The People's Court - General Discussion

[WhitneyWhit]

Screeching, high-pitched, baby daddy with the horrible grammar who busted his kid's game gave me an earache and a headache. He had to lie down on the podium but I don't know why he was so tired, since his deformation of the hand precluded him from doing any job whatsoever, or from paying child support. Calling JM "Baby"? I'm surprised she didn't throw his mouthy shortass out sooner.

 

 

A pathetic manchild if I ever saw one. I love how he had an excuse for everything: can't pay child support because his disabled, so apparently, all the disabled parents out there just let their kids starve, can't be a parent because his mom won't let him, can't go to court over that because he's poor, one thing after another.

 

I have to disagree with Milian, though, I don't think that poor child's life would be any better if that fool had been around for the past two years, he's no kind of man or father.

[BubblingKettle]

She did? Damn, I've been deleting Mathis unwatched from my PVR this week because I'm getting tight on space and haven't been able to get ahead (lots of watching planned for this weekend at least. :) ). Guess I'll have to wait for the repeats. What did she do, just be sitting in the audience or something?

It was cute....  (I just wrote out the description and then thought to look for the clip! This is better than my attempt to describe it!): 

[BubblingKettle]

A pathetic manchild if I ever saw one. I love how he had an excuse for everything: can't pay child support because his disabled, so apparently, all the disabled parents out there just let their kids starve, can't be a parent because his mom won't let him, can't go to court over that because he's poor, one thing after another.

 

I have to disagree with Milian, though, I don't think that poor child's life would be any better if that fool had been around for the past two years, he's no kind of man or father.

Totally agree with BIB.... that kid reminded me of so many of my former students. With or without the presence of dad, the outcome is not all that fantastic. There was too much dysfunction, anger, and aggression (plus mom's enablement) all around. 

[EtheltoTillie]

So sad. That case should not have been chosen and that kid should not have been on TV for even the abbreviated time he was on. No one should have been discussing his being beaten with a belt.

The case was truly incomprehensible. I couldn't tell at any moment who was breaking whose tablet or game. The unclear antecedents were being thrown around with impunity by all parties. Dad kept saying you know what I mean but the more he said it, the less I knew.

Edited October 31, 2015 by GussieK

[AngelaHunter]

Dad kept saying you know what I mean but the more he said it, the less I knew.

 

I could only understand about every fourth screech out of his mouth. I only knew he called JM "Baby" because she repeated it and I had to rewind to try and catch it. Maybe he thought he was auditioning for some reality show.

[teebax]

Hair kerfuffle: How many people here would give $2200 to someone you met a month ago? Anyone?  Even with her being a Sister in Christ and all,  who wants to pass along blessings and such, I can't comprehend that stupidity.  I love how the people here who spout religious nonsense or have prominent crosses dangling around their necks are always the worst grifters, scammers and liars.

There was a pastor on Hot Bench this week who was the best example of this I've ever seen. I won't post a clip here, but it's the kind of thing I would share with everybody I know who would consider trusting someone because of a shared religion.

He called one of the judges the n-word. Seriously, dude was completely out of control.

Personally, I don't trust anyone who is so open about their faith. You can believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster for all I care; just don't try to recruit me into your lunacy.

[AZChristian]

So sad. That case should not have been chosen and that kid should not have been on TV for even the abbreviated time he was on. No one should have been discussing his being beaten with a belt.

The case was truly incomprehensible. I couldn't tell at any moment who was breaking whose tablet or game. The unclear antecedents were being thrown around with impunity by all parties. Dad kept saying you know what I mean but the more he said it, the less I knew.

 

What really got my goat was how the "father" kept saying that the plaintiff's son broke "his" son's toy and/or bullied "his" son.  They were BOTH "his" sons.

[One Tough Cookie]

There was a pastor on Hot Bench this week who was the best example of this I've ever seen. I won't post a clip here, but it's the kind of thing I would share with everybody I know who would consider trusting someone because of a shared religion.

He called one of the judges the n-word. Seriously, dude was completely out of control.

Personally, I don't trust anyone who is so open about their faith. You can believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster for all I care; just don't try to recruit me into your lunacy.

 

teebax--PM me :)!

