You and everyone who likes or agrees with your comment is a moron and an idiot because the harassment part is calling children services a month later dumbasses
@@martinboyle9163 alone in Manhattan? at night?? and no way to get back in if he didn't have his key? as she lies there zonked out unresponsive to his knocks and shouts?
Letting her SEVEN YEAR OLD walk their dog ALONE in Manhattan(at night), while she decides to take a sleeping pill... Even if he called later, it was warranted. He may have been vindictive, but there was a basis for his call. That letter though... Oof😂.
@@peterlee584so she’s a bad parent because of that? So how many times did your parents or parent not make a mistake or a bad decision? I bet you won’t call them bad parents.
@michaeldelyjah5696 Exactly. The Defendant herself knows that she was wrong. That's why she doesn't want to bring it up again. I'm not justifying the guy's behaviour. I think writing that anonymous letter was disgusting, vindictive and uncalled for. I even have doubts about his motivation for calling ACS. However, that doesn't mean that the defendant's behaviour towards her son wasn't irresponsible and neglectful
I do believe that the plaintiff had a valid complaint to ACS but I think it’s messed up that he used it as a pawn to get his money back vs actually trying to help the kid. Also the defamation letter is crazy. I fully believe the plaintiff wrote that.
@oldageisdumb i got distracted and didn't watch the episode. I'll go back and see but if that's the case then he is wrong for that 😔 was hoping to give the benefit of the doubt.
What is wrong with a 7 year row? Walking a dog if they're mature. Enough and responsible enough? You do know that you could leave your child at home by a certain age if they're mature and responsible of not opening doors right or are you turning installs in everything like that? Play with things that they're not supposed to be playing with. If they're mature, irresponsible enough, then at that age, you're allowed to lead there. They came home by themselves that they are allowed to do the dishes by themselves. If they're responsible enough or mature enough so some kids mature faster than others, some are able to wash dishes and cook by 56 years old. Some kids are able to do laundry by 67 years old. And as a person who grew up in the 90s, I was doing laundry by 67 years old, I was pet sitting by 78 years old, so I don't understand what's wrong with the 7-year-old walking dear dog in their neighborhood. And sitting on their stoop, and if they was over to someone that was an adult, how would you know if that person wasn't someone that they already knew, yeah, I assumed the worst of everything and I want you to understand you assume and you call CS and I have to deal with it. I'm gonna hurt you simple as that. Because like I said, I've been in this system as a kid who was taking advantage of And I know that not everybody in the system is bad, but I had lucked out in gotta bad set of family and I will not have that for my child. So if you see my child who was 7 years old, walking a dog and you feel some type of way, how about you? Talk to your God and you tell your guy to bring you a child. So you could feel some type of way about your child and not mine.
Nothing against the plaintiff, but I can't imagine being a single mom of a seven-year-old and letting some random guy move in. Maybe that's judgemental of me but whatever.
I raised my children on a homestead in the country. At 6 years old, they were not walking down the road alone. How in the heck would she let a 6 year go outside alone in NYC?
I think the reason the Judge ruled in her favor on that issue was because the plaintiff waited until after he moved out to call Child Protective Services. If he believed the child was truly in danger, he should have called immediately. So the complaint to Child Protective Services may have been warranted based on her issues, but the plaintiff did it for the purpose of harassing her.
I entirely agree, yes the plaintiff was vindictive BUT the defendant is an incredibly negligent mother. That child is far too young to be left alone like that without supervision.
Even the judge said the lady shouldn't be letting her child walk the dog alone at that age. The judge was even like wtf when she heard that but then found in the defendants favor??? I'm shocked. He should have called earlier and not admitted he did it out of spite.
because it’s questionable. not ABUSE. she doesn’t deserve to get her kid taken away or lose out on work! he didn’t call earlier because it wasn’t the worst thing in the world lol. even when he called, they also decided it wasn’t the worst thing in the world. there children who are ACTUALLY abused out here.
It's not defamation because it's true. BUT because he didn't call at the time of the incident, therefore voiding his concern for the child for a month, it's vindictive and as the judge said, using the system by manipulation for his benefit.
That’s not the standard for what constitutes defamation. Truthful statements are, by definition, not defamatory. The fact that he is being vindictive or not is irrelevant. If he lied or exaggerated, then that’s different.
As the judge said, the fact that CPS came out the same day as the report was made means that he told them A WHOLE LOT MORE than just the story we heard in court. The fact that CPS found her to be a fit parent means that he obviously lied to them, which is definitely defamation.
@@rezotydnic If it’s not defamation, then the judge should have not have awarded damages. She was counterclaiming for defamation. Being vindictive alone is not a cause for action.
I don’t agree with the judgement at all. He admits it was vindictive and sure it wasn’t right, but even she admits that did actually happen. So where’s the defamation?
It's mostly defamation because he admitted to doing it in retaliation to not receiving the security deposit. It also happened a month prior and didn't call until it benefited him. Had he called the same week and he didn't have an ulterior motive for the call, she might have over looked it.
It’s defamation if it’s done vindictively. Because he chose to wait several months to make the call after he wasn’t being paid, it’s clear that it wasn’t done for the well-being of the child.
It’s defamation if it’s done maliciously. It would not have been defamation if he had very quickly made a call, but because he made the call four months later in response to her withholding the money means he did so vindictively. I’m not saying what she did is right but law cares about motivation and he did not make that call because he cared about the child, he did it with the intention of hurting her
Lies, or malicious truths. I could be a recovering alcoholic and we get into a beef , so you call my employer and tell them i had a history of public intoxication and DUIS which leads to me getting fired. You didn’t lie but you were slanderous and malicious. I can sue you.
Because it was with malicious intent. He was not actually concerned about the child, or he would've called when it happened not a month later after she with held his security deposit. He even admitted that he did it to be vindictive.
I agree with you, @danielleconnolly1224! It appears to me also that the Plaintiff was absolutely uncaring about the child and only called CPS out of spite!
it shouldn't even matter if he didn't report lies 🤦 and he should of gotten twice the amount of the deposit since she just didn't return it to get back at him 🤦
@sandylane5498 He did lie on her! They would not have cone out for a one time mistake. He definitely beefed up that phone call. Look at that nasty letter he sent to her employer about her. What does getting her fired have to do with the well-being of the child? He admitted he was being vindictive. She definitely should have had cps called on her, but when the action happened. Had she given him the money, he would not have called.
