Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
Lillybee

The People's Court

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Actually he looks like a hobo or maybe he's moonlighting as a clown?

Well, I just had to. 

  • Laugh 7

Share this post


Link to post

1 hour ago, AZChristian said:

I have a confession to make.  I absolutely loved and enjoyed the accordion case (not the one on the plaintiff's table, the one that JM had to rule upon).

I loved it too! It was different and I wasn't bored at all. It was a welcome break from as-is hoopties, irresponsible baby breeders, bail, warrants, dingbat roommates fighting over rent/utility bills,  pathetic women showering money on repulsive losers, and weave wars. I won't include animal cases sinces I never watch them.

1 hour ago, AZChristian said:

Did anyone else notice how long the defendant paused after Doug asked him whether he had ever pulled a gun on someone before? 

I skipped that. By then I'd had way more than I could take of both litigants.

44 minutes ago, PsychoKlown said:

Well, I just had to. 

Oh, hell!! LOVE your new avatar!! 🤣😅😆

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, AZChristian said:

Dear fellow People's Court Peeps:

I have a confession to make.  I absolutely loved and enjoyed the accordion case (not the one on the plaintiff's table, the one that JM had to rule upon).

When Geri popped up out of the audience (and I don't believe she was a plant, I think it was one of those great cosmic coincidences) and put that accordion on and snapped those little snaps at the top and bottom so the bellows would move . . . I thought, "This lady knows about accordions."  (I played one for about 3 months during my teen years, but even I would have known that there was something wrong with the bass (left) side of the thing.)

When she looked at JM and said, "Would you like to hear a polka?" and JM almost jumped off the bench with excitement, I thought - "Yep, in the middle of covid this is EXACTLY the case we need to hear."  

No doubt Gerry was a hit, and I enjoyed the last few minutes  - problem I had was those boring litigants. Had this been a normal length case it would have been great........ even with the slow middle, I enjoyed it more than any of the recent fare

Edited by SRTouch
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

They're showing the rerun of the failed adoption background check.  

The kid that the plaintiff wanted to adopt was so lucky that the woman was turned down.   And suing the adoption agency when you fail a background check for child abuse charges, and according to the adoption agency director, it was more than one charge.    I find it stunning that the plaintiff has been employed by a school system before, and after the abuse allegations.   

Her older son was actually hospitalized when he was 14 or so, because she whacked him with a sneaker, and she claims it was only a couple of swats.  How does a 14 year old end up in the hospital from two minor swats with a sneaker?   

 The plaintiff was totally lifeless, there was no emotion in her at all.   Her husband never even said a word in court or in the hall.   I wouldn't let either of the plaintiffs babysit a Gerbil, let alone a child.  

The adoption agency head was very wise to get the remark in about more than one abuse allegation against the plaintiff.    I'm hoping that no one will ever consider the plaintiff for fostering or adoption.    

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

They're showing the rerun of the failed adoption background check.  

The kid that the plaintiff wanted to adopt was so lucky that the woman was turned down.   And suing the adoption agency when you fail a background check for child abuse charges, and according to the adoption agency director, it was more than one charge.    I find it stunning that the plaintiff has been employed by a school system before, and after the abuse allegations.   

Her older son was actually hospitalized when he was 14 or so, because she whacked him with a sneaker, and she claims it was only a couple of swats.  How does a 14 year old end up in the hospital from two minor swats with a sneaker?

Only way I see for kid to need a doctor is 1) she's a champeeen handballer, or 2) someone (neighbor, teacher, nosy granny, whaterever reported her to CPS and CPS required a medical check.......... either way, you would think her job would have raised a BUNCH of red flags requiring an official investigation

1st NOTE: NO recap today - decided to wash my car in the rain 😄

2ND NOTE: my parents raised 5 kids in the 50s and 60s - yes we were spanked on occassion - spanked by hand or for SERIOUS stuff Dad would break out his belt for 3-4 swats...... 3 of the kids earned advanced college degrees. My youngest brother was probably the smartest of us and barely graduated HS - and now probably out earns the rest of us. Guess I'm the low earner of the 5, joined the Army after HS and retired at 38yo. None of us ever arrested, no street brawls - heck not even a single restraining order after a family thanksgiving dinner. - not even any lawsuits despite one sister being in property management and a brother having rental property

 

Edited by SRTouch
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I suspect the 'couple of swats' with a sneaker the potential adoptive mother delivered was a lot more than that.    Since when does a little bruise require a trip to the ER, and overnight at the hospital?   

Also, the adoption agency director's remark about more than one abuse complaint was interesting.    

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Today's case with the woman accusing her friend of stealing her husbands Adderal and an Iphone was all kinds of messy and I got annoyed with the double-talking plaintiff not being clear and half-assing a lot of her answers:  Is her sister involved or not, how does she know it's her husbands pills in the sock, why did she not mention various facts in the police report. 

Her first mistake was taking the one-armed druggo into her house.  By the midway of the case, the whole case started smelling fishy - was all of this drama a way to get a new phone or to cover some shenanigans with prescription drugs?  I just wanted JM to throw the two of them out and let them play their druggy games back wherever they came from.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

OMG she was so damn annoying..  Maybe she was on drugs or something as she looked like she was going to fall asleep at the podium.

Why would you take a known drug addict/thief into your house when you have young children.

I could hardly follow her story with the double talk/half ass answers as noted above by patty1h.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, NYGirl said:

OMG she was so damn annoying..  Maybe she was on drugs or something as she looked like she was going to fall asleep at the podium.

Why would you take a known drug addict/thief into your house when you have young children.

I could hardly follow her story with the double talk/half ass answers as noted above by patty1h.

So it wasn't just me...... I watched the first few minutes and just shut it off and took Silly out to check the tomato plants

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
56 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

So it wasn't just me...... I watched the first few minutes and just shut it off and took Silly out to check the tomato plants

I got all itchy just listening to her.  She certainly was cagey.

And honest-to-pete it took me more than a few minutes to figure out what was going on with his left sleeve.  Af first I thought he had his arm in a sling.  Then I realized he didn't have an arm.  Odd that you'd let the sleeve wave in the wind like that.  You'd think he'd tack it down.  

 

  • Like 4
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post

So, someone I know called and asked if I'd take in their son and take care of him because they can't deal with him anymore. Is he a 16-year-old acting out? No, he's a one-armed (lost his arm in a car accident, maybe because he was high on Adderall) 40 year old man who is a drug addict and needs a babysitter. But oh - he promised he wouldn't use drugs in my house so of course I believed him, because we all know how honest and reliable drug addicts are. I have a really KIND HEART, so I told him to come on over even though I have children who would be exposed to this. Why wouldn't I? My stupid husband agreed.

