The People's Court - General Discussion

[Guest]

16 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

I always find it amazing how people can be so dead wrong and no explanation in the world can convince them otherwise. In this case her obstinancy coupled with her inablility to listen to anyone guaranteed she will never "get it".

Ahh. The new normal.  It isn't my fault.  Someone else must pay me for my pain and suffering and new hoopty.   If he didn't stop short she would never have slammed into his ass.   This plaintiff had a head like a cement block.  

16 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

"The evidence I hired the P.I. to find didn't exist so not only do I want back what I paid him but he owes me 4500$ for my pain and suffering and the loss of my car and paying a lawyer." Wrong!

Seems to me that the Gumshoe did way more than $500 of work.  That poor guy and his assistants traipsed up and down that street hounding residents and shop owners for a videotape that did not exist.   And our Douglas really latched onto that phrase.  He's the best.  

16 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

I don't understand how knowing the driver was a woman and not a man could excuse her from her rear-ending of the person.

It couldn't.  She was hellbent on proving they were liars by finding a nonexistent tape.  Okay, say she finds a videotape of a man driving rather than the lady.  So what?  She's still responsible for ramming the guys car.  

16 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

I just couldn't with the second repeat of the vicious viper whose Momma says, "She can't hold her tongue for nothing." That she likes to breed is very sad when I think of innocent babies being subjected to this foul-tempered, foul-mouthed bitch. who has zero self-control.

If I were in Cookies shoes - I'd move and not leave a forwarding address.  Did anyone notice the viper sharply squinting?  It could be she needs glasses but it reminded me of jackal right before he pounces.  Something definitely is not right with her and her coddling/fearful momma better get her help immediately.  

The thought of two children under her care is disturbing.  And I didn't catch it, are those two children Cookie's grandchildren? I know the viper was dating her son but I didn't hear if they're the product of that romance or did she bring those two innocent children into this world with other men?  

Only asking because if they are Cookie's grandchildren/child more issues will erupt when she wants to see them.  What a mess!

I am worried about Cookie hoping that the eight tire slashes are not preview for what's to come.

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, PsychoKlown said:

 And I didn't catch it, are those two children Cookie's grandchildren?

From what I gathered she already had one when she started 'talking" to Cookie's son, and since the viper seemingly eschews birth control, dropped another baby  - to whom she feeds sticky candy for breakfast? - after the romance ended. IIRC, neither are Cookie's grandchildren.

1 hour ago, PsychoKlown said:

 Did anyone notice the viper sharply squinting?

I thought it was the "If looks could kill" Evil Eye.  Why would Momma get her help? She herself helped her darling daughter when she (Momma) joined her in her tire-slashing escapade.

1 hour ago, PsychoKlown said:

Seems to me that the Gumshoe did way more than $500 of work

He looked just like a stereotypical, hard-boiled gumshoe in some old flim noir, needing only a battered fedora and cigar to complete the image. He was cool!

[DoctorK]

33 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

battered fedora and cigar to complete the image

Of course, the cigar would be unlit but well chewed. Yes, I watch a lot of TCM (Turner Classic Movies).

[Primal Slayer]

Been catching up on TPC (up to late October/early November episodes) and the episode surrounding the "stolen cat" wherein the old woman moves out of the neighborhood, leaves her sons cat behind, he gets out of prison, drives in the old neighborhood, sees the cat and takes it even though a new family has had it for 7 months was an interesting one from the ruling. 

Im so used to Judge Judy slamming down the hammer and giving people 7 days to return property or animals (or even turn them over in court) compared to Judge Milian being like "you get the cat back, ill issue an order you can take to your local blah blah blah but it could take them months to grant the order for him to hand over the cat"

[AngelaHunter]

4 hours ago, DoctorK said:

Of course, the cigar would be unlit but well chewed. Yes, I watch a lot of TCM (Turner Classic Movies).

I used to as well, and need to start again.  I forgot about getting the gumshoe a rumpled trenchcoat.

"Avian"?
 

Quote

: of, relating to, or derived from birds

avian behavior

avian species

see also avian dinosaur

I guess her mom didn't think that through or use a dictionary. Anyway, another litigant who proudly declares something that might cause me to reply with some embarrassment, "Oh, I know I was an idiot for not getting receipts from this stranger to whom I gave cash every month."

