Your post is spot on - except that although someone can TELL her that her own behavior has resulted in her being considered a pariah, people with her particular type of ***** disorders cannot conceive of the concept that THEY are wrong. In their world, THEY are all that matters (similar to an infant or young toddler who has not yet learned that they are not the center of the universe).
12 Likes
He has no recollection of the events. Therefore your question is moot.
10 Likes
No, because RG hadn’t done much work there. Unlike at the house, where he was supposed to be working off the board on the horses. 
2 Likes
He cannot remember a snippet of the event – the actual shooting. He remembers getting the gun, getting in his car, and driving down to the house. He just doesn’t remember the actual act of shooting–the criminal acts for which he is on trial.
Only about 1% of felony cases per year use the insanity defense and of those only about 30% are successful. One option open to the defense that you failed to mention is accepting a plea deal.
6 Likes
After watching the charging hearing, I’m not sure what to think. So now self defense can no longer be considered by the jury. The verdict choices will be not guilty (reasonable doubt), or not guilty by reason of insanity. Also, it looks like the judge is seriously considering adding the lesser charge of guilty of aggravated assault, which Bilinkas did not want added. Would the judge’s exclusion of the self defense verdict option be grounds for appeal if the jury convicts? It sure seems like sufficient evidence was presented for self defense, but the judge himself decided that there wasn’t such sufficient evidence admitted to the record. Couldn’t that be a factual decision for the jury to make based on the evidence presented?
4 Likes
I thought they had been living in the main floor apartment the previous year (2018) before everyone went to Florida for the winter when the pipe froze/burst in early 2019.
3 Likes
Nobody should engage with her at all and especially not about MB.
5 Likes
The judge is trying to do Barisone a favor by adding the lesser included charge of aggravated assault. Bilinkas is going for broke, which is insane and not in the best interests of his client.
“Four elements are required for self-defense: (1) an unprovoked attack, (2) which threatens imminent injury or death, and (3) an objectively reasonable degree of force, used in response to (4) an objectively reasonable fear of injury or death.”
Barisone was not subject to an unprovoked, physical attack that threatened imminent injury or death.
4 Likes
Yeah thanks for the stats that we’ve already read 1000 times.
It is not up to YOU as to how MB should choose his defense. Your only motive to writing what you did was to impune his absolute, unresolvable guilt. And that’s a ruse. A misdirection. A lie.
Once MB got out of his car ANYTHING could have happened. The 2 witnesses to the event- let’s call them - LauBert- provided testimony that neither matched each other nor did it match the testimony of the “ear witness” famed in song and story.
And because of these indisputable facts, Balinkas and many observers believe others options either are available or should be available.
24 Likes
They went over this during the charging conference. The judge is going to give the instructions about the State’s burden of proof and reasonable doubt.
Mr B certainly did try to get in alternative theories about what happened. Listen again to the questions he asked the cops about GSR, and the way he got conflicting stories out of LK, RG, and the lawyer ear-witness.
His argument is Not Guilty, but if he did do it, it’s because he’s insane. The jury has to first prove he even committed the shooting in the first place.
15 Likes
Unprovoked attack may apply. We just don’t know.
Of all the parties involved only one doesn’t have a record of previous unprovoked attack. And that’s MB.
15 Likes
Believe me, there are people on here, like some practicing trial attorneys, court professionals, and even lay people who understand how the US legal system works as well or better than you (and don’t feel the need to crow about it, by the by - any chance you have a moustache?). And there are loads of people on here who have been on juries and received instructions - something they let us all know without the sheen of ‘know it all’ that you just displayed.
And, yes, I and many other people here find reasonable doubt that he shot her b/c there were zero forensics done. Please read along and keep up with everyone rather than having a go at me. Your style is really abrasive and off putting.
What I asked was, why would someone like you be mounting such an exhaustive campaign to mansplain the justice system to everyone for someone you find vile and hope isn’t stabled near you? If she’s so vile, what’s your motivation for finger wagging and self-promoting? It’s an odd stance. I may have realised that Kyle Rittenhouse was going to get off based on the law, but if you think I would have hopped on a BB over and over again to argue that point with people, you’re wrong. It’s odd to put so much effort into someone you find ‘vile’.
Unless you actually don’t which would at least make more sense.
32 Likes
Sorry. I don’t live on this thread, so I have no idea how many times someone has pointed out a particular fact.
If Barisone is found guilty, he will have grounds for an appeal due to ineffective counsel.
4 Likes
Whoa. That puts a whole new spin on things, esp. related to the weird rant on the SS thread.
6 Likes
I wonder if that will happen in this case. I’m picturing a bunch of jurors saying to the judge, “They did what?!? But you wouldn’t let it be admitted as evidence?!?”
6 Likes
He has grounds for Appeal but that would not be my choice.
6 Likes
An unprovoked attack would have been LK driving up to the stables while brandishing a weapon. That did not happen. Barisone set all of this in motion the moment he retrieved the gun and loaded it.
9 Likes
I think this may have been answered, and if so I apologize, but request a response for me, sitting in the back of the room trying to take it all in.
In his closing arguments, can/ may the defense attorney present the ideas that forensics didn’t prove anything and of the three people there at the time of the shooting two are unreliable at best and the third has no memory? Can/ may he draw the straight line to reasonable doubt or do the judge’s charge limitations and other instructions prohibit this?
I ask this because I’m personally familiar with a case (civil, not criminal) where the lawyer for the aggrieved party said to the jury in summation “Look, we all know what happened here. You’ve been lied to and the liars should be taken to the town square, put in stocks and horse whipped. But we can’t do that.” I’m unclear on what latitude is given to a defense attorney in a criminal case. TIA
6 Likes
Perhaps you could use a bit more objectivity like, say, the law. What will work within the confines of the law? Remove emotion from the equation. Emotion is what got Barisone to this point. Emotion (money pressure fear) is what got Barisone tied up with LK in the first place. He would have been better off selling a horse.
6 Likes
Loaded it for defensive purposes. Who goes looking to kill with all 2 bullets in it. Yeah right.
Again the only people with histories of unprovoked attack are LauBert. Not MB.
It is absolutely a possibility that MB was attacked. And it seems to be the prevailing thought amongst observers too.
30 Likes
