They took advantage of that gentleman, plain and simple, and the defendant was straight-up LYING when he said he didn’t give him a $1,600 check. What kind of answer is: *“I don’t recall a check”?* Either you did, or you didn’t! His body language even gave it away.
I agree with you completely, but Plaintiff had no proof. If he had that check, he would have won his case hands down! Defendant could deny the check because Plaintiff idiotically gave it back to Defendant. I feel sorry for Plaintiff for getting ripped off and for still thinking the Defendant is a "great guy". HUH?
You are so right to mention the body language. Nonverbal communication is key. He started patting the sweat off his head as soon she brought it up. Of course you can't rule based off body language, but it definitely gave reason to probe a little deeper into the defendant's story.
@@fjccommish LOL. Not very street smart, huh?Cuz anyone familiar with running game can see how crooked these guys are from a mile away. No paper trail at all (despite being a businessman). Can't remember if he wrote the defendant a bad check for $1600 or not (who would forget writing a check for that amount? No bill of sale to prove they sold the car for that little amount? And why would he go through all of that trouble to retrieve the car from the city just to sell it for no profit? Why would the plaintiff even agree to that? Obviously there had to be something in it for the defendant. He certainly didn't do the plaintiff a favor. I wish the plaintiff would've kept a copy of that bad check.
i disagree . the plaintiff said that the defendant was not a bad guy and if he really believed they scammed him then he would not say that . plaintiff seems to be unreliable with his testimony because he never made it clear to the judge or the defendant as to what the exact agreement was and i think he just came up with the 1600 dollar story when he was planning his lawsuit . and who is gonna give the check back without getting the cash in exchange ? plaintiff lied .
@@marleonetti7 I think you could be wrong too lets see... ' I dont recall a check" is proof for not being completely honest. if he never gave a check he will say" No I NEVER gave a check there was no check." we use I dont recall so we can get out of the situation without any criminal charge, FOR EXAMPLE : if defendant had bank copy or a picture or any kind of proof like video footage after he said I don’t recall a check , then he can easily say '''oooh now I remember it slipped my mind'. Remember politicians suddenly 'remembering' things after a video surfaces and could never be prosecuted for lying because forgetting is not a crime. on the contrary if he had said " I never gave a check " and was later proven by the defendant he actually did give a check... he could be in trouble for lying under oath and lying to the court which is a criminal offence. he might be naive enough to give the check back if the guy says you know what my bad that account didn’t have money, give the check i will just give you cash tomorrow ...... you could be right too . I am just saying this is a possibility ...
i disagree . the plaintiff said that the defendant was not a bad guy and if he really believed they scammed him then he would not say that . plaintiff seems to be unreliable with his testimony because he never made it clear to the judge or the defendant as to what the exact agreement was and i think he just came up with the 1600 dollar story when he was planning his lawsuit . and who is gonna give the check back without getting the cash in exchange ? plaintiff lied .
nobody is gonna sign over their car to someone else just because they paid the impound fees . cmon judge , common sense tells u that the 400 profit they admitted they got for selling his car should go to him because if not then the defendant got a free 400 bucks from the plaintiff , not fair .
It was.. I wonder if she rewatches these cases. She fell for the lie.. but she has been doing this for years.. his tone got loud his body language spoke in values. He didn't recall a check.. not No why would I give him a check if I getting the car for free? Come on
The condescending manner those defendants and the judge spoke to the plaintiff was terrible. They were all laughing at him, not with him and you could see the humiliation on his face. They were all arrogant. I understand that he didn’t have the evidence, but they scammed him.
She always does that when they all look alike. The plaintiff will never win in this particular setup so she laughs and giggles and demeans the plaintiff with the defendants. She already knows who she will allow to win in her courtroom. SMDH
I think she did pick up on it because you could tell she felt really bad ruling against him, she apologized to him and you could see it all over her face she didn't like it but her hands were tied, it's not her fault she had to rule that way. He had 2 major issues with his case 1. He had absolutely zero evidence to back up his version of how it went down 2. When dealing in these contract cases you have to show there was a agreement BEFORE the deal is made. He would have to prove they had a certain agreement for an amount before giving him the car, that's just how these things work. I've seen it countless times on people's court and judge judy. But he killed himself unfortunately at the end there when he said a little bit after he gave him the car he started to think he didn't get a good, fair deal and then hoped they would do the right thing. That's not a law binding contract and, like the Judge said, actually backs up the defendants version because they said he did the same thing. So he was dead in the water after that unfortunately. I feel awful for him because he definitely seems lost or confused and easily manipulated and I definitely think the defendants knew EXACTLY what they were doing and did him dirty and took advantage of him and that's horrible especially considering he's suppose to be a "special family friend", according to them. Bottom line is, yes it's super messed up but legally there's nothing the judge could do for him. 😔
no i dont think so . i thought that at first because the plaintiff seems a bit slow but as his testimony unfolded i could see how this happened , because the plaintiff seems like a guy who will enter into an agreement and then claim later that he did not understand and theres not much u can do with guys like that and i think the defendants tried to kind of explain that to the judge .
