Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaA panel of three judges hear court cases, argue the merits of the case amongst themselves, and render a verdict.A panel of three judges hear court cases, argue the merits of the case amongst themselves, and render a verdict.A panel of three judges hear court cases, argue the merits of the case amongst themselves, and render a verdict.
- Premi
- 4 candidature totali
Sfoglia gli episodi
Recensioni in evidenza
You ever notice how Judge Demango never believe anyone and is ready to dismiss each case. Too lazy to listen and learn more.
Today's episode was the last straw!! I agree that Judges Acker & Dimango have their moments but Judge Corriero totally disregards the facts in the case and makes up new ones. A young Lyft driver sued a woman for literally pulling out of a spot right into his car. She claimed to be parallel parking but clearly she was pulling out. Of course, no insurance!!! Since the plaintiff stated he didn't see her, Judge C took that to mean she was parking rather then the more logical she was pulling out. I don't know about you but I assume parked cars are staying that way. He is such a bleeding heart that it makes it impossible to enjoy the program. Time to hang up the robe!!!
My take on the objectivity of judges (I know it's only TeeVee judging):
Judge Dimango seems to be the most objective / least biased, although she has her moments.
Judge Acker makes an effort to be objective, and sometimes she surprises me with insight, but may be a bit more biased in some areas than Dimango.
Judge Corriero is more interested in showing that he is a really swell guy and a self-appointed moral giant than in following any laws / making an unbiased decision / being fair to people. His statements are full of "virtue-signaling". A man versus a woman will only be able to get any traction if his evidence and behavior and legal basis are absolutely impeccable. Corriero will try to find any weakness in the man and then lecture him.
Judge Dimango seems to be the most objective / least biased, although she has her moments.
Judge Acker makes an effort to be objective, and sometimes she surprises me with insight, but may be a bit more biased in some areas than Dimango.
Judge Corriero is more interested in showing that he is a really swell guy and a self-appointed moral giant than in following any laws / making an unbiased decision / being fair to people. His statements are full of "virtue-signaling". A man versus a woman will only be able to get any traction if his evidence and behavior and legal basis are absolutely impeccable. Corriero will try to find any weakness in the man and then lecture him.
I don't know how this show has remained on the air for 5 years. Judge Judy created it, but these judges don't compare well to her. Perhaps it's their focus on achieving unanimity that makes too many of their decisions seem unfair. Oftentimes, I find myself agreeing with Judge Acker when she dissents. (Although she was never on the bench in real life, she's the best judge on this panel, IMHO.) Judge Corriero wears his heart on his sleeves, sometimes inappropriately. I was gobsmacked when he practically apologized to a pit bull owner for ruling in favor of the plaintiff who had sued her for damages related to an attack by the defendant's dog. Whaaat?!? Lastly, what's up with Judge DiMango and Judge Corriero's inability (or refusal) to call the litigants by their names. Every one is "you," "he," "she".... They disrespect the litigants by not bothering to address them by name. Plus, for those of us who aren't staring at the TV the entire time to see on whom the camera is focused (because we're multi-tasking), it's hard to follow along. Even Judge Judy, who is probably older than DiMango and Corriero, can recall and use the names of the parties who come before her. How hard is that? (And if it is hard, the show's producers should place name cards on the front of the podia.) "Hot Bench" is amateur hour compared to Judge Judy. She should give Judge Acker her own show and be done with it.
First of all, no, I have never been on this show. I love the idea of 3 judges and being able to see their discussion. The problem that I have with this show is Judge Corriero.....he will ALWAYS side with the female, ESPECIALLY if it is a single mom, he sides with anyone who brings in a child, he is so touchy, feely, sing Koombyya that it just turns me off. He needs to get a little tougher...the only time I saw him raise his voice was at a man who he felt took advantage of a female....without letting the guy give his side of the story. He needs to go...on the opposite end, the two female judges have more moxy than Corriero...they see right through the liars where Corriero does not.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizPatricia is a retired New York City supreme court judge. Tanya & Larry are lawyers.
- ConnessioniSpoofed in Il Saturday Night Live: Emma Thompson/Jonas Brothers (2019)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How many seasons does Hot Bench have?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
By what name was Hot Bench (2014) officially released in Canada in English?
Rispondi