Nope. Avian is pleased to inform JM that she NEVER gets receipts. She just doesn't and wishes it to be acknowledged how trusting she is, even though she ends up in court (and apparently doesn't have receipts because she didn't pay her damned rent) and waves around one receipt she created from a book of them she got at Dollar General, as proof positive she paid every month. Yeah, sure - JM believes that.

Avian was so ticked off at not cleaning up here she just sailed like a queen right past Doug in the Hall, granting him not even a glance.

[Guest]

49 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Avian was so ticked off at not cleaning up here she just sailed like a queen right past Doug in the Hall, granting him not even a glance.

Now see that chapped my fanny big time.  Disrespect the Judge (she’ll clean your clock). Disrespect Harvey (please, oh please) but don’t ever disrespect our Doug and Douglas. 

I must also add that her hairdo gave me a headache.  Tight, tight braids look very uncomfortable 

She flounced out and I was half expecting Doug to pull out the old vaudeville cane to get Mr. Landlord out of the hallway!

[Bazinga]

Episode from October 25, 2018.  Discussion on page 119. 

I commented four years ago about this episode and I still feel the same way.  Plaintiff in case one is loopy, ridiculous and has no proof, but JM "feels" the defendant stole the puppy based solely on his saying that the plaintiff, who obvious to everyone, is in no position to take care of a dog, is in no position to take care of a dog.  I very much disagree with the judge, as plaintiff should have had to actually prove her case. 

Puppy Snatching

Edited December 19, 2022 by Bazinga

[CrazyInAlabama]

I made the mistake of watching today's 2018 rerun "Puppy Snatching" where a homeless woman claims the defendant stole her expensive puppy.   The judge gave the woman $1200, and that's ridiculous.   

If the man took the puppy, and found it a good home, then good for him.   That plaintiff had zero resources to keep a dog, and needed a lot of help herself.    

Edited December 19, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[Bazinga]

Today's episode is from October 26, 2018 and is discussed on page 119.

The discussion mixes in with the ongoing discussion of the episode from the prior day that was reran yesterday.   

Here is the link:

Stealing From an Ex-Husband

 

 

[Bazinga]

Today's repeat aired on Halloween, 2018.  The discussion is on Page 120 and here is the direct link:

Crashing Into a Biker.

[AngelaHunter]

4 hours ago, Bazinga said:

Today's repeat aired on Halloween, 2018.  The discussion is on Page 120 and here is the direct link:

Crashing Into a Biker.

I didn't remember Shower Door uber-annoying woman who had her neighbour or friend come over and seemingly told her, "Now, stand over theeeere, put your hand over your mouuuuthhh and look very shooocked. Hold it. Hoooolllllld it! Perfect!" *snap*

[Bazinga]

Today's repeat episode jumps to November 5, 2018.

Here is the link to the discussion on Page 120:

You Stole From My Dead Husband!

[AngelaHunter]

6 hours ago, Bazinga said:

Today's repeat episode jumps to November 5, 2018.

Here is the link to the discussion on Page 120:

You Stole From My Dead Husband!

I wondered today as I listened to this woman who had no idea how foolish she sounded: If her silent lawyer was not a family friend, how much would she have to pay him to come and sit there? What was his purpose? It's not as though he could object to anything, even erroneously, since the case for the P rested totally on hearsay and the Def had all pertinent documents. Why do I doubt her children are traumatized by the loss of this 1997 WaveRunner that none of them urgently desired in the years since their father passed away?

[Bazinga]

Today we jump back to the episode that was first aired on November 1, 2018.

Here is the direct link to the discussion on Page 120:

Furious Over False Accusations.

Merry Christmas, everyone!

[AngelaHunter]

Best wishes to all you snarky tarts!

 

 

[Bazinga]

Today's episode was first aired on November 6, 2018.

Here is the link to the discussion on Page 121:

War Over Wages.

Not much discussed about this particular episode though.

[Bazinga]

Today's repeat episode is from November 13, 2018.

Here is the link to the discussion on Page 121:

Funeral Fist Fight.

[CrazyInAlabama]

I'm watching Funeral Fist Fight.   Defendant's claims  that Grandma's spirit is haunting her is interesting.    Plaintiff is obviously trying for an Emmy nomination.  Angela Hunter's original review is epic.     What a horrible family.   

Edited December 27, 2022 by CrazyInAlabama

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I'm watching Funeral Fist Fight.   Defendant's claims  that Grandma's spirit is haunting her is interesting.    Plaintiff is obviously trying for an Emmy nomination.  Angela Hunter's original review is epic.     What a horrible family.   

