December 7, 2010 8:39 pm at 8:39 pm #717840cantoresqMember
I thought what happened was what poppa bar abba wrote…
C. An expensive shaitel was sent in and ruined. It was a few years old, and they don’t have the receipt. So they grab the Georgi receipt thinking it’s about the same anyway, or maybe thinking it is the only way to recover anything.- I think something along these lines is what happened.
In other words, commit fraud and falsify evidence with no regard to the chilul Hashem created in the wake of their dishonesty.December 7, 2010 8:50 pm at 8:50 pm #717841an ideaParticipant
Even if their story was 100% legit they had no right going on national television being depicted as orthodox jews suing over a religious item which the rest of the world has no idea about. I don’t know who was guiding them in this process but I’m sure a rav was not consulted before agreeing to go on the show. Furthermore they had extremely weak evidence going into the case. Its probably not so difficult to determine if the wig was made of sythentic or human hair and assess a price based on that but they would never go so far on these types of shows and generally its the plaintiffs responsibility not the judges!December 7, 2010 8:52 pm at 8:52 pm #717842AinOhdMilvadoParticipant
I am pretty sure the way payment on this show works, is like this…
Both sides start out with getting $5,000 from the show.
The maximum claim can be for no more than $5,000.
The side that loses has to pay from the $5,000 they would have gotten. So, – if the judge HAD awarded them the $3,000 they were asking for, they would have ended up with a total of $8,000 and the other side $2,000.
In this case, it would seem they both went home with their $5,000.
THAT is the motivation (some one asked what the motivation is) to go on this type of show.December 7, 2010 9:02 pm at 9:02 pm #717843cherrybimParticipant
“so it’s a win-win deal”
No, it’s a lose-lose deal. This is not the way Hashem wants to give you parnossa. If you have a legitimate claim, take it to small claims court, but don’t display your deception before the world to ridicule.
The actress judge is no idiot as some of you would have us believe and certainly a lot smarter than the frum chazer feesel imposters.December 7, 2010 9:09 pm at 9:09 pm #717844apushatayidParticipant
Is there a toeles in the continued discussion?December 7, 2010 9:10 pm at 9:10 pm #717845
it sounds like you are assuming the whole event was calculated to do a fraud. I find that unlikely.December 7, 2010 9:18 pm at 9:18 pm #717846
I don’t think synthetic hair would be ruined the same way a HH wig would. Judge Milian’s assertion, however, that it could not have been a long wig, is erroneous. I once myself accidentally ruined a long wig in a similar way when it ended up in my laundry by mistake. There was absolutely NOTHING that could have been done to salvage my wig, which looked much like this one.
Even had they been requested to wash it on purpose, the cleaners should have refused to do so because of the potential dmage it would cause to hair. The cleaner goofed, and so did the judge. I do not however think it was a good ideas to take this to TV court.December 7, 2010 9:20 pm at 9:20 pm #717847
The lady acting on the TV show as a so-called “judge” claimed she called Georgie’s and they confirmed to her that
1) the plaintiff did in fact purchase a wig in May from them and
2) that Georgie’s told her the wig the customer purchased had long hair and
3) she read the Georgie’s employee the ruined wig’s tags and was told that wasn’t a wig Georgie’s sells.
Clearly from the plaintiff’s comments at the end of the show that Georgie’s was in France and thus it wasn’t possible for the judge to call her, we see the plaintiff didn’t expect that Georgie’s would be contacted. Therefore there is no reason to even assume that they provided authorization to Georgie’s to provide their personal customer or purchase information to the TV show. (And the TV show is NOT a real court of law, that they are playing, with subpoena powers.)
So 1) & 2) above would be a violation of the customers privacy rights for a merchant to provide personal and private shopping habits or purchase history of a private customer’s information to a TV show.
2) long hair, is irrelevant, since the washing machine that destroyed it could have shrunk the leghnth of the hair. (It was a laundromat not a dry cleaners.)
