America's Court with Judge Ross

Working in the legal profession, I would think his show is a satire. Every ruling is wrong that I've seen. Can't watch this show. His intro claims to educate. It's not on the law, that's for sure. Too bad for losers if it's binding The worst representation of the judical process. Lazy and careless. Best representation of why you need a lawyer.

This show is really good for cringe watching at best. The plaintiffs and defendants are always terrible actors. Interesting reviews on this show are also fun to read. Surely no one thinks this is real.

Judge Judy is the original and best--in part because she's wicked smart and also because she was sitting in family court in NYC when the rest of the TV judges were in grade school. None of the other TV judges can cross-examine (eviscerate) a witness as well as Judge Judy. Judge Milian (sp) is my second fave and there are a couple of the others (i.e., Judge Alex and Judge Toler) who are okay. But the rest of the TV judges are pretty lame. Either they don't know much law; or they are not smart enough and/or quick enough to make minced meat of the liars who come before them; or they lack sufficient personality (charisma?) to entertain; or they are essentially social workers wearing a black robe and sitting on a bench. Whatever the reason, we could do with fewer of them. That includes Judge Ross. Although he's easy on the eyes, it's painful to watch him discharge his judicial duties, such as they are. Most of the time, when he says "the gavel is going to come down in favor of...," I get the impression that he hasn't even made-up his mind yet. There's a pregnant, expectant pause that screams uncertainty. And his recitation and application of the law are on the light side. Perhaps that doesn't matter on TV. But, then, what's the point?

Why is this show even on the air in select places? Kevin Ross is not a judge anymore and was disbarred by the State Bar of California.

Kevin Ross was a judge in the Los Angeles courts at one time. Unfortunately, he treated his courtroom like his own little kingdom and regularly abused the rights of people coming before him. (Do a Google search for the Los Angeles Times article on this, published Nov. 17, 2005.) He violated so many people's rights, that the Commission on Judicial Performance (California's governing body over Judges in the State) conducted an investigation.

At the end of their investigation, they REVOKED Kevin Ross' judgeship, and the State Bar of California also DISBARRED this guy from ever practicing law in California again.

So now he ends up doing a TV show as a "Judge"?? Not only is that ludicrous, the show is awful. As another reviewer here said, it's legal lite, as though the Judge doesn't have a breadth of the law. Well... he doesn't! Not when he consistently violated the rights of people appearing in his real courtroom when he was a Judge.

Yet another scripted show, with a discredited former judge. From the LA Times: "L.A. Judge Is Removed From Bench Performance panel says the jurist used TV appearances to market himself for better job." ... Judge Kevin A. Ross -- the eighth California judge removed since 1995 -- was found to have "marketed himself as a judge in hopes that he then could leave the bench for a more lucrative career in television."

The Commission on Judicial Performance also held that Ross had 'trampled' on the rights of three defendants, including a woman he jailed for 2 1/2 days after tacking extra charges on to her case.

Ross improperly commented on a pending case on a public television show and lied in hearings and documents relating to his disciplinary charges, the commission found. ... Ross had been privately sanctioned by the commission...for abusing his authority and demeaning and humiliating defendants. 'As I have previously indicated, I accept complete responsibility for those specific actions that did not exemplify the highest standards of judicial excellence,' Ross said in a written statement. ... The commission also found Ross had misled the commission and fabricated stories during his defense. ... This case, the commission concluded, 'shows a shocking abuse of power and disregard of fundamental rights.'