Plaintiff is a dull-eyed, extra-dumb moron who thought this was a good idea, for some bizarre reason. She trusted the drug addict, whose own parents couldn't stand him anymore, to live decently in her home. He might steal from other people and even from his own Dad, but never from HER or from her husband who is taking a shitload of (legal) drugs. She also thinks her sister, who lives with her, was in on the def's stealing P's 11-year-old daughter's phone. Sister still lives in her home. Def, who giggled and jumped around  like an excited monkey or someone jonesing for a fix until JM told him to knock it off, kept drugs in his socks. That's where he normally keeps them I guess. But even though he's 40 years old, an addict and a total loser who lives back with poor Mommy and Daddy, he's here with some woman who is willing to scrape the bottom of the barrel in order to have a warm body around. Wow. The big downer in this ep was that both sides have kids - def found someone willing to breed with him three times. How depressing. P has no proof D stole the phone so she gets nothing. She informs Doug in the Hall that she's learned not to be such a nice person. I believe the word JM used was"fool".

Then we had plaintiff suing her outrageous former landlord for her security deposit back. I was expecting what we often see, which are massive holes smashed in walls, doors ripped off the hinges, broken bathtubs, destroyed appiances, etc. but no. P lived in the place for TWENTY-TWO years and landlord def wants to keep the whole 1700-odd dollars for a missing towel bar, a doorframe that has a split in it, bathroom grout that is not pristine, some paint peeled from P's daughter putting up posters and dents in the walls from a door stopper (I have the same kind). Landlord has done no repairs in nearly a quarter of a century but did paint a few rooms once upon a time. It's unconscionable. Just shameful. Even if P paid only 500$/mth, she's paid landlord at the very minimum 132,000$ and she's bitching about a 15$ towel bar that she says her handyman charged her 100$ in labour to replace. 😅 15$ for the towel bar, some paint and a 10$ container of spackle would fix the place up but she wants P to pay for renewing the place for the next tenants.  She's charging her new tenant 1600$/month when P was only paying 900$. I'm sure the extra 700$ will cover the cost of the things that need fixing. What a nasty, greedy woman. She gets to keep 200$ of the sec. deposit, and plaintiff is awarded double the amount of the remainder for the illegal withholding of all of it. Good.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

So, someone I know called and asked if I'd take in their son and take care of him because they can't deal with him anymore. 

It was about 4 minutes after PC started when I realized that our governor had not done his weekly update in the middle of PC yesterday.  BOOM.  "We interrupt this program . . . "

So I only saw the first few minutes of the first case.  What had us rolling on the floor was the list of her husband's drugs that she thought the defendant had stolen.  The last one she rattled off was "sildenafil."  Yep.  Generic Viagra. 

And then, in her next statement, she said something about the defendant having been "up all night."

Well I should hope so!!!!

  • Like 2
  • Laugh 6

Share this post


Link to post

47 minutes ago, AZChristian said:

The last one she rattled off was "sildenafil."  Yep.  Generic Viagra. 

😏I didn't write down the cornucopia of pharmaceuticals hubby was downing (at only 40!) and the only name I recognized was "Adderall". I see one of the possible side effects is: "The Inability To Have An Erection" so I assume the generic Viagra countered that. What a mess these people are.

"Ask your doctor/gastroenterolgist/urologist!"

"Tell your doctor!"

Seems he did both.

  • Like 3
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, patty1h said:

Today's case with the woman accusing her friend of stealing her husbands Adderal and an Iphone was all kinds of messy and I got annoyed with the double-talking plaintiff not being clear and half-assing a lot of her answers:  Is her sister involved or not, how does she know it's her husbands pills in the sock, why did she not mention various facts in the police report. 

Her first mistake was taking the one-armed druggo into her house.  By the midway of the case, the whole case started smelling fishy - was all of this drama a way to get a new phone or to cover some shenanigans with prescription drugs?  I just wanted JM to throw the two of them out and let them play their druggy games back wherever they came from.

I think the plaintiff needed a dose of Adderall to keep her going. She was so disoriented and dull - putting me to sleep. I couldn't figure out who all the 'he' and 'she' was she kept referring to in her testimony. She would talk about anything that entered her head, with no rhyme nor reason.

And maybe - just maybe - someone can remind Harvey his new look is appropriate for his profile on  Grinder and Scruff, but not so much for The People's Court ? Just maybe someone can remind him...

  • Like 1
  • Laugh 5

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/8/2020 at 4:23 PM, ThePurpleArcher said:

SLEEPCAP:  I was totally turned off by the plaintiff. She was such a show-off in front of the camera. As someone just starting a business, she needs a good dose of humility if she intends to stay in business, otherwise she will be turning off many customers. AS for the defendant, they lose the case for following directions ???? That's a nice message to send out there. "You did it wrong on the prototype so why didn't you just keep doing it wrong?"  That's like telling them, "You went through the first red light without causing an accident, so why didn't you just keep driving through all the red lights?"

I think that JM's point was, since you weren't cutting the fabric the same way you originally did, why didn't you make just one sleep cap with the other way of cutting it and get THAT approved before you cut up all that fabric and wind up where you are now.

 

On 5/8/2020 at 5:42 PM, AngelaHunter said:

Hey, when I was very young, I would sleep in giant rollers to take the natural curl out of my red locks, so I guess I get it. I really don't know how the hell I did that. Anyway, I have no idea about the sewing stuff since I literally cannot sew a button on properly, but I always enjoy hearing JM speaking Spanish!

I literally gasped when I read this Angela, because all my life I wanted curly red hair.  I never did dye my hair, but as a kid, I did sleep on foam curlers for a while to try and get the curly.  I actually thought that if I did it long enough, it would stay curly.  Once my mother corrected my disbelief, I gave up.

I do know a bit about sewing, because my mother used to sew a lot (and made my wedding dress), and I often helped her pin the patterns to the fabric.  There are instructions on the patterns about how to lay the pattern on the fabric so that it goes the right way with the stretch and the grain and all that.  It did not help that the tailor confirmed which markings were his.

 

On 5/8/2020 at 8:28 PM, CrazyInAlabama said:

What kind of good quality, solid chain can be ripped off someone's neck?    My guess it was never a good chain, or solid. 

My guess was that perhaps the catch wasn't well made.  It would not surprise me to see that chains are manufactured with a lower quality catch.  Or his wife was really pissed and rather than kick him in the balls, she hauled off on that chain as hard as she could knowing that not having it to wear would be worse on his "manhood." 😉

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

 Rerun today had the case wit the Little Grocery Cart That Ran Down the Hill and Ricocheted.   What. The . Eff. was up with MM.   She came out of the gate like Judge Linda Blair spewing pea soup.   The defendant was hardly sympathetic, but she's dealt with far bigger losers and held her patience,..at least until things got rollong.