Nope! I disagree. I believe he spared her in court and could have said more, which is why she didn’t want the details discussed. He wanted to call cps all along but his situation with her motivated him even more. He allowed the judge to bully him and make him feel guilty. Judge was not fair. Based on the little I heard, she is a neglectful parent!
I don’t know about this ruling. Even the judge said the mother shouldn’t have her child outside alone in Manhattan while she’s passed out drunk. The timing of the call was not great, I’ll give her that. If anything this should’ve been a wash and neither side wins. To give her thousands of dollars reinforces that her behavior was ok. Child Protective Services may have closed the case, but it doesn’t mean nothing bad happened. They provide services and the goal is the keep the family together. They wouldn’t have had it open 60 days of nothing was going on
@@PeopleRTheProblem What does that have to do with anything? You are missing the point. The point is that he wasn’t going to report it until she withheld his deposit. When she did that he used cps as a weapon. The legitimacy of the claim doesn’t matter, it’s what he did and he admitted it.
The judgment was so bad. First she past out and didn’t take care of her kid and on top of that she let him walk a dog outside without supervision someone could’ve kidnapped the kid.
Judge was dead wrong on this on! You could tell there was something off with that lady. Her defense was she was tired and took a sleeping pill, but it was early enough to know your 7 year old child is out walking your dog? Shes an addict or a functioning addict, something is way off. Yes it wrong for the dude to do what he did, but I think it was justified, whether out of spite or to get his money back or whatever. Doesnt change the fact something very off with that woman. Every single time she was asked a question by the judge she would half laugh like it wasnt relevant or beneath her or something. Just odd. Plus 30 seconds in to his testimoney she was already interrupting or trying to. This one was a weird one for me.
I completely agree and the judge knowing the woman is wrong to allow a child to walk a dog at night in Manhattan glossed over this fact because he said it might have been vindictive and she now no longer cares about the safety of the kid but how terrible he was using the system to get his money and report this woman who's guilty of abuse but somehow he's worse? WTF
Law student here: This woman gives me a headache. She admits to several of the complaints and basically destroys her own case except for the defamation of character. She admits to leaving her child out alone at night in a high crime area. She admits to holding on to the deposit and spending it. She admits to breaking the law. I can see why she lost her South Africa job. As for the double jeopardy, she doesn’t understand how the courts work. ACS holding a hearing is not the same as a full on court hearing. The court can take ACS recommendations but it doesn’t count as double jeopardy.
Double Jeopardy only attaches when you're charged and convicted with a crime. She was accused and investigated for neglect. According to ACS, there were no founded accusations, thus no charges. No charges, no conviction, no double jeopardy. That's not even this type of court! 😂 I love it when people try to act smarter than they really are. FYI: Double Jeopardy only attaches in CRIMINAL CASES, not civil or administrative proceedings.
Why is everyone including the judge hung up on him saying vindictive when everything he said was true and before he used that word even the judge thought what she did was wrong and needed to be checked out......I'm just guessing but I think her sleeping pill is Xanax and a glass of wine....nobody in their right mind lets a 7 year old walk their dog alone in Manhattan or lets them play outside with nobody watching and so what if he's being vindictive it was still true and cps needed to be called... This is why she's a tv judge!
Because he called ACS out of spite, for not getting his security deposit returned. Not because he actually cares about the child's welfare. He called a month later. I'm pretty sure he wrote that letter to her employer. He is vindictive and deserved his punishment. He's out a total of $3000 bc he's an AHole
@@michaelcarver7693doesn’t matter. The allegation was still TRUE!!! Also, I’m sure he spared her and didn’t mention most of the neglect he witnessed. This is why he wanted to move out!!
The fact the defendant keeps interrupting the judge and not wanting the ACS case to be mentioned is because 1. She lacks complete accountability for her neglect of her child and ACS SHOULD get involved again because she’s a risk to be a repeat offender due to this unaccountability and 2. She’s ashamed but not because of how bad of a mother is but because she doesn’t want OTHER people to know how neglectful she is. She has no intention of changing and wants it to stay hidden.
Listen Mary, the plaintiff filed with ACS out of spite. This woman lived for a long time in S. Africa and over there crime is pretty low and like Europe 7 year olds do walk outside by themselves without having to worry about getting mugged, assaulted or killed. Before making stupid and erroneous comments educate yourself about everything associated with the case.
@@XFiorentti You mentioned wanting people to educate themselves and yet you don’t know that South Africa has one of the highest murder rates in the world? It’s riddled with crime in general, far worse than the U.S. Where are you even getting that?
The way the defendant was so annoyingly defensive and arguing with the judge I would have dismissed her case at 8:50 and she sure as hell doesn’t deserve to get rewarded.
There’s no way JM legally had the right to award the defamation. There’s no proof he said anything that was untrue, the defendant was clearly lying about many things to stretch the truth at least. He did the right thing and called cps and filed a complaint because she made poor choices regarding her son. Seriously letting him walk the dog alone at 6 years old in NYC!!!!!
Her first words “i’m a single mother.” Eye roll. That doesn’t make you special. Most mothers are single mothers these days. It isnt a handy cap, an excuse, or an anomaly. I cannot stand it when women use it as a crutch.
It's not defamation if it actually happened! Yes, he was completely wrong to call only after she started giving him the run around, but she was wrong too and should not have been awarded that money!! She's no victim!!
The child was not in danger and it happened one time . Essentially her son went outside to walk the dog and left his key to get back in lol . Thats not a danger to the child. Which is why the courts dismissed his claim
@@VANITYISFAREyou are a fool if you think a child at 7, alone at night, locked out of the home is not in danger. Do you know how many children are abducted? Clown.
I have been a single mom. Nfw in hell id ever allow a male roommate in my house with small children. I never even let the men I dated come over to visit. Ever. Wow. You have to protect your kids.
What? What is wrong with the judge? The 7 years old child was walking the dog alone at 7. Plaintiff is vindictive, but he also has a legit reason to call. This is how children gets abducted!
As the judge said, if he called EARLIER it would matter, but he waited until AFTER he left to call them. Meaning, he had actual proof during the time it happened, but afterwards, it was just words.
If you are worried you call immediately. If you’re vindictive you hold onto it until you can use it against them. He even admitted it was vindictive. Did you watch before you commented?
she thinks because shes a single mom and under stress as a single mom, the court would have leniency..... they dont GIVE A SHIT... you screw up as a parent after you prove youre capable to be a single parent..... eventually shes a single mom!
