CrazyInAlabama]

Did she say where she was a loan officer?     It might have been payday loans or something, where they would finance anybody for a title loan.  I also wonder if the 'making six figures' was either her total income for life, or she exaggerated a tad and included the amount of the loans she processed in that total income?  

[AZChristian]

2 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Did she say where she was a loan officer?     It might have been payday loans or something, where they would finance anybody for a title loan.  I also wonder if the 'making six figures' was either her total income for life, or she exaggerated a tad and included the amount of the loans she processed in that total income?  

Maybe she was counting the digits after the decimal point.  LOL.

[AngelaHunter]

6 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

 It might have been payday loans or something, where they would finance anybody for a title loan. 

Ha! Yeah, giving title loans with 104% interest to people on their 1998 Pontiac Bonnevilles. Could be. I saw my own loan officer on Tuesday to see about an increase in my homeowner's LOC and not once did she suggest I use my MC to pay for my home improvements, that a timeshare might be a great investment, or that I go to some shady loan company after I tapped myself out subsidizing some boyfriend.

You'd think someone making "six figures" would have a hair stylist who would give her something that didn't look like greasy rat tails glued on her head.

[CrazyInAlabama]

I saw the rerun of the Purple haired truck driver, suing her neighbor (the defendant claims she was moving) because the woman replaced a nasty falling over privacy fence, that was all on defendant's property, except possibly 5 feet of new chain link that replaced the nasty fence.     Purple is shacking up with a man who admits to being 25 years younger than Purple, and Adonis (his name is Don) is defendant's former boyfriend.   Purple claims that defendant replaced the fence to watch Adonis work out.    There are very nasty texts between everyone, including some that are so bad Judge Marilyn won't even consider reading them out loud, between Adonis, and defendant.      Doug in the hallway asked Adonis about the age difference, and he said 25 years, but I don't believe it's a day less than 30 at least.  

(I missed some of the beginning)   This afternoon's rerun is an adult daughter (25 years old), with her mommy, suing her former landlady over the withholding of the daughter's security deposit.    I don't think the daughter has said a single word yet, just helicopter mommy.    The defendant says she gave the daughter the choice of leaving right now, or cleaning up her room immediately.    The defendant's pictures of the room are horrific.   The mattress has stains all over it, there are many bowls, and wrappers of food, including what looks like full soup bowls sitting around. and the defendant says she told the daughter to leave because she couldn't stand the stench from the daughter's room any longer.  There are clothes, and dirty stuff all over the floor.   The daughter finally talks, and says she has anxiety issues, and a learning disorder, so she couldn't clean.   The daughter was only in the room for four months, and there is no written lease.   The mother paid extra because the daughter kept swiping a lot of the defendant's food, and supplies.   

What a surprise, daughter moved back with Mommy.    Judge Marilyn returns six weeks of rent, for $900, and defendant keeps the security deposit.    Sorry, Judge M. feeling sorry for the daughter does not mean other people should pay her for disgusting habits.   Mother says the daughter graduated massage therapy school, and is waiting to take a certification exam.   Sorry, but I expect people who lay hands on me to wash them, and have proper sanitation,   I wonder how long the daughter will last at a massage shop?  My guess is not long.  

I think Judge Marilyn felt sorry for the plaintiff, and let that guide her judgment.    

 

Edited August 20, 2020 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

3 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

  I don't think the daughter has said a single word yet, just helicopter mommy. 

Her "anxiety issues" seem to preclude this 25-year-old from wiping the crap from her toilet or throwing out the mountains of stinking, rotting food and filth in her lair. I could feel the desperation seeping from Mommy at having this giant problem land back in her lap, probably until Mommy dies. I was shocked that JM gave Mommy and Her Problem so much money back.

[PrincessPurrsALot]

Daughter is a hoarder and the judge wants her mother to continue to enable her. The mother did the best thing she could by kicking her out.  She needs therapy and action plans not the right to continue shitting up her mother's house.  If any of the stench from her room is on her clothes, no matter how well she washes, she is not going to make it as a massage therapist.  I agree, @CrazyInAlabama, I do not want to massage from someone who smells like rotting food and trash. 

