Upload
Login or register
x

Comments(115):

Leave a comment Refresh Comments Show GIFs
12>
[ 115 comments ]
Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest
Anonymous comments allowed.
103 comments displayed.
Reply
+422
User avatar #2 - therealtjthemedic (06/05/2015) [-]
>writing LOLOL instead of 'haha'
Reply
0
User avatar #67 to #2 - shadowrated (06/06/2015) [-]
LOLOL goodpoint
Reply
0
User avatar #98 to #2 - dreygur (06/06/2015) [-]
But she's not hahaing, she's laughing out loud out loud
Reply
-15
User avatar #24 to #2 - cheddarcheesestick (06/05/2015) [-]
greentexting outside of 4chan
Reply
+65
User avatar #26 to #24 - wotterpatch (06/05/2015) [-]
>not understanding the usefulness of le maymay arrows
Reply
-5
#27 to #26 - anon (06/05/2015) [-]
They are useful for people that don't understand English well enough to properly express themselves.

Considering that seems to be the majority of users for this site, I suppose they are useful. But their usefulness, and actual use, should not be encouraged.
Reply
+8
User avatar #33 to #27 - hopporto (06/06/2015) [-]
>impying
Reply
0
User avatar #75 to #27 - shieeetposter (06/06/2015) [-]
I thought ">" stood for things like

implying that...

believing that...

did you seriously just... no tumblr reference intend

Or just as a way of quoting.
Reply
0
User avatar #101 to #75 - therealtjthemedic (06/06/2015) [-]
It's to quote and you can paraphrase what someone said to show what they implied
Reply
0
#91 to #75 - anon (06/06/2015) [-]
As far as I know, it began as a way to quote people on forums/boards. It became used for many things, like what you suggested.

However, the convention is now used primarily for *********** , shoving words into someone's mouth, and as a crutch by unintelligent people that just parrot and copy everything they see on the internet.
Reply
0
#66 to #27 - anon (06/06/2015) [-]
Writing implying before every sentence is pretty lame too friend.
Reply
0
#90 to #66 - anon (06/06/2015) [-]
Then figure out a different way to form a sentence?
Reply
+4
User avatar #37 to #24 - Thevaultboy (06/06/2015) [-]
>le epic 4chan exclusive meme
Reply
0
#69 to #37 - anon (06/06/2015) [-]
ebip simply epin XDddDD
Reply
0
#93 to #69 - anon (06/06/2015) [-]
benis
Reply
0
User avatar #80 to #24 - therealtjthemedic (06/06/2015) [-]
The meme chevrons are a useful way of quoting **** from a post and open up a whole new real of possibility for commenting concisely and quickly. Meme chevrons are a linguistic masterpiece.
Reply
+156
User avatar #11 - karlKroenen (06/05/2015) [-]
holy **** he actually said that
Reply
+3
#84 to #11 - fecal (06/06/2015) [-]
come on people don't actually think this stuff is real right?
Reply
+1
User avatar #102 to #84 - dtcdannyboy (06/06/2015) [-]
I know someone who was on judge judy, its just like any other small claims court.
Reply
-2
#103 to #102 - fecal (06/06/2015) [-]
so you know a miserably failed actor?
Reply
+1
User avatar #104 to #103 - dtcdannyboy (06/06/2015) [-]
Nope, just a regularly lady who felt she was entitled to a guys motorcycle he bought for her to use while they were dating for three months. Shes a probation officer and he owns a salvage yard...
Reply
-2
#105 to #104 - fecal (06/06/2015) [-]
still don't believe it, sorry. Either it's fake or America has a massive mental redardation issue as well as a laughably bad justice system.
Reply
0
User avatar #115 to #105 - bandoslootshare (06/15/2015) [-]
Judge Judy is a TV show in which two parties who are in disagreement hires an "Arbiter" and signs a contract, saying whatever the arbiter can settle the case. Anyone can be ab Arbiter, you me, "Judge" Judy. She's just arbiter who happens to like to add in a television clause into the contract and puts it on television. Everything is real and No she does not have unlimited power, she can only tells one party to pay up to 5,000$ USD because its small claims and a lot of laws don't apply to small claims, unlike the lawsuits that go up to millions of dollars.
Reply
0
User avatar #107 to #105 - dtcdannyboy (06/06/2015) [-]
Aside from all that, I totally agree that america has a ****** justice system. Our prisons are overflowing with minor drug offenders and they just keep building more.
Reply
0
User avatar #106 to #105 - dtcdannyboy (06/06/2015) [-]
Dude, it's small claims court. You can take your case to whatever small claims court you want with hopes that the judge is in your favor. They don't deal with actual criminals. It's for americas favorite thing. SUING PEOPLE!!!!! lol
Reply
0
#108 to #106 - fecal (06/06/2015) [-]
okay, I guess you're right then. It's just really difficult for me to believe that people would actually try to make entertainment out of the justice system. And even more so that the criminals are retarded enough to actually make it entertaining.

