Judge Judy Under Fire For Alleged Racism And Abuse On Show

If there’s one thing Hollywood is known for, it’s scandals. And it appears not even the seemingly impartial presence of Judge Judy star and former Manhattan Family Court Judge Judith Sheindlin is above such allegations of impropriety.

In a new investigation by Business Insider reporter Nicole Einbinder, former Judge Judy employees alleged that Sheindlin, who launched a $25 million streaming show with Amazon earlier this week, “failed to hold the line” against racism, sexual harassment, and abuse happening on her show, Einbinder said on Twitter.

This all apparently stems from Judge Judy‘s longtime executive producer Randy Douthit, who has been repeatedly accused of disturbing behavior, such as ordering producers to bring fewer Black participants on to the show, making offensive and denigrating remarks in regard to litigants, and sexually harassing employees.

In one instance in 2007, the report said that an affidavit it obtained stated former producer Courtney Bullock, who is Black, was sexually harassed, discriminated against, and retaliated against. This included claims, which Bullock filed to the Equal Employment Opportunity, that Douthit repeatedly touched her inappropriately. She claimed she was then retaliated against and fired for not reciprocating his advances.

Another allegation from a former employee stated that Douthit openly talked about women litigants’ breasts while in the control room at show tapings and discussed what he thought their level of attractiveness was, including that he wanted to “get” those he found attractive, but made pig or cow noises for those he found “too ugly” or “too fat.” He also called a Black guest a “ho,” the accusation stated.

Does this change your perception of Judge Judy or the way Hollywood operates? Leave it in the comments below.

Comments (38)

We've migrated from our usual commenting platform and unfortunately were not able to migrate the comments over. We apologize for any inconvenience that this may cause.

  1. Anon444says:

    Just about everything in the Business Insider article has been publicized before. Allegations were dealt with by CBS and some matters went on to become lawsuits. This is old news. Judith Sheindlin was the talent for the show “Judge Judy.” She flew in from the east coast to tape the show and when done, flew back home. She did not have an office in the production office so she wouldn’t know first-hand what was going on. She may or may not have been told about these allegations. To assume she was aware and did nothing is ridiculous without absolute proof. Just because you say it doesn’t make it true.

    It’s the job of the co-executive producer and/or supervising producer to deal with problems in the office, not Judge Judy. It doesn’t seem like anything was ignored. HR was contacted every time and investigations were made. If CBS’ HR department had decided something was serious, I’m sure Randy Douthit would have been replaced. No matter how much Judge Judy likes Randy Douthit, I don’t see her protecting him and wanting him to work on her show if he had been proven to be a racist and/or sexual harasser.

    The title of the article is odd – why would former employees be so concerned that the new Amazon show would be “more of the same?” Those who are working on the new show are adults and should know how to contact HR if they feel something is amiss. Former employees are just that – former employees that need to move on.

    The timing of the publishing of this article is so suspect. Someone wants to throw shade on Judge Judy and the production company to mess up the new show. I wonder if it’s someone who was not asked to join the new show, is pissed off, and now has too much time on their hands so they’re doing whatever they can to cause problems? Hmmm…

    1. Stu woosays:

      Unfortunately many people assume an allegation is true before it’s been unequivocally proven. There are just as many people willing to falsely accuse someone of a violation as there are people willing to commit those violations. It’s the law of averages. These claims should be considered with skepticism to both parties . Allegations need to be proven , innocence does not need to be proven, and opinions are like a** ****s ! Everyone gots one and most stink!!

  2. Prettysays:

    Officer Byrd
    Didn’t get a fair deal!

    1. King dsays:

      Sounds like he didn’t get a fair deal.

  3. Babssays:

    She is abusive herself. Not surprised

  4. Hector R.says:

    Hector Rios

    1. Hector R.says:

      There are no more surprises of detox and racist work place environments. Judge Judy will just be another added to the list. SHAME SHAME..PS Sorry Byrd, you deserved better.

      1. Devotedsays:

        An allegation is simply an allegation, nothing more. It would be completely irresponsible to
        Pass judgment or form an opinion prematurely. I would think it necessary to include the performance records of all involved to come to an informed conclusion. In today’s climate of over inflated accusations and erroneous claims without a consequence for a false allegation I find it difficult to believe a great many of these claims. If and when these claimants expose themselves to complete scrutiny themselves I might then be more willing to consider they might be accurate but until then it’s simply a story from one side only.

  5. Popcornsays:

    I have NEVER like Judge Judy

    1. Pippersays:

      Change the channel. No one is forced to watch.

      1. Riesays:

        Everyone one has a right 2 their opinion. If you don’t like , it don’t respond..not everything warrants your opinion…

    2. Jakesays:

      Me neither. Let’s just say I come from a profession that through many decades of experience I can spot a liar from a mile away, and she has dishonesty just dripping from her. And before I get the usually, “If you don’t like her, don’t want her” comment, whether I watch her or not is not at issue, her seriously disordered personality (which is fairly easy to pick up on that she has a raging case of narcissistic personality disorder). It’s astounding really how many people somewhere along the spectrum of NPD study law. It seems much higher than just rank coincidence.