CPS did investigate and as usual ,they dropped the ball; Everything the plaintiff said about the defendant was True, she should've either lost custody of her child or they should've had a judge order her to go to rehab and take parenting classes ( she clearly has a substance abuse problem).
Are you deaf? Watch the entire video. I hate people who call child agencies on a mom purely out of spite. He deserved jail time for what he did to her and her son.
Im judging this whole situation but its necessary. I have a 7 year old. I wouldn't let a strange man from Craiglist move into my home, me pop some "sleeping pills" (but ima take a guess and say alcohol was involved), and send my 7 year old outside alone at nighttime into the big city to walk the dog. On top of that, not even provide my child with a key to get inside our home and being so passed out that my child's incessant knocking at the door doesnt wake me up. Negligence. The man had full grounds to call CPS but the issue is that he waited a month+ later to do so and did it out of spite instead of truly doing it for the wellbeing of the child when the incident occured
Sorry, Judge, this was not a fair ruling. I would like to advocate for the child and no matter when the call came in it was well needed to be investigated!
Judge Judy would never!!!! Its bot defamation if its true.... she was madder at the plaintiff than the defendant who admitted to having a 7 year old locked outside walking a dog at night. I would understand her being mad at the plaintiff but paying the defendant for reporting behavior that could have harmed her child? Ridiculous!!! JM rules on emotions too often
That’s a terrible verdict. She didn’t prove that he made defamatory statements. The judge assumed that he did, based on his admission that the report waa vindictive. But the defendant never actually gave any examples of other things that he told CPS beyond what actually happened, which would absolutely be a requirement in order to rule that it was defamatory. That was an emotional decision.
She's totally trying to avoid the question of why her child was outside walking the dog alone. She should have been put on notice that CPS will be checking up on her. She's too old to not know better.
He told them more than just that story. He obviously said a whole lot more otherwise they wouldn't have come the exact same day the report was made. The fact that CPS found her to be a fit parent means that he obviously grossly exaggerated or lied about her.
Defendant needs to go to AA. She clearly moved the plaintiff in to get free childcare He should've called CPS on her for leaving that child with strangers.
I wouldn’t leave my purse alone with a tenant and she leaves her child? Also, she just moved to the states, who is this “friend” she let watch her child ??? So many kids are abused because of dumb parents
Are you freaking serious?! That call was absolutely called for! She is a bad mother! How did the judge make this call. This woman is a complete liar straight from the beginning! Wow!
JM annoyed me with this ruling. Who let’s their 7 year old roam Manhattan alone with a dog. That ACS call could have saved her child’s life - it was probably a wake up call for the defendant
The defendant should absolutely lose custody of that little boy. That child is far too young to be left on his own without parental supervision. "There are lines people should never cross" well that my dear includes allowing strangers around your 7 yo child and leaving him alone when you are passed out drunk.
The reason the defendant won this ruling is simple; the plaintiff admitted that he called because he was being vindictive, he would never have called otherwise. Regardless of whether you agree with her parenting, it is illegal and punishable. There was a 60 day investigation held which concluded that she is a completely fit parent. Stop attacking her for poor judgement and making a mistake. If this was something happening on a regular basis I can assure you CPS would not have deemed her to be a fit parent. Stop thinking you know better than CPS and stop defending and supporting someone who didn't have a problem with it until he didn't get his deposit back. He has wasted valuable resources and time from children who are actually suffering in dangerous situations and conditions.
CPS is trash. They pass unfit people all the time. Look up how many times they have been sued or dragged into court over neglect and wrongful death, then continue to stand behind your statement.
Damn, I was not expecting that judgement, but I understand her anger towards the plaintiff because too many people take advantage of the system to be vindictive and it needs to stop.
She has issue but he’s a terrible human being too. Trying to rip a kid away from his home over 1 incident. Like the judge said, he HAD to have lied and said more bad things were happening for them to come out. Disgusting.
This defendant is sad and disgusting for letting her small child walk her dog by himself.🙄 It doesn't matter where they live no city is safe and crime is everywhere.
Wow! How unprofessional & crappy of a judge, she's turned into! That woman is an irresponsible mother. The mother is the victim now?! Wait! She spent the security deposit which is illegal & has been refusing to pay it back, again illegal but let's ignore that because somehow the mother is the victim?! Judy is totally off her rocker! That letter proves that mother did someone else wrong or she is making it all up to gain pity for her Pity Party. Judy rants & rages over the Child Services being called which anyone would have called them! Judy, however, doesn't bother raging about how that mother basically stole that money & keeps avoiding paying him. Why not? A woman's suffering is more than a man's suffering? Blind justice, my behind! That mother is lucky that guy wasnt a child predator! She just leaves a 7yr old to wander the streets?! That mom sure knew how to play Judy like a fiddle 🎻. You can't be a fair judge when you have biases, Judy.
Plaintiff looks like a junkie & she should lose her kid . He never defamed her , she admitted to his accusations which means there was no defamation , JM was in her feelings with this case.
Having gone through dealing with ACS myself. Years ago it doesn't take months and months in months. She's sort of milking it. It is in convenient and embarrassing, but if you've got nothing to hide, it's soon goes away.
I feel that even though the call to CPS was malicious, as long as he didn't tell any lies to CPS, he should be in the clear. It seems like this woman does have issues that should be monitored. A 7 year old walking a dog alone in Manhattan while Mommy go ni-night is not ok.
You have kids don't you? And you drink and take pills, everything this woman does while watching her kid...you probably even pass out like her during the day....why else are you so invested in this case about someone being turned into cps for being shit parents like yourself!
I don't know why the judge got so mad at the man calling child services that lady was passed out on drugs while her child was outside in New York when he or she could have been kidnapped at any time
I feel for her. I had a jealous neighbor across the street call DHS. She stated multiply lies. She was mad her hubby would constantly come over & make passes at me. I shut down everyone of them. She still wanted to ruin my life. My next door neighbor even defended me on the baseless accusations. The case was dismissed. It subjected my daughter to traumatic evaluations & put ne through stress.
Well, I think he was nervous and said yes to being vindictive but honestly I think his only mistake was waiting to call. Sounds like this happened right after he moved in and I can understand not calling immediately. He should have though! Sure he did it late and after there were issues, but it still was a legit problem. She looked hung over even in court & I’m surprised the judge awarded her a dollar
The plaintiff's defense against the countersuit, is that he only reported the truth. And that gets verified either by Protective services in the report, or with admissions against interest by the defendent. He gets to be as vindictive as he wants, as long as he does not lie. The judge really needs to see the final report from Children's services to see what they were investigating and what they found before she can come to a conclusion about defamation. We have the malicious intent, and have damages, but I am having trouble finding his false statement here.
