• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Giggling woman flips judge the bird, judge not amused

VanceMack said:
Sounds like all is well that ends well. She apologized...maybe got a little insight...and he cut her loose.
Click to expand...

I hope so. In the YouTube link, look at her family's faces. I think Ms. Penelope Soto is still in big trouble.

If I'd been the judge, I would've let her sit a full week, but I think his was a good decision. Kid was high and a jerk (and playing at times to an audience, you might have noticed), and she's probably learned her lesson.

Unless, of course, she falls prey to idiots who treat her like a folk-hero rather than the foolish smartypants she was when high. ;)
 
nota bene said:
She flipped off the judge. That's contempt of court. Look it up. Or just watch "Law and Order" to get an idea of what this concept means.
Click to expand...
The TV show "Law and Order" is not a documentary. It is fictional.

Little girl, do you understand the concept of fiction yet?
 
nota bene said:
I hope so. In the YouTube link, look at her family's faces. I think Ms. Penelope Soto is still in big trouble.

If I'd been the judge, I would've let her sit a full week, but I think his was a good decision. Kid was high and a jerk (and playing at times to an audience, you might have noticed), and she's probably learned her lesson.

Unless, of course, she falls prey to idiots who treat her like a folk-hero rather than the foolish smartypants she was when high. ;)
Click to expand...

People of course are free to act like jerks, but that doesn't mean there won't be consequences. :mrgreen:
 
It's funny when people get themselves into trouble, and then want to give everyone else attitude as if it is someone else's fault. :lol: They are TRULY ignorant.
 
Quag said:
I had no trouble understanding the judge. Dont know why you are trying to make that an issue. She was clearly in contempt. In fact he could have held her in contempt for refusing to answer the question on the value of her jewelry.
Honsetly I have no clue where you are coming from on this. It is not a free speech issue it is a contempt of court issue in which she was clearly guilty of.
Click to expand...

I agree. Both the defendent and the Judge were Hispanic, so it's not that big of a deal.
 
Muhammed said:
I didn't make it an issue.

She did not in any way shape or form disrupt the proceedings of the court.

She exercised her right to free speech.
Click to expand...

Then why did you bring up his speach and try to make it look like he couldnt speak english?
Yes she actually did disrupt the procedings. In fact she was in contempt of court when she refused to answer the questions about her jewelry.
As to exercising her freedom of speech? WTF do you have any clue what freedom of speech or contempt of court are?
Obviously not!
So some unknown internet poster named muhammed says itys a freedom of speech isssue and that is supposed to carry any weight why?
Oh yeah it isant because the internet poster know SFA about the issue!
i only bring this up because for some reason the internet poster seems to think that internet posters opinions are not important. Which is true when they are just opinions but when backed with facts they carry some weight. Your argument has none.
 
Last edited:
Muhammed said:
The TV show "Law and Order" is not a documentary. It is fictional.

Little girl, do you understand the concept of fiction yet?
Click to expand...

You really can't control yourself, apparently. That's okay, though; in trying to diminish me by calling me a little girl, you've just shown everyone reading this thread the weakness of your argument. :lol:
 
Muhammed said:
Yeah, right. There's no way in hell he could say that. The guy can barely speak English.

Seriously.

In broken English he says to her...

"Bee ay arl ess, I dunno wut dat ees." (bars)

"Ow much wood joo say yoo jewoowie wort."

She must have felt like she fell down a rabbit hole when she was brought before an illiterate judge who could barely speak English.
Click to expand...

Is anyone surprised at you posting grotesquely bigoted messages?
 
The tv show Law & Order is fictional, yes. The story lines are fictional. There is some creative license going on, as well. But, the premise is also reasonably accurate.
 
radcen said:
The tv show Law & Order is fictional, yes. The story lines are fictional. There is some creative license going on, as well. But, the premise is also reasonably accurate.
Click to expand...

And so is the modeling of court decorum and the consequences of behaving disrespectfully.

Sure, there's creative license--in a real courtroom, those testifying are generally not able to tell their truths at expansive length. Lawyers like you to answer with "yes" or "no," and I've been shut up more than once while trying to explain. And people who are testifying hardly ever get to sit in the courtroom; instead, they languish outside in a hall, languishing for endless hours and not knowing what's going on.

But how to behave in court? That's pretty faithful.
 
nota bene said:
And so is the modeling of court decorum and the consequences of behaving disrespectfully.

Sure, there's creative license--in a real courtroom, those testifying are generally not able to tell their truths at expansive length. Lawyers like you to answer with "yes" or "no," and I've been shut up more than once while trying to explain. And people who are testifying hardly ever get to sit in the courtroom; instead, they languish outside in a hall, languishing for endless hours and not knowing what's going on.