These two men conned the Plaintiff 😥 not sure why Judge Milian couldn't tell. The Defendant is a fast talker. "He's special to the family". One day if he's lucky enough, he'll make it to his golden years. Hopefully someone doesn't around and con him like he conned this poor gentleman!
could be they conned him, but either way i dont really feel sorry for him ,because he seems to have a lax attitude. does not pay his tickets, then comes to the judge without any evidence. And he was warned by the defendant what would happen.
I don’t know. The way he was saying in the beginning that the car is causing him so much problems. It sounded like he wanted to get rid of it. Any means possible.
I feel you, but if you make it to this guy’s age and you get conned this way, then you get what you deserve. He didn’t get conned. He sold it to the guy for what it costs to release it, so he wouldn’t worry about it. He had no evidence of this check he supposedly got, which typically means it didn’t happen.
It’s unfortunate that the plaintiff didn’t keep that check only way he should’ve turned over that check to him was if he was gonna put $1600 in his hand
Wtf is wrong with the judge? That wasn’t a fair ruling. She could’ve had the plaintiff call the check cashing to verify his account of the check bouncing.
He walked in trying to intimidate the plaintiff . He already told you that he is the one who started talking to the plaintiff about how he won’t be able to afford his tickets and he basically conned him out of his car . That’s so wrong and him steady telling him to come work for him sounds a little disrespectful like he’s a boy or servant . Anyways it’ll come back around on them . And they know damn well they sold it for the $800
no i think the litigants are just completely different personalities and y'all got it twisted . the plaintiff is just soft spoken and may be a bit slow and the defendant is a guy who has a different look and he is normal and not slow . but i am bothered by the fact that the judge did not order the defendants to pay him the 400 profit they made on the car .
This is horrible. I think they both took advantage of this man. I'm sure they made some money on that sale. And if he's so close, at least give him something.
When someone tells me don't worry about it, that's when I worry it. They didn't sell that car for no $450. They know that car is worth more that $450.They took advantage of him. Y'all won't be giggling when karma kicks you in the butt. The sins of the parents...
Oh no he sold it for $450. I have no doubt about that. He sold it to them for what it would cost him to get it released and who knows what’s wrong with it? He didn’t want the burden anymore. The defendants probably sold it for $800/$900 though.
I am not amused by the antics of these two defendants. They are full of themselves and they are dishonest - shysters!!! Very disappointed in this verdict.
One thing I've noticed is a lot of the cases on The People's Court seem to be a bit of a circus. Everything and everyone is all over the place with no structure or organization to the flow of the cases. Judge Milian so often just lets these people ramble on and on, talk loudly, and act like a nut inside her courtroom. Whereas judges like Judge Judy's cases are more structured and nowhere near as playful from the plaintiffs or defendant side.
“They sold the car for the same amount and split it.”, the main defendant then lost money on the deal and it wasn’t even brought up. I hoped the judge would have caught that. She got it wrong this time.
WHEN will Curt learn the difference between "take" and "bring?" He always says, for example, the "plaintiff 'brought' his car to the defendant..." And today, he says, "...so he's taking him 'here...'" You BRING something here; you TAKE something somewhere else.
I believe the Defendant's story. It would have been wise on his part to have made a copy of the $1600 bad check. The Defendant clearly took advantage of the Plaintiff because he considered him dumb, or someone he could get away with doing that to, despite the Defendant's claim of liking him and wanting to continue a friendly relationship with him. He's no friend if he did what the Plaintiff says he did. The Plaintiff clearly needs a "babysitter" because it doesn't appear he can survive in this world on his own without running across another unscrupulous person sometime in the future wanting to get the same idea in his head.
@@NubianP6 agreed! They are crooks and I don’t believe any of what they said .. it’s so obvious they played that man and how she doesn’t see through their BS is beyond me 🤯 😳🤥🤔
When you pickup your car at the pier, you need license, registration and insurance card. You don't need the title. A 98 Mazda what? How many miles on it? I think the defendant did give Mr Johnson a bum check. How's he supposed to prove it? 😭😭😭😭
The defendant gave the man 375-450 but co defendant sold the car and split the same amount of money ? So the defendant is saying he was out 225? Stop it!