3) Georgie was out of the country. So the Georgie’s employee that answers the telephone will know every tag on every wig they’ve sold? Extremely unlikely. Nor is it likely she would go looking them up for some fool who calls them saying, hi I’m “Judge Judy” (or whatever her name was) playing cops and robbers, eh judge and jury, for my TV show that needs good ratings. Can you please waste your time looking up labels and then waste some more time giving me private customer information from your heimisha store’s customers? Pretty please? With a cherry on the top?
And even if just any one of the above points is a correct analysis, the entire basis of the so-called “judge’s” decision falls.
Bottom line? Likely the actress playing judge never even spoke to anyone at Georgie’s. But, hey, it made for good ratings, and ratings is what this “show” is all about, not truth and not justice.
The whole “judge” show and play acting was a farce.December 7, 2010 9:30 pm at 9:30 pm #717848mosheemes2Member
I’m not assuming anything, it’s just that the alternative to assuming it was a five dollar wig isn’t assuming the judge didn’t know what she was looking at, it’s assuming that the judge simply made up the part about asking Georgi about the brand and finding out it was cheap wig. I find that to be extremely unlikely.December 7, 2010 10:06 pm at 10:06 pm #717849QuestionForYouParticipant
The bottom line is that whether or not the plaintiffs were lying, or whether or not the dry cleaner should have washed the wig,
this case should never have tried in front of a judge on TV. It perpetrated a huge Chillul Hashem.
If the plaintiffs were actually lying, then they perpetrated an even bigger Chillul Hashem.
If a Jew has a case, he should go to Small Claims Court, and take care of his claim in private, not in front of the entire public. End of story.December 7, 2010 10:11 pm at 10:11 pm #717850HelpfulMember
ME2, the “judge” said specifically she doesn’t know what brand or what value the wig was.December 7, 2010 10:14 pm at 10:14 pm #717851mosheemes2Member
1) She’s not a lady acting as a judge, she’s a retired judge acting as an arbitrator. If, as a result of her gross negligence (which is what your accusing her of) she cost the plaintiff’s money that was rightfully owed them, I imagine she’d be open to being sued herself (although she’d probably win that suit). In any event, she’s not some actress they pulled off the street.
2) For the umpteenth time, she didn’t just determine that it wasn’t a $3000 wig, she also, at least claimed to know that it was a cheap wig. Georgi’s employees presumably are aware of the brands they sell, and while there is no such thing as wigmaker confidentiality in the law, even if there was, revealing that they don’t sell the wig in question wouldn’t violate it. Furthermore, it seems logical that the question she called Georgi with wasn’t “Do you sell this brand of wig?” but was the question she had left the room to ask, which was “Is it possible to repair this type of wig?” Why wouldn’t the employee be able to answer that question?
3) Assuming she just made the whole thing up, she has opened herself and the show up to quite slander suit from the couple once Georgi returns from France and confirms what you seem to think he easily can.
Let’s be dan l’kav zechus here, but you can’t just make stuff up in order to do so.December 7, 2010 10:23 pm at 10:23 pm #717852
mosheemes2: You are very mistaken.
A) The so-called judge admitted she had no clue what brand it was or how much it was worth. She just threw out some _possible_ examples of how little it _might_ be worth, *for all she knew*.
B) Her business is to make ratings, not truth or justice. That is what the TV producers pay her for. That she was once upon a time a real judge (now retired), is not what she is now being paid for by her television employer.
C) Every “contestant” on the show must first sign a “I will never sue the producers or play judge” in order to get on the show. Additionally, no one (“plaintiff” or “defendant”) actually lost any money, since the TV producers are paying them more than what they actually are seeking or being sued for.December 7, 2010 11:41 pm at 11:41 pm #717853
Mrs. Milian (the fake judge) said Georgi’s told her they don’t know who the manufacturer of that wig is, based on the tags she read them on the phone, so obviously it wasn’t clear who the manufacturer was from the labels. So she then speculated saying “I don’t know if you got this wig from Revlon for a couple of bucks or you got this somewhere else.” So based on that, Mrs. Milian then reached her 2-bit conclusion that a) you didn’t buy it from Georgi’s, b) you didn’t buy it in May, and c) it didn’t cost you the $3000 this receipt from May is for.