  6. Nate Stakelysays:

    So, since liberals have murked the sediment in the water soooooooo bad I have no choice but to come away from this with ” I wonder if this is just woke nit pick”. Sorry folks, you have to entertain the boy who cried wolf every instance of reporting these days. They have done it to themselves.

    1. Marcysays:

      You probably think the Clintons are in on it. So many conspiracy theories!

  7. Scrapironsays:

    television blows bright lights and big money can’t take the animal out of people and this guy is typical of teenage mentality but his behavior is minor compared to the crap passed off as entertainment by Sheindlin. She actually may have been a normal judge once upon a time but once she got in front of the camera a really lame actress with horrible timing emerged. Can you imagine a world without crap shows like this? Joe Pine in a gown……have a great day folks you gotta wade thru this miserable level of bullshit, but thats what they want to hear “they’ll all hate her and thats what we want” mindless muck raking for the sake of dollars dumb down and devolve sign here

  8. Kat Dsays:

    Don’t understand why this is just coming to light. Judge Judy has always been abusive and derogatory. The fact that her show is so popular and profitable is disturbing.

    1. RowbieAsays:

      I totally agree with you! She is just downright RUDE!!! As someone else so aptly stated, she is abrasive and disrespectful.

      1. Jakesays:

        Agree with both of you. I know we can’t diagnose people from a distance with any certainty, but the way she acts so incredibly rude and short tempered she seems to me like she is along the spectrum for narcissistic personality disorder. She’s as mean as a snake, I think that’s part of the enjoyment of people watching unfortunately as well.

  9. D P Johnssays:

    If Judge Judy were a man, her show would have been cancelled long ago for her brash, abrasive, disrespectful manner.

    1. Bobbisays:

      Exactly

    2. Riesays:

      True that!

    3. Jakesays:

      Truth

  10. Straight Shootersays:

    Judy’s new internet program is failing miserably as she has added her really stupid granddaughter on one side of her and her mindless court reporting friend on the other side of her. She won’t get contracted for any more shows once her initial contract expires!

    1. Seegsays:

      She’s almost 80 years old and worth almost $300 million dollars. Who cares if her new show makes it or not? She made her money and her mark.

      1. Riesays:

        Duh!
        She obviously cares or her old butt would have retired by now…so if she made her mark and money .she could have stopped when her contract with Judge Judy ENDED…just sayin

    2. Riesays:

      Yep…you right about that! She said Byrd was to expensive..well..what is the granddaughter making and has she ANY LEGAL EXPERIENCE OTHER THAN HER OPINIONS, Byrd should have been told by loud mouth herself…

  11. Sparrowsays:

    I thought that Terry McAuliffe just said there were too many white teachers in Virginia. Now that’s racist.

    1. Riesays:

      Stay on topic please

      1. Thank the Good Lord Youngkin won! And you’re right. Mcauliffe is racist. 100%

    2. Marksays:

      Youngkin for the win!

  12. Sparrowsays:

    Didn’t Terry McAuliffe
    Just said we need to hire less white teachers. Is that racist.

  13. Objective Scholarsays:

    For the producer or whoever seeking to have fewer African Americans appear on the show could only protect the image of the African American community. To say that this is discriminatory is misleading.

  14. Objective Scholarsays:

    For the producer or who(m)ever to try to get fewer African Americans litigants on the show can only be complimentary to the public image of the African American community. So many times they (we) appear on the show ,the image of the African American community is set back 65 years

  15. Bobbisays:

    Never did like jj. She is one nasty woman.

    1. Riesays:

      Agreed

  16. Truth2powersays:

    No surprised at all. Judge Judy is just another hack lawyer making a farce of justice for profit by clowning the pathetic losers who appear before her clown court. You know, like most all judges.

  17. Anasays:

    She is racist, very obvious. She will never give any BIPOC a chance to be heard with dignity and with respect. I have seen a lot of them, either be the plaintiff or defendant get humiliated and indignified just because of their skin color. Sheindlin would criticize how they present themselves, even if they are not doing anything suggestive of malice or coercion. She will condition the audience that BIPOC is doing something wrong even when there is nothing in there, and in front of the camera where a lot of people gets influenced by her words. It is absolutely indoctrinating hate towards BIPOC. She has to be reprimanded for this. She thinks she is too smart to ever get sued for her demeanor, Too cocky. She sounded like the Trump telling people that he could bring his gun and shoot someone in the middle of that New York Times Square and that people would not even care. You need a better judge deciding and telling USA the law, and not a racist in a black gown whose judgment is impaired because she is color biased.

  18. Stu woosays:

    And here we go again! When someone makes a claim of being discriminated against due to race or any other distinguishing characteristics those claims should be taken seriously of course but the accuser also needs to be scrutinized just as well and if the claims turn out to be false the accuser needs to be Held accountable . Using our distinguishing differences for an excuse for anything and everything Negative that happens in your life is a bit pathetic. There appears to be a great many people willing to avoid personal responsibility for themselves and their actions lately, choosing instead to attempt to distract scrutiny of their shortcomings and failures with wild erroneous claims of discrimination. I say investigate these claims appropriately but if unfounded those making these claims should be considered discriminatory and the complainant should be held legally accountable.. That I would consider “ fair and Just”.

All Posts
Loading more posts...