The defendant has a drinking 🍷 problem. She showed up to court drunk. She's passed out, while her 7 year old son is in the street, walking a dog 🐕. She needed Department of Children Services called on her. Whenever a woman starts off saying "I'm a single mother" I immediately know, she's getting ready to make up some Bull S**T excuses for her behavior.
![Jack Harlow - Hello Miss Johnson [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Q86_nlRoIGw/mqdefault.jpg)
What kind of person rents a room to a stranger and leaves their child with them while sleeping?
Exactly
the kind of person that needs cps called on them
The kind of single women who have children and no support, to earn money to feed her kids. Been this way in USA for 500 hundred years.
Exactly i only rent to people i know and family because I'm not a single mom they always have lot's of money
A woman who takes her child away from the father
It's always "harassment" when the person you owe calls you about it 😒
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 true
Hear that all the time on here
And it’s always someone else’s fault that they didn’t pay a loan back!!!
😂😂😂❤❤❤
You and everyone who likes or agrees with your comment is a moron and an idiot because the harassment part is calling children services a month later dumbasses
I never understood that part. Pay up and don’t take others money if you wanna be left alone.
I just don't understand why a single mother would rent a room in her home to a total stranger. Let alone having a 7 year old walk the dog by himself!!
Mayhaps she wanted the guy? He almost looks like Jeffrey Dean Morgan!
@@martinboyle9163 alone in Manhattan? at night?? and no way to get back in if he didn't have his key? as she lies there zonked out unresponsive to his knocks and shouts?
@@martinboyle9163it’s sad but not in this day of human trafficking. Especially kids.
I don't know why deadbeat dads exist.
This, over and over. I can't even wrap my head around her horrible choices, whether selfisness, ignorance, laziness.... she is a shite parent.
I see why JM likes texts on the phone
🎯🎯🎯
Right!
Text messages can be very telling.
💯💯💯💯
You can still delete specific messages on the phone so it's futile. Not sure if that technology was available then though.
A sleeping pill and a 7 year old, sounds like a bad combination.
Letting her SEVEN YEAR OLD walk their dog ALONE in Manhattan(at night), while she decides to take a sleeping pill... Even if he called later, it was warranted. He may have been vindictive, but there was a basis for his call. That letter though...
Oof😂.
Ok Boomer.
@@martinboyle9163Boomer or not, she's right. That is pretty bad parenting, neglectful to say the least.
What was the basis for his call a month later ?
@@peterlee584so she’s a bad parent because of that? So how many times did your parents or parent not make a mistake or a bad decision? I bet you won’t call them bad parents.
@@martinboyle9163 you like type o negative, you're the boomer here
I notice the judge passionately hates when a litigant calls CPS for revenge more than anything else.
No she just quivers for wypipo
As she should
Yup that's vindictive and pretty low on a person to do something like that
@@milfinu It's only "low" if they're lying. He was 100% telling the truth.
@michaeldelyjah5696 Exactly. The Defendant herself knows that she was wrong. That's why she doesn't want to bring it up again.
I'm not justifying the guy's behaviour. I think writing that anonymous letter was disgusting, vindictive and uncalled for. I even have doubts about his motivation for calling ACS. However, that doesn't mean that the defendant's behaviour towards her son wasn't irresponsible and neglectful
I do believe that the plaintiff had a valid complaint to ACS but I think it’s messed up that he used it as a pawn to get his money back vs actually trying to help the kid. Also the defamation letter is crazy. I fully believe the plaintiff wrote that.
Hmm. Two things can be true at once. He could've been helping the kid and himself at the same time, but let me finish the episode. 😊
@@pickleasaurHe admitted he was being vindictive
@oldageisdumb i got distracted and didn't watch the episode. I'll go back and see but if that's the case then he is wrong for that 😔 was hoping to give the benefit of the doubt.
What is wrong with a 7 year row? Walking a dog if they're mature. Enough and responsible enough? You do know that you could leave your child at home by a certain age if they're mature and responsible of not opening doors right or are you turning installs in everything like that? Play with things that they're not supposed to be playing with. If they're mature, irresponsible enough, then at that age, you're allowed to lead there. They came home by themselves that they are allowed to do the dishes by themselves. If they're responsible enough or mature enough so some kids mature faster than others, some are able to wash dishes and cook by 56 years old. Some kids are able to do laundry by 67 years old. And as a person who grew up in the 90s, I was doing laundry by 67 years old, I was pet sitting by 78 years old, so I don't understand what's wrong with the 7-year-old walking dear dog in their neighborhood. And sitting on their stoop, and if they was over to someone that was an adult, how would you know if that person wasn't someone that they already knew, yeah, I assumed the worst of everything and I want you to understand you assume and you call CS and I have to deal with it. I'm gonna hurt you simple as that. Because like I said, I've been in this system as a kid who was taking advantage of And I know that not everybody in the system is bad, but I had lucked out in gotta bad set of family and I will not have that for my child. So if you see my child who was 7 years old, walking a dog and you feel some type of way, how about you? Talk to your God and you tell your guy to bring you a child. So you could feel some type of way about your child and not mine.
@@mahailiabrown3972 I sure hope they can do dishes by 56 years old 😆
Nothing against the plaintiff, but I can't imagine being a single mom of a seven-year-old and letting some random guy move in. Maybe that's judgemental of me but whatever.
That’s very dangerous
@@Nevaeh1 I agree. Women who do that are literally insane to me.
😮 she crazy
And without a lease! No background check 😢 poor kid
I agree
Single mother does NOT equate to negligent mother. I was a single mother. Never negligent.
Very true. I'm a single mom too and would never let my son walk a dog alone!
❤ You better say that. I too am a single mother was never neglectful of my children
Same here.
Did you do what she was doing?
I wasn't expecting that judgement. Wow!!!!!
Me either!
Any adult that says, "It's not fair!" has no business raising a child...
💯💯💯💯💯
I agree
Exactly!
What an idiotic comment.
most things as an adult aren’t fair. and clearly, the judge thought it wasn’t.
"I'm a single mother" = completely irrelevant 🙄
It actually is relevant in more ways than one
@@VJ-fm6vzBeing a single mother doesn't excuse the action. That's why it's irrelevant.
@VJ-fm6vz the only way it's relevant is that whoever says it is going to try to weaponize it.
When someone opens with that, I prepare myself to hear a list of excuses.