How are you gonna call the man delusional and then say he's still part of the family? Legally there may not be standing ground for the plaintiff, but morally the defendants messed up. They took advantage of him and are laughing about it. It's gross.
Who else thinks the two clowns offered him a ride home cause they know dang well that they scammed that plaintiff and wanted to make it right, such a shame 😔
Plaintiff told the judge he gave it back to the defendant after it was denied when he tried cashing it & was told by the defendant “don’t worry about it, you’ll get your money”.
I don't believe that the defendant sold the car for only $400 + change. Both of them sound and look like con men. No way they wouldn't have tried to make money from that car. The plaintiff needed someone to assist him gather the evidence and prepared better for the trail. At least show up in court with the bounced check !
Why didn't the judge give the plaintiff time to contact his bank to see if they had a record of the check? Or ask for proof that the defendant only sold it for $450? It would seem the defendant was lying because at first he said he didn't know how much he paid him for the car, although he had only paid $375 the cost of the fees to get it out of impound, then they said they had paid him $450 for the car and then his witness said they sold it for the same amount he gave them (ie $450 yet we already know they only gave them $375) and then they claim they split the money, yet the plaintiff said they had sold it for $800. So if they hadn't offered $1600, where did the plaintiff get that number from? It all sounds dodgy, so why didn't the judge give him more time or simply give him the $800 or the remaining $1225, because this case was based on the entire hear-say of the two defendants...
I wished they told us the model of the car in question. It seems unlikely that a 1998 mazda would be worth anywhere near $1600 + the cost of the tickets that the defendants paid off, even at the time of this case (2018? 2019?).
nobody is gonna sign over their car to someone else just because they paid the impound fees . cmon judge , common sense tells u that the 400 profit they admitted they got for selling his car should go to him because if not then the defendant got a free 400 bucks from the plaintiff , not fair .
This is a hard one. Either party could be telling the truth. JM simply couldn't rule in plaintiff's favor with zero proof that anything he was claiming was true. I do wish she'd asked for the bill of sale from the defendants from when they sold the car though.
Judge could not rule in plaintiff’s favor . Her hands were tied legally because he had no PROOF of a check. She can’t just takes his word and the burden of proof is on him, not the defendant.
What is a 98 Mazda worth, cars in New York don’t even last 20years. Plaintiff story keeps changing, I think he onset memory loss because he was all over the place and couldn’t make himself clear. Probably why the issue came up defendant, it sounds like a misunderstanding on both parts . People won’t agree but once again a 20 some odd year car in NY is a rust bucket and only worth the $100 buck you may get from the wrecker for parts and scrap.
there is no way, that guy would give $400 to be paid and then split $400 with his worker, meaning losing $200, those 2 are scammers. The plaintiff also was trying to make some money out of this situation.
Why are the comments saying that the defendants are even remotely likeable? They knowingly screwed this guy and then say their kids miss him to try and further manipulate him... wtf's likeable about them
Take a picture for everything you need to prove. The plaintiff or someone he knew, could have snapped a simple picture of the cheque that he couldn't cash! It would have had solved all this by showing who was lying?
People who move their hands like that when they talk like the defendant did are liars. They move them in such a flamboyant way like that to distract you from the fact they're being dishonest
Everybody boo-whoing for this plaintiff when he filed a court case and showed up with no evidence. A plaintiff with no evidence is either a liar or an idiot. Take your pick.
First the Blue book value for the vehicle should have being given,next comment comes from some not pleasant,I feel that the plaintiff was generous with him ,the other who collected the car known it was a piece of junk and sold it off quickly.
Sometimes she really makes me sick her decisions are wrong at times and I hate the way she makes her decisions. I don't like her at times she was way wrong on this one..... #yougotitwrongthistime"judge"
Bit of a tough one here, the Plaintiff seems very forgetful and vague at times and the defendants seem like nice guys but may have taken advantage of him. And just hope if they did rip him off they will realise their error and pay him what he deserves.
Regardless of what truly happened, none of them have proof supporting their statements. Unfortunately, the plaintiff has no proof against the defendants. The judge can’t defend anyone because of the lack of information before her. People should think before they do anything, including deals done with family, friends, co-workers, etc.