[AZChristian]

41 minutes ago, PrincessPurrsALot said:

Daughter is a hoarder and the judge wants her mother to continue to enable her. The mother did the best thing she could by kicking her out.  

I'm not sure whether she's a hoarder or just a major lazy slob . . . maybe both.

Does anyone else remember that at the very first part of the case, Plaintiff Mama said they were selling their house?  I suspect she found the fastest place she could to get stinky daughter OUT so that she could clean up her room so prospective buyers wouldn't see/smell it.

It seemed that stinky daughter's "I have learning disabilities" was a crutch she has leaned on for 25 years as to why she can't do things that even people WITH learning disabilities can learn to do.  IMHO, there is no learning disability on earth that would make it impossible for a mobile 25-year-old to know they were supposed to clean their own poop off of a toilet seat.

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, AZChristian said:

I'm not sure whether she's a hoarder or just a major lazy slob

I vote for dirty, lazy slob.

 

2 hours ago, AZChristian said:

It seemed that stinky daughter's "I have learning disabilities" was a crutch she has leaned on for 25 years as to why she can't do things that even people WITH learning disabilities can learn to do. 

Quite. I'm sure she spent her life in her room at mom's, eating around the clock and leaving all the dirty dishes with festering remnants, etc., in her room and mom cleaned it up. My brother's sister-in-law had Down's Syndrome, yet knew how to keep her room neat. Stinky is going to be in serious trouble when little mom passes away or just can't go on caring for this albatross. Massage therapist. Okay.

[AZChristian]

24 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Stinky is going to be in serious trouble when little mom passes away or just can't go on caring for this albatross. Massage therapist. Okay.

I'm not much of getting undressed in front of people who aren't my husband or a doctor.

One of the few things I enjoy that involves being touched by strangers is a reflexology foot massage.  For less than $50, you get a full hour of WHOLE BODY massage, starting at the top of your head and working down to your feet . . . and you don't have to get undressed.

When I call for my appointment, I always specify that the person doing my massage cannot be a smoker.  I cannot abide bad smells, especially when I'm trying to relax.

I'm thinking this young woman is not going to get ANY return customers if she smells like her bedroom.

[CrazyInAlabama]

The afternoon rerun is another tree case.   The only notable part of the case is the plaintiff's hair is dark purple.   At first I thought it was something wrong with the TV, or my eyes.   Another defendant who brings no proof to court.  I suspect the plaintiff and defendant came to court to get the tree removal paid for by the court.  $1700 to remove a tree?   That seems excessive.     

However, defendant claims it was a tree on the joint property line.  Cute move by the plaintiff, she submits a 4 or 5 year old google streetview of the the tree, showing a dead one, and the supposedly live one that was cut down.   However, defendant's picture of the same tree right before court shows a dead tree, with an entirely missing large Y joint, and missing bark, and it looks absolutely dead to me.    So if either side gets the money, my guess is the tree removals will be free, and that's why the litigants are in court.   Judge Marilyn rules for the defendant, so no $3,000 bonanza for the plaintiff.      Hall-terview is funny, plaintiff says she's going to get her own survey, and then sue the defendant again in civil court.   I guess she doesn't realize that all defendant has to do is submit the waiver they both signed saying this mediation by TPC is final.  

I love the plaintiff's like this next case (illegal lockout, disposal of her left behind couch, and something about rodents), and the plaintiff is telling Judge Marilyn about the law.   You don't pull that stunt, when you're suing for the bonanza of $5,000.   The biggest issue is apparently every rat on the planet was in the apartment.   So the plaintiff wants half of her rent back for the full time of her tenancy (14 months).    Defendant bought the building, and plaintiff was already a tenant.   Defendant paid for four visits by the exterminator.

Judge Marilyn says the couch part is gone, the rent isn't happening either.   In fact the judge says she thinks the plaintiff had already moved out, but wanted a bonanza.    Both sides dismissed.    

[AZChristian]

I would submit that the single-most repeated sentence on People's Court (and other shows like it) has just six words, spoken in response to the judge's request for proof:

"I don't have that WITH me."