The "father" from yesterday who couldn't stand up and thought a small child was a punching bag was quite possibly the most extreme POS I have seen on TV court shows in a long time.  If you notice the young boy was able to keep a straight face the whole time which lets me know he's been on the receiving end of many of dear old dad's "discipline".  I personally wanted Douglas to drop kick him thru the door.

Edited October 31, 2015 by One More Time

[AngelaHunter]

You can believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster for all I care; just don't try to recruit me into your lunacy.

 

100%! I don't care if they're Mormons at my door or some End of the World cult. Just leave me alone and mind your own business. And don't start your testimony with, "I was coming home from CHURCH", thinking that is proof positive what a good little Christian you are when everything else out of your mouth after that is a lie.

 

What really got my goat was how the "father" kept saying that the plaintiff's son broke "his" son's toy and/or bullied "his" son.

 

Yeah, I noticed that. And it's nice to teach your 11-year old a lesson by acting like another 11-year old. Man, was he repulsive, yet two women wanted to bear the fruits of his loins. Damn, just made myself sick.

[One Tough Cookie]

The more I watch this show the more I love MM and brand of justice and compassion liberally laced with biting humor. Whenever she quotes her grandmother I know I am in for a hilarious and pithy saying.  My favorite is "It's itching me here but you're scratching me there". It took me a bit to get used to her style of hearing cases and now she's "must see" live for me.  I absolute LOATHE Levin and his crowd talk.

Edited November 1, 2015 by One More Time

[WhitneyWhit]

Well today's episode was certainly educational, I had no idea that you could practice law as non-certified paralegal. And to think that my poor husband wasted all that time and money on law school when he could have simply called himself a paralegal and begun filing motions as soon as he completed his undergrad.

 

I love that he tried to convince JM, an actual attorney, that what he was doing was perfectly legal, even though he had nothing approaching a paralegal degree, but since he had been doing it for 11 years, it was fine.  

[AngelaHunter]

Quote

Well today's episode was certainly educational, I had no idea that you could practice law as non-certified paralegal.

 

AND can be judge with the credentials of a business administration degree! We've seen many shady "lawyers" on this show, but this one takes the cake. As for the def., how can someone have "eight or seven" (I guess he lost count) convictions still be walking around free?

 

Car case: The def, Yogi Bear, thinks that denial is the way to go. He didn't know anything - not who sent the emails, not the name of the company he works for, he never said he had a heart attack - absolutely nothing. Plaintiff? I just don't understand someone who seems to be of normal intelligence and who has lived a reasonably long time buying a ten year old car, sight unseen, from a stranger in another state. I know this kind of idiocy is not uncommon, but it never fails to stun me. Guy on the phone, saying to JM at the end of the convo, "What did you say your name is again?" Gold!

 

"I can't afford to pay my rent, so the landlord can just pound sand!" These tenant/landlord courts who grant deadbeats extensions - do they think landlords can pay their mortgage with extensions? Or do even they think that anyone who owns a rental property is a millionaire?

 

I wish we could have heard what JM said to Douglas at the beginning, but we couldn't, because we had to hear Scumbag Levin's verbal diarrhrea.

Edited November 2, 2015 by AngelaHunter

[JodhaBai]

It was cute....  (I just wrote out the description and then thought to look for the clip! This is better than my attempt to describe it!): 

 

wow, its so weird to see her without the robe.   She even sounds differently. lol

[JodhaBai]

 

I absolute LOATHE Levin and his crowd talk

 

Ugh, me too.  I can't even stomach watching him and the lame questions and answers. I usually record the show and FF right thru those moments

[rcc]

The episode yesterday (Nov. 2) had 3 scam artists. As blatant as I've ever seen on the show. JM saw right through them and they couldn't justify anything. But they got their payday from the show and that's what mattered to them. 

Edited November 3, 2015 by rcc

[cattykit]

Since when does any kind of honorary degree offer any actual benefit or credential?  And since when do you have to pay for an honorary degree?  And since when can an individual, rather than a university or college, bestow a degree?  I'd just love to know what the credentialing body is for what is clearly the defendant's degree mill.  No legitimate doctoral degree accepts life experience credits.  I am just surprised that MM didn't focus on the legitimacy of the so-called credentials and only looked at the terms of the contract.

