How in the hell did she manage to get to be a judge in the first place, and what motivated her to go on tv? (Probably because she had to stick to the law prior to that).
I’d rather slit my throat than go before her.
She got on TV because there was a 60 Minutes segment about her, and a TV producer offered her a show. By all accounts she was a tough but talented judge. She isn’t a judge now; she’s being paid to be an arbitrator and an actress. The fact that she’s bad at those jobs doesn’t mean she was a bad judge, any more than the fact you can’t drive means you don’t understand history.
I would imagine she chose to be on TV because they offered her a gigantic pile of money.
Incidentally, her “bailiff” actually was a bailiff in her court circuit for several years, which is how he got the job.
I learned something interesting about Judge Joe Brown a couple of weeks ago, and my guess would be (although I could be wrong) that it applies to Judge Judy as well.
My brother’s roommate got a letter from Judge Joe Brown asking if he’d like to appear on the show to work out a dispute he was having with a neighbor. The letter stated that the show was not a court but rather legally binding arbitration; as stated above, you waive your right to trial and appeal by pursuing or contesting your grievance before Judge Brown. Further, it said that were my brother’s roommate to lose, the show promised to pay the damages for him. He would also receive an amount of money for appearing on the show.
Thus, it seems as if nobody who appears on Judge Joe Brown ends up having to pay any money to the other party; in fact, they are paid themselves for appearing. In that light, if Judge Judy is a similar program, I don’t think that there’s anything that Judge Judy could do that would be unreasonable–it’s all for entertainment purposes. Granted, you’d still rather win than lose if you’re on the show, not only because you genuinely do collect the damages but because you don’t get made to look a fool, but still: by agreeing to appear, you’re essentially risking your dignity in order to be on TV.
You’re absolutely right about both parties being compensated for their appearance. It’s true for all the court shows on TV, including The People’s Court. So, of course, she’s not even acting as a judge on TV.
On the People’s Court, they ahve a disclaimer at the end that says there is a fund set up, and the winner is paid from the fund, and then whatever is left over is split between the two of them. And since the max settlement is 3,000, I imagine the fund for the show is probably either set at 3,000 or a bit more. The same disclaimer is at the end of Judge Judy.
So either way, Judge Judy wasn’t out of line. Everybody got their paychecks at the end of the day. Furthermore, nobody is dragged there against their will. He brought the case there, he knew what she was like–probably the money and the chance to be on TV made it all worthwhile for him.
This is a stunningly ignorant statement. Why don’t you pull some cites before you start spouting off about what an awful/horrible judge she is, since you probably have never actually seen her as a judge and don’t know anything about her?
Incidently, she’s married to the judge who replaced Wapner on the People’s Court (and who then replaced by Judge Milan, who, in case anybody missed it before, rocks.)
I remember reading a remark from a producer that even though the litigants are compensated, they will fight for their point of view, strangely enough, as if they were really having to pay what the court orders. I guess they want to prove they are right and get their revenge in public and that the money is only secondary.
I watch Judge Judy but sometimes she is a real idiot. I’m only hoping that real court cases are not tried in this manner.
It was my understanding that both parties start with $5000 each and the defendant pays the plaintiff out of that. Pepperlandgirl’s claim about $3000 makes sense because a defendant who knew he was on shaky ground would be risking the humiliation for no money if Judy could award the entire $5000 to the plaintiff.
There are a couple of things I don’t understand though. First, since all these shows are probably run the same way, how is it possible that a court in another jurisdiction would consider your rights in that jurisdiction to have been waived by participation in something many judges would feel is a mockery of the legal system? Is this only possible in the civil courts or is it possible to waive your rights in the criminal system as well? Also, previously, I thought the parties sought participation in the show but Gadarene says the parties are sought by the producers. How do the producers find these people and their details to initially contact them? Is all this stuff in the public domain?
I miss Judge Wapner too. He always explained the law and his reasoning, and he didn’t put on an over-the-top show. I guess that’s why they let him go. I don’t watch most of the “real court” TV shows now, because it seems that everyone’s chewing the scenery, except possibly the bailiffs.
Judge Judy herself told the woman that all her action of calling the police did was to scare the little girl. “Was she crying when they put her father in the car?” the judge asked. “Yes, ma’am,” the woman said. Judy glared at her with her patented see-how-smart-I-am-and-how-stupid-you-are expression.
