My grandfather (also a judge) knows her personally and said she is exactly the same in person as she is on tv. She must be a riot at dinner parties. #judgejudynatpelegacyaward
Hitching up your dress in public to adjust your Spanx is pretty understandable in my book. Those things are effing uncomfortable. #judgejudymichaellohan
@frankie22: Seriously. I've shown more cooter than that a couple drinks into a girdle-filled night. I never leave voice mails though, DDing is bad enough, don't leave any proof. #judgejudymichaellohan
@femme-bot: They came from Long Island. Which is an actual island, unlike Rhode Island. Unfortunately, I think if they can find their way to Hollywood from there, one of the furthest points in the continental USA, we'll hear from them anywhere. #judgejudymichaellohan
@femme-bot: I'm in Canada. Trust me, Canadians can find their way into the states - look at Seth Rogen and Alex Trebec. I think this is a job for Siberia or Mongolia.
I'm really starting to think that JJ doesn't like other women in any capacity.
She told a woman today who claimed that her ex-boyfriend threatened her life if she told the police the drugs she held were his that "if that was true, you wouldn't be here today."
Which, I don't know, may or may not be true, but JJ's casual dismissal of what the woman was claiming bothered me intensely. #judgejudysexualmisconduct
It's alarming that JJ, as well as so many people on here, seem to be saying that she gave up the right to be taken seriously in the sexual abuse case when she made bad decisions in unrelated areas of her life. I feel like by not taking her seriously, she is being punished for decisions she's already been punished for and not getting justice when she may very well have been a victim. As for the inconsistencies, it often happens with abuse victims that the memories blur together into one event instead of separate days. The remark that she knew him from a previous foster situation should give her claims MORE credence, not less, since he would likely be more comfortable joking around inappropriately with someone he already knew outside of work. Honestly, I feel like JJ really dropped the ball on this one, letting her feelings about the morality of the rest of this woman's life dictate her feelings about the alleged sexual assault. And the "bitchface" everyone is talking about looks like she's simply trying not to cry. If she indeed was a victim of sexual abuse, which i believe she is, she might have been fighting back a PTSD flashback. Come on, people. With the number of sexual assault victims on this forum, I am shocked with the amount of victim-shaming and moral judgy-ness around here.
@Beets.Go.On is the Fat Yogini: If she isn't a victim, it's liar-shaming, not victim-shaming. Not everyone tells the truth about these things, and the attitude that every single charge of abuse should be taken seriously (or automatically believed) is exactly the kind of attitude that can make it easy for a manipulative, malevolent person to destroy other people's lives. Claiming that since some people tell the truth about abuse, we should believe everybody claiming abuse is just as irrational as claiming that since some people lie about it, we should believe nobody.
Furthermore, a court is not supposed to use "feelings" to come to judgment about cases. Nor does the court system exist to take care of people's feelings, or improve those feelings. Cases are supposed to be decided according to evidence, statute, and legal precedent. People with problems with their feelings go to therapists. #judgejudysexualmisconduct
@Gavagirl: um, come back to me when you've actually read my comment. Nothing you responded to there were things I actually said.
I do agree with your point about how the court's shouldn't use their feelings. The only time I mentioned anyone's "feelings" was in reference to JJ letting her feelings about other choices this woman has made dictate her judgment here instead of looking at the facts and precedent and how that was a problem. So since, I agree with you, i really don't get what you're trying to argue with me about. #judgejudysexualmisconduct
@Beets.Go.On is the Fat Yogini: My argument is the assumption that she must be a victim. She would have to be for anyone to be "victim-shaming", right? She apparently already failed to prove she is a victim, legally speaking, since after she had him arrested but he was acquitted, so why should JJ treat her as a victim now? The facts don't bear that out, and she isn't the plaintiff here anyway. Her claim against him has already been dealt with.
Now, I don't know that she necessarily should have found in HIS favor, since if he's the plaintiff it's his job to prove she made all this up. That is a tough thing to do, and I don't think he met that burden of proof. He'd need something like an email or MySpace post where she stated she made it up to really support his case.
