.
1 Like
You have low standards when it comes to the police and them “doing well” and we’ve established that before. I will agree that no lives were lost that day, and that was an example of good work.
“No one died” doesn’t excuse poor crime scene processing though. You cannot use “the rain” as an excuse for everything or that they were busy saving lives (still time to process things after the victims were removed from the scene). Yes, those excuses might work for a few things, maybe, but there were some inadequacies, IMO.
22 Likes
Deleted because others have already made the same point. (I was away for 12 hours or so and am trying to get caught up,)
3 Likes
What does “being in his mid-fifties” mean? Or why does it matter much? I have not reached that age yet. Does something crazy happen when you do?
22 Likes
Oh no. I am there and I am not sure what they mean, like it is some huge time in life for something.
13 Likes
I disagree. I wouldn’t wish LK on anyone. Everyone totally gets MB getting fried and that’s why the verdict happened that way.
11 Likes
Both answers that are completely recognizable as evasive. There are really no good reasons to be evasive about where your money comes from.
10 Likes
No, the jury agreed that she was shot in an altercation that involved MB, but that he had no criminal intent to shoot her because he was insane at the time.
It is interesting that your attorney husband hasn’t explained the difference between those two interpretations. [edit]
14 Likes
It was weird and kind of rude, really.
I don’t know what’s wrong with saying, “the money comes from my father, it is his income that funds my hobby, house, animals, etc. He has been a successful (whatever his profession is) for many years.”
I mean, come on, you’re not 5 years old and neither is the jury. “The bank” is just a rude wiseass answer.
18 Likes
2 Likes
I’m still catching up on this thread, but am quoting this now simply to say that I have never seen evidence of anything resembling “reciprocal bullying.”
There was clearly tension between multiple parties at Hawthorne Hill. By mid July, LK clearly had begun listening to private conversations as a result of the recording devices she had placed, and she had learned that others REALLY didn’t like her, and wanted her gone.
But that’s not the same thing as “bullying.”
12 Likes
Couple points of interest worth mentioning.
The text where MB talks about being “aware” of his bills is dated November 2018.
The text about the divorce settlement is dated March 2019.
If MB was having any kind of cash flow crisis in July/August 2019, it is reasonable to assume that the prosecution would have found texts/emails/any kind of evidence closer in time to the incident to make it relevant. But nothing was introduced. Just one random text that never says he can’t actually pay those bills. He says,“how do you think I keep this going?. I can’t sleep. I have to be aware.” How do you think I keep this going implies he actually is keeping things going, which is the opposite of a cash flow problem that he never states in NOVEMBER 2018, or any evidence was produced that shows any time forward.
Furthermore, in March 2019, when the divorce was settled, his text doesn’t go on to say How am I going to pay it, or anything. Just, hard to feel good. And it’s not like he wrote a check that day.
So, if the cash flow problems were so bad, why isn’t there one single text between NOVEMBER 2018 and the shooting where he brings that up introduced into evidence?
MHG testified her relationship began with MB in 2015. By July 2019, 4 years later, it’s a stretch to call it a new relationship.
Good to see we’re back to worrying about MB’s ancient age status though.
26 Likes
Mhg testified under oath that there were
2 Likes
I would think that Bilinkas would find it very interesting that someone purporting to be a member of Team Kanarek has insinuated that he (Bilinkas) deliberately ignored “perjury” committed by a witness in a criminal trial.
And I guess since Schellhorn didn’t object, he was also complicit in allowing the perjurious testimony to be entered into the record, and the judge was also complicit in allowing the jury to take that testimony into consideration during their deliberations.
Just wow, wow, wow.
12 Likes
No. You’re correct that there was no criminal intent “to shoot her”, given the insanity finding. However, the jury determined that the prosecutor had met all elements of his case aside from intent, therefore it is correct to say that the jury determined that “he shot her”.
It’s not just that “she was shot in altercation that involved MB”.
If the jury had determined that that “she had been shot in an altercation that involved MB”, but it was not clear that he was the one who shot her, as in one of Eggbutt’s self defense fables, the jury would have returned a verdict if not guilty.
1 Like
Worse - the implication is that Mr Bilinkas suborned perjury, while another attorney also put his bar license on the line to commit it. And a third attorney, their attorney no less, furthered the perjury by also testifying about negotiations.
Plus, you’re right about Mr Schellhorn allowing it by not calling any witnesses to dispel all this perjury.
22 Likes
.
2 Likes
Well, since we are back to MB’s personal life and 48 hours, I’ll just put this one here…it clears up a lot.
Also, this comment was apparently the subject of a delete that was screenshot and put back into the FB record. Even the FB crowd knows to “QFP”.
11 Likes
I sincerely hope it’s better than the bombshells I kept waiting for during the trial.
15 Likes
Yeah as it turns out “bombshell watch” is actually pretty boring.
13 Likes
