So does that mean the person would be released on the spot if that is the judge’s decision? Or is there some sort of discharge process to go through first?
Not Eggbutt, but I’ll tell you flat out - 99 out of 100 criminal defense attorneys don’t want their clients anywhere near the stand, amnesia or not. They don’t have to testify. The burden’s not on them, so why open themselves up to any kind of slip-up that could harm their case? That is kind of basic criminal trial defense strategy. You just don’t do it.
Edit to add: I didn’t say the jury in the civil case could hold it against him. I said they could infer something (could be good, could be bad, who knows) from his silence. Unlike a criminal trial where silence by the defendant is a constitutional right and nothing can be inferred (good bad or indifferent.). Does that clarify?
Let’s say I had a horrible auto accident and was knocked unconscious, resulting in memory loss of the actual accident. In a criminal trial I would probably decline to testify about the actual wreck because I had no recollection, but in a civil trial I would definitely testify to the events that led up to the accident if, in fact I remembered them. I may be mistaken but I thought Simring said MB has pristine recollection up until arriving at his house and beat senseless (literally and figurally).
Does that answer your theoretical question?
I’ll be away for some time while I perform a system search of my alleged boob quote. I sure hope I’m able to find it, if not, well…
If the judge finds no evidence to support a civil commitment, then yes, the person is free to leave, provided there isn’t some other reason (like they are alreadyinn custody for something else) keeping the there. There is sometimes some guidance from the provider about where to get meds or community supports and usually an offer of transportation, depending on the location.
I don’t have a phenomenal memory, or even an above average memory. I do, absolutely, remember seeing it, and the only reason I would remember a post is because of the over the top nastiness. I remember it was in all caps.
Who would have cleaned it up or deleted it? Well, either you or the mods, obv.
Instead on “suggesting” you didn’t post it by deflecting with a meaningless question or talking about “credibility issues”, please answer directly, yes or no, whether you posted it.
Despite my non phenomenal memory, I remember it distinctly. If you want to deny having written it, please make a straight denial, instead of hiding behind the deflection.
I have a FB friend who wants to have Florida to be declared a 2nd sanctuary state, I am sure he was upset when I reacted with the laughing emoji.
So basically you get one issued at the state line…
Okay @CurrentlyHorseless I just ran a search. I found all sorts of posts with the word “boob” posted on various forums in various forms by various posters, and guess what? Not one by me!
Do you think his upcoming MH hearing will follow up with Judge Taylor from the criminal trail? I believe that is his name. In a lot of ways, I wish it were a different judge. Judge caught a lot of flack from others on YT so I suppose it’s not just me. I wondered during the criminal trial if the judge was more comfortable scolding the Mr. B because (IIRC), they had previously worked together, or if the judge had relations to a certain family.
I hope it’s public, too. Like the Heard/Depp trail, the trial was able to set the story straight regarding their characters and reputations. Maybe that, and the upcoming 48 hours episode and the Law and Crime interest will encourage its publicity.
I’ve actually seen that arrangement a few times. But in that case, the person hires their own private trainer, and compensates that trainer appropriately for the arrangement.
That is usually not the situation when a person is one customer among many in the trainer’s barn.
it should be the same judge who presided over the criminal trial. I have no reason to think he (the judge) would not rely on the expert’s opinion. That is their expertise and he is onl there to weigh the evidence presented by the state. MB will also have an attorney, if he wants to bring one to advocate for his position and to promote his interests.
It would certainly be helpful if the civil trial is broadcast to the public. But even if it’s not, even the most casual observer of the criminal trial would probably have a pretty strong opinion of her credibility.
MB was not employed as LK’s sole trainer at her facility or whatever. MB had his own facility with working students, multiple clients, multiple directives (IE sales, training, board, etc) so I do not feel in any way it was reasonable for LK to expect that.