It's odd enough appearing for a court date virtually... but what happens if you do something ridiculously inappropriate?
We're not talking about wearing a t-shirt instead of a suit or showing up two minutes late because of technical difficulties.
No, we mean appearing with a wildly inappropriate username.
It seemed a Michigan court date would go as planned until Nathaniel Saxton asked to join the Zoom call.
A video of the event was shared on YouTube.
Chief Judge Jeffrey Middleton stated after everyone else for the hearing was accounted for:
"Then we will bring this fool in."
You can watch the video here:
When Saxton appeared from the electronic waiting room, his username appeared on screen. But rather than being his legal name, it instead read "B*ttf'ker 3000."
Judge Middleton asked:
"Good morning, sir, what is your name?"
"Nathaniel Saxton, sir."
Judge Middleton quipped:
"Your name is not B*ttf'ker 3000?"
"Logging into my court with that as your screen name, what kind of idiot logs into court like that?"
"What's your name again?"
Saxton replied, appearing flustered:
"Nathanial Saxton, sir, but I don't believe that I typed anything like that in."
Judge Middleton was indignant:
"Well, that's what it says."
"Well, I apologize, that should not be there."
But Judge Middleton did not let it go:
"Yeah, you should."
"You can sit in limbo [in the virtual waiting room] for a while and think about what you should call yourself online."
The video exchange garnered more than 260-thousand views.
People enjoyed Saxton's embarrassment.
Saxton found out while waiting to come back into the courtroom his sister had written the name as a prank while setting up his Zoom account for him.
Saxton appeared in court due to possession of drug paraphernalia and was facing a fine of $200. After realizing that was the extent of his potential penalties, Saxton pled guilty and arranged to pay the fine.
Ironically, the username was what almost got him into serious trouble. Judge Middleton would have placed him in jail on a count of "contempt of court" if Saxton had not been so apologetic.