Jesus Christ loves you and died on the cross for you. Give your life to him and follow him. Repent and accept him as your Lord and savior. Talk to him and cry out to him. He loves us so much more than we could ever comprehend. God bless you all.🙏❤
Wow! Out of all the Gods and deities some people choose to worship, yours is the one true and real one? You think it has nothing to do with your parents most probably indoctrinating you from birth?Or has nothing to do with your nationality or geographical location? Seriously. If you're a white American - you're most probably Christian, if you're from Saudi Arabia -you're probably Muslim, if you're from India - you're probably Hindu, etc... Instead of spamming the comments section pushing your beliefs on people , why don't you actually get out and help people in need within your community? I often find people like you pushing your beliefs, claiming to be 'good Christians' are such hypocrites as you do very little that isn't self serving to help anyone else... Stop being sanctimonious and go and do something to help someone in need. Or do you only do good deeds when others notice? Ugh.
Divorce is never the way out, My wife and I have been having issues before I sort out help from a spiritual adviser, i wasn't going to let my marriage of 18years crash.
Totally wrong They definitely took advantage of him I’m disappointed in Judge Milan on this case Definitely the VERDICT WAS UNJUST!!! I will pray about this case, and I pray they ask for forgiveness to him Older gentleman and make it right
I knew the planet was out of gas the moment this case started. Milian is predictable all the time with respect to these cases involving black litigants. It's really sad.
They took advantage of that gentleman, plain and simple, and the defendant was straight-up LYING when he said he didn’t give him a $1,600 check. What kind of answer is: *“I don’t recall a check”?* Either you did, or you didn’t! His body language even gave it away.
I agree with you completely, but Plaintiff had no proof. If he had that check, he would have won his case hands down! Defendant could deny the check because Plaintiff idiotically gave it back to Defendant. I feel sorry for Plaintiff for getting ripped off and for still thinking the Defendant is a "great guy". HUH?
You are so right to mention the body language. Nonverbal communication is key. He started patting the sweat off his head as soon she brought it up. Of course you can't rule based off body language, but it definitely gave reason to probe a little deeper into the defendant's story.
As he pats his head....
Took advantage how? They got the car out of tow, paid the fee. They sold it to get their money back. What advantage did they take?
@@fjccommish LOL. Not very street smart, huh?Cuz anyone familiar with running game can see how crooked these guys are from a mile away. No paper trail at all (despite being a businessman). Can't remember if he wrote the defendant a bad check for $1600 or not (who would forget writing a check for that amount? No bill of sale to prove they sold the car for that little amount? And why would he go through all of that trouble to retrieve the car from the city just to sell it for no profit? Why would the plaintiff even agree to that? Obviously there had to be something in it for the defendant. He certainly didn't do the plaintiff a favor. I wish the plaintiff would've kept a copy of that bad check.
Two clowns taking advantage of this elderly man........Shame on them....... karma will happen to them!!!
Exactly
i disagree . the plaintiff said that the defendant was not a bad guy and if he really believed they scammed him then he would not say that . plaintiff seems to be unreliable with his testimony because he never made it clear to the judge or the defendant as to what the exact agreement was and i think he just came up with the 1600 dollar story when he was planning his lawsuit . and who is gonna give the check back without getting the cash in exchange ? plaintiff lied .
@@marleonetti7 I think you could be wrong too lets see... ' I dont recall a check" is proof for not being completely honest. if he never gave a check he will say" No I NEVER gave a check there was no check." we use I dont recall so we can get out of the situation without any criminal charge, FOR EXAMPLE : if defendant had bank copy or a picture or any kind of proof like video footage after he said I don’t recall a check , then he can easily say '''oooh now I remember it slipped my mind'. Remember politicians suddenly 'remembering' things after a video surfaces and could never be prosecuted for lying because forgetting is not a crime. on the contrary if he had said " I never gave a check " and was later proven by the defendant he actually did give a check... he could be in trouble for lying under oath and lying to the court which is a criminal offence. he might be naive enough to give the check back if the guy says you know what my bad that account didn’t have money, give the check i will just give you cash tomorrow ...... you could be right too . I am just saying this is a possibility ...
Dude really called him delusional at the end. Damn scammer even got the judge
Shame on the defendant for scamming the plaintiff and trash talked about him. Hope they are no longer friends.
i disagree . the plaintiff said that the defendant was not a bad guy and if he really believed they scammed him then he would not say that . plaintiff seems to be unreliable with his testimony because he never made it clear to the judge or the defendant as to what the exact agreement was and i think he just came up with the 1600 dollar story when he was planning his lawsuit . and who is gonna give the check back without getting the cash in exchange ? plaintiff lied .
That man is lying! He took complete advantage of that older man
I wish the plaintiff would leave those snakes alone. They took advantage of him. They knew what they were doing.
