FULL VIDEO AT THE END OF THIS POST
THIS EXCUSE DID NOT GO WELL IN COURT!
A Missing Apple Watch Sparks a Courtroom Battle
Imagine your child's expensive gift disappearing.
Now imagine it happened at a friend's house.
That's the situation Miss Diaz finds herself in.
She is the plaintiff in this case.
She is suing Miss DeFrancisco, the defendant.
Miss Diaz's son is also present as a witness.
Officer Borde is the bailiff.
The Plaintiff's Story: A Missing Watch and a Promise to Pay
Miss Diaz explains her son had an Apple Watch.
She bought it for him.
Her son spent a weekend at Miss DeFrancisco's house.
He came home without the watch.
Miss Diaz believes Miss DeFrancisco should be responsible.
She recounts the timeline of events.
In April 2019, her son visited the defendant's house.
The defendant has a stepson around the same age.
Her son returned home without the watch.
He told her he left it at the defendant's house.
Miss Diaz sent her son back to the house.
She also called Miss DeFrancisco.
They spoke on the phone that day.
Miss DeFrancisco told her the watch was last seen charging.
She said her daughter, Naya, was playing with it.
Judge Judy asks for clarification.
Miss Diaz confirms Miss DeFrancisco said the watch was charging.
She doesn't recall if a specific time was mentioned.
Nor if it was while her son was there or after he left.
Miss Diaz states Miss DeFrancisco promised to look for the watch.
Days passed.
Then a week.
No word about the watch.
Miss Diaz called again.
Miss DeFrancisco said he hadn't found it.
However, he promised to pay for it.
He said he would replace it because it was missing in his apartment.
More days went by.
Still nothing.
Miss Diaz called again.
No answer.
She called Miss DeFrancisco's girlfriend.
No answer there either.
Miss Diaz then sent a text to both of them.
She no longer has proof of the text.
She lost that phone.
She believes Miss DeFrancisco should have the text exchange.
Judge Judy reminds her that she needs to provide evidence.
Miss Diaz explains they had been friends for over 15 years.
Miss DeFrancisco told her he didn't have the money at the time.
Judge Judy summarizes Miss Diaz's account.
She asks if Miss DeFrancisco said he would pay because the watch went missing in his house.
Miss Diaz corrects her.
She says Miss DeFrancisco took responsibility.
He said he would pay because the watch was lost in the apartment.
Judge Judy points out that's what she just said.
The audience laughs.
Judge Judy then states Miss DeFrancisco is not legally responsible for the watch.
She explains that legal responsibility requires a connection to the loss.
The Plaintiff's Son's Conflicting Account
Miss Diaz argues her child was under Miss DeFrancisco's watch.
She believes if her child lost something at Miss DeFrancisco's house, he should replace it.
Judge Judy calls this a wrong interpretation of the law.
She asks how Miss Diaz's son got home.
Miss Diaz says they live a building away.
Judge Judy asks the son what time he left Miss DeFrancisco's house.
He says around 5 PM.
He went straight home.
He realized he didn't have the watch when he arrived home.
Judge Judy asks why he didn't go right back.
The son admits he feared his mom would be angry.
He didn't want to get in trouble.
Judge Judy says his mom wouldn't have known if he just went back.
The son says his mom asked for the watch around 6 or 7 PM.