@VJ-fm6vz In this case it's entirely irrelevant
I raised my children on a homestead in the country. At 6 years old, they were not walking down the road alone. How in the heck would she let a 6 year go outside alone in NYC?
7 year old alone outside in Manhattan??? She passed out on pills and alcohol, for sure. She still looks drunk or drugged.
That's what I thought when she walked in
I think the reason the Judge ruled in her favor on that issue was because the plaintiff waited until after he moved out to call Child Protective Services. If he believed the child was truly in danger, he should have called immediately. So the complaint to Child Protective Services may have been warranted based on her issues, but the plaintiff did it for the purpose of harassing her.
Good thing people aren't convicted from your opinion. I suppose you can just look at a guy and tell if he's guilty.
I entirely agree, yes the plaintiff was vindictive BUT the defendant is an incredibly negligent mother. That child is far too young to be left alone like that without supervision.
jesus, judgemental cow much???
He ABSOLUTELY sent that letter!!!
THE DEFENDANT IS A TOTAL SLEAZE BAG ...
😮💩💩
How do we know that it wasn't the other room mate? There was another man renting from her too.
I don’t think so because he would’ve been dumb enough to admit it like he did everything else
Absolutely. You can tell he's lying because he answered her question with a question.
"did you write that letter!?"
"Did I write the letter?"
Beth you are correct on that one. That’s Exactly what I said
Even the judge said the lady shouldn't be letting her child walk the dog alone at that age. The judge was even like wtf when she heard that but then found in the defendants favor??? I'm shocked. He should have called earlier and not admitted he did it out of spite.
because it’s questionable. not ABUSE. she doesn’t deserve to get her kid taken away or lose out on work! he didn’t call earlier because it wasn’t the worst thing in the world lol. even when he called, they also decided it wasn’t the worst thing in the world. there children who are ACTUALLY abused out here.
"I'm filing a $5,000 counterclaim because he called CPS on me but I don't want to talk about the fact that he called CPS on me." LOL!
Defendant swung open those courtroom doors like she was walking into a saloon, I thought I was watching an episode of Gunsmoke
Haha! 😂😂
It's not defamation because it's true.
BUT because he didn't call at the time of the incident, therefore voiding his concern for the child for a month, it's vindictive and as the judge said, using the system by manipulation for his benefit.
That’s not the standard for what constitutes defamation. Truthful statements are, by definition, not defamatory. The fact that he is being vindictive or not is irrelevant. If he lied or exaggerated, then that’s different.
@@josephblake5629 exactly as I said. Not defamation
As the judge said, the fact that CPS came out the same day as the report was made means that he told them A WHOLE LOT MORE than just the story we heard in court. The fact that CPS found her to be a fit parent means that he obviously lied to them, which is definitely defamation.
@@rezotydnic If it’s not defamation, then the judge should have not have awarded damages. She was counterclaiming for defamation. Being vindictive alone is not a cause for action.
@@Donna-u7f That’s pure speculation.
I don’t agree with the judgement at all. He admits it was vindictive and sure it wasn’t right, but even she admits that did actually happen. So where’s the defamation?
It's mostly defamation because he admitted to doing it in retaliation to not receiving the security deposit. It also happened a month prior and didn't call until it benefited him. Had he called the same week and he didn't have an ulterior motive for the call, she might have over looked it.
It’s defamation if it’s done vindictively. Because he chose to wait several months to make the call after he wasn’t being paid, it’s clear that it wasn’t done for the well-being of the child.
How long he took has nothing to do with defamation
Ok Boomer.
And she’s not taking any accountability for it and not wanting it to be mentioned when she counter-sued BECAUSE of it lol
Judhe Judy would never. This is outrageous. She admitted to it, so how is it defamatory
It’s defamation if it’s done maliciously. It would not have been defamation if he had very quickly made a call, but because he made the call four months later in response to her withholding the money means he did so vindictively. I’m not saying what she did is right but law cares about motivation and he did not make that call because he cared about the child, he did it with the intention of hurting her
Lies, or malicious truths. I could be a recovering alcoholic and we get into a beef , so you call my employer and tell them i had a history of public intoxication and DUIS which leads to me getting fired. You didn’t lie but you were slanderous and malicious. I can sue you.
Because it was with malicious intent. He was not actually concerned about the child, or he would've called when it happened not a month later after she with held his security deposit. He even admitted that he did it to be vindictive.
@@GateKeeperShow It's not slander. It's the truth.
@@aliyahf9104 It doesn't matter. He reported the truth. If she doesn't like it should have returned his money in a timely fashion.
The judge ruled correctly. He only called services out of spite, not because he cared about the child.
I agree with you, @danielleconnolly1224! It appears to me also that the Plaintiff was absolutely uncaring about the child and only called CPS out of spite!
it shouldn't even matter if he didn't report lies 🤦 and he should of gotten twice the amount of the deposit since she just didn't return it to get back at him 🤦
I disagree with the verdict. He may have called to be vindictive, but he didn't lie on her.
@sandylane5498 He did lie on her! They would not have cone out for a one time mistake. He definitely beefed up that phone call. Look at that nasty letter he sent to her employer about her. What does getting her fired have to do with the well-being of the child? He admitted he was being vindictive. She definitely should have had cps called on her, but when the action happened. Had she given him the money, he would not have called.
Nope! I disagree. I believe he spared her in court and could have said more, which is why she didn’t want the details discussed. He wanted to call cps all along but his situation with her motivated him even more. He allowed the judge to bully him and make him feel guilty. Judge was not fair. Based on the little I heard, she is a neglectful parent!
I don’t know about this ruling. Even the judge said the mother shouldn’t have her child outside alone in Manhattan while she’s passed out drunk. The timing of the call was not great, I’ll give her that. If anything this should’ve been a wash and neither side wins. To give her thousands of dollars reinforces that her behavior was ok. Child Protective Services may have closed the case, but it doesn’t mean nothing bad happened. They provide services and the goal is the keep the family together. They wouldn’t have had it open 60 days of nothing was going on
You do realize he admitted that he did it to be vindictive, right?
@@oldageisdumbyou do realize that she left her 7 year old with a stranger right?
@@PeopleRTheProblem What does that have to do with anything? You are missing the point. The point is that he wasn’t going to report it until she withheld his deposit. When she did that he used cps as a weapon. The legitimacy of the claim doesn’t matter, it’s what he did and he admitted it.
Drunk?
@@oldageisdumb so because he did she’s allowed to break the law again and keep his deposit? What law is that?
