Barisone Criminal Case Update

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@hut-ho78

I keep thinking about him losing his wife who took care of all the details that allowed him to teach and compete, her share of the assets that they owned together, her contacts for investors in those assets, her management skills, and her income. He suddenly had squabbles per LaLa and others with a well heeled client, a big loss of funds from the freeze, and loss of use of basement apartments because of only one egress (that is the only vacate a poster who said they were there mentioned way back in the early posts). MHG had her kids living in a barn and I wonder what her ex and both sets of the kids grandparents felt about that and how much pressure she was under from them and her kids. She was allegedly threatening to leave and he had given up everything for her.

Controlling significant others kill their partner every day when they try to leave, it’s the most dangerous time. MB just had significant losses and was threatened with more. His income and assets took a big hit. He lost control of his wife and was about to lose his girlfriend. VK and MHG are lucky to get out of there. LaLa just seemed to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and maybe very well raising cane at the changes and having to deal with other than MB and VKB without realizing how dangerous the situation was.

RG saved her life and kept MB from having murder charges. I don’t think anything in the charges show anything other than MB fired the weapon at LaLa hitting her in the chest twice.

I still can’t figure out RC letting her weapon out of her control. Maybe she trusted him to keep it in the safe. Maybe MB without VK was a different person than the MB with VK.

These aspects of the divorce actually explain a lot. If she (VK) was handling all the barn management, and investor contacts, bringing in an income, and generally keeping everything running so that he could compete, train and teach, the divorce would create financial strain and big management burdens. Horses are expensive.
If he was under a lot of financial stress, I can see why he may have been desperate to keep LK (as a multiple horse, premium package client), but at the same time desperate not to lose MHG (which apparently required getting rid of LK).
Thanks for your posts.

[eggbutt]

@Inigo-montoya

I think you will eventually come to see that is not the case.

I wouldn’t expect you to say anything to the contrary.

[eggbutt]

@RND

@eggbutt

Had you read the previous posts you would see Lala implied that in her post on the SS thread.

Snark away.

Someone implied that SCOTUS is going to hear a case about SafeSport and you believe it and repost in another thread? This explains so much - thank you!

Um, I didn’t repost anything. I simply suggested you read the previous posts and keep up.

And tell us, exactly what did your misunderstanding explain?

[Inigo-montoya]

100% correct!

People here don’t realize they’re thoughts are so contradictory.

The defense attorney is quite competent. He’ll focus on what he thinks are the strengths of his case……and I’m quite certain that chain of custody of the gun will not be where he wants to go. You don’t create reasonable doubt by insulting the jury’s intelligence.

[Knights_Mom]

@RND

@Knights_Mom

No LK thought it could happen and to me it presented as she was suggesting maybe she’d be the one to initiate that endeavor or help it along somehow.

To you it presented as she was suggesting maybe she’d be the one to initiate that endeavor or help it along somehow.

Just like many here think that maybe somehow RG and LK were the ones that probably maybe had a gun and they could have possibly potentially been the ones to shoot LK and then they might have possibly put the gun underneath MB right before the cop showed up and then when the cop was distracted RG probably maybe made the dog bite the cop so he would have an excuse to go into the house for 2 or 20 minutes and hide the gun that he probably used to shoot LK accidentally because they likely could have lured MB down there to try to shoot him but somehow it all went wrong because MB showed up with only 3 bullets so OBVIOUSLY he didn’t do it no way no how that’s just crazy because come on ONLY THREE BULLETS???

You believe what you want. So will I.

[eggbutt]

It is going to be an interesting and complicated trial. There will be no winners except the attorneys.

[Knights_Mom]

@RND

@Knights_Mom

No LK thought it could happen and to me it presented as she was suggesting maybe she’d be the one to initiate that endeavor or help it along somehow.

Why do you continue to believe some of the things you think she is saying, while completely dismissing others? I mean really, has she even come close to taking your farm yet?

No because I actually know what I’m talking about. I don’t need to threaten people or try and bend them to my way.

[eggbutt]

Give it up KM…there is no logical discussion with this one. Brick wall effect.

[Inigo-montoya]

That is for certain. I cannot imagine how hard this has been for everyone and how brutal a 3 week trial will be for everyone.

[RND]

@eggbutt

Um, I didn’t repost anything. I simply suggested you read the previous posts and keep up.

You reposted here that LK posted in another thread something that implied SCOTUS was going to hear a case about Safe Sport, implying that you believe she is telling the truth. Yet you completely dismiss her as a liar when she makes other statements that don’t fit your narrative. [edit]

[eggbutt]

@RND

@eggbutt

Um, I didn’t repost anything. I simply suggested you read the previous posts and keep up.

You reposted here that LK posted in another thread something that implied SCOTUS was going to hear a case about Safe Sport, implying that you believe she is telling the truth. Yet you completely dismiss her as a liar when she makes other statements that don’t fit your narrative. [edit]

Nope, wasn’t me, sweetie. Look again.
I don’t read the SS thread, I simply read the post Sdel made detailing Lala’s SS thread post.

[edit]

[RND]

@Knights_Mom

You believe what you want. So will I.

This reminds me of when my kids were toddlers and they would say to each other “I know you are but what am I???” Except they were cute little toddlers who didn’t know how to argue their point of view with words, instead of adults who didn’t…well, never mind.

