The People's Court - General Discussion

[AngelaHunter]

13 hours ago, PsychoKlown said:

I thought Plex was a movie channel but I have to be wrong in that regard.   

I tried using Plex once. It's not a movie channel but an app(?) I found it way too fiddly and complicated so gave it up.

ETA: Scratch the above. Things have changed since I tried to tune in a decade ago. Seems Plex is now a streaming service.

Still not sure, what with being "technologically impaired" so have a look:

https://www.plex.tv/en-ca/

Edited August 22, 2023 by AngelaHunter

[rcc]

I have Plex on my streaming service. Will tune in. Hope they left Harvey out of it.

[Paperclips]

If I had a penny for everyone on these Court Shows who said "I took my dog to the dog park",

My dog made it to 18 before cancer got her.  

I took her for 3 walks a day- she never went to the dog park.  

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, Paperclips said:

If I had a penny for everyone on these Court Shows who said "I took my dog to the dog park",

My dog made it to 18 before cancer got her.  

I took her for 3 walks a day- she never went to the dog park.  

My sis is a dog trainer.  

Her nuggets of advice include don’t take your dog to a dog park ever and if you see any sort of dog that makes you uneasy…calmly and quick get away. 

I wish the contestants on TPC would consider these suggestions.  Todays incident with the pit bull sticking his head through the fence to rip open a tiny dog is a prime example of why you should quickly and calmly get away. 

My sis said it’s been over six months but she’s still working with a dog who was attacked by three dogs in a dog park. The poor dog is terrified of so many things and probably will never get back to where he was before walking in that field. 

Heart wrenching. 

[AngelaHunter]

I probably saw these cases (minus the dog thing) but have zero recollection of them.

I'm just so glad that when I was alone and lonely, there wasn't a seductive porcine loser  Don Juan "on hard times", inarticulate and downright incoherent, and a jailbird on top of it, to beguile me out of a ton of money. I admit that hearing a 39-year-old man and a father talk about getting his first job - due to his frequent incarcerations because he's a stupid, illiterate criminal -  did tug at my heartstrings. I'm nice that way, you know.

Of course, when I was alone and lonely, I wasn't a 38-year-old woman in last-ditch desperation mode, willing to finance said bloated Don Juan and treat him to meals out if only he would PLEASE keep popping in for a little rutting. I'm sure it was heaven, having the Doughboy puffing away on top of her, but still. They were NOT "dating". It doesn't take much for some women to open their purse strings. And their legs.

The car-buying P in the last case was unbearably stupid and I couldn't finish this.

[Bazinga]

Today's episode was from February 4, 2019.

Discussion: "Boat Battle."

To quote SRTouch, "Ho-hum cases (and being generous calling them cases - JJ would have blown through 4 of these and had time for extra commercials) good thing is some truly laughable litigants."

[AngelaHunter]

17 hours ago, Bazinga said:

good thing is some truly laughable litigants."

Yes, laughable. I did enjoy Douglas providing his expertise to affirm what brainless morons the defs were.  "You're an idiot," was good too.

The single mama was wearing an unspeakable wig. The amateurs who perform in my local playhouse have better, and they wear them only for performances.

I'm gratified that someone pays not only for her rent on a two-bedroom, 2-bathroom place but also pays employees to check the place out, examine it to make sure it's not outdated, and it is up to the "standard of taste" for the entitled charity cases. ❤️

[Guest]

2 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

I'm gratified that someone pays not only for her rent on a two-bedroom, 2-bathroom place but also pays employees to check the place out, examine it to make sure it's not outdated, and it is up to the "standard of taste" for the entitled charity cases. ❤️

And again, the broken record is posting that there isn’t an ounce of dignity to be found in the contestant box. 

I know $500 is nothing to sneeze at but I think I would have just walked away and tucked this lesson in the back of my mind do it wouldn’t happen again. Lesson learned. 

Not purple mopped momma. Not only did she kick up a fuss her text messages were mocked by JM and the entire courtroom.  I would have slinked away into oblivion but not PMM. Nope.  She flounced out without nary a word to Doug. 

I just don’t get it. 

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, PsychoKlown said:

I know $500 is nothing to sneeze at but I think I would have just walked away

Personally, I might think $500 isn't that much compared to the $1000 -give or take-I'm saving every month while Douglas pays my rent. Over the course of a year (or 5 or 20), it's a very tidy sum.