 Speaking of unsympathetic litigants, today had another case where I didn't feel sorry for either party.   The plaintiff was the textbook definition of a moron.  She couldn't form a coherent thought, much less convey one.  Her husband's first thought goes to her stealing his meds (rather than accusing the drug addict she allowed into their home) and her sister is a double agent working against her.  Or triple agent working for her.  Or just another nut that fell off the family tree.   Defendant lost his arm in a car wreck and became hooked on pain meds, which could maybe garner some sympathy but then he sits there a laughs when the Judge points out what a loser he is, just like countless other losers that have passed through.   And of course his texts about the iPhone that went missing were just a joke.   THIS is when MM should have been going on one of her tirades 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, aemom said:

I literally gasped when I read this Angela, because all my life I wanted curly red hair.  I never did dye my hair, but as a kid, I did sleep on foam curlers for a while to try and get the curly.  I actually thought that if I did it long enough, it would stay curly. 

That's funny. Reminds me one time at the hairdresser, as I'm having him blow my hair straight, a woman came in and said she needed a new perm because "my hair is growing in straight." My hairdresser rolled his eyes and said to her, "Did you think it would grow in curly?" I guess we always want the opposite of what we have.  I gave up using chemical straighteners and blow dyers years ago.

2 hours ago, aemom said:

  Or his wife was really pissed and rather than kick him in the balls, she hauled off on that chain as hard as she could knowing that not having it to wear would be worse on his "manhood."

I'm pretty sure that's what happened.

16 minutes ago, Maverick said:

Rerun today had the case wit the Little Grocery Cart That Ran Down the Hill and Ricocheted. 

Funny how some of you are getting reruns, and such recent ones at that. I'm getting all new, as far as I know.

16 minutes ago, Maverick said:

 What. The . Eff. was up with MM.   She came out of the gate like Judge Linda Blair spewing pea soup.   The defendant was hardly sympathetic, but she's dealt with far bigger losers and held her patience,..at least until things got rollong.

Maybe she had just had her own car dinged by some entitled parking lot moron, and yes, she always rips them new ones.

ETA(while I remember it) I knew accordian girl, who don't know nothing, reminded me of another litigant with her "It just needs a wire": The litigant who, along with her family, destroyed her rented place. When asked about a door torn from its hinges she said, "It just needed a screw."

Sorry, had to get that out. I really loved it.

Edited by AngelaHunter
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/11/2020 at 1:30 PM, SRTouch said:
  •  (And yes, this is another half hour case.......

 

  • .. back to editing question that has been raised with this latest batch of episodes, I think they could have cut 10 minutes out of the middle of this case and been fine

My theory:  The editing dept is hard at work adding footage to each case in order to fit 2 per episode, rather than 3. They're trying to drag the new cases as long as they can, being that they're filming was cut short. I doubt they"ll he able to make it til the end of the season, though.

  • Like 1
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post

The schedule depends on the local TV station.   I get Judge Mathis at 7 a.m., then TPC (maybe new) at 8 a.m., then a Judge Mathis rerun at 9 a.m., and the a fairly recent rerun of TPC at 10 a.m.       Lately, the new ones I miss will be on at the 10 a.m. slot within a couple of weeks.   

I had the despicable jerk with the shopping cart the other day.   Today was the woman who only had the basic move insurance, and still wanted thousands from the movers for her cheap looking furniture.   I agree with the mover, the woman had a bunch of broken, and damaged furniture, and wanted the mover to pay her for it.    The jewelry box had cloth tape holding it together, but it was obviously old tape, so no way the mover did that. 

They also had the ridiculous case of the woman who sold her couch to a co-worker.   The defendant claimed it was $150, but plaintiff claimed it was $300.   The only thing they agreed on was that only one $25 payment was made.   

Then the woman who was evicted after code enforcement (it happened in Florida) caught her son running a mechanic's shop in her garage, and driveway, including cars up on blocks or jacks in the driveway.    Plus, the woman stayed a couple of days past the eviction date, the landlord did do the notifications about security deposit (taken for last month's rent), and the damages to the home.   She also left a lot of junk behind, that the landlord had to get rid of.    I'm so glad that woman lost, but found it hysterical that she stayed after eviction date because she wanted the landlord to verify her rental history to the new landlord.  

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

The defendant in the car undercoating that wasn't done case looked like the prototype for many random people/characters.  His physique and face are so... typecast, if he could be made into an action figure, he'd have so many costume changes:  retired WWE wrestler, ex-Marine drill sargeant, Russian boxing manager, Nazi camp guard, ex-power lifter, HS wrestling coach or football coach, sleazy used car salesman, biker.

On the other side, I was surprised that the plaintiff and the guy with her were mother and son. 

Edited by patty1h
  • Like 2
  • Laugh 5

Share this post


Link to post

SSM daughter suing her Daddy for a 10-year old washer/dryer she left with him for 3 years after she bought it used in 2014 for 400$: Her wig was beyond rachet and pulled down too far in front which her made look like her skull was sliced off at the top. Daddy moved and told her he was doing so. She never retrieved the appliances so he put them outside when he moved and some neighbourhood vultures came and snatched the old things. She wants 1000$ because her new place can only accomodate a stackable set so Daddy should cough up the dough to upgrade for her. Some litigants just can't deviate from their scripts even when it makes them sound ridiculous:

JM: (paraphrased) "You bought the set used in 2014 for 400$. Why do you think it's worth more now?"
SSM: "Well, I figured if I had a washing machine and dryer I could use it to wash my kids' clothes."

What? You get nothing. Go away.

Next, what appeared to be a dweeby hipster nerd suing the dopey def who sublet a basement room to him. Def told him if he saw "an old bat" coming around to just ignore her. Seems the old bat with "dementia" was the actual owner of the property who wanted to show it. Def has a hell of nerve, since he's an "old bat" himself and a stupid old bat since he's also an idiot who claims he had a verbal contract to buy the place.

BUT. We find out the dweeby plaintiff has only a flip phone. He's not allowed to access the internet since he just gets so turned on by children that he was sent to the slammer for seven years for child pornography. He comes here and announces this to the world he did "horrible, awful things" in return for his stupid security deposit. I'm so disappointed. I really thought prisoners take care of these kiddy diddlers but unfortunately this one is still sucking up oxygen. And of course, we know spending those years in prison cured him of viewing children as objects of his sexual desire. Sure it did and he'll never do it again, right? What a joke. These guys get points for good behavior in prison. Of course they do. There are no children there for them to molest.  JM, as a mother of three girls, must have hated to find in the favour of this detestable, slimy POS, but she did it. Damned well ruined my dinner. Levin, this is not what we come here for.

3 hours ago, patty1h said:

The defendant in the car undercoating that wasn't done case looked like the prototype for many random people/characters.