[eggbutt]

@Sdel

@FitzE

If I take your meaning correctly and if Plan B is to sue SS for failure to respond to reports of bullying by MB, MHG, etc. (i.e., adult-to-adult interactions) then I am thoroughly disgusted. If that’s what the tippity top ten, five? two? global - not national!!! global!!! - firms are working on, I am sickened. Any such ego-driven suit would take massive amounts of time and resources away from SS that could be used investigating harm being done to children.

That is how I took her multiple statements that mention the law firm she declares she hired. She was a little vague on if it’d be an actual lawsuit or petitioning the Congress to force a change to the rules that would make SS have to respond to allegations of victim blaming and bullying between adults. One statement also makes me think Safe Sport may have declined to consider the tapes.

That is what the following quotes seem to imply…

“ But I find it to be imperative for them to hire a blue chip global firm (preferably based in DC) and take on SafeSport also. Maybe even USEF too. USEF’s precious “donors,” may just get sick & tired of having to front the bill every time one of USEF’s “bad actors,” does something nearly unthinkable.”

“ If taken to Congress, laws could in fact be changed. In the extreme case, (if accepted) SCOTUS would hear arguments and make a ruling. That ruling would then become the precedent, as no such case involving SafeSport has ever been heard by SCOTUS at this time.”

“ If you’re going to fight an entire organization (or two, if we include Safesport) - two very well funded organizations- hire a firm who sees those organizations & thinks, “USEF VIPS & SAFESPORT? Ppffft! Welcome to DC”

“I was responding to VX re how an attorney could essentially change laws wrt SafeSport. Not make or decide the laws. Wrt this topic, SafeSport could be held accountable for either purposeful or non purposeful mistakes. In order to do that, it would probably need to begin with a civil suit, except, SafeSport is protected from lawsuits.”

“ False claims must never be tolerated. And SS should be able to tell the difference between the laughable & the critical. True claims, backed by all the types of evidence SS might require to investigate & proceed to next stages, must be taken seriously.”

I assume that the reason behind this is that Safe Sport combined her reports with the various other counter filed reports, dismissed them all, and then released the file to the defense during the investigation phase of the criminal and civil trials. See the following….

“ [the victims] distrusted their respective investigators (they likely had different one’s at first, but SS eventually assigned one investigator to combine the case) or distrusted the sudden switching around & n longer felt that SS was capable of properly handling a case if this magnitude.”

@RND for your reading pleasure. You’re welcome. Please get your facts and accusations correct before you swipe at others.

[RND]

@eggbutt

Nope, wasn’t me, sweetie. Look again.
I don’t read the SS thread, I simply read the post Sdel made detailing Lala’s SS thread post.

Parasites. Please. Parasites get something from their hosts.

You literally said in your post that I quoted:

“Lala implied that in her post on the SS thread.”

It really is like talking to toddlers here.

[eggbutt]

Are you truly that obtuse? I just tagged you in the original post (above). I didn’t say I believed anything.

[J-Lu]

@RND

@eggbutt

Um, I didn’t repost anything. I simply suggested you read the previous posts and keep up.

You reposted here that LK posted in another thread something that implied SCOTUS was going to hear a case about Safe Sport, implying that you believe she is telling the truth. Yet you completely dismiss her as a liar when she makes other statements that don’t fit your narrative. [edit]

You can get rude and members can ignore your inflammatory statements (like on the thread that just got shut down - calling someone “creepy” for giving a synopsis of what seems to be a well know series of events and statements that even YOU claim here to to have vast memory of) but this insult crosses the line.

You owe eggbutt an an apology. I know virtually nothing about the personal disagreements here stemming from previous MB threads I didn’t read but you don’t get to lump posters into the category of “parasites”. “It’s like talking to toddlers”?

Your blatant insults are unnecessary on this board. Learn to communicate better when dealing with others.

[RND]

@eggbutt

Are you truly that obtuse? I just tagged you in the original post (above). I didn’t say I believed anything.

And I just quoted your post that I responded to; I did not respond to Sdel’s post. You seem to be having a really hard time keeping up here tonight.

[eggbutt]

[Inigo-montoya]

Yet you didn’t feel it necessary to scold a poster who called people scumbags nor did you think it necessary to scold Ambitious Kate who repeatedly called LK a monster and blamed her parents for raising her.
Yeah……I think we can ignore you.

[smoofox]

@Inigo-montoya

Yet you didn’t feel it necessary to scold a poster who called people scumbags nor did you think it necessary to scold Ambitious Kate who repeatedly called LK a monster and blamed her parents for raising her.
Yeah……I think we can ignore you.

Ummm… J-Lu made it clear that she had not kept up with all the posts on all the threads… so she may not have seen the comments you mentioned.

So summarily declaring that she can be ignored suggests that you condone the parasite and toddler comments? I would hope not. Scumbags, parasites, monsters, toddlers… all of it (and a lot more of the taunting, sneering, sniping etc.) is completely unnecessary.

I so wish that those who feel the urge to insult, taunt etc. - no matter who they are or what their position is - would just refrain from doing so. It does not help the discussion in any way and the majority of the posters reading and/or participating in these threads would be grateful not to have to wade through back and forth exchanges and the hypocrisy that often results from same.