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Another defendant who brings no proof to court. 

(Paraphrasing)

JM: "Do you have proof from an aborist that the tree was dead?"
Def: "Correct".

JM: "You're not listening to me. I asked if you had a written statement that the tree was dead."

Def: "Oh. No, I don't".

JM: "Do you have a survey showing the tree was on the property line?"
Def: "Not with me."

So he has it, but chose not to bring it. Same old, same old. "I have every single piece of evidence to prove my case! It's at home. Is that a problem?"

I believe purple-haired plaintiff agreed to have the tree taken down and now is here money-grubbing. Sorry, you're out of luck. You'll have to pay for your next batch of purple dye yourself.

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

$1700 to remove a tree?   That seems excessive. 

Not around here. I paid 1900$ to have a huge beech tree removed (but that included removing everything), and I know prices will be higher in a city because doing this job on small lots is more dangerous.

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I love the plaintiff's like this next case (illegal lockout, disposal of her left behind couch, and something about rodents),

Yes, the place is overrun with rats and mice and so uninhabitable that Ms. NoseRing wants back half the rent she paid for the entire term of her tenancy, yet when the lease expires and she has given notice she is leaving, she decides she really likes the place - I guess the rats didn't bother her all that much -  and has the gall to imperiously inform def landlord on the very day she had to be out that she is going to stay. Where do they get the nerve? I'm sure JM appreciated getting a lesson on the law.

The vile car scammer: So demure and soft-spoken and modestly dressed, yet she is trying for a boe-nanza for the iPad and two expensive cameras and a sapphire ring(!!) and birth certificates and passports and I forget what else she had stashed in this 2500$, broken-down, unregistered beater she took from poor toothless def. and for which she never paid. The cops found pillows and other assorted junk in the old hoopty when they had it towed, but no sapphire and platinum rings.

[DoctorK]

24 minutes ago, AZChristian said:

just six words

Or more frequently "I don't have that with me today/here", leading to "Where did you think you were coming today?" question.

[AngelaHunter]

On 8/20/2020 at 6:05 PM, DoctorK said:

Or more frequently "I don't have that with me today/here", leading to "Where did you think you were coming today?" question.

OR, we get, "I have the "texes" proving he/she threatened to kill me/key my car/set my place on fire/murder my children. What? You want to see them? Oh, I don't have those texes anymore. I deleted them/ broke my phone/dropped it in the toilet/threw it away/smashed it during a temper tantrum. I swear I had them! Why don't you believe me??"

[Ashforth]

3 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

OR, we get, "I have the "texes" proving he/she threatened to kill me/key my car/set my place on fire/murder my children. What? You want to see them? Oh, I don't have those texes anymore. I deleted them/ broke my phone/dropped it in the toilet/threw it away/smashed it during a temper tantrum. I swear I had them! Why don't you believe me??"

Um, hello, it's "texteses" LOL

They apparently self-destruct like something from Mission Impossible.

 

[AngelaHunter]

15 hours ago, Ashforth said:

Um, hello, it's "texteses" LOL

Maybe you're thinking of "kidse's"?

Example: "After we had a physical altercation and the police was called, he threw me out of his house. I had went back to get my stuff and he wouldn't let me take my kidse's toys."

😕

[NYGirl]

They were busy conversating.

[AngelaHunter]

It's official. Google Photos is trolling me. First, Google choose to enhance a Levin photo as a !surprise! for me.  I guess I can overlook one misstep.

Hey, Google? I have tons of photos from which to choose. 99.9% of them are not Levin, but what little favour did Google do for me today? I'm taking this personally now.

🙄

 

 

Edited August 24, 2020 by AngelaHunter

[CrazyInAlabama]

I think you could get a big lawsuit against Google for that photo.

Today's rerun was the woman who had a horse 40 years ago, and now she wanted a horse.   So she finds one, rides it over three days, buys it without a PPE (pre-purchase exam), and then claims the horse is defective.     It's just like buying a boat without checking it out, or putting it in the water, buying a car without taking it to a mechanic or checking CarFax.     I feel sorry for the horse having Miss Clueless for a rider, or owner.   The best part is the defendants/sellers have a video of the woman riding the horse, and she's smiling.     

