Did Man Throw Frisbee at Drone? | Part 2
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 лис 2023
- Anthony denies throwing his frisbee at Casey’s drone - and claims he only said he’d pay for it to get him off his case.
The Original! There’s only ONE Judge Judy. Visit our website for where to watch, weekdays.
Subscribe to Judge Judy on UA-cam: / @judgejudy
#JudgeJudy
The real drone is the mother hovering over her son.
😂😂😂
Hoooly hell! 😂 😂 😂 👏 👏 👏
Hahaha! True story.
😂
Lmao! This is witty!
Son definitely should carry blame. Terrible mother trying to cover her son's mistakes by fibbing about what she Saw..
A Mothers child is never in the wrong even when the parent knows better.
@satori80 Not all mothers think that way.
@@deana1938 we should always protect our children, but we should be the example of honesty.. ❤️
It’s not called fibbing when it’s in a courtroom. It’s a bold faced lie. Immediately lost respect for her after that.
@@maggiemac5572 TRUE.
This guy had the audacity to call the defendant a knucklehead?! I almost spit out my drink 😅
made himself look and sound like a chump
Could apply to both. The plaintiff is a major mama's boy.
just because defendent is hot.. doesn't mean he is smart af... yes he is clever for sure..
2:23 innocent guy
They actually told us to say shit like that and poke at each other because it’s better tv
The drone guy should have been recording his flight. That would have been good evidence to support his claim that the defendant looked at the drone and threw the disc at the drone.
Agreed. I think JJ did side with the plaintiff based on her judgement amount because no one else but the defendant managed to hit the drone. Just that in the court of the law the truth is irrelevant independent of supporting evidence. I also think the defendant, while manipulative but not very smart figured this out as well which is why he initially agreed to pay to replace it and then reneged on his promise. After he figured out the plaintiff had no evidence he knew it was his word against the other guy and could get away with it. It’s a shame that a friendship was loss behind a petty incident but no one needs to be friends with a guy like that anyway, so IMHO the plaintiff experienced ✌🏽 victories in court that day
I know I was just thinking that.
I suspect he was filming and what was filmed doesn't support his story. Just like the mom isn't believable, apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
@@JJPrizeDistributionComitteethat's exactly what I thought!!!
who knows the mum and the son are both liers so its very likely he was recording but the footage was not what they wanted.
Keep on talking plaintiff… You’re gonna just tell on yourself 😂
Plaintiff is such whiny mama's boy. I bet he never moved out.
Yep, that's why he panicked when the drone broke- didn't want to get into trouble with mommy.
Yeah I don’t like to judge people for living with their parents because things happen, but he really doesn’t act like a 24 year old. I don’t think he’ll mature unless he gets away from his mother.
Yeah a 24 year old "student"
Prolly still sleeps in mommy's bed
Probably still nursing.
The mother lied and I’m WILLING TO BET, her son WAS recording , but the recording was NOT in his favor. I can almost believe the friend probably agreed to help pay for the drone since his FRIEND’S property had gotten damaged while they where playing whatever they was playing. I would have made the plaintiff way more liable than JJ made him because WHY would u fly the drone down so low in the MIDDLE of the action?! He was probably showing out for his friends with this EXPENSIVE thing and it backfired. Friend or not, NEVER agree to help pay for something u believe u didn’t break and IF u texting back and forth make sure u state, I DID NOT do it, but I will see what I can do to help u out.
This comment should be #pinned. 💯💯💯
He was recording which he admitted!
Yep!! Was definitely recording
NO doubt, made me believe he was the one who hit the drone and it seemed like they were not really friends to begin with.
Absolutely!!!
Kids film everything nowadays!! All young kids are constantly glued to their phones filming tiktoks and selfies. If a drone had the capability to record, you betcha that kid was recording everything from the start 😂
1. The mother did not see anything, that was a lie.
2. The plaintiff was highly likely buzzing his friends with the drone. This will be why the drone * cough * wasn't recording.
3. Defendant got sick of being buzzed by the drone and fired a frisbee at it.
Should've been a 50/50 split for the damages.
Not to mention JJ said the drone was 3 years old; $1000 for a new drone... Kind of seems like she was coming up with a number for the drone, forgot, then took 75% of the $1000 price. Or the number she came up with was $750 and forgot to take 75% of that lol.
