I don’t believe some of the cases this woman deals with.
F’rinstance just the other day a couple who ran down a kid causing him injuries had the cheek to sue the kids parents for damage to their car.
I’ll admit I find the whole show hilarious and wouldn’t miss it…but really… :dubious:
This isn’t justice…The American Way.
It’s laughable
It’s not supposed to be justice, it’s freak show entertainment. Like Jerry Springer.
But she is a real judge, right?
She was at one time. Now she is a mediator. The two parties sign a binding mediation agreement.
Right, just checked on Wiki, it seems that even the awards are paid by the TV network.
Still a funny programme tho’
Now you’ll get all the Simpsons references, too. Enjoy it now. In three months the tehmem music will be enough to make you turn off the tv.
Since this is a thread about a television show, I’ll move it over to Cafe Society.
Who made you Judge Judy and executioner?
Judge Hatchet is much much better.
Texas Justice was pretty good as well. Judge Joy Brown seems too real.
Divorce Court is still the best.
Judy is OK when she gets riled up. Marilyn is too. But for good, old-fashioned, in-your-face, Wrath of God, old time preacher rants, no one beats Joe. Judge Mathis is a weenie.
Does anyone know what these people thik of each other? All I know is that Marilyn does NOT like to be compared to Judy. She does not want to be compared to a wrikled old bitty.
I like divorce court. I am a sucker for happy endings.
I love Judge Judy. She’s pretty blatanly classist most of the time, but when she really lays into an idiot for being an idiot I get a vicarious thrill.* “YOU sir are a LOSER!”*
I want, no I ** demand** that all these other “judges” are shown on UK TV.
Not next week, NOW!
I’m curious chowder, and I don’t know all the details of the case, but why on the face of it would this be untenable?
Well the case hinged on the driver of the car saying that the kid just shot out in front of him and did not use the cycle path.
He maintained that he was only driving at the posted speed limit of 25mph and should not be held responsible for the accident.
It turned out that police measured skid marks were 39 feet long and Judge Judy therefore determined that the driver was, in light of this evidence, driving to fast.
Also taken into account was the fact that the skid marks began before he hit the kid and therefore was able to see him long before the hit occurred.
If that makes sense??
Outcome of the case was a twofold one:
Both parties seemed happy with the ruling
So we aren’t going to see Judge Judy and Executioner any time soon?
I’m cool with that. It initially seemed that you were surprised the kid (or by default, his parents) could somehow be held accountable, even partially. But it looks like apportionment has been applied after all.
Well to be perfectly honest with you I was surprised.
Here in the UK if a motorist hit a cyclist/pedestrian you can bet a pound to a pinch of shit that the motorist is found to be the guilty party 99 times in 100…no matter what the circumstances
Here in the US, too.
We’ve had many discussions on this board about how JJ doesn’t really seem to follow the letter of the law very much. It’s as if she makes it up as she goes along.
Here we have a different view, something along the lines of “…a public road is common to both pedestrians and vehicles and…when using a road a pedestrian is as much under a duty to act reasonably as a driver is.” Our law does go on to say that a driver has a higher duty of vigilance when dealing with children, but the courts seem reluctant to impose absolute liability on the driver, without due regard to the merits and circumstances of each case.