He did. The face, the haircut, the voice... he really looked and sounded like some fast-talking caricature of a hustler, which it seems he is. I guess he figured it would be easy to scam Mommy and her giant (another!) Baby Huey boy. After what we heard previously, I really didn't care if he did not return Huey's Mommy's deposit. It was mildly amusing when he claimed he bought all kinds of stuff to lube Huey's undercarriage and JM asked him for receipts. "I knew you would ask that", he says, with a grin he probably thought was ingenuous (was NOT). "I've watched this show numerous of times." So, does he have them? Of course not. Full 850$ refund for Huey and Mommy.

Edited by AngelaHunter · Reason: Ack! Multi-tasking AND drinking!!
  • Like 2
  • Laugh 3

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Full 850$ refund for Huey and Mommy.

I rally despised the plaintiffs, for some reason. I think they probably were premature in getting the car back because such treatments, involving various chemicals and steps, do take time to set. I disliked that JM did not intervene to ask hatchet-faced mom to stop staring down the defendant and to quit interjecting directly to him. Doughboy son was entirely forgettable.

But the defendant had no records or proof, so he was his own worst witness.

3 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

SSM daughter suing her Daddy for a 10-year old washer/dryer

She seemed to think that just because she needs a washer-dryer, someone else had to pay for it, and why not daddy. As JM pointed out, everyone needs such appliances. But we pay for them ourselves.

3 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

I really thought prisoners take care of these kiddy diddlers but unfortunately this one is still sucking up oxygen

He paid his debt to society, he did his time and he is owning up to this past actions, contrary to so many litigants on these court shows who try to find all sorts of excuses to weasel out of personal responsibility. So I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that he is reformed. He also did not mention having sex with chidlren, but distribution of kiddy porn, also an awful thing as he said. From his appearance and the length of his incarceration, I think he must have been rather young when he committed the offences in questions. So many young people do not grasp the severity of some of their actions on the Web.

Edited by Florinaldo
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Sounds like I missed a gem of a show today.  

I need to play the lottery so I can win a few million so I can quit my job so I can sit and watch TPC all day long.  Then come here and post with my friends.

Better yet, if I win the lottery I promise I'm coming to y'alls homes in a limo, pick y'all up, then drive to NYC where we can see TPC, JMM, Douglas and Doug in person.  Then go have a nice lunch at the top of some high-rise in NYC.   My treat.

Now that would be awesome.  We'd have a blast.

  • Like 1
  • Laugh 7

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, PsychoKlown said:

Better yet, if I win the lottery I promise I'm coming to y'alls homes in a limo, pick y'all up, then drive to NYC where we can see TPC, JMM, Douglas and Doug in person.

You didn't mention Droopy Dog, so I'm all for this excursion! Just make sure no one trashes the limo and that no gets drunk and wants to fight me. Your treat? Lobster and champagne, here I come. 😀

  • Laugh 2

Share this post


Link to post

17 hours ago, Florinaldo said:

He paid his debt to society, he did his time and he is owning up to this past actions, contrary to so many litigants on these court shows who try to find all sorts of excuses to weasel out of personal responsibility. So I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that he is reformed. He also did not mention having sex with chidlren, but distribution of kiddy porn, also an awful thing as he said. From his appearance and the length of his incarceration, I think he must have been rather young when he committed the offences in questions. So many young people do not grasp the severity of some of their actions on the Web.

This guy did more than distribute child porn. As he admitted, he did a number of awful things. I care less about whether he “paid his debt to society” (which is meaningless given the wild variances in sentencing these days) than whether he is truly reformed. Only time will tell. 
 

https://patch.com/new-jersey/baskingridge/bedminster-man-sentenced-to-7-years-for-child-porn-rebba73ba59f

Edited by laprin · Reason: Link
  • Like 4
  • Useful 1
  • Surprise 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/13/2020 at 2:55 AM, Blissfool said:

My theory:  The editing dept is hard at work adding footage to each case in order to fit 2 per episode, rather than 3. They're trying to drag the new cases as long as they can, being that they're filming was cut short. I doubt they"ll he able to make it til the end of the season, though.

I think you nailed it - probably contracted to provide so many new episodes and this let's them avoid a penalty clause of some sort.

Today, yet another 2 case day - which means I'll probably do quicky recap after giving remote a workout

  1. new bf steals life savings: geez, did P do that to her hair on purpose!?! How old is this girl, anyhow? I swear she looks like young teenager. (20yo) She brought mommy with her today, and mom can't stop smiling as lovely daughter tells the nation her story...... story here is little girly hooked up with bad boy D (who also sports quite the 'do) on Tinder - in no time he's begging money for back child support - girly lets him see where she keeps her secret stash & even counts her 'life savings' in front of him - she goes out for fast food, leaving strange dude alone in her room - he ghosts with the money (life savings 3 grand) - she calls cops & he still has some of the money when they catch up with him - he returns what he hasn't blown through but claims rest was a gift - girly suing for $1400....... not even 5 minutes in, and MM already into council mode and has told mommy this is no laughing matter (mommy still beaming at the camera)....... good grief, apparently P has a bank, as she just said she took money out of the bank that day, counted it and stashed it in front of the strange dude she's known a couple weeks (says they didn't really date, just 'hung out') - again, MM takes time out from case for more counseling, then jumps on D when she catches him laughing......... oh my -like- if the editors had -like- just cut out all the times -like- this dude says 'like' they could have shaved 5 minutes off case........ geez, now this guy is treating case as joke as he laughs and hams it up........ ok, finally he doesn't think all this is so funny as MM grills him on why he needed money - not child support, but court costs and fines from credit card fraud case (says he found card and racked up bunch of charges)....... and, that about does it for me, I reach for the remote and zip ahead........ texts texts texts........... ahhhhhh despite how D started his testimony by saying how he was going to tell the truth, when I start listening again at decision time first thing I hear is MM say she finds he IS A LIAR and owes the money........ oh, and she tells girly what she'd like to do is fine her for stupidity....... 'nother good laugh is when Doug asks mommy why she was laughing and smiling throughout case and mommy tells us how she thought D was such a nice guy
  2. bad used car deal: in intro P claims she bought hoopty from D even though he refused to let her test drive it........ simple solution lady, walk away........ anyway, she bought junker, poured good money after bad trying to get it working, and now wants 5 grand..........D says car worked just fine when he sold it, and P had car a week before she complained - D countersuing for $1500 because her complaints have caused him great emotional distress......... uh-huh, unless there's some hidden switcheroo this looks like simple AS-IS car deal - only reason I kept watching is to find out how much purchase price was and whether or not this is regular 15yo or older hoopty - nope, this Honda is a relatively new hoopty - only 12yo........... sort of like those folks who buy car with engine light on, this lady found car on FB, and when she asked to see it seller refused to show it during the day (strike 1); started car and heard strange noise, but just accepted stranger's word that it just needed a $60 part (strike 2); and when asked if she and her bf could take it for test drive is told no that car had no plates (strike 3)....... personally, I would have passed as soon as I was told I couldn't see it in the daylight - I would have demanded something in writing that sale was conditional on that strange noise being fixed for $60 if I REALLY just HAD to have this 12yo Honda, and even then only after MY mechanic checked car (we learn seller claims to be a mechanic, but in what uninverse would I just take his word) - and I would have walked if I couldn't test drive a 12 year car that had no plates (and just how long had car been sitting)........ anyway, this sounds like a 15 minute case, not 25 minutes (yes, 1st case ran long even for a long case)........ when D starts talking he makes no sense to me, and I start zipping ahead......... no surprise, P gets nothing but a lecture on buying a used AS-IS car - likewise nada on counterclaim - which has changed from emotional distress to time off work and school
Edited by SRTouch
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Moron and her idiot mother in the first case.  I am with the Judge...I wouldn't have given her the money back just for being so stupid.