There’s so many ppl having kids when they shouldn’t be.
The judgment was so bad. First she past out and didn’t take care of her kid and on top of that she let him walk a dog outside without supervision someone could’ve kidnapped the kid.
People is feeling sorry for her ! What about the safety of the child . I’m not sympathetic to her.
💯💯💯💯
I am with you! 100%
The judge is a piece of crap. She was looking for any reason to make him pay her, even though, (She was passed out on pills and alcohol).
I have no sympathy for her. shes a sneak. and an unfit mother.
I agree.
Wrong. That lady needed to be investigated.
she already was. unfounded.
Hot mess on aisle 9!
😂
That woman is on drugs
Possibly alcohol as well
Definitely.
Judge was dead wrong on this on! You could tell there was something off with that lady. Her defense was she was tired and took a sleeping pill, but it was early enough to know your 7 year old child is out walking your dog? Shes an addict or a functioning addict, something is way off. Yes it wrong for the dude to do what he did, but I think it was justified, whether out of spite or to get his money back or whatever. Doesnt change the fact something very off with that woman. Every single time she was asked a question by the judge she would half laugh like it wasnt relevant or beneath her or something. Just odd. Plus 30 seconds in to his testimoney she was already interrupting or trying to. This one was a weird one for me.
You're not a cop, are you?
I completely agree and the judge knowing the woman is wrong to allow a child to walk a dog at night in Manhattan glossed over this fact because he said it might have been vindictive and she now no longer cares about the safety of the kid but how terrible he was using the system to get his money and report this woman who's guilty of abuse but somehow he's worse? WTF
I believe she takes a sleeping pill and drinks every night is why that poor child is walking the dog
I totally agree.
Law student here:
This woman gives me a headache. She admits to several of the complaints and basically destroys her own case except for the defamation of character.
She admits to leaving her child out alone at night in a high crime area. She admits to holding on to the deposit and spending it. She admits to breaking the law. I can see why she lost her South Africa job.
As for the double jeopardy, she doesn’t understand how the courts work. ACS holding a hearing is not the same as a full on court hearing. The court can take ACS recommendations but it doesn’t count as double jeopardy.
Double Jeopardy only attaches when you're charged and convicted with a crime. She was accused and investigated for neglect. According to ACS, there were no founded accusations, thus no charges. No charges, no conviction, no double jeopardy.
That's not even this type of court!
😂 I love it when people try to act smarter than they really are.
FYI: Double Jeopardy only attaches in CRIMINAL CASES, not civil or administrative proceedings.
Damn Harvey. Went for Dina Lohan on the sly 😂 You and Douglass are the kings of throwing Shady 😂
Looks like half the dudes eyebrows gave him 30 days notice too🤣🤣
Show us your face pic
Hay-Ooooohh!
😂😂😂😂😂
Why is everyone including the judge hung up on him saying vindictive when everything he said was true and before he used that word even the judge thought what she did was wrong and needed to be checked out......I'm just guessing but I think her sleeping pill is Xanax and a glass of wine....nobody in their right mind lets a 7 year old walk their dog alone in Manhattan or lets them play outside with nobody watching and so what if he's being vindictive it was still true and cps needed to be called... This is why she's a tv judge!
Because he called ACS out of spite, for not getting his security deposit returned. Not because he actually cares about the child's welfare. He called a month later. I'm pretty sure he wrote that letter to her employer.
He is vindictive and deserved his punishment. He's out a total of $3000 bc he's an AHole
@@michaelcarver7693doesn’t matter. The allegation was still TRUE!!! Also, I’m sure he spared her and didn’t mention most of the neglect he witnessed. This is why he wanted to move out!!
@@michaelcarver7693 You need to focus on what's true and what can be proven, not feeling. Stop simping for women.
He admitted to doing it out of spite ( he said being vindicated)...smdh
He said vindictive not vindicated.
But he wasn't wrong for doing it either. That woman has problems.
Judge Judy would have said "oh word? You don't want me to discuss it? Your case is dismissed"
The fact the defendant keeps interrupting the judge and not wanting the ACS case to be mentioned is because 1. She lacks complete accountability for her neglect of her child and ACS SHOULD get involved again because she’s a risk to be a repeat offender due to this unaccountability and 2. She’s ashamed but not because of how bad of a mother is but because she doesn’t want OTHER people to know how neglectful she is. She has no intention of changing and wants it to stay hidden.
You realize cps dropped the charges against her, right? And that he admitted he did it out of retaliation?
Cps has let a lot of terrible cases slip through the cracks over the years…. 😢 this does not verify that this mother is without fault.
Right talking about double jeopardy 😒
Listen Mary, the plaintiff filed with ACS out of spite. This woman lived for a long time in S. Africa and over there crime is pretty low and like Europe 7 year olds do walk outside by themselves without having to worry about getting mugged, assaulted or killed. Before making stupid and erroneous comments educate yourself about everything associated with the case.
@@XFiorentti You mentioned wanting people to educate themselves and yet you don’t know that South Africa has one of the highest murder rates in the world? It’s riddled with crime in general, far worse than the U.S. Where are you even getting that?
Why would you move in a total stranger with a kid! Total lack of judgment 😮
No support, need money to feed the kids. Nothing wrong with that, since it has been done in America for over 500 hundred years.
EXACTLY 💯💯💯💯
The way the defendant was so annoyingly defensive and arguing with the judge I would have dismissed her case at 8:50 and she sure as hell doesn’t deserve to get rewarded.
There’s no way JM legally had the right to award the defamation. There’s no proof he said anything that was untrue, the defendant was clearly lying about many things to stretch the truth at least. He did the right thing and called cps and filed a complaint because she made poor choices regarding her son. Seriously letting him walk the dog alone at 6 years old in NYC!!!!!
If something had happened to the child everyone would be crying, "why didn't someone call CPS". JM dropped the ball on this one
Yeah. She completely overlooked the facts there. Dude had every right to call CPS, although it wasn't done in a timely manner.
BIG time
He even said why he didn't call sooner . It was because he wanted to be out first . Imagine calling and still living there or have your stuff there .
It's because of frivolous calls to CPS like this that real cases of abuse and neglect get overlooked or ignored.
Do none of you realize he admitted he did it to be vindictive?