And for Georgi’s to inform a third party that “Yes, Mendi and Heidi are our customers and purchased a long wig costing $3,000 in May” would be an extremely serious breach of a customers confidentiality. Don’t try to whitewash that. This play-judge smells to high-heavens in her tv-justice ratings games. My strong guess is she never called Georgi’s, not that Georgi’s would cooperate with some dooface calling them and the merchant giving a tv show personal shopping information on their customer.December 7, 2010 11:46 pm at 11:46 pm #717854Y_dont_U_research_b4_speakingParticipant
For all those harping on the judge…
Florida Governor Jeb Bush appointed Milian [the judge here] to the Miami Circuit Court in 1999, where she served in the Criminal Division.
Prior to that, she spent five years in the Miami County Court in the Domestic Violence Court, Criminal and Civil divisions. She was appointed to the County Court by then-Governor Lawton Chiles. Before serving in the County Court, Milian worked from 1984 to 1994 as an Assistant State Attorney for the Dade County State Attorney’s Office, personally appointed by Janet Reno.
She spent a year working at Harvard Law School, where she served as director of training for the Guatemala Project. She was responsible for training the Guatemalan trial judiciary, defense and prosecution bar in investigatory and trial techniques.
I’m sure she at least was doing her job.
Also, this was taped a month ago (11/2) –has no evidence been brought in the meantime to vindicate this couple?December 7, 2010 11:53 pm at 11:53 pm #717855
I’m not willing to go so far as she didn’t call Georgi’s, but I do think it was an expensive shaitel, not a RevlonDecember 7, 2010 11:53 pm at 11:53 pm #717856
It airs, because it gets ratings. Ratings are the only reason this show exists. No good ratings, and the show disappears faster than you can say goodbye.
She is indeed a former judge. But her paycheck today is to get ratings. No more ratings, no more paycheck from the syndicated television production company she is employed by. Even if she would have actually “judged” 100% fairly and accurately.December 8, 2010 12:03 am at 12:03 am #717857anon for thisParticipant
myfriend has repeatedly asserted that Judge Millian violated the plaintiffs’ confidentiality rights in calling Georgie’s. Are any posters familiar with what documents the people appearing on this show have signed? Is it likely that the defendants signed papers authorizing the judge to investigate the case, or not? If not, Judge Millian took a big risk.December 8, 2010 12:10 am at 12:10 am #717858
popa: So then you think that Georgi’s will confirm to me when my neighbor bought a wig from them, how much she paid for it, and when she purchased it (as Milian claims Georgi’s told her in the phone call she allegedly made to them when she took her 10 minute recess during the filming)?December 8, 2010 12:13 am at 12:13 am #717859Y_dont_U_research_b4_speakingParticipant
Judge Milian is a member in good standing with the Florida Bar.
I didn’t go through their ethics regs, but its unlikely that she can remain a member in good standing while egregiously mismanaging arbitration proceedings for ratings.December 8, 2010 12:26 am at 12:26 am #717860
anon for this: As I pointed out, it is not likely, as the couple at the end indicated they did not expect her to have actually called, and were quite surprised (and disbelieving) at her claim to have called. Furthermore, Georgi would have no reason to answer Milian’s questions when she claimed to have made a quick phone call during the “court recess”. How would Georgi’s have known any authorization existed — even IF it did exist — based on a phone call? (And even if it existed, why would Georgi’s care to participate – they have no interest to antagonize a customer — who again was surprised at the alleged call.)