I agree with your summation but not your conclusion about the 50/50 split. Fact of the matter is ultimately the defendant damaged the drone, on the plaintiff's property.
To use a different example, that's like being a passenger in someone's car and they're annoying you by playing ridiculous music very loudly, so you get sick of it punch the car's stereo head-unit with your fist and destroy it, but then defend your actions by saying the driver/car's owner was annoying you, so blame should be split 50/50.
I think JJ's 25/75 split was fair because the mere act of flying a drone carries inherent risk of damaging or destroying it without the willful act of someone else (bird strike, power failure etc etc). So 25% accounts for that, with the lion share of blame being placed on the person who willfully damages it, regardless of the reason.
If you're getting annoyed or sick of something, just remove yourself from the situation. But you can't damage others' property and equitably apportion blame.
@@damieg82 It's slightly different to your analogy though, the drone (if we believe he was buzzing them which I think we do) was being flown into and out of an area where there were multiple flying objects.
To find a better analogy would be someone in a boxer's gym, there are 10 people shadow boxing, and he starts jumping on front of them popping his face close to where there are punches being thrown. Then oops, he gets hit, then blames the person who threw the punch.
@@bravo2966 For your analogy to match what you originally said, it would have to be that he was popping his face close to where punches were being thrown, then one of them got annoyed and intentionally punched him in the face. That's different. It's the fact that the defendant likely did this on purpose that justifies the 75/25 split as opposed to 50/50 or no fault. Really, if the defendant could have proven it was an accident, the negligence would be totally on the plaintiff, and then the defendant shouldn't have been responsible for ANY of the charges.
I believe, as did the Judge, and it sounds like so do you, that he threw the frisbee at the drone on purpose. Whether he was being badgered or not, and I agree with you that the plaintiff probably was badgering them (I don't actually think he had any intention of recording. His mom said that SO FAST when she was being questioned, that it reeked of something they contrived and added after the fact). But, if you're annoyed by the presence of something, the correct response is to ask them to stop or to leave, NOT to take matters into your own hands and throw something at the property. The reason the plaintiff is SO confident it was the defendant is for the exact reason you hypothesized, he was irritating his friends and knew he was irritating the defendant, and that's what led to him lashing out against the drone. Can't say that in court though, because then you'll lose.
@@bobfalcon2756 No, she indirectly gave them 100 % of the true value of the drone at the time of the judgement while pretending to side with the defendant. Kind of like when someone gets $18k for a 3 year old car that costs $30,000 new after it’s involved in a flooding; It’s deemed a total loss but you’re receiving 100% of the value it was worth at the time of the incident.
The plaintiff states that his friend was literally looking directly at the drone just prior to throwing the frisbee that destroyed it and I 100 % believe him when he says that because none of the other game players managed to hit the drone. It’s just that the plaintiff couldn’t articulate that clearly. That sounds very premeditated act so even though the plaintiff couldn’t prove the defendant intentionally destroyed his device with actual facts, JJ could still factor that into her final judgement and still pretend go side with the defendant. She just can’t state that directly devoid of facts to support her decision
Now he wasn't recording. Dude definitely lying lol. Anyway a weird case indeed
That poor kid. That mother looks, sounds, and acts like a Karen. The fact that she lied to Judge Judy about the whole incident should have been enough to dismiss the case. I feel sorry for any girl he brings home because no girl will good enough for her wittle boy lol.
yes mother is a biiiiiii...
Don't worry, there'll be plenty of women who will get with that guy, all the while omplaining about how they "can't" find any good guys.
The drone costed $1000 new, but it was 3 years old and still the plaintiff gets $750?
I don’t understand
The immaturity of these young men is amazing
They kept the drone in perfect condition (most ppl do). Of the drone were not damaged, they could sell that for $759-$850 easily. He was 25% responsible so her got 75% of the cost. I agree.
If it had a 10 year life and straight line depreciation, it was worth $700 so the penalty would be $525. That would be more fair.
I agree. The value of that 3 hear old drone should have been 500 to 750, tops. Him having to pay 750 form that was too much.
The guy was still smirking though
@@RookSac4865 So what? Maybe he has resting smirkface....
No surprise that Mommy calls them "boys". 24 and 26! 😂
They're wasting the best years of their lives by being so childish!! They should be out chasing girls!!