I wonder if the woman every had the feet filed, or new shoes?    I wonder if she followed the feed, and turnout recommendations?     Many times a horse can sense a beginning rider who is afraid of them, and ignore what the rider says.     When a vet came out, buyer claims the horse has a neurological disease (some can show up very quickly).  The horse is claimed to have EPM (which can develop very quickly).    Bill of Sale says "As Is", no returns or refunds, horse not guaranteed.    The buyer traded Tank to some man, bought another horse, and  claims Tank is still with the man (bet Tank isn't there either, but you don't want to know what I think happened). 

EPM is usually like that, horse is fine, then they suddenly show the neurological effects, and they're very ill all of a sudden.   It mostly is carried by possums, some other creatures carry it too, but it's mostly possums.    I had to laugh at the buyer's reasons for not getting a vet exam, that the buyers being local would know all of the local vets, and a PPE would be useless.   No, only a vet who had treated the horse would be ineligible to examine the horse pre-purchase.   Either the vet would decline to do the exam, citing conflict of interest, or the vet would be someone who was impartial.   It's called professional ethics.  

The buyer saying she paid extra because the horse had special training was ridiculous.    A lot of well trained horses don't like to work for someone who is a nervous beginner who was probably giving all kinds of unintentional signals to move forward.   Or someone who tries to mount while they're standing still, and accidentally urges the horse to move.   I hope the poor horse really is turned out to pasture, or recovered, but they can have the same disease come back too.  

Buyer gets nothing.     

The two alleged drug addicts suing each other over her tenancy, and her cat, and everything else was ridiculous.   Defendant alleged a lot of damage from her cat, but he had cats also.   No proof of any damage to his stuff, or to the apartment, including a bill for carpet cleaning.     They both claim the other is on drugs.    Defendant claims the woman was an active user, that her syringes, and stuff were all over her room, but he asks her to baby sit his 3 and 4 year old children, and disappears for the rest of the night.      Then when woman figures out the defendant isn't coming back after being gone for hours, she calls the ex-mother-in-law, she calls the police for a welfare check, and then it hits the fan.   The reason the man didn't pay his rent for the last month of plaintiff's tenancy, is he was paying for attorneys, and other costs after the welfare check on the children.   

I don't even know who got what in the end, I was just appalled at the drug use, the nasty accusations by both sides, and leaving little kids with the woman for many hours, when defendant claims she's an active drug addict.   I also hate that the kids are having unsupervised visits with defendant, who either is mostly asleep or bored by the court case (or is alleged by plaintiff to still be using). 

Defendant Gregory Bringht is being sued (I've never seen that last name before) by the plaintiff over the table top candy, and video games that the plaintiff had in defendant's store.   The contract is virtually useless.

Next case is some idiot kid who claims he bought a moped from the defendant.   A complication is the plaintiff admits that he stole the moped from defendant, but claims he has a bill of sale.   Moped had only 500 miles on it, when it was stolen by plaintiff.     plaintiff is suing defendant for the money he put into the Moped he stole.  The plaintiff's mother tells Doug that the son should get the money for the improvements.    The defendant says he had reported the Moped stolen, and one day the police returned the Moped, and then thieving plaintiff and his father show up claiming the son didn't steal it, but bought it from some unknown person.   Defendant gets $600 for the Moped, and tow.   Plaintiff's idiot mother says to Doug that the defendant is too fat to ride it anyway.    I can see where the son gets his nasty attitude.    

Edited August 25, 2020 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

8 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Today's rerun was the woman who had a horse 40 years ago, and now she wanted a horse. 

Another overaged "little girl" who can't do anything herself, screws up and tries to blame everyone else for the contract she signed. I disliked her and her stupid perma-grin a lot.

She and her daughter went and bunked with total strangers for 3 days?? And couldn't get a vet there in all that time? Oh, right - this ranch was in the middle of the Saraha desert - no vets.

