Barisone Pleads Not Guilty

[GreenWithEnvy]

@YankeeDuchess

What assumptions are you criticizing me for, exactly? The statement that “negligence in not securing a gun” is a serious crime?

Who has said this gun was not secured correctly? No one knows where the gun came from, how it was secured, where it was obtained on the property, who actually owned it, etc.

[IdahoRider]

@YankeeDuchess

As I remember it, LKs “claim” was that RC had been charged, not arrested.

I could have this all entirely wrong, but…it seems that you are charged after the arrest. Or there is an indictment from a grand jury, which leads to an arrest warrant. So if you have been charged with something, there is an arrest in there somewhere.
The police investigate and an arrest warrant is issued if the investigation provides enough evidence to support the belief that a crime has been committed. The person is arrested and then the district attorney (or whatever the local legal jurisdiction is called) either charges or decides not to charge the person who has been arrested.
Sheilah

[YankeeDuchess]

@rothmpp

Except that absolutely no one posting here has any idea where the gun came from or where/how it was stored. The only thing we know for sure is that at some point the gun ended up in in MB’s hand on the day in question.

I’m finding it very difficult to believe that anyone other than MB has been arrested up to this point, LKs insistence to the contrary aside. We’ve got people on here whose internet sleuthing skills, frankly, frighten me a little. Some of 'em should be working for Homeland or the CIA. No one has been able to turn up any record at all of an arrest.

I could come up with a dozen different plausible (wild and otherwise) scenarios for where/how/who owned and/or had control of the gun prior to the shooting.

The claim, I believe, is that RC was charged, not that she was arrested. Is everyone charged with a crime in NJ listed on a publicly searchable database?

 Again with the word “plausible”. A plausible scenario is one that is sensible and believable.  A “wild” scenario is generally not plausible. There are indeed dozens of not hundreds of scenarios about who owned and had control of the gun. Only a few of those are plausible.

[GreenWithEnvy]

@YankeeDuchess

The claim, I believe, is that RC was charged, not that she was arrested. Is everyone charged with a crime in NJ listed on a publicly searchable database?

Again with the word “plausible”. A plausible scenario is one that is sensible and believable. A “wild” scenario is generally not plausible. There are indeed dozens of not hundreds of scenarios about who owned and had control of the gun. Only a few of those are plausible.

Okay…and? What is “plausible” to you does not mean it is plausible to others. This entire situation is wild to the nth degree.

[IdahoRider]

@YankeeDuchess

The claim, I believe, is that RC was charged, not that she was arrested. Is everyone charged with a crime in NJ listed on a publicly searchable database?

Again with the word “plausible”. A plausible scenario is one that is sensible and believable. A “wild” scenario is generally not plausible. There are indeed dozens of not hundreds of scenarios about who owned and had control of the gun. Only a few of those are plausible.

It is not plausible that there have been any other charges in this case without there being a public record somewhere. it is just not sensible or believable.

Considering how well versed in the law LK presents herself as, it is also not plausible that she confused being charged with a crime and being served in a civil case.
Sheilah

[GreenWithEnvy]

Again, @YankeeDuchess, the ONLY information any of us on SM have is what LK has stated as “her” truth. Many have said she is not the most honest person around (I have no idea) and question her recollection. See my post earlier about how she has never seemed to accept responsibility for anything negative in her life.)

You have chosen to believe her story, hook, line, and sinker. Others have many questions and lots of doubt other than she was shot twice. HOW that happened will be revealed in the trial.

[YankeeDuchess]

@GreenWithEnvy

Why? She was stating that in her experience guns were common in a barn area. Are we going to debate gun laws at various states now? Once again, YOU are dictating what is and isn’t relevant to this discussion and going off on tangents that make no difference whatsoever.

Why are gun laws in Southern Utah, in an area so remote that it takes two hours to get to a vet, relevant to the legality or illegality of a barn manager in NJ, which according to a knowledgeable source has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, having a HANDGUN on the premises?

[GreenWithEnvy]

@YankeeDuchess

Why are gun laws in Southern Utah, in an area so remote that it takes two hours to get to a vet, relevant to the legality or illegality of a barn manager in NJ, which according to a knowledgeable source has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, having a HANDGUN on the premises?

But who cares??? You seem to know more than you are stating and want to argue with everyone proving you are right. It just doesn’t work that way.

Here’s the thing…a handgun was obviously there. Can we leave it at that and wait for the actual trial instead of the spin LK wants to put on everything? Again, who said it wasn’t legally secured somewhere on the property?

[rothmpp]

@YankeeDuchess

Again with the word “plausible”. A plausible scenario is one that is sensible and believable. A “wild” scenario is generally not plausible. There are indeed dozens of not hundreds of scenarios about who owned and had control of the gun. Only a few of those are plausible.

Ugh, I miss the eyeroll emoji.

My bad - I momentarily forgot that we were being policed by Webster’s, rather than the commonly accepted definition.