Thank you. I didn't remember this until I saw the massive brace on P's arm, and then I hit FF with great haste. TPC - there are so many interesting reruns so why do you give us the worst of the worst of the Garbage People and their shameful acts? My god! I've (unfortunately) been to many funerals, numerous hospital visits, weddings, b-day parties, etc and not once did a brawl ensue, complete with biting and kicking(!) and I certainly don't come from any elite background. Blue collar all the way where people had way too many beers, especially if the booze was free.

One of my friends married a man whose crazy family hated her, and by association hated her whole family and all her friends. I was in the wedding party and his side of the family (I had never met them) refused to look at me or shake my hand and snubbed me in the receiving line. I thought it was amusing, but maybe I should have gotten enraged, charged at them litigant-style, and taken one of them to the floor to nearly bite her finger off while aiming for her boob. That would probably have resolved the issue.

I never knew about all these spontaneous eruptions of violence at any social affair over the most trivial of matters until I started watching court shows, where they talk about this disgraceful behavior as though it's just commonplace and normal. WT actual F?

By comparison the case of the dipshit loser who had a gaggle of kids and g/f crammed into a 1-bedroom apartment with wall-to-wall air mattresses and left his junk and mess for Def to clean up because he couldn't be bothered taking it or getting rid of it was positively soothing.

[Welshman in Ca]

I've seen many a fight break out at weddings but funerals is quite rare.

It does remind me of a guy I worked with and one of his sisters funeral. His sister had been an alcoholic & drug abuser for many years but had tried to get clean on numerous occasions until he decided that she needed to get away from the people she associated with if she was to stand any chance of becoming sober so he bought a house for her to live in (nothing fancy) after he got a settlement from a RTA he was involved in.

Long story short, he was the only one who had showed her any interest or care despite her having 2 now adult children of her own until the funeral when both kids showed up and started arguing over who was getting the house which then broke out into an all out brawl at the service with their kids joining in as well. The funny thing was my coworker had bought the house for her to live in until she passed away but it was still in his name so that she didn't sell it & spend the money on drugs. He had told her kids this but they then tried to sue him to have the house put in their mother's name so that they could sell it & pocket the proceeds.

He still owns the house & rented it out with any claims from her kids thankfully having been thrown out of court.

[Bazinga]

Today's episode is from November 19, 2018.

Here is the link to the discussion on Page 122:

Dating Money Madness.

[AngelaHunter]

I didn't watch the hallterview last time in the case of Slingblade vs Grotesque Granny (looking like a bad female impersonator) and who giggles over the fact that she raised two POS daughters who are breeders but don't want "them kids" anymore.

Anyway, in the Hall Doug asks the brutal-looking hag, "WTF??" She says, about her ATM, "He's just a dirty old man". This, from the Granny from Hell.

Doug socks it to her with, "What do you think YOU are?"

Hag starts waffling, saying she didn't need this dirty old man for money because "I could've went elsewhere." Doug opines, "You're too much" and kindly cautions her (paraphrasing)not to bump her ass on the door on her way out.

Slingblade tells Doug he only managed to scare up "about" 50 dates(?)" on POF - seriously, what's with that site? - and adds that with the monstrous Def "it was only puppy love".  Okay, and eww.

I couldn't stomach the repeat of the Jabba x Big Bird-like plaintiff, who after being confronted with her record of driving with a suspended license, falling asleep at the wheel ("I was tired") lying to the cops and having multiple arrests, gives a hideous giggle and says, "My bad" like some ditzy teenager. Double Eww.

[Bazinga]

Today's repeat episode is from November 23, 2018 - Cousin Loan Crisis.

I don't see any discussion on page 122 of this particular episode.  Sorry. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

9 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

I didn't watch the hallterview last time in the case of Slingblade vs Grotesque Granny (looking like a bad female impersonator) and who giggles over the fact that she raised two POS daughters who are breeders but don't want "them kids" anymore.

Anyway, in the Hall Doug asks the brutal-looking hag, "WTF??" She says, about her ATM, "He's just a dirty old man". This, from the Granny from Hell.

Doug socks it to her with, "What do you think YOU are?"

Hag starts waffling, saying she didn't need this dirty old man for money because "I could've went elsewhere." Doug opines, "You're too much" and kindly cautions her (paraphrasing)not to bump her ass on the door on her way out.

Slingblade tells Doug he only managed to scare up "about" 50 dates(?)" on POF - seriously, what's with that site? - and adds that with the monstrous Def "it was only puppy love".  Okay, and eww.