[CrazyInAlabama]

Today's newer rerun (usually the morning rerun is older) is really wrong.   They were showing a case of a young woman who rented an apartment, but it was moldy.   Then, suddenly they were showing the ridiculous case from three years ago over checks for a Power Squadron boating club Halloween party that had to be resubmitted three times (the former treasurer has problems apparently).   Then I switched to Weather Channel for a couple of minutes, and when I switch back to TPC it's the end of the apartment case again, then it's the Halloween party case again.     

If you can't tell the difference between mold, and fresh paint, then something is wrong.   I suspect after the water issue, and the mold, they repainted.   Probably used something like Kilz to hide the mold damage, and then painted over it.  Kilz odor stays around forever.  They might have changed some carpet out too, and that can have a chemical smell too. 

Today's older rerun is a revolting case where the permanent 'fiance' of defendant's late son is suing the mother for his property.   However, the kicker is that when the fiance/son was lying unresponsive on the floor, the plaintiff stood there staring at him, and called the mother, and asked what to do next.    Apparently the man was quite dead by the time 911 was called and arrived.    The plaintiff receives the promissory note amount from Judge Marilyn.    The plaintiff also cleared the apartment out before the funeral, and wanted his car, and other things.   The car and other proceeds will go to his many children, but none were with plaintiff, at least I don't think they were.    The plaintiff also claims that everyone in the decedents family claims plaintiff killed him, and only wants the money.    Yes, going on the People's Court over money is a good way to disprove that. 

Another stupid car case.   This is a road rage case with the woman, and her man-baby son were supposedly chased down by the defendant, and hit her car with his fists, and dented it.    Both sides are lucky that no one was armed, and someone could have died.   I think both litigants, and the son were wrong, and stupid, and it's not their first time with road rage.  

Edited August 28, 2020 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

^^ I got everything in order.

25 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

 They were showing a case of a young woman who rented an apartment, but it was moldy,

I didn't remember this case (although I'm sure I've seen it). I was irked at JM not telling the def, in his too-tight, yellow velvet pimp jacket and bling, to button up his damned shirt which was open halfway to his navel. Where did he think he was going that day? To the club? Hard to believe that plaintiff, who is a 24 recent graduate of nursing school yet says "I seen", had no idea what fresh paint smelled like. The musty smell of mildew and mold smells quite different.

[patty1h]

Just saw an ad for the new season, which starts 9/07.   Unfortunately, I had the TV on mute so I can't give any details on what was said, but I got a look at the setup they've gone to due to COVID.  MM looks like she's still sitting in her regular chair, and then they flashed a few clips of the litigants, who are on cameras from remote sites. 

I get TPC twice a day in my area, and I've seen some of the cases 3 times already.  It may take a little time to get used to this "new normal", but I'm ready for some new content.  

[CrazyInAlabama]

Yes, I just saw the ad for the new season, on some kind of remote interface, and it starts on 7 September.

The lady on today's rerun is the woman who claimed her air conditioner failed, put in an insurance claim because she said it was under warranty.  However, it was a scratch and dent unit, never used, no warranty.  It only costs $1675 or $1800, when a new one with a five year warranty would be $6500 or even more.   When plaintiff bought the house, the previous owner took the entire air conditioning unit with him.  

[Florinaldo]

I saw the promo clip this morning and it looked like they set up a big TV screen behind the bench and JM is also appearing remotely, with a fake background imitating the regular one. The only person physically in the courtroom appears to be Douglas the bailiff.

[Maverick]

 Yes, that's what I saw as well.   There's a TV screen on the bench and one each on the litigant podiums.   MM totally has a Zoom background.  I can't wait until it flakes out and looks like she's presiding from a Caribbean beach.    She really needs a Max Headroom background because that is legitimately the first thing I thought of when I saw her presiding over the courtroom on a 52' from a Walmart Black Friday sale..  Not even joking, the whole setup looks like a scene from some 80's action flick set in the "near future" where people live their lives by video because they're lazy and / or afraid to go out.   Like I totally wouldn't be shocked to see Arnold Schwarzenegger run through the courtroom chased by mutant Martians while a hologram of Richard Dawson gives a play by play.   