[Bazinga]

Today's case is from February 18, 2019

Discussion link: "Funeral Family Feud."

[Zahdii]

Bazinga, thanks for putting in a link to the past discussion of the case!  So much easier that way.

[AngelaHunter]

15 hours ago, Bazinga said:

Today's case is from February 18, 2019

Discussion link: "Funeral Family Feud."

Another one I totally forgot. I was wary, reading "Funeral Fight" that it would be the usual - brutal physical attacks at the funeral, and was relieved when it was not. I only remembered the case when I heard the "Cordelia" and "Nessie" cards, so I skipped the rest.

I passed on the repeat of the asshole cop and his big baby girl.

7 hours ago, Zahdii said:

Bazinga, thanks for putting in a link to the past discussion of the case!  So much easier that way.

Bazinga is awesome! 👍

[Bazinga]

Thank you all for the kind words.  You are all most welcome.

Sorry to disappoint, today's episode, from February 8, 2019, had no forum comments.  Doesn't bode well.

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Bazinga said:

Thank you all for the kind words.  You are all most welcome.

Sorry to disappoint, today's episode, from February 8, 2019, had no forum comments.  Doesn't bode well.

I’d normally say “challenge accepted” but I won’t be viewing today.  Prior appointment. 

I wonder why no comments?

[AngelaHunter]

8 hours ago, Bazinga said:

Thank you all for the kind words.  You are all most welcome.

Sorry to disappoint, today's episode, from February 8, 2019, had no forum comments.  Doesn't bode well.

For an episode to have no comments, I'll take a guess that it was either too horrifying/disgusting for words or so boring everyone fell asleep.

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

For an episode to have no comments, I'll take a guess that it was either too horrifying/disgusting for words or so boring everyone fell asleep.

If you’re not doing anything of importance please take a gander and let me know.  

Damn job.  Sucks the very life out of my soul.  
 

First I missed faux Robert Redford now this. 

[CrazyInAlabama]

Today's ridiculous rerun is titled "Car Loan Catastrophe" with 3 cases, all boring and stupid.

First case two defendants were given a car by plaintiff, for $3500.  Plaintiff says it wasn't a gift, and he wants his money.  I haven't disliked anyone more than the smirking, deadbeat defendants in a while.    Defendant woman is the daughter of the woman plaintiff was dating.    This money was for a second car.   Plaintiff was helped by the mother, and thought he would help the young couple with a loan for the car.  

(Defendant woman is 20, and she has a 3-year-old with defendant man baby).  Plaintiff took out a Heloc on his house for the money for the car, so if he doesn't repay the HELOC, he loses his home.  

I'm sick of cases like the second one, where people hire a service, like the bartender in this case, and demand more than they contracted for, plus a refund.  I'm suspicious that there were a lot more guests than the contract called for.  Plaintiff is suing for $3000 back from the $5,000 contract, and originally was going to demand a full refund.   Judge M gives $1666 back, a total travesty of justice. 

Real estate broker showed an apartment to defendants, who were supposed to pay a fee/commission.  Plaintiff wants $5,000 commission after defendants rented an apartment plaintiff showed them.   I already can't stand the defendants.   Plaintiff showed the defendants the apartment twice, then defendant decided to stay in their current apartment.  Two months later plaintiff is at the building, and sees defendant wife sprinting across the lobby like an Olympic sprinter to avoid plaintiff.   Then, plaintiff calls the property manager, and that person confirms defendants moved in right after the showings.   

Defendant claims it was a no fee rental, so he owes no commission to the plaintiff.    Defendant claims he works for commission, and wouldn't cheat anyone out of a commission.    Defendant woman claims an associate of plaintiff said no commission was required.  

Why didn't plaintiff get a signed commission contract with defendants?  Judge M tells defendants to pay $2500 to plaintiff, and if defendants can prove someone else said no fee.   I think plaintiff was right, and defendants are deadbeats. 

The only good thing about the bartender case is that it was pre-Covid, so we were spared the hideous retelling of Judge M's sainted daughters' horrible experience with Covid cancelling their celebrations.   

Must have been so boring, or was preempted in February 2019 when it originally ran.    Or maybe it was one of those snow emergencies that the TV weather people give a name for no reason. 