Both sides were horrible at presenting their cases. Him leaving that text out and admitting he did…smh he got what he deserved
I like how Kimberly kind of staggered into the quart room. 0:58
I like how you can't spell
I thought she staggered, too!😊
@@stephaniemayfield4573I thought so too!😅
Her first words “i’m a single mother.” Eye roll. That doesn’t make you special. Most mothers are single mothers these days. It isnt a handy cap, an excuse, or an anomaly. I cannot stand it when women use it as a crutch.
"Most mothers are single mothers these days."
[citation needed]
@@MrMatteNWk yes, i agree. Most mothers are single mothers these days. Thank you for reiterating my point.
@@danir6695 That's not how that works.
@@MeSpawn297 oook 👌
And many single mothers know they are going to be single mothers when they get pregnant
She seems like a manipulative woman i mean he did it cuz he had a grudge but letting a 7yr old walk the dog alone thats crazy irresponsible
It's not defamation if it actually happened! Yes, he was completely wrong to call only after she started giving him the run around, but she was wrong too and should not have been awarded that money!! She's no victim!!
I absolutely agree
The child was not in danger and it happened one time . Essentially her son went outside to walk the dog and left his key to get back in lol . Thats not a danger to the child. Which is why the courts dismissed his claim
@@VANITYISFARE💯
@@VANITYISFAREyou are a fool if you think a child at 7, alone at night, locked out of the home is not in danger. Do you know how many children are abducted?
Clown.
Maybe not defamation but malicious use of the legal system is something you can sue for.
I have been a single mom. Nfw in hell id ever allow a male roommate in my house with small children. I never even let the men I dated come over to visit. Ever. Wow. You have to protect your kids.
I raised a boy and girl alone and I agree with you, I would have never let some stranger move in.
What? What is wrong with the judge? The 7 years old child was walking the dog alone at 7. Plaintiff is vindictive, but he also has a legit reason to call. This is how children gets abducted!
As the judge said, if he called EARLIER it would matter, but he waited until AFTER he left to call them. Meaning, he had actual proof during the time it happened, but afterwards, it was just words.
Naw he didn’t! If it was that important, it would not have taken him a month! The child walked his dog, so what!
If you are worried you call immediately. If you’re vindictive you hold onto it until you can use it against them. He even admitted it was vindictive. Did you watch before you commented?
IF he cared THAT bad , Y then did he wait a month to call ?
The sad thing if he did care about the child he would have called immediately
she thinks because shes a single mom and under stress as a single mom, the court would have leniency..... they dont GIVE A SHIT... you screw up as a parent after you prove youre capable to be a single parent..... eventually shes a single mom!
CPS needs to get involved .
Is that you, Karen?
They already did. Lol. Did you pay attention??
CPS did investigate and as usual ,they dropped the ball; Everything the plaintiff said about the defendant was True, she should've either lost custody of her child or they should've had a judge order her to go to rehab and take parenting classes ( she clearly has a substance abuse problem).
Are you deaf? Watch the entire video. I hate people who call child agencies on a mom purely out of spite. He deserved jail time for what he did to her and her son.
What have u been listening to????????????
Im judging this whole situation but its necessary. I have a 7 year old. I wouldn't let a strange man from Craiglist move into my home, me pop some "sleeping pills" (but ima take a guess and say alcohol was involved), and send my 7 year old outside alone at nighttime into the big city to walk the dog. On top of that, not even provide my child with a key to get inside our home and being so passed out that my child's incessant knocking at the door doesnt wake me up. Negligence. The man had full grounds to call CPS but the issue is that he waited a month+ later to do so and did it out of spite instead of truly doing it for the wellbeing of the child when the incident occured
I agree!
Yea judge good job, make her feel validated about they actions, she gets to emotionally invested
I had good parents but I had a back door to our house in my bedroom.
I would sneak out at night and quietly come back home from the bowling alley!
Sorry, Judge, this was not a fair ruling. I would like to advocate for the child and no matter when the call came in it was well needed to be investigated!
Judge Judy would never!!!! Its bot defamation if its true.... she was madder at the plaintiff than the defendant who admitted to having a 7 year old locked outside walking a dog at night. I would understand her being mad at the plaintiff but paying the defendant for reporting behavior that could have harmed her child? Ridiculous!!! JM rules on emotions too often
Milian didn't use any form of law for this judgement. Im disappointed in her on this one
I don’t disagree with him calling Child Protective Services, I just disagree with him doing it out of spite. She needs to do a lot better.
That’s a terrible verdict. She didn’t prove that he made defamatory statements. The judge assumed that he did, based on his admission that the report waa vindictive.
But the defendant never actually gave any examples of other things that he told CPS beyond what actually happened, which would absolutely be a requirement in order to rule that it was defamatory.
That was an emotional decision.
He got awfully sheepish when JM asked him about omitting that text. Did he think the timeline for his call to ACS wouldn't come out?
Does this judge actually know what defamation of character is? Obviously not.... She is a joke to the judicial system
She's totally trying to avoid the question of why her child was outside walking the dog alone. She should have been put on notice that CPS will be checking up on her. She's too old to not know better.
Defamation of character is what she did to herself. Sounds to me like he was just pointing out the facts
He told them more than just that story. He obviously said a whole lot more otherwise they wouldn't have come the exact same day the report was made. The fact that CPS found her to be a fit parent means that he obviously grossly exaggerated or lied about her.
If you allow your 7 year old child to go outside, walking a dog, ALONE!!! …. You’re definitely a bad parent.
While being passed out on pills & alcohol …
Defendant needs to go to AA. She clearly moved the plaintiff in to get free childcare He should've called CPS on her for leaving that child with strangers.
The Defendant is definitely a negligent mother!
I wouldn’t leave my purse alone with a tenant and she leaves her child? Also, she just moved to the states, who is this “friend” she let watch her child ??? So many kids are abused because of dumb parents
Are you freaking serious?! That call was absolutely called for! She is a bad mother! How did the judge make this call. This woman is a complete liar straight from the beginning! Wow!
Because he admitted to doing it maliciously and that the child was never in danger.
JM annoyed me with this ruling. Who let’s their 7 year old roam Manhattan alone with a dog. That ACS call could have saved her child’s life - it was probably a wake up call for the defendant
Acs saves no child, they’re not hated for no reason and you know that and you know they are no good.
@@ClaryPamelasounds like you have some experience dealing with child protective services
Yaaaasss! The perfect judgment. 👌🏾
The defendant should absolutely lose custody of that little boy. That child is far too young to be left on his own without parental supervision. "There are lines people should never cross" well that my dear includes allowing strangers around your 7 yo child and leaving him alone when you are passed out drunk.