OR BOYS@@edpurcell7322
In part one I had to laugh when the mom said that the kids were playing out in the back. He’s a 24-year-old man! He still lives at home and I’ll bet mommy still does his laundry, cooks his meals and apparently lies for him in court. Pathetic!
He looks 15. I thought he was in high school but he's a grown man!
Mom correcting JJ on his being an, “ex-friend!” Mom needs to stop the control. Her son looked terrified of his mother in the first few minutes. Probably knew she was going to lie as well. Great job Mom on no accountability.
What a terrible person. What parent would throw that in . Terrible drama queen. Any real parent would try to resolve this and for her son to someday regain a friend. He seems like the kind of person who needs friends. She is definitely getting in the way of him learning how to have normal relationships with others. Terrible.
They are in their 20s but this whole case makes them seem like pre-teens.
...almost in tears over the drone. This whole situation weirds me out. The MOm buys a toy for the grwon-ass family. They grown ass son comes in asking for permission to use it will playing with his friends.
I picture she was watching from the window while stirring kool-aid or making animal shapes with pancake batter.
All assholes, all lying. Mom didn’t see shit. Her son was probably being a jerk and a show off with the drone. Defendant definitely did it on purpose. They deserve each other.
… also… I LOVE that JJ played dumb for a minute and then let em know that she knows ALL ABOUT drones!!
🤣
Judge should have asked:
What colour was his shirt? What color was his frisbee? How many people were there.
She said 6 - the friend say 10.
There’s a legal phrase ‘Falsus in uno, falsus’ in Latin maxim meaning "false in one thing, false in everything". At common law, it is the legal principle that a witness who testifies falsely about one matter is not credible to testify about any matter.
I ❤your commentary. Please do this for more JJ videos 🤣🤣🤣
Attack of the Drone To Be Continued 😅
REVENGE of Drone.
The mom is lying, she was not watching. The son is lying, he was definetely filming (I wonder why he doesn't want to show the video). And the defendant is lying, he definetely threw the frisbee at the drone.
He certainly saw it. There’s no way you wouldn’t see it when it was 15ft in the air. I don’t think any run silent either. But 🤷♂️
How can the son and the defendant both be lying since both stances would prove either one innocent. Only one of them would be lying in this instance. The son can’t be lying about not recording since that would have shown the defendant aiming and throwing the frisbee at the drone, unless thats not what happened but then the defendant lying about purposely aiming at the drone would have been proven by the video the son is supposedly lying about. You get what I’m saying. Both stances exonerate each other from lying.
@@jayro792 well, the defendant could have been lying about exactly where the drone was positioned and how high it really was while the defendant could still have purposely hit it. A recording would have proven they were both lying about events.
Don't people have drone insurance, especially since it's so expensive or is that not a thing?
How do you know definitely that the son was filming ? I've often pointed my camera at something and not clicked the shutter button.
lmao everybodys just lying
Fifteen feet is just 9 feet above their heads, not far for a Frisbee. I'd assigned 90% plaintiff, 10% defendant.
Played disc golf with medium skill. Even a novice wouldn't putt very high in the air, using golf discs. These guys were on league, and presumably better players. Fifteen feet above the action from thirty feet away would be highly unlikely, unless one were aiming for it. But there's plenty of blame to go around.
No way anyone is putting that high from 30' if Anything it misses just low of basket.
But like you said they are all to blame.
In Canada the minamum distance away from people or cars is 30ft or 10m.
Pilot would be 100% at fault.
They’re both ready to get past it, mature.
😂 "I was just watching cuz I was infatuated by just how cool this view is from all my friends throwing their discs in..." 😂 The way you know he was recording the whole thing!!!
"On the video, he was lookin' right at the drone" He just told JJ he didn't video it, though! How did she not catch that?!??!
That mother I can tell has hovered over her son his whole life. A helicopter mom perhaps. He seems a bit sheltered, as if he was never allowed to fly on his own. Anyways, they have their heads in the clouds to try and place all the blame on the defendant. He at least seems to be a very grounded person. Hopefully they can all reconcile and their relationship reach new heights.
Drone mum.
@@Messier45_Pleiadeshaha that’s what I was gonna say🤣🤣
@@Messier45_Pleiades bah beat me to it.
I like your "metaphoric" laden comment. Well done. "hovered" "helicopter mom" "never allowed to fly" "heads in the clouds" "very grounded" "new heights" LOL.
I would assign more blame to the plaintiff especially because the defendant said he would help fix it not pay for a devalued drone which is what $750 is. He should have maybe been charged $500.