[YankeeDuchess]

@IdahoRider

I could have this all entirely wrong, but…it seems that you are charged after the arrest. Or there is an indictment from a grand jury, which leads to an arrest warrant. So if you have been charged with something, there is an arrest in there somewhere.
The police investigate and an arrest warrant is issued if the investigation provides enough evidence to support the belief that a crime has been committed. The person is arrested and then the district attorney (or whatever the local legal jurisdiction is called) either charges or decides not to charge the person who has been arrested.
Sheilah

Someone upthread said that being cited or charged was different from being arrested.

[YankeeDuchess]

@IdahoRider

It is not plausible that there have been any other charges in this case without there being a public record somewhere. it is just not sensible or believable.

Considering how well versed in the law LK presents herself as, it is also not plausible that she confused being charged with a crime and being served in a civil case.
Sheilah

So you know for a fact that there is a record in a publicly searchable database of everyone charged with a crime in NJ?

[FatDinah]

Is it time for recipes?

[MHM]

@rothmpp

Ugh, I miss the eyeroll emoji.

Here you go.

:rolleyes:

: rolleyes : without the spaces.

[roseymare]

I am not sure cited and charged are synonyms. Cited and ticketed usually are but I suppose charged could mean cited.

I usually think of citations as mild law breaking such as speeding or jay walking.

Maybe if one is a legal owner of a gun there are just citations for certain law breakage in there regards. I would think if said weapon was part of a criminal investigation their would be more than a ticket or citation but I truly do not know if that is the case.

[YankeeDuchess]

@GreenWithEnvy

Who has said this gun was not secured correctly? No one knows where the gun came from, how it was secured, where it was obtained on the property, who actually owned it, etc.

I THOUGHT we knew that MB had a pink gun in his hand and shot LK. It is just INFERENCE on my part, but that suggests to me that either
”‹”‹”‹”‹”‹”‹ a) the owner handed it to him, or
b) the owner handled it in such a way that MB had the opportunity to pick it up without her knowledge.
Given the strict laws regarding handguns in NJ, it is my BELIEF that either of these possibilities would leave the owner of the gun liable for criminal charges.

  Based on the above, I find it PLAUSIBLE that the owner of the gun was charged with gun violations. 

  I understand that you may not find it plausible.

[YankeeDuchess]

@rothmpp

Ugh, I miss the eyeroll emoji.

My bad - I momentarily forgot that we were being policed by Webster’s, rather than the commonly accepted definition.

I’m not the one who copies and pastes from Webster’s. That is MHM.

Serious question: how are you using the word plausible if not to mean sensible and believable? Commonly accepted definition is fine by me.

I’m generally reacting to several posters who have opined that there are lots of possible scenarios out there, and stated that of the hundreds of scenarios all are “equally plausible”.

Some of the scenarios are barely conceivable, but not plausible.

[cutter99]

@YankeeDuchess

What assumptions are you criticizing me for, exactly? The statement that “negligence in not securing a gun” is a serious crime?

What would constitute negligence would vary state to state, but it still seems like a solid proposition to me.

With respect to charges against RC, I have consistently stated that LK has asserted that there were charges filed against RC, and that if people choose not to believe her that is 100% their call.

For myself, in my own little mind, I believe LKs assertion that RC was charged with gun violations. That is not speculation.

Every assumption you make I am criticizing you for, just like you do to anyone else who dares to theorize, hypothesize, wild a$$ guess, or whatever you want to call it, other than you! You are VERY quick to shoot down anyone who dare to suggest anything other than what you agree with, and yet have no issue throwing out very presumptive guesses that you even try to pass off as factual.

If the shoe fits…

[YankeeDuchess]

@GreenWithEnvy

Again, @YankeeDuchess, the ONLY information any of us on SM have is what LK has stated as “her” truth. Many have said she is not the most honest person around (I have no idea) and question her recollection. See my post earlier about how she has never seemed to accept responsibility for anything negative in her life.)

You have chosen to believe her story, hook, line, and sinker. Others have many questions and lots of doubt other than she was shot twice. HOW that happened will be revealed in the trial.

Who is SM?

[cutter99]

SM= Social Media

Or should I get out the Urban Dictionary for you???

[cutter99]

@YankeeDuchess

I THOUGHT we knew that MB had a pink gun in his hand and shot LK. It is just INFERENCE on my part, but that suggests to me that either
”‹”‹”‹”‹”‹”‹ a) the owner handed it to him, or
b) the owner handled it in such a way that MB had the opportunity to pick it up without her knowledge.
Given the strict laws regarding handguns in NJ, it is my BELIEF that either of these possibilities would leave the owner of the gun liable for criminal charges.

Based on the above, I find it PLAUSIBLE that the owner of the gun was charged with gun violations.

I understand that you may not find it plausible.

YOU thought YOU knew MB had a pink gun in his hand and shot LK. That has not been made public as a hard, cold fact anywhere, especially in a court of law.

Stop promoting what you think you know as fact, when in reality you know nothing more than the rest of us as fact.