[seacliffsal]

I'm halfway through my doctoral program and I was so saddened and shocked by the "honorary doctorate" case. I guess it makes sense that there are "programs" through which one can pay a fee and receive a fake graduate degree, but it's really disheartening to those who put in the time, work, and cost of actually earning a degree.

Man, what a case with the level one sex offender. As the Judge told him, he could have just given back the month's rent but instead he chose to come on t.v. and inform the entire viewing audience of his criminal record. I always love it when someone says to the judge that the question is irrelevant. Yep, not so much, and not when one chooses to go on television.

[WhitneyWhit]

Since when does any kind of honorary degree offer any actual benefit or credential?  And since when do you have to pay for an honorary degree?  And since when can an individual, rather than a university or college, bestow a degree?  I'd just love to know what the credentialing body is for what is clearly the defendant's degree mill.  No legitimate doctoral degree accepts life experience credits.  I am just surprised that MM didn't focus on the legitimacy of the so-called credentials and only looked at the terms of the contract.

I was wondering the same thing. I mean honorary, doesn't that say it all? 

 

The roommate case left me scratching my head. I couldn't figure out why this 20 year old girl (who bore a striking resemblance to Amy Fisher) would want to live with a bunch of strange guys who appeared to be a lot older than her. Couldn't she and some girlfriends get a place together? And that guy, what a creep. Lies about his name so people can't find out he's a sex offender. 

[AngelaHunter]

I couldn't figure out why this 20 year old girl (who bore a striking resemblance to Amy Fisher) would want to live with a bunch of strange guys who appeared to be a lot older than her. Couldn't she and some girlfriends get a place together? And that guy, what a creep. Lies about his name so people can't find out he's a sex offender.

 

I couldn't figure out why she had a bunch of missing teeth. She was one tough little critter, but the the pie-faced, sawed-off little moussed muppet defendant, who appears to middleaged (and expected JM to believe he just wanted to be buddies with a young girl) and lives in daddy's house (and still is a brokeass) is a total creep. For - what? $750? - he let the world know he's a disgusting sex offender who was trying to get his hands on a 20 year old. Ick.  

[DoctorK]

 

I was so saddened and shocked by the "honorary doctorate" case.

Actually, I have a real doctorate in physics but I am bombarded with spam emails for bogus doctorates. It seems to be a growth industry these days.

 

I couldn't figure out why she had a bunch of missing teeth.

I really noticed that, also that where the teeth were missing the remnant was bright red. Maybe the teeth were recently knocked out and there hasn't been enough time to heal? She clearly had a speech problem from the missing teetth, I suspect they were knocked out within a day or so of her court appearance. Might be an interesting story there.

[Rick Kitchen]

Does anybody remember the name of the level one sex offender?  I wanted to google him.

[BubblingKettle]

I have always been somewhat disgusted by the whole honorary doctorate idea. There are ways to recognize/reward an individual's accomplishments, but I don't like the idea of a sham academic degree being one of them. It cheapens the actual work done by students in legitimate institutions of higher education --- it's scholarly blood, sweat, and tears that earn those higher degrees. 

 

It became clear to me that the plaintiff either could not read or had very weak literacy skills. The defendant communicated with him in writing --- so, no, the plaintiff hadn't known earlier in the process that he'd have to submit a portfolio -- he saw all that text on the page, but he didn't read it. And the prospect of having him dictate something to someone (and then be asked to read/proof it) was not something he was going to do.  I think JMM did a good job of delicately wording her message to the defendant so she didn't blatantly disclose the plaintiff's issue. 

 

Don't get me wrong -- the plaintiff's work in the church and community should be celebrated. But this case is a good example of the mockery people try to make when they dole out honorary degrees. In reality, the plaintiff would have been better served years ago (if able to set aside his pride and fears) had he been able to discreetly receive literacy instruction in his adulthood. (Not that he couldn't now at 85)

[AngelaHunter]

I think JMM did a good job of delicately wording her message to the defendant so she didn't blatantly disclose the plaintiff's issue.

 

I admit it never occured to me that the plaintiff is illiterate, but I now I see that's probably the case. I remember watching a show about illiteracy and how inventive people can be about hiding the fact that they can't read.

