I find these cheaply-made, shoddily conceived TV shows to be hugely entertaining! The pathetic complaints, the dopey plaintiffs and defendents…“your honor, I lent my car to my ex-wife’s boyfriend, and he smashed it up and now I can’t pay for the repars…”
Better yet are the judges…they look like they would have trouble rousting up the clients that an average “whiskey” lawyer would take…But I digress…my vote for worst TV judges is “Judge” Judy-the nasal NY whine, that grating voice-she is SO annoying!
But, an aside-how is it that these black-robed imposters manage to mete out justice in 15 minutes or les? Do they know something that our usual hack judges don’t?
So who is your worst TV judge?
Are these judges real?
And as for 15 minute justice, I’m sure the editors have to get scissor happy to get it down to that short a time.
I find you in contempt of court for posting in the wrong forum.
But it’s got to be that old fart with the strong southern drawl who tacks on a goofy colloquialism to the end of every single sentence:
“My decision is gonna stick to you like a tight shirt on a sweaty farmhand”.
“You better calm down now, missy. You’re wound up tighter than the girdle on a baptist minister’s wife at an all-you-can-eat pancake breakfast”.
“The witness is clearly jumpier than a virgin at a prison rodeo”.
:puking smiley:
In my judgement, this is gonna be moved to IMHO.
I agree that Judge Judy is by far the worst of the lot, with Judge Mathis running a close second (he’s almost seemed to be snot-flying drunk in some of the shows I’ve seen recently).
Judge Judy gets the nod for:
a) her incessant, moralistic badgering of plaintiff and defendant alike
b) her utter lack of anything resmbling compassion
c) her routine failure to provide any legal context for her decisions.
AFAIK, all the judges on the courtroom TV shows are qualified to sit the bench in one state or another, and most have five years or more of experience. Shocking as it may seem, even the obnoxious Judge Judy is a highly experienced family court judge.
The court shows generally use cases filed in actual small claims courts. Since the TV courtrooms are not legally constituted courts, the litigants sign agreements to submit to binding arbitration by the “judge”. Although it may not be explicitly stated during each case, the judge will set award limits and make rulings based on case law of the state in which the litigants reside. As I undertand it, awards are made from a fund set up by the shows’ producers, thus losing litigants do not actually pay out of pocket.
According to my reading, the show that most closely mimics the procedures of a real-life small claims court is The People’s Court, and Judge Miliam (rowwrrr) seems to be fairly careful in explaining the legal basis for her rulings. Most of the other shows seem to be little more than morality plays and have varying degrees of divorcement from reality.
From my reading in other threads on this subject, the cases are heavily edited to fit in their time slots, with the actual elapsed time for the litigants’ presentations taking 45 minutes to an hour. Often the judge needs additional time to consult specific case law applicable to the litigants’ jurisdiction, and this is normally edited out completely.
Your honor, I object! The topic deals with TV judges. Therefore, it clearly belongs in Cafe Society.
(We’ll return to “The Case of the Bungled Forum” after these messages from our sponsor.)
I consider Justice Bao to be by far the best of all TV judges. However, it’s a Hong Kong TV show of a fictional court set in a historical period, and it’s all in Chinese, so most of you have probably never seen it!
There was a soap opera back in the 1960s called Divorce Court, but it was fictional, and abysmally stupid too. I vote for it as the worst ever.
Your honor, anyone can see this is a poll, and thus under SDMB law must be moved to IMHO.
I request $1500 in damages and $500 for lost wages and emotional distress.
What happened to Judge Wapner…he looked like he had some brains! The shows seem to be attracted the real low-IQ defendents…“like wow man. I did’nt know I was stealing the car, dude”…
I also like the family-type cases, where daughter is evicting mom, because Mom refuses to stop hooking!
Upon considering the objections, and in light of the finding of contempt of court by the defendant, I must overrule the objection and hereby do declare that this thread belongs in IMHO, pending review by the appellate moderators.
This thread is as out-of-place as a pay toilet in diarrhea county.
The Great Debates Forum of the Straight Dope Message Board v. Who’s The WORST TV Judge?
MEBuckner delivered the opinion of the forum.
Respondant Who’s The WORST TV Judge? (thread) poses a question of opinion regarding a particular genre of television show. Petitioner The Great Debates Forum of the Straight Dope Message Board (Great Debates) brought this action for moderatorial relief, alleging that the thread is beyond the stated scope of Great Debates, and should properly be moved elsewhere.
(a) The forum description of Great Debates states that it is for “discussions of the great questions of our time” (7 SDMB f.d.). Discussions of opinions regarding the merits of television shows or genres of television shows are held not to fall under this forum description. (See You Nazi Jack-booted Hartless [sic] Thug, Why Did You Move My Thread About G.I. Joe against the Transformers From Great Debates!!!)