Judge Judy displays consistently bad judgement and has been criticized by many a judge. She just can’t read people well and often misses the important subtleties in determing whether the defendant or plaintiff’s story is more believable.
Didn’t she have to apologize once a few years ago for being an over zealous bitch?
Seems like I rember hearing about that on the news.
In any case; as they say in Hollywood: Any publicity is GOOD publicity.
Sorry, plg, but from what I’ve seen of her, she comes off as shrill and self-righteous. You’re right-I HAVEN’T seen her in an actual court. Still, does that mean I can’t have an opinion of her?
If you like her, that’s fine. I don’t.
I don’t care if you don’t like her. Saying things like “I don’t know how she got to be a judge in the first place” when you know absolutely nothing about her ability as a judge, her background, her education, or any cases she’s tried is ignorant.
Call her and shrill and abrasive, I don’t care. She can be a caustic bitch. But there’s a big difference between commenting on her attitude a TV show designed for entertainment purposes where everybody gets compensated and commenting on her ability as a judge in a court of law.
Maybe he can go on Dr. Phil and get some counseling to feel all better. :rolleyes:
But, but, but… if **Guin ** really doesn’t know anything about her (as you say), then she quite honestly wouldn’t “know how she got to be a judge in the first place.”
Of course, then she’d be ignorant… of how Judge Judy got to be a judge in the first place. 
Oh, and on the original topic: yep, unreasonable. But she’s not judging, she’s providing a show, so you get what you pay for.
No, Dr. Phil would call him names and give him the proverbial kick in the ass and it’d be funny.
I wish I had Dr. Phil’s job every day.
Judge Judy’s a moron who exploits popular anger to get the public’s attention. Railing about deadbeat dads is an easy way to get people into a blind, stupid rage - so she did it. Screw reality, she wants ratings. If she’s so honestly unbalanced and biased as to really feel this way, then she shouldn’t be on the bench period. (She is, like, a real judge, right?)
I don’t know much about law, but no matter the specifics of what you sign to get on the show, refusing to examine the evidence and making judgments based on her own irrational morality ought to get her disbarred.
But hey - more evidence that you can get people to do anything if you just close your ears and scream, “Won’t somebody please think of the children?”
If you read the thread at all, you’d have the answer to that question.
Judge Judy retired from the bench before her show aired on television… Before she retired, she served as a judge on the criminal court since 1982, and then in '86 was promoted to supervising judge in the Manhatten division of family court. According to biography.com, she heard over 20,000 cases before she retired. Yeah, that’s a sure sign of a raging moron. Of course, people think she’s shrill, so I’m sure somebody will come along shortly and bleat that she was an awful judge, despite all the evidence to the contrary. In 1996, she retired. On the show, we call her “judge”, but she acts as a legal arbitrator.
Arbitration is not the same as appearing in court.
You’ll note that there is nothing referring to judges or court systems in these definitions.
One party contacts the producers of Judge Judy. The producers contact the other party. Both parties agree to appear before her with their dispute and agree to abide by her decision rather than going to court. Both parties receive comensation regardless of who gets the “award.” And above all, both parties are aware of who Judge Judy is and what treatment they can expect to receive.
The old fart Wapnor had an eye for little old ladies, though. They seemed to always win.
True. I did read it, but stupidly, I submitted my reply first.
Ok, not a moron. A bitch. A bitch who is popular because she makes easy-to-swallow moralistic diatribes about any number of things, rather than “ruling” based on the merits of the case. She’s not a judge, so I guess she’s not bound to be impartial, and I have no sympathy for the folks on her show since they clearly get a good deal no matter how she rules. But I don’t think a loud voice and such ‘pithy’ phrases as “Don’t pee on my leg and tell me it’s raining” are evidence of thought or intelligence. They’re just as easy way to get people riled up. It feeds into the public’s love of easy answers.
Was she a bad judge? I couldn’t say, of course. If she was like this when she was on the bench, she was. But if this is just how she plays for ratings, then she’s like any other talk show host who uses easy morality to score points with her audience. Who happens to have been a good judge once upon a time. Hell, Jerry Springer was a popular and intelligent politician. Doesn’t mean his show’s not completely worthless.