Edited August 25, 2023 by CrazyInAlabama

[ItsHelloPattiagain]

On 8/22/2023 at 4:35 PM, PsychoKlown said:

Her nuggets of advice include don’t take your dog to a dog park ever and if you see any sort of dog that makes you uneasy…calmly and quick get away. 

I took my rescue dog to the dog park - all she did was run back and forth along the fence line trying to chase the cars that drove by (which apparently she did at her old house because they had a doggie door and she and the other dogs were left home alone all day and were bored). No interaction with any other dogs. 

[DoctorK]

3 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Must have been so boring, or was preempted in February 2019 when it originally ran

I think I vaguely remembered the first case with the car loan to the two giggling irresponsible parents who stiffed the guy who loaned them money for a car. I am surprised that I didn't comment back when it ran because those two smirking deadbeats would have riled me up a bit when I first saw it. I hated the way that the two dim bulbs smiled at each other and laughed while claiming that they never knew this was always a loan in spite of the check given to them clearly stated on the memo line (right next to where the dim guy filled in his name on the check) that this was a loan. But neither one of them noticed this (giggle, laugh, smile at each other and giggle more) on the check. Maybe I shouldn't use the word "dim", maybe they both have the maturity level of ten year olds. JM was right that these two should not be raising a child.

Second case was boring because it was just another case of someone who thought that her party didn’t go as well as she was entitled to and wants a big pile of money back. We have seen this many times before. Personally, I think plaintiff and her indignant witness were at least exaggerating (if not making up) the issues so they could cut their costs for the party.

Third case was also lacking in excitement, a bunch of unlikable people. The female defendant was annoying, frequently talking and arguing directly with the plaintiff (and JM let her keep doing it) and came across to me as an aggressive argumentative person whose indignation outweighed her credibility. The male defendant was awfully self-righteous too.

All three  cases looked like people trying to avoid paying what they owed.

Edited August 25, 2023 by DoctorK

[AngelaHunter]

4 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

Must have been so boring, or was preempted in February 2019 when it originally ran.

It must have been preempted since I know for sure I never saw these cases.

1 hour ago, DoctorK said:

I think I vaguely remembered the first case with the car loan to the two giggling irresponsible parents who stiffed the guy who loaned them money for a car.

When I checked the blurb, I saw "cat" instead of "car" so I skipped it. 🤔 After reading the summation here, I'm glad I did that.

4 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I'm sick of cases like the second one, where people hire a service, like the bartender in this case, and demand more than they contracted for, plus a refund. 

Oh, my. So particular, so choosy are the connoisseur Plaintiffs that if their drinks of choice, "Bulliet" and "Ciroc" aren't available, they refuse to even consider having a sip of anything else. Gimme a break. I have preferences too, but if they aren't available I won't turn up my nose at everything else. Wife says hubby got NO Bulliet, but then he admits he had only "3 or 4 glasses".  Oops. That's a hell of a lot of bourbon.

According to bartender Def, P's hubby drank 1 1/2 bottles of the stuff. 😆 Get outta here with that! Both sides have a problem with exaggeration and the truth. I did believe Def when he said the guests came too early and guzzled up all the !FREE! liquor like a swarm of boozy locusts, so there was a shortage later. Don't drink any Bulliet every time Def claims to "take care of the guests." The wife's brother's mother steps up to gripe about something or other - a lack of alcohol, I'm assuming.

P wife states she was going to try to get every penny they paid - free booze for 142 people! -  but magnanimously settled for only going after 3K of the 5K paid. They're also suing the venue for the lack of air conditioning. No mention that they're suing the food truck operator. Who knows?

4 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

 Judge M gives $1666 back, a total travesty of justice. 

Agree! Even $500 would have been very generous, IMO.

1 hour ago, DoctorK said:

Third case was also lacking in excitement, a bunch of unlikable people.

Let's see: We have another real estate broker who doesn't believe in written contracts for property, and chiseling renters who tried to weasel their way out of paying him his commission after he found them an apartment. We've never heard THAT before. "Why pay if you don't have to?" asks Def husband. Indeed - why? Defs put the onus on property managers Ali, Ali, and Sheik, none of whom are present.

Goofy, annoying Def calls his wife Natasha and Natalia. Maybe he's not sure. Natasha/Natalia is super-mouthy and blabs over JM, who doesn't give her the spanking she deserves. Def is in sales himself, so never would he try to "stiff" someone else (he reiterates that to Doug in the Hall) like the P, who works on commissions. Except he did.