This episode is sad to see that man really did love those 2 defendants and his family And they screwed him over
nobody is gonna sign over their car to someone else just because they paid the impound fees . cmon judge , common sense tells u that the 400 profit they admitted they got for selling his car should go to him because if not then the defendant got a free 400 bucks from the plaintiff , not fair .
@@marleonetti7 Sure they would depending on the value of the car. If they don't get it out right away, the fees are just going to keep increasing.
They took advantage of this man
Her ruling was all the way off!
It was.. I wonder if she rewatches these cases. She fell for the lie.. but she has been doing this for years.. his tone got loud his body language spoke in values. He didn't recall a check.. not No why would I give him a check if I getting the car for free? Come on
You don't rule based on feelings
WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE of a $1600 sale?
The condescending manner those defendants and the judge spoke to the plaintiff was terrible. They were all laughing at him, not with him and you could see the humiliation on his face. They were all arrogant. I understand that he didn’t have the evidence, but they scammed him.
I agree!!!
You need evidence for court, Tess
@@SnowWhiteTheU2 I said that he didn’t have the evidence.
She always does that when they all look alike. The plaintiff will never win in this particular setup so she laughs and giggles and demeans the plaintiff with the defendants. She already knows who she will allow to win in her courtroom. SMDH
Cause of yall comments I'm not even watching this case cause it's gone piss me off that the plaintiff lost this case 😂
THEN DON'T READ THE COMMENTS BEFORE WATCHING
Those two are con men .poor honey .😢I can’t see how she didn’t spot it a mile away 🙄
I heard several red flags 🚩 as soon as the other guy started talking
I think she did pick up on it because you could tell she felt really bad ruling against him, she apologized to him and you could see it all over her face she didn't like it but her hands were tied, it's not her fault she had to rule that way.
He had 2 major issues with his case
1. He had absolutely zero evidence to back up his version of how it went down
2. When dealing in these contract cases you have to show there was a agreement BEFORE the deal is made. He would have to prove they had a certain agreement for an amount before giving him the car, that's just how these things work. I've seen it countless times on people's court and judge judy. But he killed himself unfortunately at the end there when he said a little bit after he gave him the car he started to think he didn't get a good, fair deal and then hoped they would do the right thing. That's not a law binding contract and, like the Judge said, actually backs up the defendants version because they said he did the same thing. So he was dead in the water after that unfortunately.
I feel awful for him because he definitely seems lost or confused and easily manipulated and I definitely think the defendants knew EXACTLY what they were doing and did him dirty and took advantage of him and that's horrible especially considering he's suppose to be a "special family friend", according to them.
Bottom line is, yes it's super messed up but legally there's nothing the judge could do for him. 😔
@@sashabenoit1518 HOSEA 4:6
Nope.
no i dont think so . i thought that at first because the plaintiff seems a bit slow but as his testimony unfolded i could see how this happened , because the plaintiff seems like a guy who will enter into an agreement and then claim later that he did not understand and theres not much u can do with guys like that and i think the defendants tried to kind of explain that to the judge .
The defendant is a liar. And the witness is too. His sitting there wiping the sweat off his face let's me FURTHER know he's lying.
Why does she never look up the bluebook value DURING THE CASE like judy does?
These two men conned the Plaintiff 😥 not sure why Judge Milian couldn't tell. The Defendant is a fast talker. "He's special to the family". One day if he's lucky enough, he'll make it to his golden years. Hopefully someone doesn't around and con him like he conned this poor gentleman!
could be they conned him, but either way i dont really feel sorry for him ,because he seems to have a lax attitude. does not pay his tickets, then comes to the judge without any evidence. And he was warned by the defendant what would happen.
I agreed
I don’t know. The way he was saying in the beginning that the car is causing him so much problems. It sounded like he wanted to get rid of it. Any means possible.
Because he couldn’t prove it
I feel you, but if you make it to this guy’s age and you get conned this way, then you get what you deserve. He didn’t get conned. He sold it to the guy for what it costs to release it, so he wouldn’t worry about it. He had no evidence of this check he supposedly got, which typically means it didn’t happen.
Jackson you made this man turn you into the family pet.
It’s unfortunate that the plaintiff didn’t keep that check only way he should’ve turned over that check to him was if he was gonna put $1600 in his hand
Wtf is wrong with the judge? That wasn’t a fair ruling. She could’ve had the plaintiff call the check cashing to verify his account of the check bouncing.
She ruled cruelly. That poor innocent man was fleeced by the two crooks. May they get a taste of their own medicine through divine justice!
