Barisone/Kanarek Legal Filings (Public Record)

[La-LaPopRider]

@Jenerationx

Agreed, we don’t know. I would think Barisone’s attorney would have mentioned physical abuse of his client or animals if it had actually occurred though. It would seem strange to mention all the other things she’s being accused of without mentioning that.

Right now, I’m interested in whether or not there was a tox screen at the hospital and what that might show.

BINGO! (Wrt to tox screens @ the hospital - as well as from my primary care physician, who takes blood and/or urine during my mandatory appointments every 3 months, usually randomly, to test liver levels of possible toxins, caused by medications taken after a prolonged period of time.) I.e- blood pressure, insomnia, anti-anxiety etc…

If they wish to make medical files admissible for me, they must allow the same files to be admissible from MB’s doctors. I do wonder though, how riding numerous horses daily, could ever be accomplished by any person addicted to HEROIN! Of course, nearly 3/4’s of the accusations in this answer to our complaint, came from one source. Not a doctor. They can be found by viewing “girl joeys,” many text exchanges with MB- in which it is admitted, “MH found you (Joey) online, have you ever met Lauren?” Of course, her answer was “no.” Yet, she’s back on Dressage Hub’s post (the one Eggbutt began this thread, based on) ranting again about how “jealous I am of her.” (Plus, more of the same sob story, of which the true parts are conveniently, left out. But, that too will come out, in time.) As will evidence to the contrary of each & every “answer/complaint,” made by MB & each & every person who falsely claims/ed I ever harassed or bullied them in ANY way. It’s a bit ridiculous to make false accusations against me - on behalf of Eggbutt, Omgitsme (who are close IRL) & the woman I fired, knowing full well I can’t comment on any of it, upon the advice of counsel. Doesn’t make it true though.

[JFJ]

Someone should call Netflix, this could be the next Tiger King!

[La-LaPopRider]

@eggbutt

@Jenerationx yes, lots of legalese here but it sure shoots down her “I’m so innocent” defense.

Um, yeah. That’s what counterclaim answer aims to do. Or, did you expect them to say, “yes, we are very sorry our client chose to torture & abuse your client, followed by attempting to murder her & her boyfriend?” Get real.

Another piece of “real,” for you- Robert, not “Bob the Builder,” was begged to remodel the barn- which after completion added about 500k to the value of the barn itself. Robert, was then begged to remodel the basement (not including bathrooms, since MH could not comprehend that a handicapped bathtub for her mother could literally, not be fit into the tiny bathroom space available - without tearing down structures to expand the space available) - which he did - under the annoying supervision & constant seeking advice by MH - as to the color scheme & floor materials. No interference by Michael though! He was beyond satisfied with Roberts carpentry abilities- as he well should’ve been. Unfortunately, the work was halted after overhearing … things you WILL be hearing for yourself, in the very near future & of course, due to the attempted murders.

One request. Can you please pick a word, any word, aside from “fascinating,” & “shoddy.” Or, are these the only adjectives available in your vocabulary? Also, it’s always so difficult to tell whether your many “questions,” in each of your posts are rhetorical or just dumb. (Ie “ah, but I never said I didn’t know her, did I?” And, “seems she (JI) is doing quite well for herself, isn’t she?” Best to use statements when your writing comments. Otherwise, you only cause confusion. But hey, if that’s the way you were taught to write, who am I to intercept?

[Mersidoats]

@CanteringCarrot

What is your professional background and education? After all of these threads and junk floating around, I actually don’t even know such a basic piece of info. But I haven’t been reading consistently either.

”‹”‹”‹”‹”‹”‹But one doesn’t always have to work hard or have any life accomplishments to own, ride, train, and compete horses. Many people fall into fortunate life circumstances or find themselves in a good financial situation due to trust funds, inheritance, family money, a wealthy partner, etc.

Well, if you look at her profile here, she says that she works (worked?) as a “liaison for clients/investors for 2 healthcare companies.” Whatever that is.