But how to behave in court? That's pretty faithful.
Click to expand...
Yep. Agreed.
 
Muhammed said:
I didn't make it an issue.

She did not in any way shape or form disrupt the proceedings of the court.

She exercised her right to free speech.
Click to expand...

Muhammed, what country are you from? Are you new to this country?

If you are American, are you just a kid who doesn't know any better?

Either way, it is an universally bad idea, to do such things in a Court of Law. If you feel otherwise, I invite you to similarly express your "Free Speech", and appeal it on those grounds from your cell.
 
nota bene said:
You really can't control yourself, apparently. That's okay, though; in trying to diminish me by calling me a little girl, you've just shown everyone reading this thread the weakness of your argument. :lol:
Click to expand...

Hypocrite alert!

So you can dish it out but you can't take it?

You poor wittle girl. :(

That aside, you can't seem to produce any argument which shows the societal benefits of suppressing free speech by force of violence.

bye-bye.
 
Last edited:
Muhammed said:
Hypocrite alert!

So you can dish it out but you can't take it?

You poor wittle girl. :(

That aside, you can't seem to produce any argument which shows the societal benefits of suppressing free speech by force of violence.
bye-bye.
Click to expand...

You have not produced any argument to make this a free speech issue and not a contempt of court issue. Just claiming it is because is not an argument.
 
Quag said:
You have not produced any argument to make this a free speech issue and not a contempt of court issue. Just claiming it is because is not an argument.
Click to expand...
It's clearly a freedom of speech issue. The judge doubled her bond simply because she said "adios" in response to him condescendingly saying "bye bye" to her like she was a toddler.

And then when she expressed her displeasure via speech by saying FU as she was walking away the illiterate judge gave her 30 days in the slammer.

It's clearly about freedom of speech.
 
Muhammed said:
It's clearly a freedom of speech issue. The judge doubled her bond simply because she said "adios" in response to him condescendingly saying "bye bye" to her like she was a toddler.

And then when she expressed her displeasure via speech by saying FU as she was walking away the illiterate judge gave her 30 days in the slammer.

It's clearly about freedom of speech.
Click to expand...

Umm no it is clearly a contempt of court issue. He doubled the bond not just because of the adios that was simple the last straw or didnt you watch the video? as to the FU comment how is that not contempt of court?
I really think you have no clue what contempt of court is nor do you have any clue whjat freedom of speech is.
Untill you learn what these two things are you have no hope of ever understanding anything to do with this thread.
 
Muhammed said:
It's clearly a freedom of speech issue. The judge doubled her bond simply because she said "adios" in response to him condescendingly saying "bye bye" to her like she was a toddler.
Click to expand...

If she didn't act like a toddler, maybe she wouldn't have been treated like a toddler. /shrugs
 
Quag said:
Umm no it is clearly a contempt of court issue. He doubled the bond not just because of the adios that was simple the last straw or didnt you watch the video? as to the FU comment how is that not contempt of court?
I really think you have no clue what contempt of court is nor do you have any clue whjat freedom of speech is.
Untill you learn what these two things are you have no hope of ever understanding anything to do with this thread.
Click to expand...

These are complex concepts. Let's begin with understanding what "illiterate" means. The judge is demonstrably not illiterate.
 
Quag said:
Umm no it is clearly a contempt of court issue.
Click to expand...
Awww, cute little child... are you not yet old enough yet to understand the concept of freedom of speech?

Have you not yet gotten beyond mommy's "do what the babysitter says" stage of life yet?
 
nota bene said:
These are complex concepts. Let's begin with understanding what "illiterate" means. The judge is demonstrably not illiterate.
Click to expand...
Errrm, he demonstrated his illiteracy when he had to ask what the letters B A R S spelled.
 
Muhammed said:
Awww, cute little child... are you not yet old enough yet to understand the concept of freedom of speech?

Have you not yet gotten beyond mommy's "do what the babysitter says" stage of life yet?
Click to expand...

No it is you who does not seem to understand the concepts of freedom of speech not of contempt of court. Calling me a cute little child does not further your cause, it only show that you are unable to come up with a logical defense of your position.
 
Quag said:
No it is you who does not seem to understand the concepts of freedom of speech not of contempt of court. Calling me a cute little child does not further your cause, it only show that you are unable to come up with a logical defense of your position.
Click to expand...

My position is rock solid.

Freedom of speech.

Bye bye wittle gurl.
 
Superfly said:
You are really not helping your argument, Muhammed.
Click to expand...
Awww, is that wut your wittle gurl opinion is?

That's sooo cute, you wubby dubby wittle superfwy cutie.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom