Barisone assessment

[BrownDerby]

@hut-ho78

Social media is wonderful for finding old friends and keeping up with friends and family. It’s great for “how to do” type videos, training, etc. However, other uses to manipulate public opinion can be problematic. Politically, the use can be very sophisticated and powerful. So I wonder how it can affect our courts.

I always felt YD’s mission in life was to influence potential jurors.

[Warmblood1]

@eggbutt

Did she have that in writing? Did she agree to be on time, every time to ride as scheduled? Did she repeatedly waste his time to the point he relegated her to someone else? No instructor appreciates being made to stand around waiting for someone to come ride. In high caliber barns such as Hawthorne Hill, I suspect they have a routine that once the horse is tacked up if the rider doesn’t show up, a trainer must ride unless an agreement has been made that working students can assume that work. If she was frequently a no show, I imagine all the trainers became fed up.

She has stated before the only times she didn’t show up was when she’d been bitten by a brown recluse spider. To my knowledge this excuse has been used at least twice, so she must be pretty attractive to the shy recluse spiders!

Every single trainer I’ve ever had would had NEVER tolerated no-shows that were not outside of an emergency. Absolutely not. They were serious horse men and women and I imagine MB took riding just as seriously.

[ohnoO]

@Fiesta01

I agree. With the news of the recent 48 Hours interview, maybe they’re trying to build a case like “Look, those awful people on COTH are still bullying us.” They’re trying to build sympathy from future viewers of the program.

And 48 hours is thinking, “Yay, bring on the viewers!”

[hut-ho78]

@RHdobes563

@hut-ho78

@Knights_Mom

LK had zero right to stay in that barn.

Not according to New Jersey tenant law. I base this partly on your explanations of New York tenant law, reading the for the public New Jersey helpful guidelines, and the law segments available online and posted by others all very informative.

After 30 days, they had tenant rights and evictions were to be according to law. Her testified and admitted behavior should have enabled him to evict her under the 3 day section (with time added to get time on a judge’s schedule as explained by yourself and/or others) for being disorderly. The horses could have a 30 day notice to leave.

He gave an unfiled notice, then if not acted on, he could file, then once the time was up and the paperwork signed, have LE evict her.

I would like to see the New Jersey law about “evicting horses from a BARN.”

Ok. Right. Barn. Ok. Different from house. @Knights_Mom I should have noticed you said barn not house.

[ekat]

@Warmblood1

Great post, @ekat. Thank you for being factual and providing the testimony. It seems no matter how factual one is, k-klan will distort anything to try to satisfy their own narratives. Broken records.

Edit: Sorry, not sure why everything quoted weird.

Thank you. I think it’s always important to include context, and full quotes when possible because that’s usually more illuminating.

[hut-ho78]

@ekat

@hut-ho78

Right at the beginning of her testimony, she does state she entered into a romantic relationship with MB in 2015

This has no context or significance for the events of the summer of 2019.

@hut-ho78

She read one from July 13, 2019 from MB to her stating words to the effect of trust me, I’ll make it so bad they will be begging to leave. I know how and I’m good at it.

Yep. Specifically, it says:

“ I will just make it so miserable to be here that they will beg to go elsewhere watch me. This I am very very good at.”

Again, context being important, on July 12 (day before that test) LK posted a seemingly derogatory post about MHB on Facebook, one that even LK said, in court, could be perceived as threatening.

@hut-ho78

She read one from July 30, 2029 from MB to her stating contact everyone who has ever been screwed by LK and her dad as he was going to get LK a lifetime ban from USDF.

Yep.

Mr Schellhorn: I’m going to direct your attention to s 171 line 93-38. Is that a text message from Michael Barisone you on July 30th 2019?

MHG : it looks like me to Michael

Mr S: uh 93-38, I’m sorry the wrong one was highlighted…it’s line 93 38 38 can you read that uh text message that the defendant sent you on July 30th.

MHG: yes um I need every single person who has ever been screwed by Lauren, Rob, and the dad. Farriers, vets, trainers, every single one. I’m going to get her a lifetime ban as a competitor.

Mr S: and are the words every single person entirely in capitals?

MHG: yes.

Mr S: did he then go on online 93 42 approximately three text messages later to repeat every single person all in capitals?

MHG: Yes.

Again, context

July 25 - LK and RG buy recorders. In the next few days, MB’s private conversations show up on social media.
July 25 - long FB post about MHG, also, by LK’s admission in court, could be perceived as threatening
July 30 - LK posts about multiple personalities, and weapons hot, etc on FB. I don’t know, are threatening FB posts a reason to contact USEF and SS? (I’m seriously asking. I don’t know a thing about reporting to those organizations)

@hut-ho78

I think LK was still singing MB’s praises on the 13th. Maybe he broke her like he said he would

Singing his praises where? Because she was trashing the heck out MHG the day before on FB, per trial testimony. Additionally, the “broke” text doesn’t come until Aug 3rd, which, well, I already addressed everything leading up to that. Who broke whom, is my question.

@hut-ho78

She also testified as to MB’s financial position. He did have a cash flow problem he told her about and it was because he had to come up with the $965,000 for his ex. She testified that the divorce was final in December 2018 and on 3/24/2019 he texted her that after being clipped for $965,000, it was hard to feel good. She also testified he had horses worth approximately $1M and the two places were worth millions, so while he was worth millions he actually did have a cash flow problem at the time.

That’s not really how the testimony went.

is that a text message from michael barissone to you

2:37:02

Mr S : …text in November of 2018 that says how do you think I keep all this going 40k a month? I can’t go to sleep I have to be aware every day.

MHG: That is correct.

Mr S: and then down approximately six or seven more lines on line 54.05 did he send you a text message on that same day indicating the per month expenses at the farm?

MHG: yes he did.

Mr S: and did he indicate the lease for the New Jersey farm was six thousand dollars a month, mortgage Florida three thousand, feed five thousand dollars, shavings three thousand dollars, farrier three thousand dollars, property taxes three thousand dollars, workers eight thousand dollars, insurance three thousand dollars, utilities two thousand dollars etc etc etc

MHG: yes sir

Where does that say he has a cash flow problem? He says he always has to be aware. Who wouldn’t when you’re talking those kind of dollars?

Mr S: the other text message that I wanted to direct your attention to was online 7270, are you aware of approximately when Michael Barisone’s divorce with Vera Kessels (sp?) became final?

MHG: I am pretty sure it was December of 2018.

Mr S: okay and so this is a text message from march 19 2019 is that correct from Michael Barisone?

MHG: yes

Mr S: and did he say I got clipped 965k hard to feel good?

MHG: yes

Mr S: and was it your understanding or does that refresh your memory that he had paid approximately that amount of money as a result of the divorce?

MHG: yes

I mean, would ANYONE feel good about writing a check (or, more likely, multiple checks over several years) for $965K? Still doesn’t indicate a cash flow problem to me.

Good detail.

[ohnoO]

SM for the most part used to drive me crazy, but I’m beginning to realize that, as awful as it can be, it’s also seems to have now occurred to politicians (especially) some celebrities and even some criminals that it will eventually catch up to them and not in a good way.

[ekat]

@hut-ho78

Good detail.

Thanks.

[hut-ho78]

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

@Knights_Mom

LK had zero right to stay in that barn.

Not according to New Jersey tenant law. I base this partly on your explanations of New York tenant law, reading the for the public New Jersey helpful guidelines, and the law segments available online and posted by others all very informative.

After 30 days, they had tenant rights and evictions were to be according to law. Her testified and admitted behavior should have enabled him to evict her under the 3 day section (with time added to get time on a judge’s schedule as explained by yourself and/or others) for being disorderly. The horses could have a 30 day notice to leave.

He gave an unfiled notice, then if not acted on, he could file, then once the time was up and the paperwork signed, have LE evict her.

