Barisone KROL this Friday, 5/26

[Seeker1]

It is up to the judge

[Seeker1]

The hospital can make recommendations based on how mb reacts to more freedom. The judge makes the decisions.

[SoCoPony]

Oh the murder plot. Right that one that was played in court or not.

Oh wait you mean the recordings that were released about it, oh wait that didn’t happen either.

Ohhh no the transcripts that you so loving did that what where are those?

[Seeker1]

What are u talking about socopony?

[erinmeri]

@CurrentlyHorseless

One of the protections afforded to a defendant in a criminal trial is that he is only being tried on the incident that was charged. Bringing up previous related behavior to establish a pattern of behavior is not permitted.

Not always true. Character is different than habit. If, as Seeker claims, there was sufficiently related behavior, they could have held a Molineaux hearing to attempt to admit such evidence. Did they even try to do that? If not, these are unsubstantiated, libelous claims.

Seeker says the prosecutor politely declined to include that witness because they didn’t want to testify. Not how this works. (See: Harvey Weinstein’s trials and also “hostile witnesses”.)

[SoCoPony]

Go fetch. I am not a dog.

[erinmeri]

@hut-ho78

Actually a Krol hearing for NGRI for murder or attempted murder is required to be public, not private.

You’re wrong, and I specifically posted screenshots (or a link?) that says otherwise. There are NO PROVISIONS for public hearings for attempted murder. This is untrue and has previously been debunked.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@erinmeri

@CurrentlyHorseless

Where has that “been proven” Eggbutt?

Both sides, LK and MB, voluntarily dismissed their civil claims against the other.

Why are you determined to rehash this? (Rhetorical question, of course.)

To push back on the apparently false and libelous narrative that MB has a history of “semi violent” incidents? And because of the fact that a hearing that should be private according to the law and is instead public and is being attended by the Kanareks, who should ostensibly have this incident in their rearview mirror since it was THEY who instituted the dismissal of the civil trial? (Rhetorical questions, of course.)

I was asking Eggbutt where it has “been proven” that the entire mess was solely the fault of LK.

It’s the refrain she has been pushing for years, and continues to rehash now. It’s not true. It certainly has not “been proven”.

The hearing was open to the public. The Kanareks had as much right to attend as any other member of the public.

I have not pushed the idea that MB has a history of violent incidents, but I can imagine it may have come up in the hearing, and I explained to you why such a history, if it exists, would not have come up in the criminal trial.

Someone who has a feeling of grandiosity, has an obsession with power and winning, and thinks the rules do not apply to him, as the psychiatrist characterized MB, might get a gun and shoot someone he delusionally thinks is a danger to him. Such a person may have engaged in semi violent confrontations before the actual shooting. Such behavior, if it exists, seems entirely relevant to the Kroll hearing, although not to the criminal trial.

[Knights_Mom]

@Seeker1

How would you know km

I know the opposite of what certain posters say is truth.

[SoCoPony]

Someone who has a feeling of grandiosity, has an obsession with power and winning.

Again someone is mixing up their hims and hers.

[rothmpp]

@hut-ho78

I think she was horrified to see her daughter near death in a hospital room. I think she was horrified to get a phone call telling her a man they trusted shot her daughter twice

She can be horrified that her daughter was shot and still not condone the rest of her behavior. Getting shot does not excuse prior behavior, nor does it excuse all future behavior.

As has been documented, LK has been a loose cannon wrecking havoc for many, many years prior to meeting MB.

[erinmeri]

@CurrentlyHorseless

I was asking Eggbutt where it has “been proven” that the entire mess was solely the fault of LK.

It’s the refrain she has been pushing for years, and continues to rehash now. It’s not true. It certainly has not “been proven”.

The hearing was open to the public. The Kanareks had as much right to attend as any other member of the public.

I have not pushed the idea that MB has a history of violent incidents, but I can imagine it may have come up in the hearing, and I explained to you why such a history, if it exists, would not have come up in the criminal trial.

