Imsobored152 clearly identified the person in Exhibit A as "wonder woman" and "her". Yet it is also very clear that the person in said photo is clearly a man....so If the 'man' thinks he is a female/woman then by today's standards we are suppose to just accept this as the truth, which is referred to as a tranny.
Judge Judy
- Thread starter Thekid
- Start date
Ahh i havent decide wether im taking this case on as my hourly rate is quite high BUT the other defendants fish keeping skills are not on trial my good man.
Again i refer back to your client asking "have you kept this fish before" first
Clearly tossing the first stone. How each of them worded thier statements is irrelevant since both are accurate and justified.
Example.
I post a question about say...keeping an oscar.
If said member replies "oh out right trouble maker, real beast of a fish"
To me that soundslike said member has kept the fish and is speaking from experience. I may then choose to pass up keeping oscars based in this comment.
BUT if said member ststes "hey i never kept such fish but have read they could be trouble makers" i could then assume thst the member is just trying to be helpful but seek more opinions from members thst have actually kept the fish in question
Listen...you aren't even considering the poor Jet's feelings...I'm sure airplanes will be personified right along with chimpanzees soon....get with the times Borg!
Also on a relatively serious note, I think the whole he/she/it movement is going waaaaaaaaaaaay off track from the people who actually may have the biological problems of gender issues, not these new age turds who are jumping on the wagon because its the thing at this point to go against the norm....
I object! Since said plane cannot be seen, there is no evidence of said state.
I again refer to my client's previous actions on this site and ask for more thought into how it was perceived vs. how it was meant. Also for the record my client would have insulted the OP, not the other fellow in question here who cast a far larger, and more blatant stone.
I still feel the defendant's posts were not justified when it could have been a discussion not an attack.
Ah but my client stated the tank was overstocked, in which you do not need to have on-hand experience with said animal to see that it was in fact the case or at the very least very close to the case. I've never owned a goliath tiger fish or a red tailed cat but I certainly know when a tank is too small for them.
Overstocking is not an experience-based judgment, its a judgment on the well being of a fish being locked up inside a glass box not big enough to thrive in. Telling someone to blatantly stop posting because they think shoving said fish in said box was not overstocked at all, and then slowly changing their story to "not ideal but ok" is not a viable use of time for the OP at all.
I rest my case! KANGAROO COURT!
Check the previous posts about kid calling hendre a giant piece of asparagus and I'mbored making the comparison joke between a pic of hendre and a man in asparagus costume, then Borg coming in hot with current events about the whole dudes being women and viceversa movement haha.
damn!....how do I twist this around in a liberal agenda now...we can't see what this jet is! hahaha
BUT your client did insinuate the exact thing that your accusing the other defendant of doing !!!!! Your out of order...this whole court is out of order...YOU CSNT HANDLE THE TRUTH !!!!!! LMAO
We need to know if judge judy will allow evidencefrom kther threads
Hendre
your still my man bro !