(b) The question is one of opinion; the stated forum description of the In My Humble Opinion forum of the Straight Dope Message Board (IMHO) includes “[f]or frank exchanges of views on less-than-cosmic topics” (12 SDMB f.d.). See The Great Debates Forum of the Straight Dope Message Board v. Do you look at it after you pick your nose? et seq.
© However, the question is also specifically regarding a particular genre of television show; the stated forum description of the Cafe Society forum of the Straight Dope Message Board (Cafe Society) includes the statements “if it’s about art or entertainment, it goes here” (13 SDMB f.d.). See, e.g., The Great Debates Forum of the Straight Dope Message Board v. Classic or Next Gen: Could Kirk Kick Picard’s Ass, or what?
The court finds that the usage of the words “if it’s about art or entertainment, it goes here” in the forum description for Cafe Society takes precedence over the description “[f]or frank exchanges of views on less-than-cosmic topics” from the IMHO forum description.
The thread is hereby remanded to Cafe Society for judgement.
It is so ordered.
And it’s nice to finally see ol’ Scott getting some work after Charles in Charge.
Because the award (if any) comes from a fund provided by the show, I’ve always wondered why everybody who had a case against them wouldn’t try to get on one of these shows?? Also, why do they care if they win or lose (if they are the defendant)? they don’t have pay anyway. any thoughts?
Mike
I seem to recall that on The People’s Court both sides were given a fund equal to the maximum judgement ($1500 in those days) and the amount the loser had to pay was taken from it - so they didn’t really lose money, but they didn’t get as much (or any) if they lost.
I only saw Judge Joe Brown one time and he did something that so pissed me off that I vowed to never watch him again. Maybe I saw him on an off day but, my god, what a fucking asshole.
Here was the situation. A young man of 18 was suing his ex-girl friend, also 18. The parents of both of them were in the audience. When she was 17, he and his family took her along on a week long cruise. She didn’t bring any cash so she borrowed a few hundred dollars from the boy friend for spending money. She claimed the money was given to her, he claimed there was a verbal contract for her to repay him. IANAL but the verdict seems pretty clear to me.
That piece of shit Joe Brown, maybe because he needed to fill the whole fifteen minutes, asked a few extra questions. The man was suing for 200 dollars or so less than he allegedly lent to her. Joe asked why. He replied that he owed her the 200 from another matter so he wasn’t suing for the total amount. Joe wanted specifics on the other matter and the boy friend didn’t want to tell. Joe raised his voice and coerced boy friend into telling. It turns out that he had gotten the girl friend pregnant and it was half of the price of the abortion that she got. The camera cut to a shot of the lady’s mother, who didn’t know about the abortion, bursting into tears then to the lady bawling.
Joe’s verdict: The girl was underage at the time of the loan which made any contract unenforceable. Even if she was of age, there were not witnesses and there was nothing in writing so it was a “he said-she said” and didn’t meet the burden of proof. Why then, didn’t he end the question before fucking up that lady’s relationship with her mother?
I hate Judge Joe Brown.
Haj
The absolute worst TV judge is my daughter, Michaela. She actually thinks Scooby Doo, Where Are You? is better than Jabberjaws.
d&r
I hate JUDGE JOE BROWN as well. If you watch him for any stretch of time (as I had to since I worked at the television station that carried his program) you will learn that he is really very misogynistic! I find myself wondering why any woman will go on his show cuz she’s bound to get shredded!
There was one of this crazy shows on a few years back where the judge let the lawyers do all sorts of weird crap without even a wrist slap. A crappy parody of US justice. It only lasted like a year.
I think the judge’s name was “Ito” or some such.
What? Oh, never mind.
I forget her name, but the judge on the new version of Divorce Court is horrid. She always interrupts the litigants just as they’re saying something pertinent, buts lets them rant at one another forever. Then she has this little segment at the end of each case where she retires to her chambers with her rent-a-cop and expounds for a minute on the evils of today’s world while he nods his head and grunts. Really, really lame.
I like the new judge on The Peoples’ Court, though. She’s sassy. 
And I’m ashamed to say that I’ve watched any of these shows, just so you know, but I only do so on days off when I’m feeling sluggish.
If you mean Judge Mablean, I actually like her.
However. . .
I heard this story about a case on Judge Judy’s program in the past two years:
Guy tells girl-friend that he has sent a virus to her computer.
Girl-friend spends several hundred dollars vaccinating her computer.
Guy says "Naw, just kidding! "
(now ex-) Girl-friend takes him to court to recover unnecessary cleanup costs.
Judge Judy ruled in her favor, but also seemed to be pretty clueless as to what a computer virus–or even a computer for that mater–was.
All of the above is stuff that I heard. I didn’t actually see it first-hand, so if anyone has any more details, please supply the
[Judge Mills Lang]
“Lets Git It Awn”
[/Judge Mills Lang]