Why doesn’t someone call Georgi’s and ask them directly? They’re a local heimishe shaitel company. I doubt they would have done anything to jeopardize their customer relationship — especially with assisting in a breach of privacy.December 8, 2010 12:37 am at 12:37 am #717861msseekerMember
Does anybody know this couple? Isn’t it possible that they’re fraudsters posing as frum Jews to bolter ratings? Ridiculing Orthodox Jews always works.December 8, 2010 12:45 am at 12:45 am #717862Lakewood MomMember
I definitely believe that she called georgie but as they said Georgie was away, could be the receptionist did not recognize the name or the way that the judge pronounced the name. I assume that it was expensive but they had no way to get the receipt so they used another receipt with a similar amount. Could be the shaitel was older than may as the show was taped several months ago not this week. It also looks like a short or medium length wig.December 8, 2010 1:00 am at 1:00 am #717863
that is a good point. Maybe they had to agree to that like some of the posters are suggesting.December 8, 2010 1:34 am at 1:34 am #717864Bob SquappstienParticipant
It’s ridiculous that ppl aren’t being dan l’kaf zechus over here. Based on the ramblings of a non-Jew, you’ll accuse a fellow Jew of transgressing one of the worst aveiros? Get real! They are in all likeliness, innocent. And anybody who accuses them of being wrong is adding to a made up chillul Hashem. Which in itself is a chillul Hashem. There’s no mitzvah to blast the plaintiffs in this case. There is a mitzvah of dan l’kaf zechus. Do the math, which way are you going to come ahead?December 8, 2010 2:00 am at 2:00 am #717865bezalelParticipant
They are obviously being framed by the anti-semitic television network. We should start a collection to buy Heidi a new wig.December 8, 2010 2:09 am at 2:09 am #717866HealthParticipant
myfriend -Even an arbirtrator can do whatever to figure out who is right. Where did you get this notion of violation of privacy? How else do you expect this arbirtrator to come to a decision? This calling to the company was for verification of the claim of the plaintiff. Poppa’s scenario is probably somewhat correct. She probably bought a shaitel awhile ago -she probably paid hundreds to $3000 -she didn’t have the receipt and decided to use this one. It never occurred to her that it might be checked out. As far as commiting any fraud -that’s ridiculous. In order to prove fraud -you have to know the original value of the shaitel -which noone knows and prove they willingly wanted more money than it’s value. There is no fraud here and no chillul Hashem. They just shouldn’t have made a public spectacle of frum Jews. Next time hire a lawyer, so you know how to prove your case.December 8, 2010 2:22 am at 2:22 am #717867
The entire basis that this hoax of a self-declared non-judge is based on two fallacious points: 1] her mistakenly thinking the wig couldn’t have shrunk in the wash (she made a stink over the fact that the plaintiff supposedly bought a long wig but that the destroyed wig was short); and 2] her inability to identify the brand of wig she was dealing with — resulting in her claiming the info she supplied to the phone clerk at the manufacturer (Georgi) who supposedly answered her phone call, based on whatever tag [from the out of shape wig] she allegedly read to her, was unrecognized by the clerk as one of theirs. This is easily a miscommunication, even trying to credit Ms. Milian of “The People’s Court” from Warner Brothers Television with not purposefully lying. Georgi’s website lists hundreds of models of wigs in their current lineup.December 8, 2010 2:55 am at 2:55 am #717868
The show-judge also based her “decision” on the fact that the destroyed wig had short hair, but the receipt was for a long hair wig. She was oblivious to the fact that it could have shrunk in the wash.December 8, 2010 3:42 am at 3:42 am #717869
Put aside for a moment the issue of whether Ms. Milian even had a right to seek the personal and private information from the retailer. Why would Georgi actually give such personal purchase information to a caller — right in middle of the “court” proceedings while in recess — who claims over the phone to be a “judge” needing their customers private information.
Georgi is a private heimisha shaitel company in Boro Park, Brooklyn. Do you think they would give out customer purchase history to a phone call (coming in out of the blue in middle of a few minutes recessed TV “trial”) because the caller claims she is a judge????