I guess all of his "legal/criminal" problems meant nothing to her and she counts her money in front of him.  You can't make this stuff up. 

I guess she gets her stupidity from her idiot laughing mother.

I need to go to work.  I can't take this quarantine anymore.  I'm getting angry at litigants on TV.

Edited by NYGirl
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
54 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

I swear she looks like young teenager.

Actually, she looks like she is 11 or 12. That whole case reeked of a set up. Dim as the plaintiff seemed, I find it hard to believe that someone who is 20 years old, living in her own apartment, saving almost three thousand dollars over four years, neatly dressed (style is another question), well spoken (except for "basically" and "like") and a mother who seems normal except for her behavior in court would behave this stupidly. The way that the plaintiff and her mother smiled, laughed and giggled throughout the case about having $2700 (sitting in a tin box on the dresser) stolen by the also laughing and smirking defendant makes me suspect that this was all a set up to bilk the show. They all got a trip out of it, the show pays the judgement and then splits the rest of the pot between the litigants, and they all go home with a free trip and a good chunk of money. The plaintiff's hallterview also smelled - she listened to everything that JM told her and she promises that she will never behave that stupidly again; my guess is that she and piece of garbage defendant will be in bed together again as soon as they get back home.

  • Like 7
  • Useful 2

Share this post


Link to post
50 minutes ago, DoctorK said:

...my guess is that she and piece of garbage defendant will be in bed together again as soon as they get back home.

I'm thinking "mile high club."

  • Like 4
  • Laugh 4

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, NYGirl said:

Moron and her idiot mother in the first case.

This wouldn't be nearly as depressing if we didn't see the same story ALL THE DAMNED TIME.

Taya, green-haired moron/bimbo(as JM called her) likes to find her true love on Tinder. She meets this utter piece of shit, Erick, and decides he's the man for her. Maybe it was the semi-dyed cornrows? Sure, they can hang out in her bedroom, while she flashes her "life savings" of 2700$ that she keeps in a jar by the door - who is it for? (oops. Got carried away) in front of him, hoping that when he sees how flush she is he might stick around. Then she had an urgent desire for food, so goes out and leaves Erick, who she has known for 3 weeks - and who has been arrested and convicted for burglary and credit card fraud. Not his fault, of course. He just innocently found a credit card lying on the ground, so of course he does what all of us would do, took it and racked up 3 or 4K on it.  He just threw in "gun charges" to the nitwitted Tara to give him cred, I guess. Anyway, she knew the neighbourhood he comes from so should expect him to be a slimy crook.

Taya cannot testify without adding an "and everything" or "and stuff" to the end of every sentence. I agree with JM. She sounds like a 12-year-old, or even a 6-year-old, but so what? We see women more than twice her age buying the love of losers and con artists.

Then we get the grinning Erick who cannot speak two words without basically, like, basically, like like credit card fraud, like basically, like back child support, basically. But I get it. Taya was entranced by his "tweakin'", "trippin' out", "you know what I mean?" "lingo". But hey, it's "my lingo!" He thinks he's cute. JM is not captivated by this low down petty thief, scumbag and liar.

So. was Erick like, basically, like, selling weed to, like, Taya the Desperate Idiot? I think so, and this was even after he stole her money and told her. "Babes, I want to make babies with you". Excuse me while I gag. Erick doesn't provide for the baby or babies he whipped up with other stupid bimbos. I shouldn't be so hard on poor pathetic Taya. Looking at her Mommy sitting there, cracking up during the whole case as though her utter failure as a parent - SSM no doubt - and her daughter's tragic mental issues and feelings of worthlessness are just the funniest damned things she's ever heard. JM gave Taya a world-class spanking and excellent advice but you know it just went in one ear and out the other, especially when we hear she gave another Tinder loser 500$. Oh, well. JM orders the return of the 1400$ owed. Actually, Taya is very lucky all she lost was money. So far. That luck might not hold the next time she invites a Tinder guy into her place. I hope she doesn't end up another statistic.

Then we get a middleaged woman who wants to buy a car she "seen" on FB Marketplace, which seems to be the new go-to place for people looking to be ripped off. I could write this script in my sleep. She was only allowed to look at the 2008 Accord at night. She axed him to see it in the day, but he said no so she obeyed the seller and saw it after dark. No, she couldn't test drive it because it had no license. Fine with her, but hey, it had these little lights inside and oh, the lights, the lights! She did manage to turn the key and it made a funny noise, but the seller told her it just needed a wire. No, a screw. No, a 60$ part and of course she put absolute trust in a total stranger trying to get rid of a 10+ year old car. DId she at least check the value of this car online? Of course not. She trusted this character, totally. She spends a fortune trying to fix the thing up, and finally sold it and lost a bunch of money. Too bad, so sad. Go home.

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Laugh 3

Share this post


Link to post

5 hours ago, laprin said:

This guy did more than distribute child porn. As he admitted, he did a number of awful things. I care less about whether he “paid his debt to society” (which is meaningless given the wild variances in sentencing these days) than whether he is truly reformed. Only time will tell. 

Agree. Child molesters don't lose their taste for kiddies and get "cured" by doing a few years in jail. Maybe he "paid his debt" but I bet those children have a life sentence. But hey, he has his rights. I didn't click on your link because I really don't want to know what he did to children. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
42 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Taya, green-haired moron/bimbo(as JM called her) likes to find her true love on Tinder. She meets this utter piece of shit, Erick, and decides he's the man for her. 

And her answer when JM reads her the riot act about how stupid she is?  "I'm aware."

8 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Maybe he "paid his debt" but I bet those children have a life sentence. But hey, he has his rights. I didn't click on your link because I really don't want to know what he did to children. 

I heard a line on a TV show that touched me to my core:  "When a child suffers sexual abuse, they are changed instantly and forever."  Even if he "only" trafficked in child porn, SOMEONE took those pictures, thereby abusing those children.

