Barisone- New Thread

[RND]

@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.

Ah, you are one who needs constant attention to feel validated, As long as you are on MB’s side you will do well here.

[MHM]

@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.

Don’t trouble yourself.

[Knights_Mom]

Somebody is getting all touchy

[Angela_Freda]

That’s not how any of this works.

[MHM]

@Sdel

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?

I believe so. Am I remembering correctly that the one thing the jurors were allowed to take into the jury room was the transcript of the judge’s instructions?

[BatCoach]

Yep. Constant attention seeker over here!! Oh dear. Compare the our post counts on this thread to see who is seeking attention. Be well!

[RND]

@Angela_Freda

That’s not how any of this works.

Well of course I can’t force you to put me on ignore. I just thought it might be better for you since you rarely understand the words I use when responding to your posts.

[Sdel]

@MHM

@Sdel

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?

I believe so. Am I remembering correctly that the one thing the jurors were allowed to take into the jury room was the transcript of the judge’s instructions?

Simring put the gun in MB’s hands out of extreme fear of being killed by LK and RG and needing protection.

[CanteringCarrot]

@Sdel

@MHM

@Sdel

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?

I believe so. Am I remembering correctly that the one thing the jurors were allowed to take into the jury room was the transcript of the judge’s instructions?

Simring put the gun in MB’s hands out of extreme fear of being killed by LK and RG and needing protection.

Which I don’t think is that unrealistic, sadly.

[FitzE]

I’m actually being super polite and asking a simple question. @RND, I don’t understand your response about someone saying you were drinking (i.e., I don’t understand how that is a response to my post that you quoted).

What would be your answer to my question? No wrong answer at all, just each person’s personal evaluation of the evidence.

[MHM]

@CanteringCarrot

@Sdel

Simring put the gun in MB’s hands out of extreme fear of being killed by LK and RG and needing protection.

Which I don’t think is that unrealistic, sadly.

Same. Especially after seeing the picture Mr. B showed the jury of MB’s injuries.

[FitzE]

Those injuries were way more than I was expecting.

[MHM]

@FitzE

Those injuries were way more than I was expecting.

Ditto.

MB looked bad enough at his first hearing, but it was nothing compared to that day.

[Sdel]

@MHM

@CanteringCarrot

@Sdel

Simring put the gun in MB’s hands out of extreme fear of being killed by LK and RG and needing protection.

Which I don’t think is that unrealistic, sadly.

Same. Especially after seeing the picture Mr. B showed the jury of MB’s injuries.

More to the point, the states expert followed up, very clearly, that it wasn’t all in his head, these things were happening and everyone else was in fear too. I think it got lost a bit, but the defenses’ experts were trying to push that his reactions to the fear was the insane part….not the fear itself.

[Rhythm_Pace_Impulsion]

@FitzE

Those injuries were way more than I was expecting.

Same

[hut-ho78]

@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?

Ah. Thanks. Yes I believe so. Thanks for the memory jog.

[Sdel]

[RND]

@CanteringCarrot

Jesus H Christ. Stop being so petty. You wonder why people talk to you they way that they do, but you’re constantly flinging insults and other backhanded BS.

Instead of sticking to the argument, you go after posters. Maybe they go after you too, but be better than that.

Or not.

I know the Mods will remove my post and/or I’ll get slapped, but whatever.

I don’t see anything wrong with your post so I hope the Moderator doesn’t remove it.

You don’t like my posts, but you don’t make it clear why you don’t like them. You accuse me of being petty, but words matter to me. I get a whole lot of replies here that have nothing to do with my posts and yes, that bothers me. I can’t tell if people here are too lazy to read for comprehension or if they are just too stupid to read for comprehension or if they are just too hateful towards LK and too in love with MB to read for comprehension, but very few people here are capable of reading for comprehension. And no matter the reason, it’s annoying as hell.

[hut-ho78]

@Djones

@hut-ho78

Yes, it is common for contractors to pull permits but it is usually part of the agreement. The owner has to sign something.

Is that NJ law? I ask because my DH is an electrical contractor in Alabama and there is nothing in the permit process here that involves the homeowner in terms of signing anything or being involved in the process…except for paying it when invoiced for it.

It is the law in New Jersey. I posted it upthread. Somewhere. I’ll see if I can find it.

It’s the law where I live. A governmental body can’t authorize work on property without the owner’s ok. The contractor usually pulls the permits but they have to have a notarized affidavit from the owner.

[skydy]

@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.

I was speaking to a friend today about the trial. She asked me what I thought regarding the defendant’s guilt or innocence. I said that I could not answer for certain between which of the available verdicts were specified, because I had not discussed the evidence with a jury of my peers. I said “he might have done it” and “it looks as if he had done it” but THAT’S NOT GOOD ENOUGH. The standard is “beyond a reasonable doubt” and I can’t reconcile the evidence to that standard.
I do know that would be unable to find Barisone guilty, because the reasonable doubt is very much apparent and I could not ignore it. It would be either Not Guilty or more likely, Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity.
@FitzE to answer you question , no, I would not want my friend/relative/loved one convicted with the evidence we’ve seen in this trial. After listening to the evidence, I do believe that Barisone had a psychotic break in this instance, that he needs treatment and needs to have no contact with the victim or her boyfriend. Hopefully all of them can move on and that LK can leave him alone.

As far as the civil suit is concerned, I think LK is making a big mistake in pursuing it. The discovery will be so damaging.