Don't get me wrong I've been and America in many ways is an amazing country just some **** seems so stupid to me it's hard to believe it's considered normal over there. That being said, we don't have as many ******* over here and the ones we do have are usually pretty much functioning members of society. More than enough arabs, but they're not hilarious-stupid, more dangerously stupid
Reply
+12
#63 to #11 - anon (06/06/2015) [-]
There was another episode where this idiot girl said (in reference to her throwing a rock through her ex boyfriend's car window) "He didn't see me do that!" That's pretty damning, but she continued. "That car is too old to even run. It' s not because I threw the r- uh his car got damaged that it doesn't run."
Reply
+84
User avatar #17 to #11 - pistachioofdoom (06/05/2015) [-]
the absolute madman
Reply
+2
User avatar #9 - elmilius (06/05/2015) [-]
explain?
Reply
-4
#89 to #9 - privateno (06/06/2015) [-]
Nowhere in the content did the cheap ass ****** say the ydid not steal the wallet
Reply
0
#72 to #9 - anon (06/06/2015) [-]
They did be saying there was no earpiece
Reply
-6
#16 to #9 - anon (06/05/2015) [-]
yeah you ******* tard
Reply
+726
User avatar #10 to #9 - seeyouinhell (06/05/2015) [-]
how did they know there was no earpiece when they said they didnt steal it?

they proved themselves guilty
Reply
+8
#99 to #10 - seeyouinhell (06/06/2015) [-]
oh i wasnt expecting that many thumbs
Reply
+4
User avatar #100 to #99 - wtfduud (06/06/2015) [-]
How to get thumbs: Be early comment.
Reply
-9
#31 to #10 - anon (06/06/2015) [-]
The fact that 116+ people didn't understand this, makes them equal too or worse than the "dumbass ****** ". Christ the FJ fanbase has crumbled.
dubstop i feel you bro
Reply
-5
User avatar #74 to #31 - shieeetposter (06/06/2015) [-]
Or maybe they can't brain at the moment. It happens to me a lot, I would get stuck on a simple addition problem longer than I would be willing to admit and sometimes I can solve a complex riddle pretty quick.
Reply
-4
#44 to #31 - anon (06/06/2015) [-]
Samefag? Most likely. Will the anon retort with something claiming they're not? I doubt it.
-62
#19 to #10 - dubstop has deleted their comment [-]
Reply
+64
User avatar #22 to #19 - jamiemsm ONLINE (06/05/2015) [-]
yes he explained the joke to someone who wanted the joke explained
Reply
+184
#1 - roguekek (06/05/2015) [-]
Reply
+39
#56 - munchyman (06/06/2015) [-]
That black guys mind probably went something like this.
That black guys mind probably went something like this.
Reply
+2
User avatar #60 to #56 - PVTDickStryker ONLINE (06/06/2015) [-]
****** dont think.
Reply
0
#94 to #60 - henkstr (06/06/2015) [-]
****** racist ass funnyjunk at it again
Reply
0
User avatar #109 to #94 - PVTDickStryker ONLINE (06/06/2015) [-]
I said ******* , not black people.