Wrong. Your trick won’t work. I’m not talking about the human domicile. I’m talking exclusively about the horses occupying barn space. Horses, as chattel, have zero tenancy rights snd can be compelled to leave at any time. They are never considered part of a human/landlord tenancy.

It wasn’t a trick. I should have paid more attention to the word barn which was pointed out by someone else. Apologies to you.

[Sdel]

@hut-ho78

@LilRanger

@hut-ho78

I’m not sure how much they still are because of the growing use of the internet to influence events and I wonder about that spilling into court systems.

Gossip has always been a factor in the court system. That’ is baked into the part about being “judged by a jury of your peers”.

This whole “SM influencing the court” is a newly voiced concern by you, though. What has changed in the last few weeks that has you now worried about it?

1. Speculation here as to whether or not the jury would be sequestered.
2. The criminal trial and SM comments during the same including speculation the jury and families were reading SM posts.
3. The judge shutting down comments on Law and Order and their echo of comments here.
4. Rereading the first threads to back up my own comments and noticing the introduction and close alignment of a version of events with the timing of addition of a prolific poster and the hiring of Bilinkas.
5. The concentrated attack on other views of events than that one.
6. Thinking my imagination was working overtime and the idea was preposterous until being accused of it here.
7. An article about at home side jobs in retirement listing being on a virtual jury and wondering what other jobs a defense attorney could farm out.
8. AH/JD articles on the dynamics of televised trials and crowd choosing of winners and losers.
   9. Dishonest witnesses and their families watching testimony and logging onto to other SM sites where the testimony they are supposed to be sequestered from is being avidly discussed.

Social media is wonderful for finding old friends and keeping up with friends and family. It’s great for “how to do” type videos, training, etc. However, other uses to manipulate public opinion can be problematic. Politically, the use can be very sophisticated and powerful. So I wonder how it can affect our courts.

There fixed it for you. Bolding mine.

[Knights_Mom]

@hut-ho78

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

@Knights_Mom

LK had zero right to stay in that barn.

Not according to New Jersey tenant law. I base this partly on your explanations of New York tenant law, reading the for the public New Jersey helpful guidelines, and the law segments available online and posted by others all very informative.

After 30 days, they had tenant rights and evictions were to be according to law. Her testified and admitted behavior should have enabled him to evict her under the 3 day section (with time added to get time on a judge’s schedule as explained by yourself and/or others) for being disorderly. The horses could have a 30 day notice to leave.

He gave an unfiled notice, then if not acted on, he could file, then once the time was up and the paperwork signed, have LE evict her.

Wrong. Your trick won’t work. I’m not talking about the human domicile. I’m talking exclusively about the horses occupying barn space. Horses, as chattel, have zero tenancy rights snd can be compelled to leave at any time. They are never considered part of a human/landlord tenancy.

It wasn’t a trick. I should have paid more attention to the word barn which was pointed out by someone else. Apologies to you.

Accepted.

[erinmeri]

@hut-ho78

I think she made it pretty clear that she wanted training from MB directly and she thought he had committed to that.

I have an honest question: Have you ever ridden with a “BNT”? I have. Do you honestly think that Lauren’s riding ability (and the paltry amount she was paying to board and train her horses) would have dictated that she have unfettered access to an Olympic caliber trainer? I don’t.

Why do you think that she was entitled to MB’s training when she (based on testimony) didn’t pay full freight, and (based on testimony) didn’t oft show up to do the work, and (based on show records and video) wasn’t that talented? Curious…

[LilRanger]

[quote=“hut-ho78, post:3555, topic:773116, full:true”]

@LilRanger

@hut-ho78

I’m not sure how much they still are because of the growing use of the internet to influence events and I wonder about that spilling into court systems.
[/quote]

Gossip has always been a factor in the court system. That’ is baked into the part about being “judged by a jury of your peers”.

This whole “SM influencing the court” is a newly voiced concern by you, though. What has changed in the last few weeks that has you now worried about it?