The defendant sold car way more than 400 and they split the profits with each other shady defendant robbed plaintiff
He walked in trying to intimidate the plaintiff . He already told you that he is the one who started talking to the plaintiff about how he won’t be able to afford his tickets and he basically conned him out of his car . That’s so wrong and him steady telling him to come work for him sounds a little disrespectful like he’s a boy or servant . Anyways it’ll come back around on them . And they know damn well they sold it for the $800
That’s the same vibe I got from him as well like he’s trying to son him.
no i think the litigants are just completely different personalities and y'all got it twisted . the plaintiff is just soft spoken and may be a bit slow and the defendant is a guy who has a different look and he is normal and not slow . but i am bothered by the fact that the judge did not order the defendants to pay him the 400 profit they made on the car .
Be Done with that Family sir! They're scumbag scammers.
They took advantage of him. The check story sounds believable, I wish someone would have helped him get his evidence in order.
This is horrible. I think they both took advantage of this man. I'm sure they made some money on that sale. And if he's so close, at least give him something.
What a scam. The Plaintiff just gave him a car? Come off it.
The plantiff is a handsome seasoned man
LOL I like the way you put that
I am curious to know what was the Bluebook on this car. That would have told us a lot.
My respect🙏🏾 I rather watch Judge Mathis because he would of give fair rules to plaintiff ... So disappointed in this case.
When someone tells me don't worry about it, that's when I worry it. They didn't sell that car for no $450. They know that car is worth more that $450.They took advantage of him. Y'all won't be giggling when karma kicks you in the butt. The sins of the parents...
That's what I always say..." the sins of the parents". It's a real thing. Karma will take care of things in due time. I believe it 100%
Oh no he sold it for $450. I have no doubt about that. He sold it to them for what it would cost him to get it released and who knows what’s wrong with it? He didn’t want the burden anymore. The defendants probably sold it for $800/$900 though.
I am not amused by the antics of these two defendants. They are full of themselves and they are dishonest - shysters!!! Very disappointed in this verdict.
So sad that they took advantage of an elderly man
One thing I've noticed is a lot of the cases on The People's Court seem to be a bit of a circus. Everything and everyone is all over the place with no structure or organization to the flow of the cases. Judge Milian so often just lets these people ramble on and on, talk loudly, and act like a nut inside her courtroom. Whereas judges like Judge Judy's cases are more structured and nowhere near as playful from the plaintiffs or defendant side.
The defendants would’ve never gotten involved if it wasn’t money for them
“They sold the car for the same amount and split it.”, the main defendant then lost money on the deal and it wasn’t even brought up. I hoped the judge would have caught that. She got it wrong this time.
Awwww they totally shafted the poor man .Karma is coming for you both !!!
WHEN will Curt learn the difference between "take" and "bring?" He always says, for example, the "plaintiff 'brought' his car to the defendant..." And today, he says, "...so he's taking him 'here...'" You BRING something here; you TAKE something somewhere else.
Those two guys are full of it. Dishonest people who took advantage of the plaintiff
Defendant probably thinks he’s Elliot Stabler from Law and Order. 😏
The combined IQ of these 3 men MIGHT possibly equal mine. Wow!
I believe the Defendant's story. It would have been wise on his part to have made a copy of the $1600 bad check. The Defendant clearly took advantage of the Plaintiff because he considered him dumb, or someone he could get away with doing that to, despite the Defendant's claim of liking him and wanting to continue a friendly relationship with him. He's no friend if he did what the Plaintiff says he did. The Plaintiff clearly needs a "babysitter" because it doesn't appear he can survive in this world on his own without running across another unscrupulous person sometime in the future wanting to get the same idea in his head.
I'm sorry Mr. Jackson I am for real...
… Ms. Jackson, if you're nasty…
Defendants are entertaining but I don't believe a word they say.
I don’t believe them, and I’m not entertained. They’re liars.
@@NubianP6 agreed! They are crooks and I don’t believe any of what they said .. it’s so obvious they played that man and how she doesn’t see through their BS is beyond me 🤯 😳🤥🤔
You're amused by them???
When you pickup your car at the pier, you need license, registration and insurance card. You don't need the title. A 98 Mazda what? How many miles on it? I think the defendant did give Mr Johnson a bum check. How's he supposed to prove it? 😭😭😭😭
The defendant gave the man 375-450 but co defendant sold the car and split the same amount of money ? So the defendant is saying he was out 225? Stop it!