 

Today's cases: I guess to a certain degree, we all have had some disfunctionality in our families, but I'm always amazed when I see how other people live. In the vandalized, '97 car case, I was really trying to imagine myself living with my friend, father, brother, sister, sister's boyfriend, etc. and getting into a knock-down, drag-out fight with any of these people, literally rolling around on the floor and having whoever I was fighting go outside and bust my car windows - maybe in retaliation because I wouldn't sell drugs for them or whatever. And it's not the first time, since def.'s girlfriend (or whoever the hell she was) ALWAYS goes in her room when "the ruckus starts). I just can't visualize such occurances even in my wildest fantasies. Poor Maleek was having the worst time trying to formulate a thought, and then went on to insult JM. She's a woman, so of course she always finds in favour of women - to hell with the law! Wow.

 

Defendants in the landlord case: I nearly had to stop watching because the toothless defendant kept flicking out his tongue like a hungry lizard and was making me ill. I know they lived there for ten years, but the mess they left behind was astonishing. And disgusting.

[NYCFree]

I loved when MM asked the plaintiff how the dad reacted to his daughter being hit in her own home. MM had such a genuine curiosity about it, imagining her own dad's reaction in those circumstances. I had the exact same feeling, knowing my dad might have wound up in prison if someone had beaten his daughter in her own home. Apparently life was so chaotic in that household it didn't merit any additional attention.

[WhitneyWhit]

I loved when MM asked the plaintiff how the dad reacted to his daughter being hit in her own home. MM had such a genuine curiosity about it, imagining her own dad's reaction in those circumstances. I had the exact same feeling, knowing my dad might have wound up in prison if someone had beaten his daughter in her own home. Apparently life was so chaotic in that household it didn't merit any additional attention.

Considering her sister basically said she deserved it, I can only imagine what her father would have to say. What a messed up family.

 

I really enjoyed the second case with the bed that fell a part and landed in eleven, perfectly placed pieces on the floor. 

[ItsHelloPattiagain]

I also FF through Levin's blabber. I just can't take it.

 

Thanks for posting the MM clip above! I live in the area where the Flip Off Girl came to court and she did come back and apologize to the judge. She was in jail something like four days and had to come back and apologize. 

[rcc]

The defendent in the landlord/tenant case was dirty, disgusting and they lived like pigs. The wife didn't look too bad and she apparently worked because she said she took a week off to clean before they moved. I can only imagine what it looked like before she "cleaned."

 

I missed who won the lottery. Was it the plaintiff or the defendent?

[how55]

Lottery was mentioned in the case intro - think Curt mentioned it was the defendants, but have no idea what it had to do w//the case..Both sides got very cagey when prodded.  The Judge kept asking "Why, why" as if to lead into it, but they both got evasive. It was like if the defendant scored the lottery win, the plaintiffs wanted to cash in on it. I wanted to at least know if they won a Mega jackpot or just a $5.000 scratch ticket. 

[AngelaHunter]

Judge M has the patience of a saint to listen for so long to the video case. No written contract, but the video should be... well, this way or that way, kind of like Tim Burton (yeah, right) but not TOO much like Tim Burton. We don't know who wanted what and the only thing I found of note was that the def. at least knew there's no "r" at the end of "idea."

 

Annoying, obnoxious, "chicken necking" lady accusing def of breaking her gas cap after he was going to fix ALL the scratches on her eight year old car for $99 - I don't know why anyone found her amusing. I didn't.

 

Musician - who is so harried, busy and rushed he can't possibly take the time to get something in writing for his gig - go pound sand.

[rcc]

Thanks how 55. Now I know why JM was questioning them like she did. If the defendent won millions then I would think he would get some teeth and dress better. lol But it must have been a scratch ticket.

[cattykit]

Is that the first time MM has polled the audience to see what they think?  Instead of Levin out on the street, who has the benefit of already knowing how MM's ruled, give the courtroom audience a voting box and show the results on the screen before the verdict, in real time.

[DoctorK]

That polling was hilarious, especially since the only person who raised her hand to agree with the plaintiff turned out to be the plaintiff's daughter.

[zillabreeze]

Annoying, obnoxious, "chicken necking" lady accusing def of breaking her gas cap after he was going to fix ALL the scratches on her eight year old car for $99 - I don't know why anyone found her amusing. I didn't.

 

WHERE, OH, WHERE do these folks get the idea that VeeHickles never malfunction or have anything go wrong?   In their magical world, all things mechanical should work perfectly forever and ever, amen.  When they don't, someone MUST PAY!