If Milian had claimed she contacted Georgi on a date prior to the “court” session — rather than smack in middle of it during a 10 minute court break — and provided Georgi’s signed statements from the customer authorizing the retailer to provide personal purchase history of the customer, it might have been slightly more plausible. (But even then, why should Georgi waste their time with a TV show? Warner Brother Television producers don’t have subpoena powers forcing Georgi to supply any information. Additionally, the frum couple [Mendi and Hindi] expressed disbelief that the retailer was contacted, as they were interviewed after the show, making it likely they never agreed to that.)
But in fact Milian claimed to have made the call — and gotten that information — right in middle of the court session, not beforehand. And if there was communication between Ms. Milian and Georgi before the date of the “court” case, Ms. Milian could have gotten all the information she needed from Georgi’s as well before the date of the court case — and have had all the information prior to the start of the case. Instead she played dumb for the first 15 minutes of the case, and then all of a sudden went to make a phone call, and then supposedly came back with this “new bombshell information” that she never had before.
She actually said on the program “let me adjourn this case so the plaintiff can bring in more info at a later date…” and then she suddenly changed her mind and said “never mind, I have a better idea, I’m going into chambers for a few minutes”, and then she came back from “chambers” after the little intermission claiming her sudden, bright, unplanned idea that suddenly occurred to her was to call Georgi’s.December 8, 2010 4:03 am at 4:03 am #717870
“And the TV show is NOT a real court of law, that they are playing, with subpoena powers.)”
You are mistaken, the court is real, and the ruling is legally binding on all who come there for abitration. These are people who want to sue in small claims court, and the TV court invites them to handle it in their court instead. It is 100% real.December 8, 2010 4:05 am at 4:05 am #717871
The Judge is not an actress — she is a bona fide judge.December 8, 2010 4:06 am at 4:06 am #717872apushatayidParticipant
Wouldn’t it be better to spend more time on a teshuvas rabbi akiva eiger instead of lihavdil elef havdalos a teshuvas judge millian?December 8, 2010 4:25 am at 4:25 am #717873HomeownerMember
I thank my brother in the bar cantoresq for posting this link.
Regrettably, this is not the first case of “frum perjury” I have seen. Just the first one on national television.
It never ceases to amaze me how the usual crew of folks who possibly graduated high school profess untold sums of knowledge of the laws of the United States. Not quite.
There is insufficient space on the Coffee Room to review every piece of tipshus posted in this thread.December 8, 2010 4:34 am at 4:34 am #717874
No she isn’t a (current) judge, and no her TV show isn’t a real court. At most, she is an arbitrator and her show is binding arbitration. She holds no current title of judge.December 8, 2010 4:38 am at 4:38 am #717875anon for thisParticipant
I think it would be very strange if Judge Millian and the producers of the show did not have the plaintiffs and defendants appearing on the show sign some sort of waiver authorizing the judge to investigate their claims. (If anyone familiar with how the show works could comment on that, I’d appreciate it.)
This question is for those who are familiar with the show: does Judge Millian see the case for the first time while the show is televised? I would think that she’d want to review the evidence before. And if that’s the case, she may have already examined the wig and noticed the discrepancy between the receipt and the damaged wig. She may even have called Georgie to do some preliminary investigation before the show was televised.
I agree with Judge Millian that it’s surprising that the couple did not bring in documentation attesting to their claim that three experts had examined the wig and declared it unsalvageable. If the documentation had included testimony to the quality and value of the orginal wig (which an expert would have recognized even in its damaged state) then perhaps the embarrassment could have been avoided.December 8, 2010 4:54 am at 4:54 am #717876TheChevraMember
Additionally there is ample reason to believe the “frum” (whom you are easily dismissive of) in this case are to be believed, considering the abundance of evidence [much of it presented earlier in this thread] of a lack of cautiousness on the part of the arbitrator.December 8, 2010 4:55 am at 4:55 am #717877RamchasParticipant
If indeed the Judge called Georgi, there is little doubt she did it way prior to the show and the whole hearing was just a set up:
The Judge asks pertinent questions about the Shaitel she’s presently wearing…at the BEGINNING of the show;
She mentions calling a DIFFERENT expert and then suddenly comes up with the idea of calling Georgi!