The real estate broker, who looks like he time-traveled in from some 1975 cop show, concedes to Doug in the hall that he might draw up a contract next time.

Defs need to go sue Shiek and the double Alis.

 

 

[Bazinga]

Today's episode originally aired on February 22, 2019.

Here is the discussion link:

"Livid Over a Loan."

Edited August 29, 2023 by Bazinga
Corrected link. Confused the date with February 20th. Sorry everyone.

[CrazyInAlabama]

The rerun from 2018 called "Terrible Training" is so funny though I've watched it several times now.   The woman is suing the defendant/bus training company owner after plaintiff flunked the bus driver license test several times.  She wants her money back, and doesn't get it.   For the sake of children who would have been captives on her careening bus, I'm so glad she never passed. 

[Guest]

10 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

The rerun from 2018 called "Terrible Training" is so funny though I've watched it several times now.   The woman is suing the defendant/bus training company owner after plaintiff flunked the bus driver license test several times.  She wants her money back, and doesn't get it.   For the sake of children who would have been captives on her careening bus, I'm so glad she never passed. 

Was she from Massachusetts?  I recall a lot of banter about her pronunciations of certain words. 

She is what Lt. Columbo would call “an individual person”.

And yes, I thank my lucky stars she is not a bus driver. I am on the Massachusetts roads and have witnessed my share of insane behavior.  The one thing I do notice with school bus drivers here is that when they stop to pick up the kiddos they’ll turn their front wheels into the opposite lane.  So many drivers here will fly by flashing red lights for school buses.  Now, if you’re going to do it you’re going to have to ride partly on the sidewalk.  I’ve witnessed that a few times too  

Anyway, I think it’s best for all that she gives up the notion of driving a bus and suggest she get an account with Uber. 

[Bazinga]

Today's episode, Season 22, Episode 87, originally aired on February 19, 2019.

Here is the discussion link:

"Spreading Social Media Lies."

[Guest]

On 2/19/2019 at 7:30 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

What was wrong with Mello's lip?     

I don’t know but I realized as I was watching her I kept biting my upper lip.

Did anyone else notice the Prophetess’ blue eyebrows, eyes, lips and hair?  How many pounds do you think those braids weighed?

Also, just an observation…when all hell broke loose did you notice the children in the church audience had zero reaction?  None.  My guess (and I hope I’m wrong) is that the kids are so used to screaming and yelling in their lives it did not phase them in the least 

And that folks, in my opinion, is just as sad if not more so than the death of a 13 year old boy. 

[AngelaHunter]

On 8/28/2023 at 10:39 PM, PsychoKlown said:

Was she from Massachusetts?  I recall a lot of banter about her pronunciations of certain words. 

I don't think people there say "feeled" instead of "failed", or "Yip" instead of "Yelp". I didn't rewatch this but agree it was funny with the double Igors and someone who wants to be a bus driver but is too girly to learn about engines, something which requires a penis, according to her.

 

8 hours ago, PsychoKlown said:

Did anyone else notice the Prophetess’ blue eyebrows, eyes, lips and hair?  How many pounds do you think those braids weighed?

I took one look at that lineup, remembered it, and said, "OhHellNo"

 

8 hours ago, PsychoKlown said:

 My guess (and I hope I’m wrong) is that the kids are so used to screaming and yelling in their lives it did not phase them in the least 

Sadly, I'm sure you're right. If they have zero self-control and behave this way in a church you can just imagine elsewhere.

[Bazinga]

Today's episode, Season 22, Episode 100, originally aired on March 15, 2019.

Here is the discussion link:

"Business Battle."

Warning: case two is a dog attack case.

[CrazyInAlabama]

On 3/15/2019 at 5:09 PM, AngelaHunter said:

SRTouch, I'm not talking about sentimental value for pets or the cost of the value of the animal, since in the law dogs are property like any other, I just don't understand why one plaintiff whose old dog died as the result of the negligence of the defendant couldn't recoup any of the money spent on vet bills trying to save his dog because the dog died, yet today's plaintiff, under the same circumstances, got all her money back for the vet care for her old dog, which also did not survive. The dog dying does not negate what must be paid to the vet. 