******* are the moronic black people that decide to perpetuate the stereotypes that plague their culture by adopting the whole hood mentality crap. i.e. Snoop Dogg is a ****** , Neil Degrasse Tyson is not.
Reply
0
#110 to #109 - henkstr (06/06/2015) [-]
man **** you, the way I see it you just trying to justify your racist thinking and trying to get away with saying ****** , but it doesnt work that way. You think people would approve if you were to say " ****** dont think" in public? You wouldnt even dare to say that man.
Reply
0
User avatar #111 to #110 - PVTDickStryker ONLINE (06/06/2015) [-]
You seem to still think that when I say ***** , im talking about every black. Consider that every demographic has a population within it that seems to take pride in the negative assumptions made towards their own kind, assumptions that hurt the rest but they themselves act out. In my view, derogatory terms would properly apply to them. A thieving, treacherous hispanic that feels only empathy towards their own kind deserves to be called a spic, a gay man that forces their sexuality on everyone and assumes that any form of tension is homophobia should be a faggot, etc. Nobody's special.

But yeah, you're right. Instead of using those words on the people that actually perpetuate them, lets just cover it up, make it illegal, and pretend it never happened. After all, no group has its own common denominator.
Reply
0
#112 to #111 - henkstr (06/06/2015) [-]
I'm not saying make saying ****** illegal, im just saying many people on this site make themselves feel comfortable with the word by justifying it with ******** reasons. I know what youre talking about, but if I were black, I'd often just feel like you just needed an excuse to say the word because deep down, you grew a hatred towards that race/minority, know what I mean?
Not an english language native btw.
Reply
0
#82 to #60 - anon (06/06/2015) [-]
****** do, ******* do not
Reply
+86
#54 - Elk (06/06/2015) [-]
**Elk used "*roll picture*"**
**Elk rolled image** Me when I'm on Judge Judy.
Reply
+5
#73 to #54 - insaneflame (06/06/2015) [-]
**insaneflame used "*roll picture*"**
**insaneflame rolled image**

Sucks
Reply
+8
User avatar #15 - rothingham (06/05/2015) [-]
Doesn't that mean she lied stating there was an earpiece in her wallet while there wasn't , while being under oath?
Wouldn't this cause the case to be dismissed or something?
I'm just saying, I really don't know though.
Reply
0
#45 to #15 - anon (06/06/2015) [-]
Yeah, because the american legal system is retarded.
Reply
0
#97 to #15 - rknight (06/06/2015) [-]
Doesn't really matter. She could claim an 500 pound elephant was among the stolen items in her wallet. There's no way the defendants would know what was in the wallet unless they took it. By stating an item was in fact, NOT in the wallet, they proved they had knowledge of its contents. The girl had to make the initial claim as to what was stolen. That would be in the police report. If she suddenly added something while in court, the judge would see that as she has copies of the reports and could call her out on it. If the defendant had just stayed silent they could of argued their case. I'd bet they still would of lost tho.
Doesn't really matter. She could claim an 500 pound elephant was among the stolen items in her wallet. There's no way the defendants would know what was in the wallet unless they took it. By stating an item was in fact, NOT in the wallet, they proved they had knowledge of its contents.

The girl had to make the initial claim as to what was stolen. That would be in the police report. If she suddenly added something while in court, the judge would see that as she has copies of the reports and could call her out on it.