Notice the smirk on her face when she decides to put the court on recess;
The case is adjourned too quickly for a Judge who’s trying hard to find out the intricacies of the case…
In conclusion, she’s appalled at the “false” proof of value for the Shaitel and I’m appalled at the false presentation of the case process…December 8, 2010 5:15 am at 5:15 am #717878
There is no way that frum couple were imposters.
Anyone who lived/lives in Brooklyn knows that she had the perfect accent which would be very difficult for an non jewish actor to duplicate.December 8, 2010 5:29 am at 5:29 am #717879TheChevraMember
I’ve just been told, on good word, that Georgie Wigs has commented on this incident as follows:
1. The employee who answered the phone call when The People’s Court called, did not advise or identify to the caller that any particular wig or label number was not purchased from Georgie Wigs. This is in contradiction to the statement made by the arbiter on the show, that was used as the basis for the dismissal.
2. After looking at the damaged wig in question, have determined this is the Georgie Wig that the $3,000 receipt represented. (This physical inspection occurred after the arbiter dismissed the case.)
This ought to put to final lie this incident as fodder for the usual anti-semites. No doubt they will ignore this, even if indisputably disproved, and will be sure to fabricate other “incidents” to attack Frum Yidden.December 8, 2010 5:31 am at 5:31 am #717880
Helpful, you asked for me, here I am. You won’t give up will you. You are going to go one on one with me till one of us leaves this forum. So I am not even going to read all the posts I am only going to address you.
The court case can go on for hours YOU have no clue how long any case can take, the final editing and cuts shorten the case to the allotted time frame. The case itself is not squeezed into a time frame. Every case is given the appropriate time and attention. The Judge is NOT an actress, she is a qualified and honorable judge with all the degrees and appointments that any other judge has. She follows all the laws within the State and City jurisdiction. She makes her decisions based on the LAW and not a script. The only judgement I have an issue with right now is YOURS and maybe YOU should be taking a lesson from the judge who actually follows the law. As for you, you just go by your own opinion.December 8, 2010 5:33 am at 5:33 am #717881smartcookieMemberDecember 8, 2010 5:57 am at 5:57 am #717882
As far as my own take on the situation, the Judge has the absolute right to investigate the situation and any call she places to bring clarity to the case is appropriate. When she places the call she introduces herself and explains the situation. She asks questions and asks for honest answers to assist in coming to a fair and just decision. There is no reason for the person she calls to lie. What did she ask, how could one identify one of Georgie’s wigs? That was quite an intuitive question. We all know that each sheitel manufacturer labels their wigs and a well known one such as Georgie would not allow a wig out of her salon without a label. All the wigs she sells have labels because she wouldn’t sell a no-name wig. When the judge realized that the couple were trying to pass off the receipt which was really for the wig she was wearing for the wig that was ruined all the credibility of the couple was destroyed. She was disgusted by them and that is what made it a chilul Hashem. What they could have done and should have done was just shown that receipt for the wig she was wearing as an example of how much these wigs actually cost. But she didn’t make any sense from the start. She said she only had two, the one she was wearing and a fall. But then the ruined one would make three. So even that didn’t make sense.
There was fault on both sides. Obviously the Laundromat should never have washed the wig. However, if the couple really wanted to be compensated for their loss they should have told the truth and not try to fault the laundromat above and beyond what they were responsible for. That is just plain greed and in this case wanting their 15 minutes of fame.
Why did they ask that their last name not be announced? Did they know that the truth would come out? Were they afraid of that from the start? Why were they not afraid that someone would recognize them? Why did she say that Georgie was out of the country? Georgie has a whole staff, the Judge would not have to talk to Georgie herself! And more than anything else, why didn’t they bring any estimates for replacing the wig or statements that the wig was beyond repair? Didn’t he ever learn gemarah? Does he not know how to be prepared for court?