Trust me, I know.  No matter how good you make your life afterwards, that abuse DOES change you . . . instantly and FOREVER.  It IS a life sentence.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
54 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Taya, green-haired moron/bimbo(as JM called her) likes to find her true love on Tinder. She meets this utter piece of shit, Erick, and decides he's the man for her. Maybe it was the semi-dyed cornrows? Sure, they can hang out in her bedroom, while she flashes her "life savings" of 2700$ that she keeps in a jar by the door - who is it for? (oops. Got carried away) in front of him, hoping that when he sees how flush she is he might stick around. Then she had an urgent desire for food, so goes out and leaves Erick, who she has known for 3 weeks - and who has been arrested and convicted for burglary and credit card fraud. Not his fault, of course. He just innocently found a credit card lying on the ground, so of course he does what all of us would do, took it and racked up 3 or 4K on it.  He just threw in "gun charges" to the nitwitted Tara to give him cred, I guess. Anyway, she knew the neighbourhood he comes from so should expect him to be a slimy crook.

Taya cannot testify without adding an "and everything" or "and stuff" to the end of every sentence. I agree with JM. She sounds like a 12-year-old, or even a 6-year-old, but so what? We see women more than twice her age buying the love of losers and con artists.

Then we get the grinning Erick who cannot speak two words without basically, like, basically, like like credit card fraud, like basically, like back child support, basically. But I get it. Taya was entranced by his "tweakin'", "trippin' out", "you know what I mean?" "lingo". But hey, it's "my lingo!" He thinks he's cute. JM is not captivated by this low down petty thief, scumbag and liar.

So. was Erick like, basically, like, selling weed to, like, Taya the Desperate Idiot? I think so, and this was even after he stole her money and told her. "Babes, I want to make babies with you". Excuse me while I gag. Erick doesn't provide for the baby or babies he whipped up with other stupid bimbos. I shouldn't be so hard on poor pathetic Taya. Looking at her Mommy sitting there, cracking up during the whole case as though her utter failure as a parent - SSM no doubt - and her daughter's tragic mental issues and feelings of worthlessness are just the funniest damned things she's ever heard.

 

 

WOW - this played out like a skit on SNL:  Back to the 1970's when Jane Curtin played the mother to 'Lisa the Nerd' who was played by Gilda Radner (I've included a photo below).   And who's bright idea was it to dress the 20-year-old nerd in her great-grandmother's mourning dress? It clashed with her teal hair. 

Maybe I'm in the minority, but I found Erick Mitchell damn sexy - guess I'm attracted to the courtroom 'Bad Boys' ?  I wouldn't have him in my house, or count out $2700 in front of him - but I'd like to spend 'quality time' with him (at Harvey's house). LOL!  And if the two of them keep having sex (as he testified to in court) he will indeed be having babies with her, so she best put more money in the cookie jar. 

download.jpg

  • Laugh 4

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, DoctorK said:

That whole case reeked of a set up. Dim as the plaintiff seemed, I find it hard to believe that someone who is 20 years old, living in her own apartment, saving almost three thousand dollars over four years, neatly dressed (style is another question), well spoken (except for "basically" and "like") and a mother who seems normal except for her behavior in court would behave this stupidly

I think the mother's behaviour explains it all. I am certain that she acts the same way in all situations, and not only when she is "nervous" as she said. Her daughter probably interprets her little giggles as sign of approval and forgiveness. At least we know where the plaintiff got her airhead ditziness from.

Too bad there is no law against stupidity; JM could have thrown the book at her. But she probably would have brushed it off with a toss of her so-sophisticated hairdo.

And then to further extend a rather thin gruel of cases, we get an overlong "as-is" car sale, with a plaintiff making the same mistakes all others have made before her. How can  poeple be in such a hurry to buy a car that they do not take the most basic precautions before shelling out the cash?

9 hours ago, laprin said:

I care less about whether he “paid his debt to society” (which is meaningless given the wild variances in sentencing these days) than whether he is truly reformed. Only time will tell. 

Any subsequent offence of that nature should warrant him the harshest punishment possible. He may not have had sexual contact with children, but his distribution of such material aided and abetted the people who produce it and encourage them to keep making more.

But as long as he has done his time according to the rules in place, he now has his chance to reinsert himself into society as a regular citizen. If those statutes and the sentencing standards are too lenient, it should be taken up with the relevant legislatures or governing bodies.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/13/2020 at 4:48 PM, AngelaHunter said:

. We find out the dweeby plaintiff has only a flip phone. He's not allowed to access the internet since he just gets so turned on by children that he was sent to the slammer for seven years for child pornography. He comes here and announces this to the world he did "horrible, awful things" in return for his stupid security deposit

I looked at an article about him, the seven years was for all of his offenses, and sending around pictures of kids was the least of it.    He must have had a great attorney, or ratted out other people to get seven years, most with his list of offenses get a much longer sentence.     

He also took clothed pictures of kids at the day care he was working at.  

I found it very interesting that the phony landlord said that the tenant couldn't have internet, but had to return his cable internet modems to the cable company after he moved out.  I hope the parole officer watched this case.  

I was amazed at the casual way the boyfriend in the Taya/Erick case was about announcing he was Taya, and the entire world's drug dealer.  

The new one this morning with the failed dog breeding case was ridiculous.   Two people who contacted each other on "breed your dog . com", to breed Huskies.   When one pup turned out to have an undescended testicles doesn't mean you neuter the sire, you neuter the dog with the condition.     The defendant physician's assistant didn't strike me as legit, and I wonder if she exaggerated her credentials?        Both dog owners were idiots.  

 

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

 I found it very interesting that the phony landlord said that the tenant couldn't have internet, but had to return his cable internet modems to the cable company after he moved out.

He wanted money, so he don't know nothing. He don't see nothing.

Quote

The release said Gundersen also engaged in sexual conduct "which would tend to impair or debauch the morals of children under the age of sixteen by possessing clothed images of multiple children who were students at the day care center where he worked and of children on the hike and bike path."

🙄

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post

On 5/13/2020 at 7:26 PM, Florinaldo said:

He paid his debt to society, he did his time and he is owning up to this past actions, contrary to so many litigants on these court shows who try to find all sorts of excuses to weasel out of personal responsibility. So I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that he is reformed. He also did not mention having sex with chidlren, but distribution of kiddy porn, also an awful thing as he said. From his appearance and the length of his incarceration, I think he must have been rather young when he committed the offences in questions. So many young people do not grasp the severity of some of their actions on the Web.

I truly don't believe that child molesters can be reformed because there is something chemically-in-the-head-not-right with them, but I was surprised how honest he was about his past.  Hopefully he is staying FAR AWAY from children now.