If the defendant had just stayed silent they could of argued their case. I'd bet they still would of lost tho.
Reply
0
User avatar #20 to #15 - goondas (06/05/2015) [-]
Or maybe the blacks were lying that there wasnt an earpiece?
Reply
+1
#29 to #15 - selfrazedzealot (06/05/2015) [-]
If the defendant pretty much admits to committing the crime, then that's that. If someone had their purse stolen and lied about one item, taking them to a separate case of perjury would be a huge waste, especially if she was already a victim. In this case, chances are she either wasn't sure of the items in the purse and they were because they had it last or they weren't sure of what was in the purse because they're complete idiots. I doubt she would lie to get an extra couple bucks if she won, seems like an unlikely risk.
Reply
+1
User avatar #32 to #15 - heartlessrobot (06/06/2015) [-]
Could be passed off as thinking her earpiece was in there when it really wasn't.
Reply
+1
#62 to #15 - twilightdusk (06/06/2015) [-]
This is Judge Judy, in which both the prosecution and the defense have essentially agreed to throw out all pretense of proper court procedure and accept whatever judgement Judy decides on.
Reply
+2
User avatar #25 to #15 - fudgem (06/05/2015) [-]
they are arbitration's, and even if she was in a hearing or trial she isnt on the stand and therefore not underoath.
Reply
+3
#28 to #25 - selfrazedzealot (06/05/2015) [-]
Plaintiffs are under oath and it's called perjury.
Reply
+3
User avatar #21 to #15 - iqequalzero (06/05/2015) [-]
Any legal system that lets a case drop when the defendant has all but confessed is a ******* failure.

Lying under oath could be cause for a separate trial, I dont think it can cause the current case to be dropped.
Reply
+4
#30 to #15 - kingderps (06/05/2015) [-]
She didn't lie, there was an ear piece, they were denying it to avoid guilt... ironically.
Reply
+43
User avatar #18 to #15 - wolfypolli (06/05/2015) [-]
Only if you could prove she purposefully lied. It'd be pretty easy for any defense to just blame it on having to try and remember every single item that was in her purse on a specific day.
Reply
0
User avatar #87 to #18 - didactus ONLINE (06/06/2015) [-]
Also, perjury only applies if it is proven willful and has central meaning to the outcome of the case aswell as it only is called perjury if she asserts the thruthfulness of her statement which she didn't.
She has not committed perjury under any legal definition.
Reply
0
User avatar #86 to #18 - didactus ONLINE (06/06/2015) [-]
Another excuse could just be that she had dropped it or the criminals in this case had dropped it when stealing it.
Reply
+4
#38 - Persistence (06/06/2015) [-]
Teeeeeeeeechnially, she just lied. You can't do that in court.
Reply
+1
#52 to #38 - DudeBro (06/06/2015) [-]
When you agree to be on judge Judy you waive the right to an actual fair trial and give the judge full power on the trial. This is why many cases that have no chance are on the show, because although Judge Judy has a very fine understanding of the law, anything can still happen.

I'm not sure if its true but I'm pretty sure if you tried hard enough you could actually appeal her decision if you thought it went over the line. But that might be covered by the waiver when you sign up.1
Reply
+2
User avatar #49 to #38 - therealfell (06/06/2015) [-]
are you ******* serious? either she thought it was, or it was and ******** lied
Reply
+4
User avatar #46 to #38 - gmarrox (06/06/2015) [-]
Judge Judy is to the judicial system what a Big Mac is to gourmet cuisine.
Reply
+32
User avatar #39 to #38 - sociocat (06/06/2015) [-]
you cant be the one who stole stuff in court either
Reply
-5
#40 to #39 - Persistence (06/06/2015) [-]
You can, you'll just be on trial.

See, anyone can break the law, but America likes to spout this specific phrase:

*Innocent until proven guilty*

So you will be given a hearing and/or trial, go over both sides of each story, and have those 12 people on the side decide your fate right before the judge does.

Now that I think about it, Judge Judy is one of the few judges that are televised. Are they just ****** judges compared to those that deal with murder?