 

I, on the other hand, am always surprised when I am NOT looking for, planning for, or waiting for a technician for the house or truck!

[rcc]

58 year old plaintiff and the 22 year old defendent case today. JM let the defendent vent and she says "I need money ... " So she wanted money, he wanted sex and he sues because she was in such a hurry to get to him she ran over his ramp. The mother sits there and when Curt asks her in the hall what she thought she says "I told her not to go with old mens." 

[teebax]

Judge M has the patience of a saint to listen for so long to the video case. No written contract, but the video should be... well, this way or that way, kind of like Tim Burton (yeah, right) but not TOO much like Tim Burton. We don't know who wanted what and the only thing I found of note was that the def. at least knew there's no "r" at the end of "idea."

 

Annoying, obnoxious, "chicken necking" lady accusing def of breaking her gas cap after he was going to fix ALL the scratches on her eight year old car for $99 - I don't know why anyone found her amusing. I didn't.

 

Musician - who is so harried, busy and rushed he can't possibly take the time to get something in writing for his gig - go pound sand.

I didn't mind the car lady because she seemed to have a good sense of humor, and MM was amused. Anything that makes MM laugh it okay with me. I also liked that she admitted her story was long and stupid. I don't have a problem with her blaming the guy that had just worked on her car for her gas cap not working. Yes, it could have been from age, or the Wawa gas attendant, but the guy was working very close to it. It's not like she just randomly accused someone off the street.

 

The defendant in the video case was annoying. You don't get to decide what does and doesn't go into someone else's music video. I thought he was well-spoken and intelligent (they both were) but I don't know what made him think he could veto the band's ideas. That was strange, and the kind of case People's Court seems to get while all the other shows are dealing with exes and stupid dog bites.

 

The musician too busy to sign a contract was just stupid. I insure several local bands (if you want to play at one of the resorts here, you will need insurance to do so.) It's an easy policy to write, and they only have to sit still for about 10 minutes while I do it. Anyone who claims they didn't get a contract because they're just too busy immediately loses my sympathy.

[AngelaHunter]

That was strange, and the kind of case People's Court seems to get while all the other shows are dealing with exes and stupid dog bites.

 

I love contracts cases! Well, when the litigants actually HAVE a contract, and not some nebulous "it was understood", "I thought/I trusted him/her"  whatever.

 

I thought Dirty Old Men cases were confined to JJ, but today we got one here. Dirty old (toothless) man proudly proclaimed he never hit on a female under the age of nineteen, seeing as he has a daughter that age, but over that age? Bring 'em on! Very admirable. His only other requirement seems to be that they actually be female and very young. The amoral defendant was kind of scary/brutal looking, but when you're a Grandpa who is not rich, I guess that's the best you can do if you want to get your paws on some young flesh. I had a hard time understanding either of them, so I may have missed something.

 

Headboard case was boring.

[WhitneyWhit]

I love contracts cases! Well, when the litigants actually HAVE a contract, and not some nebulous "it was understood", "I thought/I trusted him/her"  whatever.

 

I thought Dirty Old Men cases were confined to JJ, but today we got one here. Dirty old (toothless) man proudly proclaimed he never hit on a female under the age of nineteen, seeing as he has a daughter that age, but over that age? Bring 'em on! Very admirable. His only other requirement seems to be that they actually be female and very young. The amoral defendant was kind of scary/brutal looking, but when you're a Grandpa who is not rich, I guess that's the best you can do if you want to get your paws on some young flesh. I had a hard time understanding either of them, so I may have missed something.

 

Headboard case was boring.

You didn't miss much. She was looking for a sugar daddy, but all Papa Smurf had to offer was dust. They were both gross JM was right, they were made for each other.

 

The last two cases were boring. Six kids, though, damn. 

[cattykit]

I'm the same age as today's Dirty Old Man, and he looked like he could be my grandfather, too.  And the 22 year old already looks like she's been rode hard and put up wet.  I hate to think what she'll look like when she's my age.  If she lives that long.

[AngelaHunter]

I'm the same age as today's Dirty Old Man, and he looked like he could be my grandfather, too.

 

Yabbut, you probably have teeth, correct? I can't believe how many people I see lately both here and on JJ who feel that having front teeth is very low on their list of priorities.

