On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 19:34:12 -0500, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

>On 11/27/2018 5:21 PM, Bruce wrote:
>> On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 16:16:28 -0600, Hank Rogers >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Bruce wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 21:25:38 GMT, Pamela >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I like Judge Judy too. She cuts straight through to the heart of the
>>>>> matter.
>>>>
>>>> A judge should be intelligent, balanced and maybe even wise, and not a
>>>> snarky bitch with a sharp tongue and a bad temper.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It may be just for show. Court cases are mostly boring as hell, so they
>>> may just have her put on a show for the viewers.
>>
>> That's no doubt true, but are here verdicts binding or also just for
>> show?
>>
>
>Verdicts are binding but you can't lose. The winner is paid from a pot
>of $5000 and they split the leftover.
>
>As for being a snarky bitch, this is about TV ratings, not justice.

In my country, "judge" really means something. There's a Dutch TV
judge. He's a friendly, mild-mannered man. His cases are real and his
verdicts are binding. Ratings are important for that show too, but not
at the expense of everything.