Barisone- New Thread

[Fat_Dinah]

There is specific law based on a “dying declaratio n” that says the words of someone facing death must be given special weight.

[hut-ho78]

@EADoug

I slowly went through Taylor’s instructions tonight, after seeing a few more comments about how MB has already admitted to shooting LK/RG (Taylor says differently - first generally not guilty, then add in insanity if found guilty).

From the flow chart Taylor gave the jury, if they are asking to review Dr. Simring, I would lean towards they found the State DID in fact prove their case, and they are now considering the insanity claim. Still not putting money on anything, but it would fit with the flow chart.

Yeah. That first step wouldn’t take long. Anyone not think the state made its burden. Ok next.

[Fat_Dinah]

I think I have answe red, just not given the answer you want. I would accept the jury’s verdict as reasonable, period. If this jury finds Barisone guilty, I will accept it. If they find him insane, I will accept it. If they acquit him, I will accept it.
I will feel sorry for him and LK and everyone else.

[hut-ho78]

@RND

@BigMama1

On the off chance you aren’t being deliberately obtuse and you genuinely don’t understand what projection is, perhaps this will help:

Psychology Today

Projection

Projection is the process of displacing one’s feelings onto a different person, animal, or object. The term is most commonly used to describe defensive projection—attributing one’s own unacceptable urges to another. For example, if someone…

Again, JESUS. Where in my post that was quoted did I project anything?

The sun has set. Things get weirder here then. I can think of a lot of reasons why but that doesn’t matter. It just happens.

[MHM]

@FitzE

No need to extrapolate to other hypothetical cases. Just looking at the circumstances presented by this exact case. Why is it so hard to just answer that question?

There seem to be a lot of people who don’t want to answer.

[RND]

@BatCoach

Something sure seems stuck in @RND’s craw tonight. Hitting the margs too hard perhaps? Such a strong opinion for not even following the whole trial. Oh well. We are all entitled to our hot takes.

What is your issue that I bother you so much and why would you accuse me of drinking? Are you an alcoholic and you’re just projecting on me? What specifically do you find problematic with my posts in the last ten hours because I was honest from the beginning that I hadn’t watched the entire trial?

[FitzE]

I’m not looking for either yes or no. I’m looking for either ‘yes, I personally find the evidence presented to be sufficient to me in order to convict me or someone I love’ or ‘no, I personally do not find the evidence presented to be sufficient to me in order to convict me or someone I love’.

Again, you are answering a question I did not ask: would you accept the jury’s decision.

I’m asking would you personally find the evidence presented sufficient - you, not the jury.

ETA: you can answer either way, it’s up to you; I’m not looking for one answer or the other. I am looking for one of those two answers b/c that’s the question; it’s not another different question.

[FitzE]

@MHM

There seem to be a lot of people who don’t want to answer.

Thank you! I feel very Twilight Zone-y here. It’s very weird - I’m asking a super simple question and I’m either getting deflection/evasion from folks like Rowdy, or answers to a completely different question. Maybe I should make a poll so people can focus and just answer the question asked without going further afield.

For the folks I’ve asked (and anyone who wants to answer) which of these two answers would you choose given the exact evidence presented in this case:

• ‘yes, I personally find the evidence presented to be sufficient to me in order to convict me or someone I love’

• ‘no, I personally do not find the evidence presented to be sufficient to me in order to convict me or someone I love’

You are answering for yourself, not the jury, not a hypothetical juror, not for another case, not with respect to a jury’s decision. You are answering whether or not you find the evidence as presented compelling enough to convict you or someone you love.

[MHM]

@FitzE

I am looking for one of those two answers b/c that’s the question; it’s not another different question.

Omg.

If (heaven forbid) there is a hung jury and another trial, we should send the lawyers T-shirts with that sentence on them! Lol.

[Knights_Mom]

In the event of a hung jury I just don’t see them reprosecuting.

LOL is reprosecuting a word? If not it should be

[FitzE]

For colour, the case in which my loved one was killed by a drunk driver: the driver’s family was devastated and crying in court, but they stated unequivocally that the evidence presented established beyond a reasonable doubt that their loved one was guilty.

My question: would this evidence* satisfy you beyond a reasonable doubt that your loved one was guilty?

This evidence:

• no forensics were done on the weapon
• no testing was done on anyone’s hands at the scene
• the only ‘evidence’ presented was the mismatched stories of two people who were demonstrated to have lied while under oath, have verifiable criminal/drug histories, and an admitted scheme to destroy the defendant

[RND]

@MHM

Omg.

If (heaven forbid) there is a hung jury and another trial, we should send the lawyers T-shirts with that sentence on them! Lol.

What? How old are you? I’ve thought since these threads started that you are 60s or 70s, but this post makes you seem like you’re 12 and now I am feeling really sorry for how I have responded to you.

[FitzE]

@RND : would this evidence as presented satisfy you beyond a reasonable doubt that your loved one in the position of defendant was guilty?

[Sdel]

@hut-ho78

@BigMama1

@CurrentlyHorseless

What about a 911 call in which a woman says “I’ve been shot. Michael Barisone just shot me”, and when LE gets there a minute later they find a woman with two bullet holes in her chest.

That’s not evidence?

No. That is an anecdotal report. Evidence would be something conclusively corroborating what LK said on the phone to 911, something to show that MB pointed a gun at her and pulled the trigger. Video footage of the events would be evidence. The presence of GSR on his hands would be evidence

LK said MB shot me to 911. He told Dr Simring he got the gun out of the safe. He drove there. LK had 2 bullet wounds. RG spoke to 911 and corroborated LK’s testimony while sounding like he is struggling. LE arrives. RG is on top of MB. Same gun is under MB. RG tells LE that MB is the shooter. RC tells LE it is her gun and she gave it to MB. Ear witness testifies LK told him MB shot me in the heart.

Were there not admonishments from the Judge that the experts statements about what MB may or may not have told them were not to be considered as “evidence” for guilt but for determining state of mind only?

[RND]

@FitzE

RND: would this evidence as presented satisfy you beyond a reasonable doubt that your loved one in the position of defendant way guilty?

I just have to quote this since I was accused by someone of drinking earlier.

[Angela_Freda]

Shocking

[BatCoach]

You just seem to be a wee bit sensitive (jumping to conclusions and getting offended by your own unique interpretation of common thread emojis) and resulting to ad hominem snark. Just saying there is no need for it.

Watch as little or as much of the trial as you want, but don’t be surprised that people who have watched it all might have a different opinion than you. We are all entitled to our individual takes.

Apologies if the “margs” comment offended you - blue saddle inn, margs, chips n dip and all that. It was meant in jest.

[CanteringCarrot]

@Fat_Dinah

There is specific law based on a “dying declaratio n” that says the words of someone facing death must be given special weight.

Does “special weight” mean treated as the absolute truth though? I mean, don’t get me wrong, I understand why it is given special weight. Is this a law that varies by state? Just curious since this isn’t my legal realm…or country.

[FitzE]

I don’t understand how this answers my question. What would your answer to that question be, honestly.

As I noted in the drunk driving case, it is possible to love someone and accept that they are guilty of a crime based on the evidence at trial. I actually felt bad for the driver’s family. They even asked if they could hug me after I spoke at sentencing.

Therefore, ‘yes, this evidence is sufficient to convict my loved one’ is a perfectly rational response if that’s true for you.

[MHM]

@Knights_Mom

In the event of a hung jury I just don’t see them reprosecuting.

I would hope not.

But with those shirts the lawyers would be prepared. Lol.