Barisone Pleads Not Guilty

[Ammy]

Like I said in the other thread, it has surprised me all along how many posters have such strong opinions about this case with so many facts unknown.

I don’t think we’ve even begun to learn what happened here.

[emipou]

@netg

Yep, you received answers, but this is pretty standard in a murder case. Even the picture I saw with something like 12 police cars at the crime scene - each of those will likely have a report. Interviews in the formal transcribed format can take hundreds of pages for fairly insignificant witnesses. Every single person spoken to, officer action, photo taken, etc., has to be shared with the defense as discovery - and it meant thousands of pages in the relatively simple murder case I worked back when I worked for a lawyer. Now that there is social media, even horse records and contracts around the property, the other calls to law enforcement made, etc., the prosecution would be hiding something illegally if they didn’t produce thousands of pages. We used cardboard file boxes to store all disclosure with case names, and once categorized and catalogued we would easily have 20 or more boxes. That was in the 90s, and lawyers had to have storage to keep all their files. These days I don’t know how much is catalogued electronically instead.

Also, all Safe Sport records and personnel who touched this have also probably been pulled in to make it even more fun.

According to my friend who is a paralegal, it’s all paper still.

[kande04]

@Ammy

Like I said in the other thread, it has surprised me all along how many posters have such strong opinions about this case with so many facts unknown.

I don’t think we’ve even begun to learn what happened here.

I saw a lot more speculating than strong opinions.

[YankeeDuchess]

@initiate1987

I was waiting for someone to start this. I’m so confused as to why he would plead not guilty to everything. I know that we don’t know the whole story, but I’m not sure how the situation could be construed as anything but attempted murder.

      Why would there be confusion regarding his pleading not guilty to everything?  He has nothing to lose by pleading not guilty and forcing the state to make its case, UNLESS he was offered a deal to plead guilty to a lesser charge (like second degree murder or manslaughter). 

      I interpret his pleading not guilty to all charges as indicating that either 1) no plea deal was offered or 2) he rejected any plea deal that was offered.

[merrygoround]

At the risk of people thinking I have not followed this closely enough, whose gun was it in the first place?

[MHM]

@merrygoround

At the risk of people thinking I have not followed this closely enough, whose gun was it in the first place?

I have not seen any official notice on the ownership of the gun.

[BigMama1]

@merrygoround

At the risk of people thinking I have not followed this closely enough, whose gun was it in the first place?

According to posts here from the victim, it belonged to another person at the barn. Nothing official has ever been said.

[YankeeDuchess]

@MHM

I have not seen any official notice on the ownership of the gun.

  According to LK, the barn manager was arrested on a gun charge, suggesting that she was the owner of the gun, or gave possession of it to MB.

[MHM]

@YankeeDuchess

According to LK, the barn manager was arrested on a gun charge, suggesting that she was the owner of the gun, or gave possession of it to MB.

According to LK.

As I said, I have not seen any official notice on the ownership of the gun.

[YankeeDuchess]

@MHM

According to LK.

As I said, I have not seen any official notice on the ownership of the gun.

 I understood that aspect of your post. 

 I thought

@merrygoround

might be interested in what unofficial information there was, and made a point of indicating the source so that readers could trust the information or not, depending on how credible they view the source.

[netg]

@YankeeDuchess

Why would there be confusion regarding his pleading not guilty to everything? He has nothing to lose by pleading not guilty and forcing the state to make its case, UNLESS he was offered a deal to plead guilty to a lesser charge (like second degree murder or manslaughter).

I interpret his pleading not guilty to all charges as indicating that either 1) no plea deal was offered or 2) he rejected any plea deal that was offered.

Because not everyone has much familiarity with the legal system and how criminal cases go. I don’t see that as a negative when people have questions!

[merrygoround]

@MHM

According to LK.

As I said, I have not seen any official notice on the ownership of the gun.

I consider LK an unreliable, and unverifiable resource.

[YankeeDuchess]

@merrygoround

At the risk of people thinking I have not followed this closely enough, whose gun was it in the first place?

There was speculation that it was LKs gun. However, I think it is verifiable that she has filed a civil suit against about 10 possible owners of the gun, and the barn manager is one of the 10.
I don’t think she would file a civil suit against 10 possible gun owners if she in fact owned the gun, so I personally assume the gun was not owned by LK. But perhaps others think she is nutty enough to file a civil suit against others for negligence in leaving a gun around, even if the gun was hers.

Some posters made a big deal of the fact that the gun was pink, and, the logic goes, therefore did not belong to MB.

However, if he was the owner of the gun, and could establish that he routinely had it with him when he walked around the farm, for protection against rabid badgers or whatever, he would have more chance to say that the shooting was unpremeditated, and occurred on the spur of the moment.

If the gun belonged to someone else (other than LK), then he had to use foresight to borrow the gun, which will make it more difficult for the defense to knock down premeditation.