I think a dismissal would have been a better outcome. I definitely agree with you that JJ's interpretation of her past and her behavior in court seem to have inappropriately influenced her $2500 judgment, but that's because his case was weak, not because that judgment is traumatizing to the defendant. #judgejudysexualmisconduct
"the burden of proof for the plaintiff was much heavier than "beyond a reasonable doubt."
Nope. The burden of proof is less in civil court and merely requires the plaintiff to prove her/his case by the "preponderance of evidence." Meaning, crudely, that it's 51% likely the plaintiff is correct.
This is why O.J. lost his civil court case, the burden of proof was a lot less than in a criminal case wherein the jury has to determine "beyond a reasonable doubt." #judgejudysexualmisconduct
@JinxyMcDeath: Tracie has it right, but its worded in a confusing way. You are correct that the burden on the plaintiff in a civil case is lower than the burden on the state in a criminal case, but here the plaintiff in the civil case was the *defendant* in the criminal case. The important point here is the burden on the store owner in each case.
In the criminal case, all this gentleman had to do was introduce reasonable doubt into the mind of the judge/jury. That's a very low bar for the defendant (which corresponds to the high bar for the state).
In this civil case, the store owner is now the plaintiff, and has to meet a preponderance of the evidence. That bar is, as you say, only 51%, but it's higher than the bar he had to meet when he was a defendant in criminal court. #judgejudysexualmisconduct
11/11/09
Especially if the dope is standing before Judge Judy, making her mad. #judgejudynatpelegacyaward
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/09/09
11/07/09
Give the man his own show! #judgejudymichaellohan
11/07/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/07/09
11/06/09
Seriously, this just cheered me up a lot. Thanks. #judgejudymichaellohan
11/06/09
11/07/09
11/03/09
She told a woman today who claimed that her ex-boyfriend threatened her life if she told the police the drugs she held were his that "if that was true, you wouldn't be here today."
Which, I don't know, may or may not be true, but JJ's casual dismissal of what the woman was claiming bothered me intensely. #judgejudysexualmisconduct
11/03/09
11/03/09
Furthermore, a court is not supposed to use "feelings" to come to judgment about cases. Nor does the court system exist to take care of people's feelings, or improve those feelings. Cases are supposed to be decided according to evidence, statute, and legal precedent. People with problems with their feelings go to therapists. #judgejudysexualmisconduct
11/03/09
I do agree with your point about how the court's shouldn't use their feelings. The only time I mentioned anyone's "feelings" was in reference to JJ letting her feelings about other choices this woman has made dictate her judgment here instead of looking at the facts and precedent and how that was a problem. So since, I agree with you, i really don't get what you're trying to argue with me about. #judgejudysexualmisconduct
11/03/09
Now, I don't know that she necessarily should have found in HIS favor, since if he's the plaintiff it's his job to prove she made all this up. That is a tough thing to do, and I don't think he met that burden of proof. He'd need something like an email or MySpace post where she stated she made it up to really support his case.
I think a dismissal would have been a better outcome. I definitely agree with you that JJ's interpretation of her past and her behavior in court seem to have inappropriately influenced her $2500 judgment, but that's because his case was weak, not because that judgment is traumatizing to the defendant. #judgejudysexualmisconduct
11/03/09
11/03/09
11/03/09
Nope. The burden of proof is less in civil court and merely requires the plaintiff to prove her/his case by the "preponderance of evidence." Meaning, crudely, that it's 51% likely the plaintiff is correct.
This is why O.J. lost his civil court case, the burden of proof was a lot less than in a criminal case wherein the jury has to determine "beyond a reasonable doubt." #judgejudysexualmisconduct
11/03/09
In the criminal case, all this gentleman had to do was introduce reasonable doubt into the mind of the judge/jury. That's a very low bar for the defendant (which corresponds to the high bar for the state).
In this civil case, the store owner is now the plaintiff, and has to meet a preponderance of the evidence. That bar is, as you say, only 51%, but it's higher than the bar he had to meet when he was a defendant in criminal court. #judgejudysexualmisconduct
11/03/09
11/03/09
11/03/09
11/03/09
11/03/09
11/03/09
11/03/09
11/03/09
11/03/09