Judge Judy destroys an eBay scammer

[Dominoelover thegamenotthepizza]

Judge Judy at her best

 

[George C]

That was great. If anyone has an ebay problem take it to Judy Judy. :lol:



George

 

[Todd Z]

HAHA, that was great.....



TOO bad the people get paied to be on those shows.... Takes some of the truth out of it IMO.



Todd Z

 

[A K]

Todd,



If I am not mistaken, the standard operating procedure is each party gets $5000 to be on the show (maybe less) and the judgment is taken from that payday. So, theoretically, someone could not get paid. Of course, free lodging, food, etc., if that's covered, makes losing still an attractive deal.

 

[Gary DiPietroSr]

Not sure about being paid for it but, I was asked to be on the "peoples court" for a small claims case. They said they would pay the winner and the looser would not be charged anything. I told them I was sure I was going to win and I wanted the defendant to be hit in the pocket. I won and and he got hit in the wallet big time.

 

[Tim Turner]

I love Judge Judy.

 

[TomT]

It would be so much more interesting if the looser automatically got the death penalty.

 

[Todd Z]

Whether you win or loose you get money from them for being on the show...



Todd Z

 

[Woppy V]

I actually dont like that show cause that woman is a witch... BUT I AM NOW A FAN!!!! HAHAHAHA 'I have more brains in my little finger than you' 'She doesn't like to work... she just likes to stay home and make babies!' HAHAHAHAHA priceless :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

 

[Travis Munday]

Gotta love it when the system works.

 

[Richard L]

Juge Judy can be a witch at times, but this time she was a good witch and I hope she does follow up by having the IRS investigate this criminal and her husband.



...Rich

 

[Adam Cat]

WOW :lol::lol:

 

[Josh Langel]

It would have been easier to take her and her husband out back and shoot them. The cost of two $.18 bullets would have satisfied me.

 

[Thomas Rogers]

I found Judge Judy to be over the line quite a few times with that girl. Yes, she is a scammer, but c'mon, as a judge she isn't supposed to personally attack the girl, which she did.

 

[Tom Schindler]

TJR,



I agree with you. I also did not like the fact that Judge Judy did not read the auction. The auction stated that you are bidding on a picture of the phone. Sure it is misleading, but that is what the auction stated.



My wife doesn't work. It is a choice we make. I make enough money to support the both of us. There is no law that states my wife MUST work and to make the comment of staying home and making babies, what business is it of her? She is married. Isn't that one of the benefits of marriage?





Tom

 

[Jeff C]

Tom, the auction also said that the item weighed 4.9 ounces. That piece of paper did not weigh 4.9 ounces. If we're getting technical, then she DID NOT send what was paid for. You say she shouldn't personally attack people...that's not good TV. I'm sure these people sign waivers and have seen the show before. They know what's coming.

 

[TomT]

The auction stated that you are bidding on a picture of the phone. Sure it is misleading, but that is what the auction stated.

It also gave the full specs on the phones. They knew exactly what they were doing. The ******** have kids. I wonder what they will turn out to be like. Thats why we need forced sterilization in this country for people like that.

 

[Thomas Rogers]

JeffC, TomT, I simply think Judge Judy was out of line.



Yes, there was no doubt in my mind the seller was hoping to scam someone too stupid to read the listing. They were counting on the old saying "A fool and their money are soon parted."



Regarding the listing giving the full specs of the phone, it should be noted that it's a very common eBay practice to auction off coupons, vouchers and email info on how to get "cheap" products. The description of such auctions typically showcase the product and therefore it's not uncommon to see weight, color, and other attributes listed in the description. The description of the product in such listings should not lead one to believe they are getting the actual product.



JJ had no reason to bring the kid, child protective service and the IRS into things. That's where she crossed the line. The girl, technically did nothing illegal, and then Judge Judy went on to verbally bitchslap and threaten her.



TJR

 

[Travis Munday]

JJ had no reason to bring the kid, child protective service and the IRS into things. That's where she crossed the line. The girl, technically did nothing illegal, and then Judge Judy went on to verbally bitchslap and threaten her.

...as she should.



"But officer, I know I was going 56 MPH in a 55, but so was everyone else. Why am I being picked on? Everyone speeds, just let me off and I'll go on my way."



That's the exact argument you are trying here. Just because a practice is common doesn't make it any less wrong or illegal.



If that officer pulls you over for speeding, and he suspects something else is amiss, he has every right to investigate further to ensure no additional laws are being broken. Judge Judy was simply doing the same thing. She was exercising her right, and ability, to ensure that further illegal activity was not going on.

 

[Thomas Rogers]

No, Tiger, I am not saying that. Your example is not the same as your example describes a common practice that is illegal.



Technically, the girl did nothing illegal. Therefore, Judge Judy was incorrect in both her judgement and her harsh admonishment.



TJR