[YankeeDuchess]

@Knights Mom

Not an insider. I SAW THE SIGNED ORDER AS IT HAD BEEN POSTED.

I KNOW NONE OF THE PARTIES INVOLVED.

Have I been clear enough now?

    It was not posted when I checked earlier today. How did you see it, with date and signature, two days ago?

     I don’t need a response.

[YankeeDuchess]

@Knights Mom

The motion was denied because LK is not yet a creditor. That’s what the POSTED ORDER SAID.

   On March 24 and March 25, Barisone’s lawyer, not the judge, filed a “proposed order” and then a corrected “proposed order” that he, well, proposed, the judge sign. Both were blank for the date and signature. (Still are.) The contents of the unsigned “proposed” order are as you describe. 

     You stated there was an order signed by the judge, and added the detail that the date appeared over the signature. No such signed and dated order has been filed by the judge when I looked earlier today.

[eggbutt]

@La-LaPopRider

Of course, by now, it’s really not so shocking Eggbutt (whom identified herself by referencing a comment I made to her on FB) would open yet another thread, again, twisting words used in “answer,” to my complaint, and calling them “facts.” She is known for doing the same thing to others -with her small group of lackeys, (IRL) in NC. Arguing with her is pointless. Her agenda is clear. Anytime she is called out- she pivots to “recipes.” Therefore, her interest is not in this case- rather, her interest is far more along the lines of proving her undying loyalty to her “very good friends,” - which she has named as being “MH’s family & MH “- since she has “known MH since she was a teen.” Disclaimer- That does not make her the “friend,” she believes to be she is. Though, I suppose, as long as SHE believes it… she can be as much a lackey for MH as R.C was for both MH & MB- by providing the gun used to (attempt) to murder us.

Lastly, she must have forgotten her post claiming she may have been “hiding,” in MB’s dually at the time of the shooting. That’s a bold claim. Random, I know. But thought I’d remind her 5 (ish) “comment boosters,” we are keeping very close track of her rantings- for obvious legal reasons, during an ongoing criminal investigation.

What in the hell??? Please, provide these posts. You are always so very quick to call people out but you never back anything up. I could not care less what “legal reasons” you are stalking me or anyone else for with your paranoid delusions., Nothing anyone has said here is slander or liable. Everything here has been noted back to the Public Record with the exception of the “rumor” I heard 4th hand, which you confirmed. Not one word. You love to threaten and harass which is so typical of your kind. You are so anxious about who people are…why? What difference does it make? It is clear many of us know of you, your reputation, your past and your antics simply by reading the PUBLIC RECORD briefs of your behavior. It’s also funny you say “we” are suing blah-blah-blah, yet your boyfriend is not mentioned by name anywhere that I read in these interesting papers.

Knittting, try knitting Lauren. It will help busy your hands.

[NotGrandPrixYet]

@La-LaPopRider

Of course, by now, it’s really not so shocking Eggbutt (whom identified herself by referencing a comment I made to her on FB) would open yet another thread, again, twisting words used in “answer,” to my complaint, and calling them “facts”.

While we are correcting writing styles, let’ talk about the proper use of whom and who, shall we?

If the subject of the sentence is performing the action, then one would use “who”, not “whom”. It should be “who identified herself by…”

[NotGrandPrixYet]

There are many people in NJ who have full, real-time access to all court documents. As of today, there are 41,569 attorneys in the state alone, and that’s not counting their staff, or court staff. Civil cases are presumptively open pursuant to the guarantees under the First Amendment.

So have fun trying to figure out the identity of Knights Mom. 😂 That IS the purpose of YD’s line of questioning, most likely.

[YankeeDuchess]

@NotGrandPrixYet

There are many people in NJ who have full, real-time access to all court documents. As of today, there are 41,569 attorneys in the state alone, and that’s not counting their staff, or court staff. Civil cases are presumptively open pursuant to the guarantees under the First Amendment.