Someone who has a feeling of grandiosity, has an obsession with power and winning, and thinks the rules do not apply to him, as the psychiatrist characterized MB, might get a gun and shoot someone he delusionally thinks is a danger to him. Such a person may have engaged in semi violent confrontations before the actual shooting. Such behavior, if it exists, seems entirely relevant to the Kroll hearing, although not to the criminal trial.

Okay, cool. So you still don’t understand the law and its nuances, or that the testimony about said “grandiosity” was misguided, or that Seeker’s unsubstantiated claims are libelous.

Done with engaging with you.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@ekat

@hut-ho78

Actually a Krol hearing for NGRI for murder or attempted murder is required to be public, not private.

That’s wrong. The only exception is murder. Not attempted murder.

https://www.mercerbar.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/8.12.2020-Directive-21.20-Supercedes-Directive-9-96-Criminal-Procedures-for-Defendants-Found-Not-Guilty-by-Reason-of-Insanity-and-other-Committments-Resulting-from-Criminal-Proceedings.pdf

I can see why you might think you understand the law on this better than a Coth poster, but I’m surprised and a little amused that you think you understand the law better than Judge Taylor.

Perhaps a feeling of grandiosity?

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@erinmeri

@CurrentlyHorseless

I was asking Eggbutt where it has “been proven” that the entire mess was solely the fault of LK.

It’s the refrain she has been pushing for years, and continues to rehash now. It’s not true. It certainly has not “been proven”.

The hearing was open to the public. The Kanareks had as much right to attend as any other member of the public.

I have not pushed the idea that MB has a history of violent incidents, but I can imagine it may have come up in the hearing, and I explained to you why such a history, if it exists, would not have come up in the criminal trial.

Someone who has a feeling of grandiosity, has an obsession with power and winning, and thinks the rules do not apply to him, as the psychiatrist characterized MB, might get a gun and shoot someone he delusionally thinks is a danger to him. Such a person may have engaged in semi violent confrontations before the actual shooting. Such behavior, if it exists, seems entirely relevant to the Kroll hearing, although not to the criminal trial.

Okay, cool. So you still don’t understand the law and its nuances, or that the testimony about said “grandiosity” was misguided, or that Seeker’s unsubstantiated claims are libelous.

Done with engaging with you.

I’m glad to hear you’re done “engaging” with me.

Your previous responses haven’t really “engaged” with my posts, anyway.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@erinmeri

@hut-ho78

Actually a Krol hearing for NGRI for murder or attempted murder is required to be public, not private.

You’re wrong, and I specifically posted screenshots (or a link?) that says otherwise. There are NO PROVISIONS for public hearings for attempted murder. This is untrue and has previously been debunked.

Another poster who understands the law on Krol hearings better than the judge!

[SoCoPony]

Oh yes your Google law degree wins the day.

Way to go CH, now report back to HQ with the victory

[eggbutt]

Let’s cut to the chase, Kirby. What do you and your family plan to do to Barisone when he is released? It is obvious you have no intention of leaving him alone. How much further are you people planning to go to further destroy this man???

[hut-ho78]

MB’s psychologist?

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@SoCoPony

Oh yes your Google law degree wins the day.

Way to go CH, now report back to HQ with the victory

Since I don’t have a law degree, even from Google, I have not taken a position on whether Kroll hearings are required by law to be private.

However, both @Ekat and Judge Taylor have taken positions on the law on this regard. Opposing positions.

I have more faith in the legal knowledge of the judge on this issue.

[erinmeri]

@CurrentlyHorseless

Another poster who understands the law on Kroll hearings better than the judge!

First off, it’s Krol, not Kroll. Secondly, point me in the direction where Taylor demonstrates one iota of understanding about Krol. It’s not frequently a subject that they (judges) have to familiarize themselves with, so is it so difficult for you to imagine that Taylor might not be very familiar with it or its requirements? Insanity defenses, especially successful ones, are indeed quite rare.

As for your other “slight” that I don’t engage with your posts, I would beg to differ. But okay!