[CrazyInAlabama]

This afternoon's rerun cases are funny.    The first one has a deadbeat tenant, who seems to be a regular at housing court, and defendant is a clueless landlord who didn't bring much to court with him.   And since it's Florida, the landlord didn't send the required notice about why he was keeping the security deposit.   I think he only received the two months unpaid rent, but it was so boring I didn't really notice. 

Then there some woman suing over a sick Siamese kitten she bought from defendant, and woman starts her spiel off with her congenital heart condition, leading to a procedure to the woman.    The kitten was supposed to be near death, there is no testimony from the vet either.    The defendant, her daughter and another woman charge into the court room like their butts are on fire, and the defendant circles the podium all the way around before landing at the microphone.    Defendant claims the cat had medication it needed, and she told the plaintiff to call her if there were issues with the kitten.   Plaintiff claims the defendant was charged with animal cruelty too.  

$364 to plaintiff, for vet bills.  

[Jaded]

 

[AngelaHunter]

18 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

  The first one has a deadbeat tenant, who seems to be a regular at housing court, and defendant is a clueless landlord

I had forgotten I'd ever seen this case until the annoying, whiny plaintiff whined she she didn't have the texts to prove what she's whining about because she has to buy a new phone every 4 months. Yes, she loses them, breaks them or drops them in the toilet. What are you - eight years old? No, of course she has no receipts for anything she's claiming. She pays everything in cash only, and none of these big, bad men would give poor wittle helpless her a receipt? What's a girl to do? Landlord was a dingbat who knew absolutely nothing. Only Izzy knows, and Izzy did not make an appearance.  Doug in the hall to the Whiner: "Why do you pay everything in cash?" Reply, in a whine: "I don't know." Oh, I bet you do know but just don't want to say.

New season looks totally wild! Is there a chance we won't have to see the ugly mug of the "Beater? He hardly KNEW 'ER!" shortass and his mob of nitwits outside?

[Maverick]

 The Peanut Gallery has been gone since the end of last season but Harv still Zoomed in.   At first he was in his office but then he switched to some gold lame background.   For a couple of episodes, they trying having viewer submitted questions; it was bad as it sounds and hopefully that won't be back.  I'm Harv will be though.   If he brings his dogs in on rotation as co-host I'm good with that.

 Hopefully we'll be back to 3 cases per episode so we're not stuck with trying to stretch a straightforward "he cut a tree I liked but it was on his property" case that never should have made it to court into a half hour.  

[jilliannatalia]

On 8/11/2020 at 11:18 AM, AngelaHunter said:

Yesterday's lying, broke-ass playboy: "Hi, Ms. Milian." 🙄

For unknown reasons (or maybe just because a pool boy-type was involved) the case reminded me of the Falwell situation. I would love for Marilyn Milian to adjudicate that case on the air.

[jilliannatalia]

6 hours ago, Florinaldo said:

The only person physically in the courtroom appears to be Douglas the bailiff.

A bailiff is so incredibly relevant in the new remote format.

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, Maverick said:

 At first he was in his office but then he switched to some gold lame background. 

Silly me and my wrecked memory banks. Of course I remember the Levin Clown with his circus background. I even posted a pic. I guess I just mentally block anything to do with that gossip-mongering little dirtbag who needs to make himself feel Very Important while he shoves his little mic in the faces of the Outside Peanut Gallery so we can hear all their insightful, intelligent commentary on each case. "Gotcher point!"

"It's the case of 'Stick it in your ear!'" I have some better advice for you, Levin, but I'm too much of a lady to say it.

Edited August 28, 2020 by AngelaHunter

[Florinaldo]

2 hours ago, jilliannatalia said:

A bailiff is so incredibly relevant in the new remote format.

I think that in the clip we see him briefly bringing some document to the bench so JM can peruse it through some strategically placed camera; I do not know if it is simply the summary slip for the hearing or some piece of evidence. They appear to be trying to keep up some pretense of normalcy. We will see soon enough.