**** the legal system, I'm gonna go play LoL.
Reply
+3
User avatar #41 to #40 - sociocat (06/06/2015) [-]
"im gonna go play LoL"
well i cant disagree with your compelling argument
Reply
+47
#3 - summin (06/05/2015) [-]
Shaqwoya have really adorable face in that last picture.
Reply
+1
#58 to #3 - newdevyx (06/06/2015) [-]
Yes.
Yes.
Reply
+2
#36 to #3 - lithiumION (06/06/2015) [-]
oh god thank you so much for this video
Reply
+5
#59 to #3 - newdevyx (06/06/2015) [-]
But wait, there's more!
Reply
+6
User avatar #34 to #3 - hopporto (06/06/2015) [-]
HOW DOES THAT 3RD ONE SOUND SO MUCH LIKE A NORMAL HUMAN BEING
Reply
+14
#50 - OldSnake (06/06/2015) [-]
To quote an older meme,
To quote an older meme,
Reply
+4
#61 to #50 - pinethrush (06/06/2015) [-]
>2010
>older meme

oh wait... **** , 2010's actually kinda old now.
Reply
+3
User avatar #4 - DivineInfinity ONLINE (06/05/2015) [-]
source?
0
#5 to #4 - whatdoyawant [OP] Comment deleted by whatdoyawant [-]
0
#6 to #4 - whatdoyawant [OP] Comment deleted by whatdoyawant [-]
Reply
+9
#92 - tarabostes ONLINE (06/06/2015) [-]
Reply
+12
User avatar #47 - kibuza ONLINE (06/06/2015) [-]
There was an episode a few days ago at work where a Mom was suing her 18y old son for breaking a bunch of **** in the apartment he was renting from his Mom and Judge Judy just said
"Well, it's your 18y old. What do you expect 18y olds to do in a rented apartment."

As if the fact that she was renting to her own kid it makes him null from rentee responsibilities. She's such a stupid cunt sometimes.
Reply
0
#55 to #47 - lonerstonerr (06/06/2015) [-]
That's an absolute load of ****
Reply
0
User avatar #77 to #47 - jaevel (06/06/2015) [-]
I'm going to need citations on that one!
Reply
0
User avatar #95 to #47 - neokun (06/06/2015) [-]
If that is true she automatically goes from stuck up cow to pants on head retarded.
Reply
+3
#81 - obese ONLINE (06/06/2015) [-]
My laptop is broken, I lost all my relevant images. I'm not finding the one I want to post on this machine, it sucks too much balls. Here's what I'd post if... lol you know what would be perfect? I'm gonna go google a different one. After reading my comment you'll understand how awesomely relevant the image will be. I feel like a wizard. I guess at this point I could have probably found the original image I wanted. Now I'm just wasting my time typing this. **** . I'm being dumb though so that should count for something at least?
Reply
+4
#88 to #81 - basalm (06/06/2015) [-]
4 lulz
Reply
+4
User avatar #70 - thegreenbutton (06/06/2015) [-]
The guy on the left looks like he can't believe what his friend just did.
Reply
+4
#64 - anon (06/06/2015) [-]
For those that are having trouble understanding, by them saying there wasn't an earpiece in there, they proved themselves guilty because how could they know the earpiece wasn't in the purse if they didn't steal it.
Reply
+3
#76 to #64 - ryrynz (06/06/2015) [-]
There are people having trouble understanding this?
Reply
+1
User avatar #85 to #76 - technobanana (06/06/2015) [-]
Well if there is people stupid enough to do something this stupid theres gonna be people stupid enough to not get it...
Reply
0
#113 to #85 - ryrynz (06/08/2015) [-]
People that dumb know how to internet?
Reply
0
User avatar #114 to #113 - technobanana (06/08/2015) [-]
Unfortunately people that dumb do know how to internet
Reply
0
User avatar #83 to #76 - weinerdick (06/06/2015) [-]
you would be surprised
Reply
+2
User avatar #35 - nanako (06/06/2015) [-]
Judge Jewdy
Reply
0
User avatar #57 - theugandanhero (06/06/2015) [-]
It's funny because I didn't see anything anwhere about the two ****** in question denying the fact that they were in her wallet, and before someone gets on here and corrects me; shut the **** up, I know now.
12>
[ 115 comments ]
Leave a comment
<
>
 Friends (0)