I couldn't stomach the repeat of the Jabba x Big Bird-like plaintiff, who after being confronted with her record of driving with a suspended license, falling asleep at the wheel ("I was tired") lying to the cops and having multiple arrests, gives a hideous giggle and says, "My bad" like some ditzy teenager. Double Eww.

I used to live in Colorado, and the suspended license woman/convicted felon who moved to Florida looked very familiar, and not just from watching this show.   I had to laugh when she tried to minimize her crominal past.   Does she really think anyone in history had a felony conviction for traffic tickets?   I hope after this case the business owner started doing background checks on potential employees.   

[AngelaHunter]

I have zero memory of the first two cases.

Another fine example of, "We're both _____ (Nigerians in this case) so I trusted him completely to not scam me".  Another one in the category of "I never thought the leopard would eat MY face off!"

I just don't understand why lying forger P got all his money - 4K - back from lying scammer D when he admitted here that he forged someone's name. Oh, wait - he didn't committ forgery. He "just signed someone else's name". That's not forgery, is it? What about the doctrine of clean hands, which neither of these scammers had?

Anyway, in the hall D scammer tells Doug, "The judge doesn't know anything."  Right. She's just a woman. How could she know how real men do business?

Then we had the horrid Def, "mutton dressed as lamb" (which I read somewhere once and thought it a perfect description) with her flowery dress displaying cleavage, her mass of bleached, fried hair and haggish face sporting a grotesque huge grin as though she felt that ripping off her cousin was cute or charming.

P cousin hadn't seen the hag for years when he moved to her state. I just know she tapped out everyone else in the family and thought, "Oh, boy. Fresh fish!" and immediately hit him up for 5K. She works two jobs but is broke. He takes out a loan to give her the money and she has absolutely no idea she needed to pay him back, even though she told him she would get 10K back on her tax refund. How does one wrangle that much money? LIstening to litigants makes me realize how wrong I've been in my life, never managing to get a ton of free money.  I guess she had better things on which to spend her refund besides paying her debts and pays P not one nickel.

Anyway, she says, "We're family! Families help each other!" but has to admit under JM's questioning SHE has never helped "family" to the tune of over 2K and probably not for even a dollar. SSM defense? Nothing JM said to her could wipe the big nasty grin off her face, in which she managed to show both huge rows of teeth and which she continued to do with Doug in the hall. Shameless, lowdown, ugly grifter.

[Bazinga]

Finishing off (Monday brings new episodes for the new year) our end of year run of repeats with another return to 2018, specifically, November 20, 2018.

Link to discussion on page 122:

Exes Bitter Battle.

Happy New Year to everyone!  Thank you all for making watching a show I am annoyed by necessary viewing.  

Edited December 30, 2022 by Bazinga

[AngelaHunter]

39 minutes ago, Bazinga said:

Happy New Year to everyone!  Thank you all for making watching a show I am annoyed by necessary viewing.  

I second that! Watching this makes me understand why those gamblers keeping pulling the handles in a casino - the hope of random rewards.

 

[Guest]

On 11/20/2018 at 7:25 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

JM really needs to ask the questions we want to know about, criminal background and exactly what the crimes were, and in the case of the apartment plaintiff, why she doesn't get her beard removed.   I loved it when the defendant took off her shoes, and JM asked if it was so she could be ready to fight.   

Apologies for resurrecting this gem.  That's what I remember most from the huffalumps arguing today...JM asking her was she removing her shoes so she can be ready to fight.

I should/would comment about this but apparently fighting amongst the youngins' is not considered a rarity.   There are even reality shows of neighbors beating the hell out of each other.  JM seems to be familiar with the drill.

I will comment on the speed some of these contestants find bed warmers.   Dump one fiance get "engaged" to another within the week.  Seems about right.   And just for the record I do not care one whit about any of them - what disturbs me is that a young child is in the middle of all of this and absorbing every vile word, every punch, every insult and has a distorted view of the world. 

Anyway Happy New Year to all those who make me laugh, think and be grateful that there are great people online who can make my day brighter even in the midst of all this garbage.

The very happiest and healthiest of New Years with minimal bicker-backing is my wish for you.  

Cheers.  

[badhaggis]

Happy New Year! 

I appreciate your recaps! You keep me entertained all year!

[AngelaHunter]

16 hours ago, PsychoKlown said:

 JM seems to be familiar with the drill.

