HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, get em Judge Joe!

LOL! He seems like someone who had bad pictures taken of his own wedding. Haha. That is awesome!

I agree. Lol!

Oh my gosh, that photographer was SOOO trashy. Poor bride.
I do think the judge made some assumptions and had opinions that perhaps weren't necessarily true. How was he going to prove they didn't use a tripod, it's not like that's in the exif data, unless they had witnesses? And further more, I do know that pastors and priests have asked photographers (recently) not to use flash, so that could have happened. We won't know unless we ask the pastor.
However, with that being said I agree with the ruling, the bride was trying to be fair and I think that's what won her the case from the get-go.

Ooooh when that photographer said "she's gonna cry now" I was floored. I think that was a big reason the judge ruled that she should pay more.

I agree that he did make assumptions, but it drives me crazy when people can't just shut up sometimes and let other people talk. I think that's what bothered me most about the photographer.    There was one time where the bride started to do that, and the judge stopped her and she didn't do it again. Oh well. I like that he gave her over twice as much as she was asking for; everyone there just looked completely shocked.

I think that was the point when my mouth fell open.

YEAH, meeting in the parking lot of Walmart!  Sheesh. Now I have done prints for myself once or twice at Walmart because the kiosk is fast, but NEVER NEVER NEVER for a client, and prints I made were for things like my daughter's birthday spotlight at school.

And yeah, a Rebel isn't a bad camera but.... yeah it didn't help their case.

I think it's weird they didn't show ceremony shots. Some of the ones they showed weren't that awful or anything, not great, but not awful. But seeing it on a Youtube video means I can't see blur or noise.

  HAHAHHAHAHAH!!!