So have fun trying to figure out the identity of Knights Mom. 😂 That IS the purpose of YD’s line of questioning, most likely.

I have no idea who Knights Mom is, and don’t particularly care who she is. I think it’s somewhat useful to keep track of who the insiders are, and in my own little mind, I have inferred that she is an insider, based on her assertions that she knew there was a signed order two days prior to it being posted in the online system. If she wants to deny it, that’s cool.

[CanteringCarrot]

@YankeeDuchess

I have no idea who Knights Mom is, and don’t particularly care who she is. I think it’s somewhat useful to keep track of who the insiders are, and in my own little mind, I have inferred that she is an insider, based on her assertions that she knew there was a signed order two days prior to it being posted in the online system. If she wants to deny it, that’s cool.

What? Where did she say she knew there was a signed order 2 days prior to it being signed?

[NotGrandPrixYet]

Again…for people (or a person) who has a problem with comprehension and likes to push their own “she wants to deny it” mantra into the minds of COTH readers (who are more intelligent than one might think):

There are many people in NJ who have full, real-time access to all court documents. As of today, there are 41,569 attorneys in the state alone, and that’s not counting their staff, or court staff. Civil cases are presumptively open pursuant to the guarantees under the First Amendment.

[NotGrandPrixYet]

So you don’t have to be an insider to have access to this information.

[Denali6298]

@Knights Mom

Not an insider. I SAW THE SIGNED ORDER AS IT HAD BEEN POSTED.

I KNOW NONE OF THE PARTIES INVOLVED.

Have I been clear enough now?

You are talking about the denial filed on Feb 21st right?

[YankeeDuchess]

@CanteringCarrot

”‹”‹”‹”‹”‹”‹”‹

@Knights Mom

The site is down right now but there is a signed order, with the date above the judges signature with the order stating the reasons for the denial. It basically said that LK is not an official creditor and is not entitled to such a judgment. It cited case law and added that law does not include potential creditors and only includes current ones.

[YankeeDuchess]

@Denali6298

You are talking about the denial filed on Feb 21st right?

No.

She is talking about a signed version (signed by the judge) of the unsigned “proposed order” filed by Barisone’s lawyer on March 24, which is cut and pasted in Eggbutt’s post #1, which is the subject of the thread.

[YankeeDuchess]

@CanteringCarrot

@Knights Mom

The judge denied that motion.

[Ambitious_Kate]

Yes, there was a signed denial of the order, and then the signed denial of the order was aparently retracted. Forget why, now. Technicality of how it was written. So, now there is a new unsigned order presented and the judge has not posted anything further about his intentions. If I am not mistaken, the new unsigned order is presumptive based on the conclusions of the 3/20 hearing, which denied the order to show cause, but it is all open to further discussion or hearings. Everything will toddle along, orders will be signed once they are correct, LK will continue to jump up and down and turn meaningless cartwheels, and those who have investigated the filings, who have actually read them, have not posted anything incorrect.

[CanteringCarrot]

@YankeeDuchess

@CanteringCarrot

Ok. I definitely missed something because I thought she was just repeating already posted info, not giving insider info or knowing something ahead of time.

I’m clearly not paying proper attention. :lol:

[Knights_Mom]

@Ambitious Kate

Yes, there was a signed denial of the order, and then the signed denial of the order was aparently retracted. Forget why, now. Technicality of how it was written. So, now there is a new unsigned order presented and the judge has not posted anything further about his intentions. If I am not mistaken, the new unsigned order is presumptive based on the conclusions of the 3/20 hearing, which denied the order to show cause. Everything will toddle along, orders will be signed once they are correct, and those who have investigated the filings, none of them who have actually read them, have posted anything incorrect.

Thank you. I was beginning to wonder if I had attained the ability to imagine things in stunning detail. But it was that detail that made me sure I had read the order and that it wasn’t an early morning hallucination LOL