She was a FL. circuit judge. I'm sure she's very familiar with all the drills. One can only imagine the horrors she witnessed and heard about.

I really wonder sometimes, for instance in that case: if I were a judge and that little creepy freak "fiance" told me, "I have a six-month-old baby" if I might lose control, scream, "Oh, fuck this shit!" and storm off the bench.

16 hours ago, PsychoKlown said:

Anyway Happy New Year to all those who make me laugh, think and be grateful that there are great people online who can make my day brighter even in the midst of all this garbage.

Yes.  Knowing there are still sane people around makes our forced tenancy (and we're not even subsidized) in Clown World a little more bearable. 😀

[AngelaHunter]

New cases, right?

The first one had P, resembling Gabriel Byrne, suing her beloved, wonderful sister after P paid sis to care for her animals - birds and fish - and came home to find them all dead or missing. I shut it down there. I guess P is a lot more forgiving than I. If my sister treated my pets this way, I would not be publicly declaring how much I love her.

Then we get a garden-variety low-level bottom feeder who took his 2019 Lexus (that he bought used) to a carwash/detailing business. He says he made it very clear that he did not want the interior of the car touched but just the outside.

He's watching his car geting being cleaned from some sort of elevated customer waiting area and saw an employee inside his car! Customers are not allowed in the work area and I guess are also not allowed to comment or protest about what is being done to their cars, even if against their expressed wishes so he says nothing.

He tells JM that as soon as he saw that, his very first thought was along the lines of, "I just KNOW my car is being damaged and that the shop will deny it later!"

When he gets his car, does he check for the damage he's sure is there? Well, no. It was night. JM asks if he turned the lights on in the car and checked? Well, no. He just went home, parked his car and left it unchecked for 5 days until he needed it to drive his momma to a doctor appointment. Doesn't that prove what a good, honest person he is?

THEN, he sees a ton of scratches all over the GPS screen and even all around the frame. His theory, what he thinks and supposes, is that the employee used Windex or had rocks or glass embedded in his microfiber cloth. He took the car to Lexus, but got nothing in writing as to what needed replacing and what it would cost. He wants the carwash to pay for a whole new device for 1200$.

Carwash Def says he can't imagine how the screen got scratched up, told P to bring the car to him and they could work something out. P goes unannounced on a  day the owner is not there, talks to some manager who can't help him, refuses to meet with the owner and just sues.

He loses, of course, and talking to Doug he shows the usual rage and indignation of the scammer over his scam failing and declares the judge wouldn't let him explain. He snarks at Doug, "You have a nice day, now", to which Doug merely chuckles. On the contrary JM really tried to get anything from him that would prove the damage was done by the carwash. Too bad, so sad.

[Pepper the Cat]

I noped out of the first case as soon as they said  dead fish and birds. 
the second case was just stupid.

[AngelaHunter]

55 minutes ago, Pepper the Cat said:

the second case was just stupid.

It was. Just a scuzzy attempt to suck up undeserved money but I don't care. My standards have dropped so much that if we don't hear about unfortunate little babies in the dubious care of vicious breeders,  and there are no abused animals I'm fine with the case.

[Cotypubby]

The defendant in the first case was a real piece of work. She was watching her sisters birds and fish while she was on vacation, took her own cat to the house, and then left to do an errand and left her cat there alone! 😲 When she came back the birds were injured and the fish tank was on the floor broken. She then gave really weird answers that sounded like she didn’t even try to save the ones that were alive. She didn’t even clean up the mess before the plaintiff returned. And she countersued because her cat was now traumatized from the fish tank falling and scaring it. 🙄

The both of them were so very weird. The defendant was crying and seemed sad and upset but didn’t think she did anything wrong, and the plaintiff kept making excuses for her. It was so strange.

[callie lee 29]

Correct me if in worng but did she allude to the fact that she buried one of the birds alive???

[Guest]

1 hour ago, callie lee 29 said:

Correct me if in worng but did she allude to the fact that she buried one of the birds alive???

🤯

Even if this is true, please for all that is holy say it didn't happen.  I turned it off when I heard about the dead animals.  

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, PsychoKlown said:

🤯

Even if this is true, please for all that is holy say it didn't happen.  I turned it off when I heard about the dead animals.  

I have no idea, but don't forget we've heard litigants refer to a dead infant's body as a "carcass". Not much can surprise me after that. Disgust, horrify, and repulse me maybe, but not surprise.

No show today, for me anyway. I guess TPTB were waiting for some new episodes so they could horn into them with some earthshattering news event that simply could not wait another hour.

