Justice with Judge Mablean - Drive by DUI
Vložit
- čas přidán 27. 03. 2024
- Woman claims her car was damaged in a hit-and-run.
Welcome to Justice Central, the ultimate destination for your court TV cravings! ⚖️✨ Dive into the fascinating world of Justice with our lineup of nine incredible court TV shows. From dramatic rulings to heartfelt justice, we've got it all.
Justice Central lineup of Judges includes Supreme Justice with Judge Karen, America's Court with Judge Ross, Justice for the People with Judge Milian, We the People with Judge Lauren Lake, The Verdict with Judge Hatchett, Mathis Court with Judge Mathis, Equal Justice with Judge Eboni K Williams, Justice for All with Judge Cristina Perez, and Justice with Judge Mablean.
Don't miss a single case - find all of these captivating shows right here on Justice Central's CZcams channel, as well as on The Grio and your local TV listings. Subscribe now to stay up-to-date with the latest courtroom drama and legal showdowns! Justice awaits ⚖️
Follow Justice Central across the web:
Instagram: / justicecentraltv
Facebook: / justicecentraltv
TikTok: / justicecentral - Zábava
She said don’t shuck n jive me!! I’m 💀! Glad Byron Allen is in charge now ! All our favorite judges of color can be real now ❤
The defendant left the scene of the accident because she didn't have insurance, she probably didn't have a valid driver's license.
Neither party had insurance. LMAO!
Judge Mablean is the best!!!
I love Judge Mablean ❤❤❤
The defendant is having to navigate the adult world on her own for the first time. Her parents washed their hands of her.
I totally disagree with the judgment. Apparently the plaintiff knew not to go to my JJ 😂😂😂😂
She’s only supposed to pay the damages up to the value of the car
she doesn't have to, because she is reckless and always refuses to understand the judge's statements. In this case the judge can literally go with the indicated amount and because she pretends not to know anything about hit and run
Baby girl!!!!😅
Legally, the ruling was incorrect. The damages to the car should not have exceeded the Blue Book value of $4800.00. Plus, the plaintiff is entitled to the cost of the rental car. I think the judge did what's called "rough justice" aka "punitive damages" because the defendant did hit-and-run, hid at a neighbor's home, and then lied in court when she claimed she didn't know hit-and-run is a crime. The defendant also contradicted herself by saying "I went to the neighbor's home to get a second opinion".
You do not determine what a judge's ruling will be, she can judge based on the situation and the behavior of the defendant. Her behavior is reckless and shows no understanding of the situation... and she can prepare a higher amount if she want it. Period!!!
@@elsjeels158 This is one of the stupidest things I have heard in a long time. If a judge can do whatever they want then please tell me why we have laws? Why do lawyers and judges have to go to law school? The main reason for our legal system is so that citizens get just and equal treatment. The law defines those rules and boundaries and prosecutors and judges have to stay within them. Maybe you are too ignorant to know this, but "court tv" shows are not real judges. They are arbitrators...and the litigants agree (before coming to court) to whatever the arbitrator rules. Most of the litigants are paid to be there. In a "real" court the ruling would not have gone that way. The LAW is very clear on these type of cases. Oh, and where did you study law?
She can't do whatever she wants, yes she could possibly give punitive damages because of the defendants actions but the ruling should have reflected that she was only getting the value of the car and rental car and then x in damages. If I break somebody's lawn mower and it costs $300 new or $500 to repair it. No judge can make you pay the $500 because the plaintiff wants his lawn mower repaired. They are only legally entitled to the depreciated value of said item. This is my first case watching this judge and I won't watch another
@@brentlockhart8228 Judge shows are not real judges. Legally, they are considered arbitrators. Therefore, their rulings don't have to strictly follow state and/or federal the laws.
The witness for the defendant called the plantif by her name, but called the defendant by MISS.
So that tells me a lot.
Because he knows the defendant, not the plaintiff. Watch the video again listen to the witness of the defendant. Ugh!
Tells me the plaintiff made the right choice not to trust the hit & run driver’s family friend to handle repairs. He was only looking out for the defendant’s interests. 27 yr old doesn’t need to be coddled
Is this lady a real judge/attorney? I've never seen someone awarded more than the blue book value.
I kind of like watching these shows and when a law is interesting, I look it up. I feel like I learn a little something. But this was a bad ruling and it wasn't based on the law. Unless they live in a state that's unlike any other state and can award more than the value of a totalled car.
She should only have to pay the blur book value of the car not over thats some shit right there thats crazy
Kelley Blue *book.
This was totally unfair!
Unfair is having someone hit your car & try to run off without paying for damages. She even said, “In LA we hit eachother’s cars”. That indicates that she done it before & finds it reasonable.She deserved full punishment so she could learn her lesson.
I ❤ Judge Mablean, but this verdict is total BS and not in accordance with the law. You are supposed to recoup the value of the loss, which is not to exceed the fair market value unless you can prove a higher value based on antique or collector values. This was a REALLY bad verdict.
It is not really court, it is mediation. All parties agree to have it settled in mediation.
and it depends on the state laws of the litigants. State laws differ state from state.
@@trekgirl65 I know, but they are still actual attorneys and judges, and they are supposed to uphold the law in the relevant jurisdiction.
@@trekgirl65 yes, that's what I just said, "they are supposed to uphold the law in the relevant jurisdiction."
should only pay blue book value
Don't like this judge attitude, and after this episode, I will no longer watch Judge Mablean. I think she was prejudiced, my opinion. I don't think the defendant should have to pay 7255, plus associate cost, It's to much
The defendant should have never had the car on the road with no insurance 😂
Judge Mablean is NOT prejudiced! She’s teaching the 27 yr old a life lesson. The defendant chose to lie like she didn’t know the law & play victim “I lost alot”. Boo boo. Crime doesn’t pay