eye95
Well-known member
Not the best publicity. The OCer (the defendant) was kind of foolish and Judge Judy is clearly anti-gun. At one point she asked him how many other morons had a gun on their hip, and he replied that he was the only moron with a gun.
He admitted to having had the "one or two drinks" that every drunk in creation for all time has said he had when challenged. His girlfriend was drunk (he claims and she denies) so he drove her car. They were going to a place where he assured her that they'd need the gun.
For some reason, not clearly explained, something about her not being comfortable with his carrying the gun with "one in the end," he took the gun out of his holster and placed it on the console.
Also unclear is why he later handled the gun. Conflicting stories from the defendant himself indicate that he might have been trying to clear it or that both of them were handling the weapon when it went off, putting a small hole in the dash where the bullet went in and a large hole where it exited before shattering the windshield.
The defendant had already paid for a new windshield so the plaintiff could drive her car, but refused to pay for the dash. Judge Judy thought the plaintiff was an idiot for letting a gun into her car. She ruled that they were both responsible. Since the defendant had paid for the windshield, she gave the plaintiff nothing for the dash.
I'd've made the defendant pay for everything. If one carries a gun, he should handle it responsibly or suffer all consequences for any discharges that result.
He admitted to having had the "one or two drinks" that every drunk in creation for all time has said he had when challenged. His girlfriend was drunk (he claims and she denies) so he drove her car. They were going to a place where he assured her that they'd need the gun.
For some reason, not clearly explained, something about her not being comfortable with his carrying the gun with "one in the end," he took the gun out of his holster and placed it on the console.
Also unclear is why he later handled the gun. Conflicting stories from the defendant himself indicate that he might have been trying to clear it or that both of them were handling the weapon when it went off, putting a small hole in the dash where the bullet went in and a large hole where it exited before shattering the windshield.
The defendant had already paid for a new windshield so the plaintiff could drive her car, but refused to pay for the dash. Judge Judy thought the plaintiff was an idiot for letting a gun into her car. She ruled that they were both responsible. Since the defendant had paid for the windshield, she gave the plaintiff nothing for the dash.
I'd've made the defendant pay for everything. If one carries a gun, he should handle it responsibly or suffer all consequences for any discharges that result.