[Mrs Shibbles]

14 hours ago, Cotypubby said:

The defendant in the first case was a real piece of work. She was watching her sisters birds and fish while she was on vacation, took her own cat to the house, and then left to do an errand and left her cat there alone! 😲 When she came back the birds were injured and the fish tank was on the floor broken. She then gave really weird answers that sounded like she didn’t even try to save the ones that were alive. She didn’t even clean up the mess before the plaintiff returned. And she countersued because her cat was now traumatized from the fish tank falling and scaring it. 🙄

The both of them were so very weird. The defendant was crying and seemed sad and upset but didn’t think she did anything wrong, and the plaintiff kept making excuses for her. It was so strange.

The plaintiff talked about how her sister was one of the most caring wonderful people in the world.  I’m sorry, but when you don’t care about animals and essentially bury one alive you are a terrible, sick person.  Psychopathic, even.  Then, she sued for acupuncture for HER cat? Nope.

[Bazinga]

One week of new episodes and we are back with reruns from the fall of 2018, again.

Here is the direct link to the discussion on page 113:

Brotherly Brawl 

[AngelaHunter]

50 minutes ago, Bazinga said:

One week of new episodes and we are back with reruns from the fall of 2018, again.

Here is the direct link to the discussion on page 113:

Brotherly Brawl 

And nearly every new one got butted into for me, but not today's sick-making rerun! I'm starting to take it personally. 😒

[bref]

6 hours ago, Bazinga said:

One week of new episodes and we are back with reruns from the fall of 2018, again.

That was weird, eh?

[Bazinga]

It's 2019 on  today's repeat of The People's Court; January 25, 2019 to be precise.  Advanced warning, in case 2, cows are killed by dogs and dogs get shot in return.  I'll pass on this episode, thank you.  Again I ask, why are these particular episodes the ones chosen to be reran?  

Here is the link to the discussion on page 126:

Brother-in-Law Battle.

Edited January 10, 2023 by Bazinga
Fixed Link

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, Bazinga said:

I'll pass on this episode, thank you.

Thanks for the warning.

LOVE the new avatar, btw!

[CrazyInAlabama]

I'm skipping the animal case, because no court takes the pain and suffering of an animal attack seriously.   

 However, the deadbeat brother in law case does have some funny moments.   Why do people think you'll reunite with estranged relatives, and then everything will be a Hallmark movie, and everything will be wonderful? 

[AngelaHunter]

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I'm skipping the animal case, because no court takes the pain and suffering of an animal attack seriously. 

Yeah, it does seem that if the victims  - little children/babies/animals - can't talk and don't pay taxes no one gives a shit about what happens to them. Serial killers get more consideration.

[Bazinga]

We are jumping ahead a few weeks to February 6, 2019.  I am sure it is going to be a good one, especially chosen for its entertainment value!

Here is the direct link to the discussion on page 127:
Ranting Over a Roommate.

Edited January 11, 2023 by Bazinga

[AngelaHunter]

9 hours ago, Bazinga said:

We are jumping ahead a few weeks to February 6, 2019.  I am sure it is going to be a good one, especially chosen for its entertainment value!

Here is the direct link to the discussion on page 127:
Ranting Over a Roommate.

I clearly remember the first case of the idiotic duo, but had zero recall of the second case. Went to the link and came upon this perfect summation from patty1h:

Quote

The 2nd case was a frightening look into what happens when chromosomes go wrong and/or drugs like meth come into the community.

I started watching this and as it went on I could feel my face changing:

Start: 🙂

1 min: 🤔

3 min: 😒

4 min: 😖

5 min: 😱

OUT. 

[Bazinga]

Today's episode is from February 27, 2019.  Discussion is on page 129. 

Here is the direct link:

Tenant Tussle.

[AngelaHunter]

7 hours ago, Bazinga said:

Today's episode is from February 27, 2019.  Discussion is on page 129. 

Here is the direct link:

Tenant Tussle.

LOVED this repeat. The only downside is that the Evil Witch will never pay a cent of the many judgments against her. At least she got exposed here as a scamming, vile, BSC scumbag, so that's something.

Something I missed the first time and wasn't quick enough to avoid this time was Levin's idiotic, "Was she running with scissors?" I hope he runs into this malignant hag and she strangles him.

[CrazyInAlabama]

I find it despicable that the defendant preys on people she thinks won't fight her.   How can any city allow her to rent after being convicted of assaulting tenants?