OMG😱!!!
3 Likes
There you go fishing around in nothingburgerland again. Alluding to my having some secret knowledge while admonishing us to believe that YOU are an impartial party.
Sure. Right.
Again, I posted an example of what is admissible and what is not. Believe me, don’t believe, whatever.
My guess is Balinkas is reviewing the tapes to see if something in there helps in the defense. Not the tape itself, but some factoid of information.
24 Likes
Well, for starters? They could be used by the defense to show how MB’s capacity to deal with the situation degraded over a period of time. They could also provide a real time documentation of what LK was up to. Perhaps there is a tape of MB discussing LK and/or RG yelling outside a window?
Those recordings could go a long way to establishing a lot of things. Perhaps not what LK intended for them to establish.
Sheilah
14 Likes
I am shocked mostly at what seems to be the admission of LK picking out women for him to…you know.
4 Likes
Sick, dysfunctional relationship I’d say. To each their own.
4 Likes
As was I.
3 Likes
Wax his pole?
Its possible she was being flippant. It’s also possible that she is on the wild side. Not outside possiblity.
4 Likes
Since the barn was declared uninhabitable, I guess MB should have purchased a bunch of tents and camped out (in August heat and humidity) or rented/purchased several RV’s and parked them on his property rather than living in his own home while LK relaxed, reading on the back porch of MB’s home, and RG was upstairs doing heaven knows what. What a shame the timing of CPS arriving changed the emotional dynamic to the extreme.
I thought you said that you knew for a fact that they would be inadmissible because you knew for a fact that the court would rule that there is an expectation of privacy in a barn aisle. If I misunderstood your position, I apologize.
Daily admonition- PLEASE DO NOT FEED THE TROLL!!!
6 Likes
Actually, he specifically commentated on the illegality of the recordings because they contained information that was protected by attorney-client privilege. Attorney-client privilege isn’t necessarily waived just because your standing in a barn aisle or next to an arena.
Further more…the prosecutor confirmed only about 20 recordings are in possession.
On Sept 6th LK claims she had two weeks of audio from the barn and video from everywhere.
On Dec 29th LK claimed she and RG were within range and could be heard in some of the recordings.
On Dec 30th LK claims there were at least 3 cameras, 1-50 audio (recording devices or recordings?), and too many phone videos to count.
On Dec 30th LK admits to having recorded privileged conversation when she very clearly stated he was ignoring his attorney.
On Dec 30th LK claims to have been in MB’s presence and recording him during one of his 9-1-1 calls.
On Jan 3rd, LK claims the recording only take place over the span of 4 - 6 days, with 6 days probably being too many. She also claims MB acknowledges that he was being recorded in multiple recordings.
And, I’m sorry, it doesn’t matter if you think it can be used in court or not…you review ALL discovery because one item, even if you can’t use it in court, may inform you about something else that can be used.
All that recording time and only about 20 recordings in evidence?
17 Likes
How can they be used by the defense if they’re illegally made and inadmissible? KM is confident that they’re inadmissible because a barn qualifies as a situation with a reasonable expectation of privacy, but I’m not so sure.I actually intended to go back and add that it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s true, because there’s no real context. Just struck me as wild that anyone would say that to a stranger. (Poster said she had never met LK)
I got sidetracked and forgot to edit and no real use going back to edit now.
1 Like
Extremely emotional posts that became more passionate as she went on detailing her years of experience with LK and was banned for cursing I believe. She posted in the first thread. I assume most of her posts are still there except for the offending posts. LK’s bullying has changed her for life.
9 Likes
I can definitely see that a recording of MB talking with his lawyer would be inadmissible, even if the court ruled that there were no expectation of privacy in a barn aisle.
The issue, to me, is whether conversations between MB and people other than his lawyer are admissible.
Will be interesting to see in the trial.I’m not even answering you any more. No one is this obtuse.
33 Likes
If LK truly had the barn, lounge and other areas wired for sound and possibly video, she should definitely know who was there days before the shooting as well as the day of the shooting, shouldn’t she? When did she retrieve the recordings if she was in the hospital? Is that why RG and her daddy rushed to get to the farm the next day? Or were they all transmitted to her computer? Wouldn’t the computers have been taken by the police as evidence along with their cell phones? Suddenly, so many questions.
9 Likes
All those cameras, videos etc seem to me to indicate the possibility of extreme psychological obsession.
Who does that?
22 Likes