1. Speculation here as to whether or not the jury would be sequestered.
2. The criminal trial and SM comments during the same including speculation the jury and families were reading SM posts.
3. The judge shutting down comments on Law and Order and their echo of comments here.
4. Rereading the first threads to back up my own comments and noticing the introduction and close alignment of a version of events with the timing of addition of a prolific poster and the hiring of Bilinkas.
5. The concentrated attack on other views of events than that one.
6. Thinking my imagination was working overtime and the idea was preposterous until being accused of it here.
7. An article about at home side jobs in retirement listing being on a virtual jury and wondering what other jobs a defense attorney could farm out.
8. AH/JD articles on the dynamics of televised trials and crowd choosing of winners and losers.

Social media is wonderful for finding old friends and keeping up with friends and family. It’s great for “how to do” type videos, training, etc. However, other uses to manipulate public opinion can be problematic. Politically, the use can be very sophisticated and powerful. So I wonder how it can affect our courts.

I appreciate your perspective and those concerns are actually not new. Since the advent of cell phones and especially with smart phones, courts have been worried about internet/phone useage. I can’t speak to every jurisdiction, but I think most judges are pretty hard on any attorneys who engage in unethical practice. And many attorneys are too, and won’t hesitate to out a colleague who is crossing the line.

I do think some of your concerns are not applicable to this situation, because I suspect this is a very uninteresting case in the grand scheme of things, and probably won’t be televised if/when it goes to trial.

I think media in general is a risk, and I wouldn’t limit your concerns to one side or the other, since LK herself has shown she is quite willing to engage in all sorts of online shenanigans. I don’t recall if this is a jury trial or bench trial, but most jurers really do take their duty to be impartial quite seriously, as does the court. No judge wants the legal process marred by bad online behavior, it is not at all a game to them.

[eggbutt]

@hut-ho78

It was proven in a court of law. Otherwise he would have been found simply NG, not NGRI and he would have walked out of court that day.

Here we go again…the conflicting testimony of two known, admitted liars didn’t prove anything, nor did the massive amounts of forensic evidence /s.

[eggbutt]

@Fiesta01

I agree. With the news of the recent 48 Hours interview, maybe they’re trying to build a case like “Look, those awful people on COTH are still bullying us.” They’re trying to build sympathy from future viewers of the program.

Well, that would work except it also shows how desperate they appear to control the narrative on an insignificant forum. Same for YouTube.

[eggbutt]

For the legal gurus, what normally isn’t allowed in a civil trial?

[Sdel]

Hearsay isn’t allowed unless you are using not for factualness of the statement but for state of mind.

[Fiesta01]

@eggbutt

Well, that would work except it also shows how desperate they appear to control the narrative on an insignificant forum. Same for YouTube.

We may be insignificant, along with Youtube, but when 48 Hours hits screens nation-wide, millions will see them for what they are. They know this.

Lastest viewership numbers for 48 Hours - 2.82 million in the 18-49 demographic. Many more, I’m sure, for the 50 and ups.

I have to be pretty bored to watch a true crime show. When I do, I always google the case after watching the show to see if there is any other information available. Think how many people will know way more about the Kanareks than the Kanareks want known.

[Knights_Mom]

@eggbutt

For the legal gurus, what normally isn’t allowed in a civil trial?

Seances, ouija boards, sun tanning and buffet lunches. Pretty much everything else goes. It varies even between judges and jurisdictions, regional/national politics, media access and local politics.

[Fiesta01]

@Wind_Horse

While I do not makes excuses, I also don’t bring it up. We have moved on with OUR lives. The choices that person makes are their own. The consequences of their actions are theirs alone to deal with.

But this is the difference. Your relative is having to face the consequences of their actions on their own, as any adult should do. You are not enabling the continued poor behavior. You have gone above and beyond to help this individual, but you are not providing a soft spot for them to land where they can avoid consequences.

I’m so sorry you have gone through this and wish you a peaceful heart knowing you did everything that you could.