JJ was not having it with the plaintiffs. I’m surprised that she awarded them $750.
This "put your hand down!" was pretty nice. After you get told, "Now you can sit down," you usually don't have anything interesting to say as far as Judge Judy is concerned.
“Kids” in their mid 20’s lol. And ones name is Timmy lol.
But they're in a super-duper serious disc golf league...even practicing.
MOMMY ...CAN I USE THE DRONE ??? And show off to all my frisbee friends
Plaintiff is a weirdo spoiled kid
It’s not often that I disagree with JJ, but BOY!! OH BOY!! did she ever get this one wrong!!!
Why are these grown men in their 20s acting like middle schoolers?
Only two parts. I thought this case was going to drone on.
😂😂😂
Heh 😅
😂😂😂😂😂
Yeah this case flew by.
Good for Judge Judy, you see how the mom probably gets away with talking to teachers and coworkers and her local barista the way she tried to do with Judy to get her way. I could tell by her reactions to the conversation she thought it was going to turn into a gal pal coffee clash.
Clatch
The defendant is handsome, he shouldn’t have to pay.
He surely is
Lol I don't see it. He looks alright
Bruh 🤡
He's not handsome enough.
6/10. There are others in the world who are better looking.
Are they 12 or 26 I can’t tell by how they are acting lol
Sounds like the plaintiff has never been held accountable for his actions by mom and dad in his whole life.
I hate drones. If it's hovering over you, you ought to get points for bringing it down.
Plaintiff is a man baby
Good that the JJ awarded only 75% to the plaintiff. Wonder what the outcome would have been if there was no proof of the texts or witness lol 🤣
“Don’t call him a knucklehead. The knucklehead brought out the drone.” ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
And people wonder why young men today aren't getting dates ...Duh
Waiting for JJ to say her "DUH"
Thank you my lunch is almost over lol
Lunch crew🙋🏼♀️
Almost in tear cuz his drone broke ?How old is he again?😂😂😂😂
SO conveniant that the drone wasn't recording.
Why is this guy flying drones so low in such a busy area? That's his problem.
Adios to getting past this and being friends again.
Even the audience members sitting behind the son when he was giving his testimony didn't believe him😂😂
😂
Why was the mother not supervising these young children playing
Judge Judy was nicer than me. I wouldn't have given the whiney brat and his lying mother anything.
thank God you are not a judge; you have been dethroned a long time ago with that attitude problem you have.
People have a right to privacy. Hes lucky it wasnt shot with a gun.
Stop flying drones in public.
Your comment is lunacy. You have no expectation of privacy in "public" spaces. Cameras are everywhere recording your every behavior. Flying drones in public is completely legal.
Interesting the plaintiff calls his friend "knucklehead" when this is exactly what his mother calls him in the written complaint. He is definitely a momma's boy.
I don't think the defendant should be responsible at all. That kid willing took his drone out where people throw things 🤦♀️🤦♀️
Hello there my dearest, how are you
That’s what I was hoping but I guess judy saw it differently 😢
It's odd how immature they are for 24-26 year olds
Put your hand down 😂
The man is 24. He came to court with his mother...
TBF she bought the drone. But u can tell he is a mamma's boy
They all lying, birds of a feather 🤣🥴
JJ was being unreasonable. I don’t see how the plaintiff was partially responsible if the drone was hovering 15ft in the air. The players were supposed to be throwing the disc parallel to the ground, not 15ft up into the air. I’m also surprised that JJ didn’t call out the defendant for lying that he wasn’t aware of the drone being used. The noise from a flying drone is very obvious.
😂😂 that 75% would’ve switched as soon as he said “I wasn’t recording” cause what was the point?
What a baby 😂
Ugh… plaintiffs are so whiney. Cringe.
They grown ash playing with frisbee inna first place🤣
I’m saying hello to the defendant. 👋
👋
The defendant and his friend are so fine 😍😍
Thank you!
She gave TOO MUCH MONEY. The drone was 2-3 years old. She needed to DEPRECIATE the value of the drone. It was worth no more than $500. 75% of $500 is $375.
$1000 drone brought out to capture shots but no evidence to prove anything. I would've dismissed this case!