 

The 22 year old tootsie was such a beast that Gummy Gramps is no doubt the best she can do to get her bills paid.

[teebax]

I love contracts cases! Well, when the litigants actually HAVE a contract, and not some nebulous "it was understood", "I thought/I trusted him/her"  whatever.

 

I thought Dirty Old Men cases were confined to JJ, but today we got one here. Dirty old (toothless) man proudly proclaimed he never hit on a female under the age of nineteen, seeing as he has a daughter that age, but over that age? Bring 'em on! Very admirable. His only other requirement seems to be that they actually be female and very young. The amoral defendant was kind of scary/brutal looking, but when you're a Grandpa who is not rich, I guess that's the best you can do if you want to get your paws on some young flesh. I had a hard time understanding either of them, so I may have missed something.

 

Headboard case was boring.

Sugar daddy must have been the week's theme. They had one on Hot Bench, too, although the age difference was onoy about 20 years.

It saddens me that these girls are picking up the message that it's perfectly okay to pimp themselves out to get their bills paid. It hasn't occurred to them to get a damn job and support themselves, or to wait until they can afford a baby before they have one.

I don't fault the men; they're being men. Yes, that's sexist, but I'm sure it's a ego boost for them to have a young trophy on their arm. If they're etupid enough to fork over their money, then they're as culpable as the women we see who shower men with gifts and then sue afterward.

That being said, I'll take more sugar daddy cases if it means fewer cases with stupid women putting themselves in debt to buy some asshole a car, clothes, tattoos, bail them out of jail, etc.

[AngelaHunter]

It hasn't occurred to them to get a damn job and support themselves, or to wait until they can afford a baby before they have one.

 

 

To quote one of JM's expressions: What planet are you living on, Teebax? Get an education and work? Use birth control? Wait until they have stability and can afford to have a baby (or two or six)? Stop it. You're making me laugh so hard my sides hurt.

 

I'm sure it's a ego boost for them to have a young trophy on their arm.

 

If SHE is his idea of a trophy, then he's the lowest-rent, bottom-of-the-barrel sugar daddy we've ever seen.

 

I'll take more sugar daddy cases if it means fewer cases with stupid women putting themselves in debt to buy some asshole a car, clothes, tattoos, bail them out of jail, etc.

 

I'd rather have more contract cases, shady operators, pyramid schemers, etc., but yeah, even sugar daddies are preferable to pathetic desperate women trying to buy the love of scumbag losers with the gift of bail.

[rcc]

"Can I go home now" says the defendent who lied about having the dog and saying he would pay for it. JM kicked him out because he wouldn't stop whining then became belligerent. The plaintiff got her award because JM saw right through him. What a pathetic loser he was!

[AngelaHunter]

Quote

"Can I go home now"

 

He was entertaining way before that:

 

Def: "Like I said on the phone she's axin' to help with the dog and stuff because the situation's the situation and..."

 

JM: "You're not making any sense. ... respond to what I asked you."

 

Def: "I'm responding. You're not listening."

 

Okay, as scuzzy as he was, I give him credit for getting the poor puppymill/petshop dog neutered. At least it won't end up with some backyard breeder or another mill.

 

Plaintiff made me sick. Buying a petstore dog with money she doesn't have (what would she do if the dog needed vet care?) and then dumping it because she suddenly discovered her daughter has allergies - or she couldn't make the payments. Ugh.

 

Take the Last Train to the Shelter:

 

Maybe it's just me, but when I see a woman who came from another country, dropped FIVE kids (the last one just two years ago) with three different baby daddies, has no money, no job and no home (and finds it all amusing) and expects the taxpayers - in a country where I doubt she's paid one cent in taxes -  and strangers to support her and her litter I get somewhat irate. But maybe that's just me.

Edited November 9, 2015 by AngelaHunter

[teebax]

"Can I go home now" says the defendent who lied about having the dog and saying he would pay for it. JM kicked him out because he wouldn't stop whining then became belligerent. The plaintiff got her award because JM saw right through him. What a pathetic loser he was!

In my naive little corner of the world, I had no idea people financed pet purchases. Aren't there a plethora of pets out there just waiting for a loving person to adopt them? I got mine from the local beagle rescue. I think I donated a couple of hundred bucks, if that. Who the hell is financing pets???