 

On 5/13/2020 at 9:28 PM, PsychoKlown said:

Sounds like I missed a gem of a show today.  

I need to play the lottery so I can win a few million so I can quit my job so I can sit and watch TPC all day long.  Then come here and post with my friends.

Better yet, if I win the lottery I promise I'm coming to y'alls homes in a limo, pick y'all up, then drive to NYC where we can see TPC, JMM, Douglas and Doug in person.  Then go have a nice lunch at the top of some high-rise in NYC.   My treat.

Now that would be awesome.  We'd have a blast.

It would also be fun if we could be in the peanut gallery and show up Levin with our intelligent answers (though I know that those segments are filmed at later times)

 

On 5/14/2020 at 2:36 PM, SRTouch said:

Today, yet another 2 case day - which means I'll probably do quicky recap after giving remote a workout

  1. new bf steals life savings: 
  2. bad used car deal: 

Seriously, these 2 types of cases are the bread and butter of TPC.  An idiot woman who trusts some loser guy with money and a moron who just can't wait to be parted from their money for a POS car.  However, as for the idiot woman:

 

On 5/14/2020 at 3:42 PM, DoctorK said:

Actually, she looks like she is 11 or 12. That whole case reeked of a set up. Dim as the plaintiff seemed, I find it hard to believe that someone who is 20 years old, living in her own apartment, saving almost three thousand dollars over four years, neatly dressed (style is another question), well spoken (except for "basically" and "like") and a mother who seems normal except for her behavior in court would behave this stupidly. The way that the plaintiff and her mother smiled, laughed and giggled throughout the case about having $2700 (sitting in a tin box on the dresser) stolen by the also laughing and smirking defendant makes me suspect that this was all a set up to bilk the show. They all got a trip out of it, the show pays the judgement and then splits the rest of the pot between the litigants, and they all go home with a free trip and a good chunk of money. The plaintiff's hallterview also smelled - she listened to everything that JM told her and she promises that she will never behave that stupidly again; my guess is that she and piece of garbage defendant will be in bed together again as soon as they get back home.

I was also thinking that it seemed like a setup as well.  Especially since I cannot recall ever seeing the loser guy admit to stealing all the money.  This guy also said "like" so many times, that if I was playing a drinking game, I would have alcohol poisoning.  I will confess, that I did like her dress.

Edited by aemom · Reason: Typo
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I had no sympathy for the woman who was trying to start a leaf clearing business, low-balled a job and didn't complete it.   She was whining about her back and being threatened by the plaintiff, and she brought her big-mouthed associate to help but he made them look worse.  Both of the plaintiffs were full of excuses and wanted to skate on being new in the business. 

She seemed a little dim to me and I don't think she's going to be in the landscaping business for long.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, patty1h said:

I had no sympathy for the woman who was trying to start a leaf clearing business, 

Oh, boy. Maybe she does well cleaning houses and she should stick to that. Seriously, we're talking leaf cleaning here, not tax preparation or heart surgery. She told plaintiff 400$ for yard work so 400 it is. However, her wee dweeby cohort, mouthpiece and financial advisor - she calls him "my four men" (which is what my CC also said) - informs her that isn't nearly enough, so she thinks she can tell the client to give her more after they agreed on the price. Don't think so. Oh, but she had injections in her back and couldn't drive to his place and went to the hospital and her four men for some reason couldn't drive there or do the work either so a simple leaf job lasts for months and isn't finished by January when P hires someone else to do it. P texts, wanting to know WTF is going on with the no-show. "He be there," D replies, except he NOT be there. Def is very affronted that plaintiff "got pissed" and threatened her. What did he threaten? Well, to post on Home Advisor that she didn't do the job. That's a threat?  It's merely a fact. No, plaintiff should not have texted, "He better be there", or "Bullshit" but in this case I can understand it.

Speaking of morons, the first case had one in the slow-thinking, mouthy yokel who buys some old motor that's been sitting on blocks for 1 1/2 years or so and pays 1300$ for it (he bargained it down from 1600$ and thought he was making a big score)without any inkling if it works or not. Seems it did not work, although he only contacted D after a month or so. "He scammed me!" he declares of the Def. with zero proof he did so. Def's ad said it had been sitting all that time. P is another nitwit who doesn't believe that "as is" should apply to him because he's special. He declares in the hall that the money means nothing to him, but it was the principle. What principle? The one for people who insist on buying some old item from a private party, do no due diligence of the most minimal kind and want someone else to pay for their stupidity because they don't like the deal they made?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, aemom said:

I truly don't believe that child molesters can be reformed because there is something chemically-in-the-head-not-right with them, but I was surprised how honest he was about his past.  Hopefully he is staying FAR AWAY from children now.

Agree. No jail term would make me completely give up my interest in men. No way will he stay away from children and more of them will be traumatized for life because of a woefully lenient justice system in which children seem to have few rights.

  • Sad 3

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, AngelaHunter said:

Speaking of morons, the first case had one in the slow-thinking, mouthy yokel who buys some old motor that's been sitting on blocks for 1 1/2 years or so and pays 1300$ for it (he bargained it down from 1600$ and thought he was making a big score)without any inkling if it works or not. Seems it did not work, although he only contacted D after a month or so. "He scammed me!" he declares of the Def. with zero proof he did so. Def's ad said it had been sitting all that time. P is another nitwit who doesn't believe that "as is" should apply to him because he's special. He declares in the hall that the money means nothing to him, but it was the principle. What principle? The one for people who insist on buying some old item from a private party, do no due diligence of the most minimal kind and want someone else to pay for their stupidity because they don't like the deal they made?

The moron in today’s case was a bit on the hyper side.  So let’s get this straight, Mr. Moneybags took the time to file a lawsuit, meet with TPC producers, dressed (what he believed to be) nattily for his television premier, semi-irritated JMM just for the principle of the thing?  Nope.  Not buying that.  He wanted his cash back.  He is a moron.

And the other moronic contestant - Ms. LeafBags was as clueless as they come.  She reminded me of someone I met long ago when I was completing my internship at a State Hospital.  In fact, I looked twice thinking it could be her but the dates don’t add up.  Either that, or she hasn’t aged one day.  She too was a ball-tosser like the defendant.  I was actually considering ending my counseling studies because of this person.  Another buried memory  about her- vomit stains linen shoes.  Don’t ask.

And just my two cents - the two case format is quite tedious.  I now know more about a damn engine than I need or want to.  

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Laugh 2

Share this post


Link to post
48 minutes ago, PsychoKlown said:

The moron in today’s case was a bit on the hyper side.  So let’s get this straight, Mr. Moneybags took the time to file a lawsuit, meet with TPC producers, dressed (what he believed to be) nattily for his television premier, semi-irritated JMM just for the principle of the thing?  Nope.  Not buying that.  He wanted his cash back.  He is a moron.