Shame on him. Sorry he was wrong. He hurt not only the lady but the child. He had no remorse. 😥
The reason the defendant won this ruling is simple; the plaintiff admitted that he called because he was being vindictive, he would never have called otherwise. Regardless of whether you agree with her parenting, it is illegal and punishable. There was a 60 day investigation held which concluded that she is a completely fit parent. Stop attacking her for poor judgement and making a mistake. If this was something happening on a regular basis I can assure you CPS would not have deemed her to be a fit parent. Stop thinking you know better than CPS and stop defending and supporting someone who didn't have a problem with it until he didn't get his deposit back. He has wasted valuable resources and time from children who are actually suffering in dangerous situations and conditions.
CPS is trash. They pass unfit people all the time.
Look up how many times they have been sued or dragged into court over neglect and wrongful death, then continue to stand behind your statement.
Damn, I was not expecting that judgement, but I understand her anger towards the plaintiff because too many people take advantage of the system to be vindictive and it needs to stop.
She should have started with, I’m an irresponsible mother
😂😂😂 👍🏼
She has issue but he’s a terrible human being too. Trying to rip a kid away from his home over 1 incident. Like the judge said, he HAD to have lied and said more bad things were happening for them to come out. Disgusting.
This defendant is sad and disgusting for letting her small child walk her dog by himself.🙄 It doesn't matter where they live no city is safe and crime is everywhere.
Plus she was drunk & full of pills passed out in bed!
Wow! How unprofessional & crappy of a judge, she's turned into! That woman is an irresponsible mother. The mother is the victim now?! Wait! She spent the security deposit which is illegal & has been refusing to pay it back, again illegal but let's ignore that because somehow the mother is the victim?! Judy is totally off her rocker! That letter proves that mother did someone else wrong or she is making it all up to gain pity for her Pity Party. Judy rants & rages over the Child Services being called which anyone would have called them! Judy, however, doesn't bother raging about how that mother basically stole that money & keeps avoiding paying him. Why not? A woman's suffering is more than a man's suffering? Blind justice, my behind! That mother is lucky that guy wasnt a child predator! She just leaves a 7yr old to wander the streets?! That mom sure knew how to play Judy like a fiddle 🎻. You can't be a fair judge when you have biases, Judy.
What a jerk...he looks like a real piece of work. Great judgement JM.
Plaintiff looks like a junkie & she should lose her kid . He never defamed her , she admitted to his accusations which means there was no defamation , JM was in her feelings with this case.
Exactly
@@4CQueenYou mixed up the plaintiff and the defendant.
Having gone through dealing with ACS myself. Years ago it doesn't take months and months in months. She's sort of milking it. It is in convenient and embarrassing, but if you've got nothing to hide, it's soon goes away.
You cannot get deleted texts from your carrier. lol.
I didn’t think that was true either… I think they can be subpoenaed, but the carriers take forever
She needs to get help and the child may need ACS to stay involved. She seems a little high right now. I pray for the safety of this child.
I feel that even though the call to CPS was malicious, as long as he didn't tell any lies to CPS, he should be in the clear. It seems like this woman does have issues that should be monitored. A 7 year old walking a dog alone in Manhattan while Mommy go ni-night is not ok.
Ok Boomer.
You have kids don't you? And you drink and take pills, everything this woman does while watching her kid...you probably even pass out like her during the day....why else are you so invested in this case about someone being turned into cps for being shit parents like yourself!
I agree - why is it malicious when he told the truth - and he is entitled to his money
@Estesvideos I agree
He sent that letter and maliciously called CPS. Boy, what a catch!
I don't know why the judge got so mad at the man calling child services that lady was passed out on drugs while her child was outside in New York when he or she could have been kidnapped at any time
Because when you make false allegations.. you take resources and help away from ACTUAL abuse victims.
@@Aceofwolvesit wasn’t false. She admitted to it!
I feel for her. I had a jealous neighbor across the street call DHS. She stated multiply lies. She was mad her hubby would constantly come over & make passes at me. I shut down everyone of them. She still wanted to ruin my life. My next door neighbor even defended me on the baseless accusations. The case was dismissed. It subjected my daughter to traumatic evaluations & put ne through stress.
she even says it's not a lie though, she admits to what was reported
Well, I think he was nervous and said yes to being vindictive but honestly I think his only mistake was waiting to call. Sounds like this happened right after he moved in and I can understand not calling immediately. He should have though! Sure he did it late and after there were issues, but it still was a legit problem. She looked hung over even in court & I’m surprised the judge awarded her a dollar
Ok Boomer.
@@martinboyle9163 ok gender confused.
😂😂😂
@jasoncook, I agree
The plaintiff's defense against the countersuit, is that he only reported the truth. And that gets verified either by Protective services in the report, or with admissions against interest by the defendent. He gets to be as vindictive as he wants, as long as he does not lie. The judge really needs to see the final report from Children's services to see what they were investigating and what they found before she can come to a conclusion about defamation. We have the malicious intent, and have damages, but I am having trouble finding his false statement here.
Oh the single mother what a hero🙄 JM more excuses defend a terrible mom passed out 7yr old locked out at night! Modern women 🤦🏽♂️
👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼
This case just pissed me off all the way around....I love Judge Milian so much, she is so Just!❤ fair
Plaintiff shouldn't have given ANY texts to the Judge.
The single mother thing. We don't care😒
You're supposed to keep the deposit in a separate account
I am very happy the judge found in her favor.
I do believe he sent that letter.
Yes, she owed him his money, but his vendetta was uncalled for.
Defendant is a dangerous drunk, who lies.
How would you even know that based on this alone? Don't look ignorant
@@darlenerider4146I have alcoholics in my family. From my own experience she def looks like a heavy alcoholic and needs serious help
@@onyxmadison321 I agree. That's why she was passed out with her child outside.
I agree she was about to say she had drinks but paused and said took some sleeping pills
@@annetteroman2331yup. Caught herself
Now look at you, owing 2200 🤣🤣
😂😂😂
So sry for the child😢
Ah ha ha ha great verdict! Finally some rough justice that feels like justice! 😂
He absolutely sent that letter
Whoo hoo! Great episode! - Pay the lady!!!
The defendant has a drinking 🍷 problem. She showed up to court drunk. She's passed out, while her 7 year old son is in the street, walking a dog 🐕. She needed Department of Children Services called on her. Whenever a woman starts off saying "I'm a single mother" I immediately know, she's getting ready to make up some Bull S**T excuses for her behavior.
👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