I know this is a long time after, but I think the dog case where Judge M ruled no vet costs to plaintiff was because the dog was terminally ill with cancer, and the vets told the owner dog wouldn't survive. So, Judge M and her stone cold heart ruled the vet bills should have only been for the inevitable euthanasia.  Therefore, the attacking dog's owner wasn't liable, because the vet bills were only a futile effort to treat the already dying animal.     I found her ruling despicable in this case.

I watched todays rerun of poor little Mylo the 16-year-old dachshund.   The vet never told the owner it was hopeless.   Also, I almost puked when Judge M said the despicable defendant felt bad about the attack and death, resulting from her Pit Bull attacking and killing Mylo on the plaintiff's property.  The defendant didn't care, she didn't even pretend to care.  Doug in the hall mentions that defendant put the Pit Bull down, but she still makes excuses for her dog and the attack. Defendant puts in a few jabs about the poor victim dog, and how inhumane the treatment of the dachshund was pointless.   I think the defendant just wanted the case dismissed, so she could get half of the money pool. 

Edited August 30, 2023 by CrazyInAlabama

[Guest]

On 3/15/2019 at 5:16 PM, AngelaHunter said:

😂Yes, I'm sure someone who took a year to scrape up 850$ for a non-working, ancient heap keeps a lawyer on retainer.

You scoff but how many past contestants claim to have a “family bondsman” that they call on a fairly regular basis.  Maybe there’s a kernel of truth that he has a lawyer on call  

We have a handyman, plumber and electrician that we call if needed.  I am so screwed if I need to bail myself or a loved one out of the slammer because bail bondsman is not on my phone contacts. 

Similarly to buying dried foods in the event of a disaster I should probably prepare for the need of a bail bondsman. 

I ain’t as chill as I used to be.  Scratch that.  I was never chill, it’s just that as I get older I get mouthier. 

[AngelaHunter]

15 hours ago, Bazinga said:

Here is the discussion link:

"Business Battle."

I started watching this before reading your post. Once again, I had zero memory of a case and thought I might be mildly entertained by the hijinks of these professional ladies and pillars of the community.

I only realized I had indeed seen this when I saw the video and heard:

"Why you rollin' up on my car taking video of me? Why you rollin' up on my car taking video of me? Why you rollin' up on my car taking video of me? Why you rollin' up on my car taking video of me? Why you rollin' up on my car taking video of me?

Did I miss any?

I vaguely remembered the incoherent P who was suing the Def because the ancient vehicle he begged for and that she sold him, which had been sitting for years, was not showroom-worthy. He informs JM and then Doug that in HIS town, the Lemon Law applies to 17-year-old wrecks that cost 850$, even if he sees the words "AS IS" on the sales contract. I guess he's off to the Supreme Court in HIS town, which must be in the merry old land of Oz where a wizard might grant him a brain.

I just wish the Def had been granted some award for this ultra-dumb harassment she endured.

JM said something I DO not recall, and really liked:

"If you don't win the lottery, you can't sue and get the cost of the ticket back."

 

2 hours ago, PsychoKlown said:

I ain’t as chill as I used to be.  Scratch that.  I was never chill, it’s just that as I get older I get mouthier.

That makes two of us.

[Paperclips]

Saw a commercial for the new show.  It's going to air here on a local station.  It looks like a much smaller set.  No sign of Douglas - in fact I didn't even see a baliff, although maybe they just didn't show him/her in the commercial.

[Bazinga]

Today's episode, Season 22, Episode 96, originally aired on March 11, 2019.

Here is the discussion link:

"Your Food Almost Killed Me!"

Edited August 31, 2023 by Bazinga

[AngelaHunter]

What I missed the first time around in the "She threw my junk out" case of the silly, dumb bitches.

"I don't know how to put food on a grill."

I had no idea dropping a steak on a barbeque grill required a special skill set or the completion of a course. Maybe I've been doing it wrong all these years.

And people, update your dictionaries to strike out the word "said". It's "like" as in "I was like, " and "She was, like" or "go/goes" = "I go," "she goes". No "SAID", whatever you do.

Sorry. Feeling cranky. I have another ventriloquist cricket in my basement which I've failed to locate and the chirping is driving me to drink.  Well, Jiminy is driving me to drink more than usual.