Def was very credible. However I worked for many years with people in the financial business/with financial advisors and they are very smooth talkers. They often had me awestruck at their ability to sell stuff to total strangers. Anyway, not saying he was not being truthful, and why not pawn some old hunk of junk on someone too dumb to check out something before they buy it?

Apologies in advance for this, but this stay-at-home thing leaves me with way too much time on my hands:

Need a lawyer?

 

levinctitioner.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Laugh 4

Share this post


Link to post

1 hour ago, AngelaHunter said:

 

levinctitioner.jpg

While you’re at home suffering from you injury Harvey is working hard for your rIghts  

injured in a semi truck crash?  

Have you developed cancer after using talcum powder?

Minor heartburn turn into something serious?

Did your nasty spouse clean out the bank account and run away with someone from Craigslist?

What about asbestos?  Are you sure?

Trust all your legal woes to the best in the business (that is if you consider stalking D-list celebrities a business or making rude Jr high jokes to clueless idiots standing on a street corner a business)
 

Harvey Levin   Let him stick his hands in your pockets

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

i

  • Laugh 4

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

Agree. No jail term would make me completely give up my interest in men. No way will he stay away from children and more of them will be traumatized for life because of a woefully lenient justice system in which children seem to have few rights.

I think the biggest issue is that though the man admitted to the child porn charges, and mentioned he only had a flip phone (no internet was the rule for his parole), he failed to mention he had cable internet.   The landlord managed to get in a remark that no only did he have to get rid of a lot of junk left behind, he had to turn in the internet modems that the convicted sex offender didn't return to the cable company.   Hopefully, the parole officer heard that tidbit.

 

It certainly was a change of pace from car repair and sales cases, and unpaid loans.    

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I think the biggest issue is that though the man admitted to the child porn charges, and mentioned he only had a flip phone (no internet was the rule for his parole), he failed to mention he had cable internet.   The landlord managed to get in a remark that no only did he have to get rid of a lot of junk left behind, he had to turn in the internet modems that the convicted sex offender didn't return to the cable company.   Hopefully, the parole officer heard that tidbit.

 

It certainly was a change of pace from car repair and sales cases, and unpaid loans.    

Also different - how many times have we seen MM have to badger a litigant to get them to admit they did  anything wrong - whenever someone answers right away it's a point in their favorite (sometimes quite the surprise, too)

Edited by SRTouch
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, patty1h said:

I had no sympathy for the woman who was trying to start a leaf clearing business, low-balled a job and didn't complete it.

She was completely in over her head and could not figure out how to extricate from the situation.

On the other hand the plaintiff had a part in creating that situation. Instead of being wary when being quoted an amount below what other businesses usually charge him, his only reaction was probably "kaching!" Whenever a supplier quotes a price that is below the norm or average in our city for some product or job, it usually raises red flags for me and I double check.

Also since it was established that they did part of the work (gathering a good chunk of leaves), I could not understand the full refund.

In the motor sale, the plaintiff is one of those people who thinks that by talking loudly and roughly he can get others to ignore the facts and agree with his theories and opinions. It may work for him in his daily life, but thankfull not in TPC.

8 hours ago, SRTouch said:

Also different - how many times have we seen MM have to badger a litigant to get them to admit they did  anything wrong - whenever someone answers right away it's a point in their favorite (sometimes quite the surprise, too)

Which is one sign that there is a chance he is indeed working on his problems and is staying away from kiddie porn (he did not mention child molestation); aren't there drugs and treatment that can help with that? The unhealthy interests may still be present, but can't they can be controlled?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

When I lived in New Mexico, it was the start of the priest lawsuits, and the disclosure by victims of what happened to them.    There is a place (or was) called the Paraclete Center, it was church owned, and treated only priests with all kinds of substance abuse, or were abusers.   The head of the center was interviewed on the radio, and this man who had been treating all kinds of issues for many years (he was a psychiatrist), said the only issue he couldn't treat was pedophilia.       He said that the only priests that never abused children again were the ones who were never around children again (not in a parish, or on campus either).   If a priest was assigned to a parish, they always assaulted again.  There is no treatment that works.   

The man in this case from the article, worked in a day care, and also was at the library ogling pre-teen girls, and other scary actions.      

If that litigant was smart, he wouldn't have left the internet modems behind for the landlord to return, and he should have paid everything he owed, and gone away quietly.   Now, the entire country knows about his conviction, and that he did have internet access. 

This isn't the first litigant that should have paid what they needed to settle, and then walked off into the sunset.    I'm amazed at the litigants with a long criminal history, or the professional squatters or housing court professionals, that appear on this show.    

They claim that there are new episodes all week, my guess is 2 case episodes.    

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

  There is no treatment that works. 

How or with what methed can you treat someone to change their sexual orientation? We're sexually attracted to women or men.  Or children. Can't go much lower than that and I see no way to change it. He'll do it again for sure and more children will suffer. But hey - kids don't pay taxes so who cares? He can't help himself, any more than I can help being attracted to men. Just the way he said, "I did awful, terrible things", sounded like he was mocking what he was told in court.

1 hour ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

  I'm amazed at the litigants with a long criminal history, or the professional squatters or housing court professionals, that appear on this show.    

I'm always amazed at this. I can't imagine standing in TPC, telling the world that I traded sex for a sofa or an old beater car. 🙄

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, AngelaHunter said:

I'm always amazed at this. I can't imagine standing in TPC, telling the world that I traded sex for a sofa or an old beater car. 🙄

Then we had little girly this week who met dude on tinder. She tells us they never really 'dated' - just sort of 'hung out together.' She withdraws her 'life savings' from bank and has dude help count the cash - then leaves dude alone with cash while she runs out for a MickeyDee kiddy meal or some such.......... when MM is appalled and tells her just how STOOPID that is, girly smiles real big and says I'm Aware!  (several times) ........  when they reach Doug for hallterview, girly's mommy explains reason she was smiling and laughing throughout case was that dude seemed like such a nice guy

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, SRTouch said:

when MM is appalled and tells her just how STOOPID that is, girly smiles real big and says I'm Aware!  (several times) 

Yeah, she may be aware of her problems and mistakes, but that doesn't mean she won't do it again. Two times now that we know of she's put all her trust in some Tinder hustler and I can't help thinking there will be a 3rd time. 

I admit I'm a dinosaur, but is there no other way to meet a partner than on Tinder or CL or whatever they use these days? "Why, in MY day," she pontificates, "we met at work or through friends, and we could be reasonably sure our new friend didn't have a bunch of felony convictions." Hopelessly old-fashioned, I know. Now, 20-year-old girls use captivating lines like "My super power is that I don't have a gag reflex" accompanied by a photo that looks like an audition pic for porn movies. Sad.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size