So I think the main issue is: was the gun owned by MB, LK, or someone other than LK or MB. If the gun was owned by either MB or LK, that seems favorable to his defense for the purpose of arguing no premeditation. But if it was owned by neither MB nor LK, I don’t see why it matters much precisely who owned it, as borrowing from the barn manager or some other person suggests premeditation.

[Angela_Freda]

@YankeeDuchess

According to LK, the barn manager was arrested on a gun charge, suggesting that she was the owner of the gun, or gave possession of it to MB.

But has anyone seen anything verifying she was arrested? I haven’t, but have really looked, either.

[Angela_Freda]

@YankeeDuchess

There was speculation that it was LKs gun. However, I think it is verifiable that she has filed a civil suit against about 10 possible owners of the gun, and the barn manager is one of the 10.
I don’t think she would file a civil suit against 10 possible gun owners if she in fact owned the gun, so I personally assume the gun was not owned by LK. But perhaps others think she is nutty enough to file a civil suit against others for negligence in leaving a gun around, even if the gun was hers.

Some posters made a big deal of the fact that the gun was pink, and, the logic goes, therefore did not belong to MB.

However, if he was the owner of the gun, and could establish that he routinely had it with him when he walked around the farm, for protection against rabid badgers or whatever, he would have more chance to say that the shooting was unpremeditated, and occurred on the spur of the moment.

If the gun belonged to someone else (other than LK), then he had to use foresight to borrow the gun, which will make it more difficult for the defense to knock down premeditation.

So I think the main issue is: was the gun owned by MB, LK, or someone other than LK or MB. If the gun was owned by either MB or LK, that seems favorable to his defense for the purpose of arguing no premeditation. But if it was owned by neither MB nor LK, I don’t see why it matters much precisely who owned it, as borrowing from the barn manager or some other person suggests premeditation.

How so?

Again, speculating… but there were suggestions that LKs dog had gone after people on the farm.
Carrying a gun, even a borrowed one, to protect ones self from said dog =/= premeditation wrt shooting LK (which was a bad thing to do, however it came to pass).

[YankeeDuchess]

@Angela Freda

How so?

Again, speculating… but there were suggestions that LKs dog had gone after people on the farm.
Carrying a gun, even a borrowed one, to protect ones self from said dog =/= premeditation wrt shooting LK (which was a bad thing to do, however it came to pass).

If you’re afraid of LK, RG, or her dog, why not talk to her by phone instead of walking up to her house with a gun?

Why arm yourself with a gun on Aug 7, if you haven’t been carrying a gun previously? Hadn’t the dog been there for months?

Personally, I don’t find it very plausible that he would borrow a gun out of fear of a 25 lb dog, but if that is the defense strategy, yes, I can see that in that scenario, he was not premeditating murder.

Which presumably is what the trial will focus on. Seems clear that he shot her. The question is whether he can convince the jury that there was no premeditation, or it was self defense, or that there was diminished responsibility in the sense that he “snapped”. Any of those things would be preferable to shooting her after clear premeditation, from his point of view.

[GiveEmEl]

@YankeeDuchess

If you’re afraid of LK, RG, or her dog, why not talk to her by phone instead of walking up to her house with a gun?

Why arm yourself with a gun on Aug 7, if you haven’t been carrying a gun previously? Hadn’t the dog been there for months?

Personally, I don’t find it very plausible that he would borrow a gun out of fear of a 25 lb dog, but if that is the defense strategy, yes, I can see that in that scenario, he was not premeditating murder.

Which presumably is what the trial will focus on. Seems clear that he shot her. The question is whether he can convince the jury that there was no premeditation, or it was self defense, or that there was diminished responsibility in the sense that he “snapped”. Any of those things would be preferable to shooting her after clear premeditation, from his point of view.

For all we know, he did call her and she hung up on him. Perhaps he thought it was a conversation best had in person, or whatever other reason a person would have for going to their own home to talk to a tenant, or whatever everyone has decided she was. Hell, maybe he needed some personal item from his house and brought the gun with him because he was afraid, as I would be, after reading her posts. Or he just decided he’d kill her, we have no idea.

The facts are: he shot her. The shooting took place on the farm, at his house where LK and RG were residing. Beyond that shrug

[MHM]

@YankeeDuchess

Why arm yourself with a gun on Aug 7, if you haven’t been carrying a gun previously? Hadn’t the dog been there for months?

How do you know he wasn’t carrying it before August 7th? If, in fact, he was carrying it on that day.

[YankeeDuchess]

@MHM

How do you know he wasn’t carrying it before August 7th? If, in fact, he was carrying it on that day.

I was responding to a proposed scenario offered by AF in which she suggested he was carrying the gun on Aug 7 because he was afraid of the dog.

[iris2006]

@YankeeDuchess

I was responding to a proposed scenario offered by AF in which she suggested he was carrying the gun on Aug 7 because he was afraid of the dog.

Premeditation is confusing::

I found this:

“The preparation of arms or other instruments required for the execution of the crime are indications of premeditation, but are not absolute proof of it, as these preparations may have been intended for other purposes, and then suddenly changed to the performance of the criminal act.”

There is no specified time element to premeditation. It can happen in an instant.