[AngelaHunter]

I thought I'd let all of you peeps worrying about my cricket problem know I just now caught the little bastard and relocated him to my garden. Chirp free, Jiminy!

 

I just hope I don't get sued for an illegal eviction and return of security deposit.

I can just hear The Levin screeching, "CHIRPER? He hardly KNEW'ER!"

 

[Bazinga]

Today's episode, Season 22, Episode 101, originally aired on April 8, 2019.

Here is the discussion link:

"Stealing From a Friend."

[Guest]

On 10/30/2018 at 5:06 PM, AngelaHunter said:

I lived in a few apartments in days long gone by. I even had company, some who stayed for a week or more, but somehow we never trashed the place or punched holes in the walls. What level of human being does this? 

What level of human being does this?

I am going to put this on a post it note and affix it to my notebook for permanent enshrinement 

I plan to throw this little gem out when least expected. 

There’s a family wedding coming up in November.  It just might be appropriate at that gathering. 
 

[Guest]

On 4/8/2019 at 5:30 PM, AngelaHunter said:

Def contractor, appearing here in a rather girlish top designed to show off his biceps, tries to double-talk JM about why such a deplorable mess is acceptable. 

His ensemble is strangely mesmerizing.  I’ve never seen a man wear a delicate knit shirt with a scoop neck.  Never.  Couple that with his pasty skin and his getup screams we need a delicate strand of seed pearls to complete the look!

I do wonder what was rolling through his mind when he chose that particular shirt to wear on that particular day.

And maybe I’m a run of the mill rube but I’m thinking Made in Japan on a hunk of tile does not signify that it’s rare or valuable.  And while we’re on the subject that bathroom looks like something you’d see in an episode of LockUp - Life on Death Row. 

Shudder!!!

[AngelaHunter]

3 hours ago, PsychoKlown said:

His ensemble is strangely mesmerizing.  I’ve never seen a man wear a delicate knit shirt with a scoop neck.  Never.  Couple that with his pasty skin and his getup screams we need a delicate strand of seed pearls to complete the look!

I do wonder what was rolling through his mind when he chose that particular shirt to wear on that particular day.

And maybe I’m a run of the mill rube but I’m thinking Made in Japan on a hunk of tile does not signify that it’s rare or valuable.  And while we’re on the subject that bathroom looks like something you’d see in an episode of LockUp - Life on Death Row. 

Shudder!!!

I had to quote all of that so I can give it another 😆

The valuable post-war wallpaper, ready to crumble into dust at the slightest touch, and the rare Japanese white tiles along with the P who refuses to answer her door for any reason were worth a second look. I couldn't help thinking, "STOP saying "caulk", everyone." I have a little personal story about that but I'm not a litigant so I'm sure no one wants to hear it.

I also skimmed the first case, just to marvel again at Brandon, the moon-faced mooching addict who has something (deeply hidden, to be sure)irresistible that draws all the girls to his yard. I had to FF over any mention of the insane P having a child. Not amusing. Disturbing. Maybe she was just pissed off that Brandon wouldn't give her some of that lovin' he gives all the other smitten ladies, even though she complained he tried to touch her "area".

[Guest]

1 hour ago, AngelaHunter said:

I also skimmed the first case, just to marvel again at Brandon, the moon-faced mooching addict who has something (deeply hidden, to be sure)irresistible that draws all the girls to his yard. I had to FF over any mention of the insane P having a child. Not amusing. Disturbing. Maybe she was just pissed off that Brandon wouldn't give her some of that lovin' he gives all the other smitten ladies, even though she complained he tried to touch her "area".

It was interesting that the plaintiff was taken aback when JM insisted she show her exactly what MoonPie did and how he touched her.

Yet, strangely she had no issue with coming on national tv with hundreds of millions of people watching her kvetch that the convict she let into her home (along with her nine year old daughter) was not behaving properly.

Also, would any of you ever lounge across a couch while said convict is at the other end?  None of this makes sense.  Then, when JM called her out on it she seemed annoyed.

If I may use one of my mom's quotes to explain the plaintiff..."she sure is living the scummy life".    

Out of the mouths of moms.....

 

[AngelaHunter]

2 hours ago, PsychoKlown said:

Also, would any of you ever lounge across a couch while said convict is at the other end?

Would I? That would be "no". Brandon is not really my type, no matter how smooth his moves. However, this is mild behavior compared to the circus of insanity and utter depravity we've seen on this show.