In today's rerun, I finally saw the 'fecal position' case! I liked the girlfriend of the defendant, but her grammar was horrific. I don't even think it was a misstatement. And the defendant with that cockamamie story about mothers not being able to sell cars to their spouses or children? Did he think MM would believe that shit? Did anyone else in his life believe that shit?

For the last case on the rerun, involving the tenants suing for their security deposit, I did a little snooping about the car crash that almost took the life of their son and severely injured their other son.

When asked if the boys were wearing their seat belts, the plaintiff said they were. If this link is to the car crash in question, one son was ejected from the car. I'm not saying you can't be ejected while wearing a seat belt, but usually when someone is ejected it's because they're not belted in. I know they can fail, but that seems strange to me. Anyway, it looks like it was a single-vehicle crash, and the driver was intoxicated:

http://www.nj.com/bergen/index.ssf/2013/07/mahwah_man_charged_in_allegedly_drunken_crash_that_seriously_injured_passenger.html

[AngelaHunter]

I had no idea people financed pet purchases. Aren't there a plethora of pets out there just waiting for a loving person to adopt them? I got mine from the local beagle rescue.

 

My dogs came from rescues or after being dumped by their owners. There's really no excuse these days for anyone to financially support the unbelievable cruelty of puppymills or "private breeders" = backyard breeders. It must be that "I want it NOW" mindset so popular these days. If you can't afford the purchase price of an animal - which is miniscule compared to the lifetime costs - you can't afford a pet, even if it's really REALLY trendy.

 

I got a beautiful, smart, loving, sweet and purebred dog from a rescue. Cost: $250, including spay.

 

If we never saw another animal case on this show I would be happy. Oh, and Levin? Go suck a big one.

[teebax]

My dogs came from rescues or after being dumped by their owners. There's really no excuse these days for anyone to financially support the unbelievable cruelty of puppymills or "private breeders" = backyard breeders. It must be that "I want it NOW" mindset so popular these days. If you can't afford the purchase price of an animal - which is miniscule compared to the lifetime costs - you can't afford a pet, even if it's really REALLY trendy.

 

I got a beautiful, smart, loving, sweet and purebred dog from a rescue. Cost: $250, including spay.

 

If we never saw another animal case on this show I would be happy. Oh, and Levin? Go suck a big one.

You're not a Levin fan? I had no idea. :-)

I fast forward through most of what he says, but I caught a conversation in which someone he was talking to on the street mentioned screwing their sister-in-law. I have no idea what that was about, nor did I care to rewind and find out.

[AngelaHunter]

You're not a Levin fan? I had no idea. :-)

 

Actually, I am. The highlight of my day is seeing Levin shove his mic in the faces of the dullards - who make him feel important -  outside. I await, breath bated, their insightful, incisive and articulate commentary. Once they've given me something very deep to ponder, I just LOVE seeing Levin turn to the camera with his enchanting smile. I like to think it's just for me and it makes my little heart go pitty-pat. I especially love when he talks over JM, screeching uproariously funny things like, "Did the plaintiff have the right to wig out?" about a cancer patient. Be still my heart.

 

 

 

[WhitneyWhit]

Financing a dog is new one to me, but it sounds stupid enough that of course a People's Court litigant would do it. I don't even care if she was in the "right" I don't get behind anyone who buys a dog. We just adopted the most beautiful six month old yellow lab who was rescued from a backyard breeder and he's the most precious and lovable little thing. I think people who buy their dogs view them as an accessory, just something cute to say they have. They're also under the misguided thought that they're healthier than rescue dogs. 

Edited November 10, 2015 by WhitneyWhit

[Rick Kitchen]

 

I fast forward through most of what he says, but I caught a conversation in which someone he was talking to on the street mentioned screwing their sister-in-law. I have no idea what that was about, nor did I care to rewind and find out.

 

The guy meant to say "sue" and accidentally said "screw" and Levin made it dirty.

[NYCFree]

The guy meant to say "sue" and accidentally said "screw" and Levin made it dirty.

Almost, Levin said something like "would you screw over your sister-in-law?" Because in the case the five-child woman defendant was actually the sister-in-law of the plaintiff. When the guy on the street responded, he left off the "over" and said he would never screw his sister-in-law. Hilarity ensued.....

Normally I can't fast forward fast enough to get rid of him, my fingers slipped today.