In addition, to put these people down even further and say they don’t speak English when clearly they speak English quite legibly also made them look quite foolish, so much so that he said he had people in his office call to speak to them in Spanish. Very, very foolish.
I am not going to try to speculate why this couple did this or what their issue really was with the people they dragged into court. I am not going to try to analyze why people do what they do. But why do so many of you try to twist it and say the Judge is an actress, and how can a 20 minute show…blah..blah…blah. This couple was wrong!!! There is no ifs ands or buts about it. And if the laundromat was owned by Yiddin, you would never say these things. It is only because they tried to cheat goyim that you say that. I don’t believe that any RAV would deny that the Judge was absolutely correct in her ruling.December 8, 2010 6:28 am at 6:28 am #717884commonsenseParticipant
I don’t have patience to read all the comments but the fact that the wig on the reciept is for a long sheitel is meaningless, I buy long sheitlach and cut them down into short sheitlach. Also maybe the couple was quiet because they were in an embarrassing situation and they did not want to look worse on tv, maybe they were warned before to be quiet when the judge was speaking. I don’t think anyone would agree to go on tv for a small case like this if they were lying, why take the chance of being caught and having to deal with the embarrassment?December 8, 2010 6:46 am at 6:46 am #717885
This couple went on national television.
The video has been shown to the public in full.
It’s interesting that so far, nobody commented that they have seen these people around, or they recognize them etc.
So many people visit this site and probably watched the show.
Its very strange that NOBODY knows them!December 8, 2010 7:08 am at 7:08 am #717887HomeownerMember
TheChevra, thank you for the amusement. We are all happy you know how to use Google. Unfortunately, having a fact at hand and applying it correctly are often different.
(By the way, since you are nitpicking, I am not a “barrister;” this is not the United Kingdom.)
Title 18 of the United States Code is the federal criminal code. The section you quoted is applicable only to federal cases and has nothing to do with this matter.
It may have missed your attention, but the blue flag on Ms. Milian’s left was the flag of the State of New York. If you make a false statement after being sworn during an arbitration hearing in New York (as this was), you indeed commit perjury.
As I said earlier, there is not the time and space to review all the tipshus posted here. Why are you adding to it?
I have a more productive use of your time–argue medicine with your doctor. LOL!December 8, 2010 8:08 am at 8:08 am #717889
commonsense, the judge did not say the bill was for a long sheitel. The judge said the bill was for a Georgie sheitel, and that there is not marking on the ruined sheitel that would determine it to be a Georgie wig. Therefore the judge determined that the sheitel the lady was wearing was probably the expensive Georgie wig!December 8, 2010 8:12 am at 8:12 am #717890
A further point,
I find it very strange that when the jusge asked her how many wigs she had, she inssited only one besides the fall. Somehow the wig in question, which apparantly was worth 3 grand, and su^pposedly the focus of her case, didnt seem to come into the equation.
You would think that she would harp on the fact that she had 2 super wigs (besides the fall) and unfortunatley now, one was badly damaged. But in fact, she seemd to trivialize the fact that it was ruined.
Although I doubt this was a premeditated scam, but rather something they decided to take advantage of when they saw the devastating results, they were very unprepared.December 8, 2010 11:01 am at 11:01 am #717891Bob SquappstienParticipant
@ aries2756: ” I don’t believe that any RAV would deny that the Judge was absolutely correct in her ruling. ”
A rav would trust a fellow Jew rather than the word of a Judge, in a case like this where there is ZERO hard evidence. Just her word against theirs.
I think it’s a bigger chillul Hashem that so many Jews are being dan l’kaf chov. Actually, I shouldn’t say that. I could just assume that most of the commenter’s aren’t Jewish and therefore are not expected to be dan l’kaf zechus.December 8, 2010 12:04 pm at 12:04 pm #717892Feif UnParticipant
I was visiting some family last night for a Chanukah party, and I showed the video to my brother in law and his wife. He immediately said “Oh my God! I know them! They used to be our neighbors, but recently moved to Brooklyn!”
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.