'Do You Think I'm That Stupid?' Judge Slams Woman's Lies About Driving During Court Appearance

As I've stated many times, I am not a lawyer, nor am I qualified to give actual legal advice, but I'm pretty sure most actual lawyers would agree it's probably best not to break the law in front of a judge, especially if you're only in front of said judge to talk about other alleged crimes. But some people just can't help themselves, like the Metro Detroit woman who Michigan's Fox 2 says appeared in court on a Zoom call this week while driving, lied to the judge about it, and ended up in way more trouble than she ever would have been in originally. Oops.

Allegedly, Kimberly Carroll had owed a company called LVNV Funding a little less than $2,000 for long enough that LVNV was looking for a default judgement. That's not millions of dollars or anything, but a court date is still a court date, and you generally want to prepare for those enough to, like, show up on time. Carroll reportedly did not, even though it was literally just a Zoom call, but she did call in late with her camera off and her name listed as "iPhone." At that point, Judge Michael McNally appeared to be merely annoyed, telling her to turn her camera on and change her display name to her actual name, since, you know, it's court.

Carroll blamed her lateness on the Zoom software, which could or could not have been legitimate, but when she turned her camera on, the judge almost immediately noticed she appeared to be driving. Like most states, Michigan's distracted driving laws ban phone use while driving, which means she somehow managed to commit a crime while in court. And the crime wasn't even perjury. I bet some defense attorneys down in the comments can provide some entertaining examples of this not being the first time that's ever happened, but I bet they'd also recommend against joining that club. 

As you can imagine, the judge wasn't going to sit back while a defendant actively broke the law in their courtroom. "You can not be driving ma'am," McNally told Carroll. "What are you doing?" Carroll then claimed she had to leave town for a family emergency, she was just a passenger in a car someone else was driving, and she could have them pull over. Which is still bad, especially since your lawyer can notify the court that you have a family emergency ahead of your scheduled appearance and let the judge decide whether to have you call in from the road or reschedule. 

Unfortunately for Carroll, the judge could see with his own eyes that she was lying. I don't believe she was sworn in at the time, so it wasn't technically perjury, but "lie to the judge's face, badly" is still one of those strategies most lawyers insist stays filed in the "not recommended" folder. As outside observers who don't know either party, though, Carroll's poor decisions did bless us with this glorious, beautiful, incredible exchange, and for that, I sincerely thank her. Because this? This is art:

Judge McNally: Am I crazy, or does it not look like you're driving that car?

Carroll: I'm not driving the car. I'm a passenger in the car, sir.

Judge McNally: What side of the car are you on?

Carroll: I'm on the left-hand side.

Judge McNally: How would you be on the left-hand side if you're a passenger in the front seat. Am I missing something? 

Carroll: Left-hand...right-hand side. I'm sorry, I've been sitting in a room. I didn't know.

Judge McNally: Yeah, the seatbelt's coming off of the driver's side. You know you're lying to me, right?

Carroll: No, I'm not, sir. 

Judge McNally: Let me see the driver. 

Carroll: ...

Judge McNally: Let me see the driver.

Carroll: Hang on one second. I have to ask their permission. 

Judge McNally: Now!

Carroll: [exits vehicle on the front, driver-side door]

Judge McNally: Oh my god. "You were not in the driver's side." You think I'm that stupid? I'm going to go ahead and enter a default judgement.

Like I said, incredible. Everyone knew from the moment she turned her camera on that Carroll was driving, but she just couldn't resist the urge to double down again and again. That said, I do find one of Judge McNally's follow-up questions more interesting than perhaps I should. After announcing the default judgement, he doesn't point out that it's illegal to video chat while driving but instead asks, "Does our paperwork not tell people that they can't be in a car?" He presumably isn't condoning the distracted driving but thinking, "We very specifically told this defendant she couldn't do this, right?"

Judge McNally then hit Carroll with another, "You lied to me," and instructed the court to put it on the record that the defendant "was not available at the time and then was driving a car and telling the court she was not." Despite having just lost her case because she got caught lying to the judge, Carroll used her last chance to speak to the judge to...tell him she got back in the car on the passenger side and signed into the call early? Again, probably not the strategy I would have deployed, but who am I to judge, because it obviously worked. 

"You got an attitude with you, I'll tell you that," Judge McNally responded. "You got an attitude. Good luck to you." See? He's wishing her good luck! He knows she's really a good person and just made a little mistake, but everyone lies to the judge a little bit, right? Wait, I'm getting word that's not actually something you want a judge to tell your client? Huh. I wonder why not?