How are you gonna call the man delusional and then say he's still part of the family? Legally there may not be standing ground for the plaintiff, but morally the defendants messed up. They took advantage of him and are laughing about it. It's gross.
Who else thinks the two clowns offered him a ride home cause they know dang well that they scammed that plaintiff and wanted to make it right, such a shame 😔
Your judgement was off…
Does plantiff have check from defendant that bounced?
Boing boing boing boing.....
Plaintiff told the judge he gave it back to the defendant after it was denied when he tried cashing it & was told by the defendant “don’t worry about it, you’ll get your money”.
Morning All
Good evening from Las Vegas
Evening from Illinois!!
@@crystalshaw8744 where at In Illinois, I'm across the water in stl
1:30 am here, greetings from europe :)
Evening in mountain Maryland 😊
JM couldn't sleep that night, no way.
You still worked for him so you loose is really what the judge is saying to the plaintiff.
If the plaintiff didn't want the car any more, he could have just left it with the city.
Yes
So the defendants took his old man’s car and sold it without giving him any money for it and it’s his car 🤨 wow snakes they took advantage
Took this show off tv so I’ll watch on line! Leave tv off just like I leave News off.
He might not look at value, but he's definitely not looking at street and parking signs!
Lol keeps blaming the car for his tickets!
why this grown man racking up tickets for?
he seems to just park and walk off not caring where he parks
then being suprised his car gets a ticket?
He played an old man! 😡
We all know the defendant is lying! He definitely made a profit from that car😡
I don't believe that the defendant sold the car for only $400 + change. Both of them sound and look like con men. No way they wouldn't have tried to make money from that car.
The plaintiff needed someone to assist him gather the evidence and prepared better for the trail. At least show up in court with the bounced check !
Why didn't the judge give the plaintiff time to contact his bank to see if they had a record of the check? Or ask for proof that the defendant only sold it for $450? It would seem the defendant was lying because at first he said he didn't know how much he paid him for the car, although he had only paid $375 the cost of the fees to get it out of impound, then they said they had paid him $450 for the car and then his witness said they sold it for the same amount he gave them (ie $450 yet we already know they only gave them $375) and then they claim they split the money, yet the plaintiff said they had sold it for $800. So if they hadn't offered $1600, where did the plaintiff get that number from? It all sounds dodgy, so why didn't the judge give him more time or simply give him the $800 or the remaining $1225, because this case was based on the entire hear-say of the two defendants...
I wished they told us the model of the car in question. It seems unlikely that a 1998 mazda would be worth anywhere near $1600 + the cost of the tickets that the defendants paid off, even at the time of this case (2018? 2019?).
nobody is gonna sign over their car to someone else just because they paid the impound fees . cmon judge , common sense tells u that the 400 profit they admitted they got for selling his car should go to him because if not then the defendant got a free 400 bucks from the plaintiff , not fair .
This was shady I don't really like this verdict the end was very telling also so they definitely pulled a fast one
This is a hard one. Either party could be telling the truth. JM simply couldn't rule in plaintiff's favor with zero proof that anything he was claiming was true. I do wish she'd asked for the bill of sale from the defendants from when they sold the car though.
She's taken recesses for proof before too, I wish she'd given the plaintiff that opportunity to try, too
Judge could not rule in plaintiff’s favor . Her hands were tied legally because he had no PROOF of a check. She can’t just takes his word and the burden of proof is on him, not the defendant.
Them two men must be brothers cuz they both take fast
What is a 98 Mazda worth, cars in New York don’t even last 20years. Plaintiff story keeps changing, I think he onset memory loss because he was all over the place and couldn’t make himself clear. Probably why the issue came up defendant, it sounds like a misunderstanding on both parts . People won’t agree but once again a 20 some odd year car in NY is a rust bucket and only worth the $100 buck you may get from the wrecker for parts and scrap.
Defendants know that car is worth more than $450. They took advantage of him.
I wish he had that bounced check to show her. Wrong
there is no way, that guy would give $400 to be paid and then split $400 with his worker, meaning losing $200, those 2 are scammers. The plaintiff also was trying to make some money out of this situation.
Why are the comments saying that the defendants are even remotely likeable? They knowingly screwed this guy and then say their kids miss him to try and further manipulate him... wtf's likeable about them
maybe they are likeable, you have only known them for 13 minutes.
Boy, New Yorkers are a different breed. 😂 😂 😂!!?
The defendant took advantage of the clueless plaintiff
Take a picture for everything you need to prove. The plaintiff or someone he knew, could have snapped a simple picture of the cheque that he couldn't cash! It would have had solved all this by showing who was lying?
