ByCody Medrano, writer at Creators.co
Just a dude liking things that are fun. Working on his own book hopefully to get it printed soon

So, I'm not a fan of shows like Dancing With The Stars. It holds no interest to me, and despite my respect for dancers, it's just a meh show to me. That being said, I do pay attention to the news and there's one piece of news that I just had to bring up.

On November 5th, a LA Supreme Court Judge stated that since the young Bindi Irwin was still a minor of seventeen, she needed both parents to sign, giving consent for her to compete and collect what she stands to earn for her participation.

Now, of course you all may be thinking, "Uhmm...her father is dead man." I thought the exact same thing but the reasoning of the courts was this:

“the court is unable to find that it is in the best interest of the minor to be bound by the terms of the contract”.

9news.com.au (Read the full article here.)

This because the certificate of death for Steve Irwin could not be presented.

This all happened after Bindi Irwin had already competed in eight weeks of the show and is already set to pocket a handsome purse and even more if she win. One cannot help but look at this news and ask,

As always, what do you guys think? This judge being too obtuse? This whole thing just seems ridiculous? Why is Dancing With The Stars still on the air?

As always, comments below guys. Till Next Time.

Trending

Latest from our Creators