Hello there my dearest
I love judge Judy and her content..she is very bright and fair..see's through all the lies and the deceit from each side..I think she would make the best president of th USA....just the people in court room sitting should not leaning off there seats behind the people standing trying to get there 5mins of fame it's very distracting. Keep up the good work judge Judy x
I'm not up on the FAA rules about flying a drone but I believe it is illegal to hover a drone such as this DJI above peoples heads.
$120.00 worth of parts, soldering gun, heat shrink tube, good as new.
The mom is either immature or had too much Vicodin before the show
that smirk the defendant wears😮
I wonder if the mom still wipes her son when he goes poopie?
The way the camera zoomed in on the mom lol
Plaintiff the mamas boy crying, oh mom my toy broke. Grow up, and be responsible for your actions.
"The kids were playing in the backyard"...kids???
These are two grown up men of 24 and 26 years!!
Moms like this one are the reason why these "kids" never grow up..
The defendant is cute 🔥
When the guy said he giggled about it, that’s the point where I knew he was lying. It might sound like nothing but it’s a detail you would definitely not feel the need to share if you honestly believed you didn’t do it.
2:23 he is hot but cunning too
The defendant implied he would give the plaintiff money. Which spells guilt. Plus the mother lied. I think that's the reason J.J. awarded the plaintiff $$. BTW can anyone tell me when the youth of today grows up? In their twenties going on 7.
Thank god the show pays the judgments. Still, they should have been thrown out of court for lying about it.
Oh wow, they are all liars😂😂😂😂
Knuckle head 😅😅😅
PARDING!!!! That's Mass accent.
Mummy did not like her son being admonished that way. The other thing I noticed was when he got stuck with his contradictions, he started to blush a little bit. He's damn lucky Judge Judy didn't pull him up for that.
Now he was not recording, really ?🙄 I believe the defendant did but he’s trying to exaggerate whatever happened.🤦🏽♀️
"Birds of a feather,flock together."All involved r"knuckleheads".🙄
loosing a friend over a drone... wow...
Nah we’re still cool to this day it was mostly his mom who’s a total bitch
Who else thought it was adorable when the defendant said: "The defendant, oh the defendant, sorry" xP
😂😂
Smug mama boys. Too much free time on their hands. Something bound to happen.
Nobody offers to pay for a $1000 drone because they 'feel bad' that it got broken, even though they didn't break it. Defendant knew he was responsible and he probably DID tell them he'd pay for it with no intention of actually paying for it.... which is why this case ended up in court. At least that part of his testimony was true.
Hey there Diva, how are you
That was very poor judgement. She said the defendant was 75% responsible for a 2-3 year old drone. In other cases she goes to great lengths to point out you don't get new - you get the value at the time of the loss. So its value was not $1000, closer to $600 market value - judgement should have been 75% of 600 = $450. I'm not impressed by judges that are not consistent with their own prior cases.
The reason the son still lives with his mother at 24 is because she keeps trying to lie and cover for him. He'll never learn to stand on his own two feet. I feel sorry for any woman he marries.
...almost in tears over the drone. This whole situation weirds me out. The Mom buys a toy for the grown-ass family. The grown ass son comes in asking for permission to use it while playing with his friends.
I picture she was watching from the window while stirring kool-aid or making animal shapes with pancake batter.
I think that was a fair judgement. I believe the guy knew he hit. Why else would he say he'd pay? They were both goof's though.
The defendant and his witness are some good looking guys.
Mom is definitely lying for her son. I'm surprised that JJ didn't assign the blame 50/50. I like that both guys think that they'll be able to get past this and possibly be friends again.
She probably believes he intentionally aimed at the drone because if it was an accident,he wouldn't have sued him nor would the defendant agree to replace it. But since there's no proof, 75% culpability is better than 100%.
We were friends the whole time 😂🤣 it was his moms that’s the issue. I offered to pay to get it fixed but she wanted a whole new one. Also don’t forget while this is a real case it’s stil television
When did 20-something become the new adolescence in the US?
24 yrs old acting like he's 14. That's embarrassing.
That’s the type of mom that would cover for her son even if he doesn’t take care of his kids. She looks like the type that would blame the baby mama. What a sad mother and son
Grown men acting like they are still in junior high.
The defendant gets to keep the drone ?
On the video…….that was never on.
I love how the plaintiff leaves off the Gs on almost all his words lol
Right, he didnt know it was 9-10 feet above him 😂 Those things are anything but quite, especially at that range. Why people gotta lie?