These two Defendants are terrible people. I could barely follow anything they said- seemed to me like a scam.
The defendants are definitely crookes and the witness is on drugs. Get deals on writing people so this doesn't happen to you.
Really disappointed in the judge on this one! Its clear the man was scammed by these 2 slimeballs!!!
$450 liars lol
I don't think they tried to hurt him.
Methinks defendant has a cocaine habit “sniff sniff”
Steven is a stud
People who move their hands like that when they talk like the defendant did are liars. They move them in such a flamboyant way like that to distract you from the fact they're being dishonest
Or they could just be Italian
Fast talkers!
This judge is nasty as hell at times!!! A
Everybody boo-whoing for this plaintiff when he filed a court case and showed up with no evidence. A plaintiff with no evidence is either a liar or an idiot. Take your pick.
Agreed! A bunch of cry babies in the comments!!
First the Blue book value for the vehicle should have being given,next comment comes from some not pleasant,I feel that the plaintiff was generous with him ,the other who collected the car known it was a piece of junk and sold it off quickly.
He may be delusional but you talk too much
Delusional…?
Sometimes she really makes me sick her decisions are wrong at times and I hate the way she makes her decisions. I don't like her at times she was way wrong on this one..... #yougotitwrongthistime"judge"
SRB
I found out that / "Trajia and "Run ,both , were setting "Sept 11th group,/ to be captured /
Bit of a tough one here, the Plaintiff seems very forgetful and vague at times and the defendants seem like nice guys but may have taken advantage of him. And just hope if they did rip him off they will realise their error and pay him what he deserves.
💯 They did take advantage because
he's elderly.
Nice guys?? Get real pls
Gentle designer 92
Regardless of what truly happened, none of them have proof supporting their statements. Unfortunately, the plaintiff has no proof against the defendants. The judge can’t defend anyone because of the lack of information before her. People should think before they do anything, including deals done with family, friends, co-workers, etc.
Jesus Christ loves you and died on the cross for you. Give your life to him and follow him. Repent and accept him as your Lord and savior. Talk to him and cry out to him. He loves us so much more than we could ever comprehend. God bless you all.🙏❤
BS
@@larrywarren2431 I can't stand these comments...these and the Whoever you are I hope you're having a great day comments
Go somewhere else for this you weirdo
Nah I'm good. Satan is my bro and we chilling in the jacuzzi smoking weed and eating pizza. But thanks for the words.
Wow! Out of all the Gods and deities some people choose to worship, yours is the one true and real one? You think it has nothing to do with your parents most probably indoctrinating you from birth?Or has nothing to do with your nationality or geographical location? Seriously. If you're a white American - you're most probably Christian, if you're from Saudi Arabia -you're probably Muslim, if you're from India - you're probably Hindu, etc... Instead of spamming the comments section pushing your beliefs on people , why don't you actually get out and help people in need within your community? I often find people like you pushing your beliefs, claiming to be 'good Christians' are such hypocrites as you do very little that isn't self serving to help anyone else... Stop being sanctimonious and go and do something to help someone in need. Or do you only do good deeds when others notice? Ugh.
Weak friend 20
Divorce is never the way out, My wife and I have been having issues before I sort out help from a spiritual adviser, i wasn't going to let my marriage of 18years crash.
@Rose Allen well not the orthodox way but i was referred by a friend to a spiritual adviser and healer.
@Rose Allen her name is Shelly Renee White, and she is a great spiritual adviser as well as caster.
@Rose Allen you can look her name up online and you will find all you need.
Call
The psychic friends network
They will set you straight for only $9.00 per minute. 30 minutes minimum.
Totally wrong
They definitely took advantage of him
I’m disappointed in Judge Milan on this case
Definitely the VERDICT WAS
UNJUST!!!
I will pray about this case, and I pray they ask for forgiveness to him Older gentleman and make it right
Plantiff is the worst storyteller EVER!
He was struggling a bit bless his heart
Athletic designer 06
Intelligente hunter 81
I knew the planet was out of gas the moment this case started. Milian is predictable all the time with respect to these cases involving black litigants. It's really sad.
planet? lol shut the f up she is not against blackj people BUT U R AGAINST HER BIG TIME!!!! no ione cares about ur rants!
You really should read your comment before posting. The planet is out of gas? 😂😂
Tell them to stop filling lawsuits without EVIDENCE! 👩🏿⚖️
@@Childfree334 😂😂😂
The planet is outta gas? 😂😂😂
My heart goes out to the plantiff, but he did not have any evidence. The judge has to go by the law and cannot give a verdicts base on feelings.