The worst part about this dimbo and her precious "area" is not that she sat on the sofa with the silly-looking addict/jailbird/moocher, but that she brought him into her home to live with her small daughter. I wouldn't care if he ravaged her area with any instrumentality at hand, but the kid part? 😡 Makes me sick.

[Guest]

8 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

The worst part about this dimbo and her precious "area" is not that she sat on the sofa with the silly-looking addict/jailbird/moocher, but that she brought him into her home to live with her small daughter. I wouldn't care if he ravaged her area with any instrumentality at hand, but the kid part? 😡 Makes me sick.

Where are the Gladys Kravitz’s of the world?

CPS is so overwhelmed sometimes reports gets lost in the shuffle. Sad, but true. 

We had a recent case here with an apartment full of children, two male adults, deplorable conditions and questionable situations.  Slipped through the cracks. 

I would like to know if the offended contestant had any relatives or friends who were aware of the situation?  Why didn’t they alert or say something to her?

She looked a bit dim but was savvy enough to bring a lawsuit.  Then again doesn’t that describe most of the contestants on this show that gives away prizes?

[AngelaHunter]

12 hours ago, PsychoKlown said:

We had a recent case here with an apartment full of children, two male adults, deplorable conditions and questionable situations.  Slipped through the cracks. 

Even when they don't slip through the cracks and a child/children are removed due to an assortment of abuse/neglect, they are often returned - "Oh, they'll be fine. The parents promised they won't beat, starve or neglect them anymore." -  and end up dead at the hands of loving parents. How often have we heard that? Children are Job 10 for governments. They don't vote or pay taxes, and in the case of infants they can't even talk, so no big deal. Governments have better things on which to spend our money than protecting the most helpless of victims. It makes my blood boil.

Even on this show, we've often heard about the mistreatment or neglect of children and I just bet nothing is ever done.

[Bazinga]

There is drag racing scheduled today instead of The People's Court, so I won't be able to provide the link to the episode discussion.  I am assuming that others will get an episode today.  Sorry.

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Bazinga said:

There is drag racing scheduled today instead of The People's Court, so I won't be able to provide the link to the episode discussion.  I am assuming that others will get an episode today.  Sorry.

We’re the ones who should be sorry. Compared to TPC drag racing sounds downright educational. 

I hope our station shows something else. 

Happy Labor Day!

[Maverick]

  No TPC here either.  The new season usually started on Labor Day so I'm assuming the syndication contracts expired last week so no more show.    I'm getting old sitcoms and and infomercials in the slots where TPC aired so I'm hoping that's just temporary until the new show starts and it goes in the same slots. 

[Paperclips]

I got the episode today - Drag Racing was on another channel.  They showed the episode where Doug came back for the first time.   Before they used to have MM and her husband talk after the case, they used to get in 3 cases a show instead of 2.

[AngelaHunter]

I got the show today and it was good since I have zero memory of the cases. Bedbugs, 15 -year-old Dell desktop, and cat pee chairs.  Everyone is civil.

I actually found it. It was the day of Doug's return.

Sept 5, 2016.

The Levin says, "He didn't let the bedbugs bite but they did anyway." Once a jerkoff, always a jerkoff.

[Maverick]

 Interesting.  I guess the production company is still offering old shows and my local station decided not to continue.   Hope the new show starts soon but it's not looking good that I'll get it in my area.  

[Bazinga]

Today's episode, Season 20, Episode 2, originally aired on September 6, 2016.  At least we have apparently moved on from repeats from 2018/19.

Here is the discussion link:

"Tree Cutter Tantrum."

 

[AngelaHunter]

16 hours ago, Bazinga said:

At least we have apparently moved on from repeats from 2018/19

That's a good thing since they're mostly new now to me. Well, except for that rat-faced, sneaky, smirking witch, "Elizabeth" who scammed the plaintiffs, and even after the reaming she got, requested JM to issue a gag order on the Ps. That earned her an even worse reaming. Heh. Such brazen shamelessness is kind of awesome, actually.

And people, if you need big trees cut down, please go with a reputable company, not some unintelligible, belligerent kook, whose workers hate him and who will accuse you of "taking advantage" if you expect him to do the job for the price HE quoted. That way you don't have to pay twice as much when you do hire someone reputable.