Barisone Safe Sport Update

[Knights_Mom]

@hut-ho78

@trubandloki

@hut-ho78

What I have done is point out that MB had a lot more going on in his life to stress him out and cause him to have a mental breakdown and be in a delusion than one problematic boarder.

So how do you know that? Do you know him personally? Did he tell you that?

Divorce
“Hard to feel good after being clipped for $965,000.” (Divorce again)
New girlfriend.
Loss of income (ex-wife’s)
Loss of business manager (wife)
Possible aging issues with 8-9 concussions (court)
Ice storm and house damage

You seem to think he went straight from VB to MHG. That would be an error.

[OntheFnce]

@Dragonfly90

@eggbutt

Why didn’t/couldn’t RG have negotiated with the farrier to do the work and he or LK would pay him themselves that day?

My impression was the farrier was told not to do them. Didn’t RG confront the farrier because he wouldn’t do them? If the BO tells the barn farrier not to do a boarder’s horse(s) I doubt he/she would go over BO head even if they asked if they could pay direct. Aside, every barn I have boarded at if you are not present to pay you are left a bill. Most barn owner I have known could not afford to pay for everyone’s horse and then try to collect later.

It depends on the set up. A lot of BNTs will bill for farrier service…and tack on a bit extra for the “convenience” of taking care of the bill. Otherwise, the farrier will leave the bill in your tack trunk or mail it to you.
My guess is maybe MB wanted the other horses in the barn to be done first and/or he was tired of paying maybe a thousand or more for farrier work. My farrier charges $325 shoeing. Not sure who MB used but being in the same area, I can’t imagine it would be much less.

[erinmeri]

@hut-ho78

You can’t say why I believe what I do. We don’t know each other. I haven’t told you. Thank you for another example of your treatment of people who don’t agree with you.

Perhaps this is why some find these droning threads tiresome. When I state what I believe, I try to back that up with context - whether it is experience or fact. Repeating the same argument ad nauseam and then saying you won’t tell people why you believe what you do is frustrating. This is not a personal attack - and sometimes I agree with at least parts of your posts… but when you go on lengthy tirades, reply with extreme frequency, repeat the same argument over and over, and refuse to back said assertions, I find it frustrating.

I also frequently disagree on certain stances with several posters here, including with some stances taken by @eggbutt, but I don’t feel lambasted. I actually disagree that Taylor was obviously or necessarily biased. That said, we can have a respectful debate because we have a dialogue wherein we are allowed to say what we believe and why, and then agree to disagree amicably.

On a side note, I really wish you would stop fixating on the divorce, his age, virility, and other creepy observations. It’s odd.

This thread is supposed to be about SS and the implications of the trial’s outcomes, but since you’re intent on rehashing old arguments…

@hut-ho78

It seems that all parties were concerned with safety and horse care. RC was sleeping in the barn aisle outside of Didi’s stall. LK was worried about barn fires. Her family was worried about horse care after she was shot twice. It was a deteriorating situation. This all came out in court.

The only parties who testified at trial they were concerned about horse care were LK and RG. Everyone else was concerned about LK and RG and the effect of their harassment on MB’s deteriorating mental state and on the barn harmony. That is what came out at court.

@hut-ho78

Thank you for examples of how you treat people with differing opinions.

Posting this as a reply to multiple people, even those who give thoughtful replies, isn’t a good look.

This thread would have been a pretty sleepy one had not certain posters shown up apparently intent on drumming up age old debates. Personally, I am curious how this will all unfold with SS and the USEF, as that affects us all.

[eggbutt]

Yeah, that overlap is a common misconception for many regardless how many times it is corrected.

[eggbutt]

@erinmeri

I also frequently disagree on certain stances with several posters here, including with some stances taken by @eggbutt, but I don’t feel lambasted. I actually disagree that Taylor was obviously or necessarily biased. That said, we can have a respectful debate because we have a dialogue wherein we are allowed to say what we believe and why , and then agree to disagree amicably.

Totally agree!!! I have actually revised my thinking a smidgen in several instances based on others’ thoughtful post. There is only one stance I will not budge on though - ever.

And, I don’t demand everyone believe as I do, but as you have so eloquently stated, back up what you say if you’re going to argue with everyone repeatedly. My mind can be changed on occasion!

[Knights_Mom]

@eggbutt

Yeah, that overlap is a common misconception for many regardless how many times it is corrected.

It’s almost like they have MB snatching the bed covers off of VB so he could tuck MHG in LOL

[erinmeri]

@erinmeri

I also frequently disagree on certain stances with several posters here, including with some stances taken by @eggbutt, but I don’t feel lambasted. I actually disagree that Taylor was obviously or necessarily biased. That said, we can have a respectful debate because we have a dialogue wherein we are allowed to say what we believe and why , and then agree to disagree amicably.

On another side note: I met up in person with a poster on these threads yesterday. We gasp disagreed about something I had said 2 years ago on the Barisone threads to this day. And yet? There was no arguing. We had a fun day swearing our ****s off and sipping champagne. To each their own!

ETA: sweating not swearing - although I probably was swearing my you-know-what off as I am want to do!

[PDDT]

I feel that this comment you made, “Why on earth would she think they would care for her horses if they wanted her out to the point of being shot twice?” suggests they had the intention to shoot her if she didn’t leave. I was pointing out that he was acquitted because it was proven he didn’t have the capacity to have that intention.

[hut-ho78]

@PDDT

@hut-ho78

SafeSport is not part of the justice system. It works for a private club(s) to keep athletes competing in Olympic sports safe. Civil rights are not involved.

I’m curious about this. In Canada, we have the Charter of Rights and Freedoms which applies to government services and other areas of life including private services and employment which fall under federal regulation. Provinces have their own human rights legislation for “social areas” (e.g. employment, housing, goods, services, facilities and vocational associations).
If someone was mentally ill, but cleared of a reasonable risk to cause harm to others, banning him from participation in competition, even attending them and worse preventing him from earning his living could reasonably be found to be a violation of his human rights.

Do you not have the same protections in the US?

edited to move to a proper computer - my tablet thought I was too long winded

To participate in the Olympics here, there are official organizations that organize each sport. They are private organizations and have their own rules. Congress passed a law to protect athletes after the horror of the young gymnasts came out. SafeSport has more leeway as the statute of limitations may have run out on the complaint but the complaint may be so egregious and the chance of a repetition so high that a person can be banned by SafeSport and yet not have a criminal record. Yes, it does affect their income. It is a matter of debate here that people can be banned after a lifetime of contributing to the sport and yet not be convicted of a crime or even given to trial.

Unfortunately, some who came out the loudest against SafeSport turned out to have their own history.

It gets ugly. Lots of victim blaming/shaming. One of the icons wrote a book long ago and his advice on that book probably saved my life. Later he wrote another book that was really hard to read, kind of a tell all.

I’m sure the legal people may wade in with better explanations. I tend to lean towards protecting the athletes considering the abuse.

Some of the people arguing here have stated they knew about abuse in the horse world for decades but looked the other way. I can only hope that was just kind of a lame put down to me because they disagreed with my comment at the time and they were just trying to say I’m not in the “in crowd” of dressage competition or I would know.

There are no hints or rumors except for one said by LK that sounds pretty bad that MB has been attracted to anyone younger than 40 so he seems pretty squeaky clean compared to others. This just seems to be a one off.

This LK/MB is a strange situation. I don’t know what they will do.

[erinmeri]

@erinmeri

as I am want to do!

English people: wont or want? LOL.

[ekat]

@IPEsq

And didn’t see it posted - this is the definition of Criminal Disposition.

It is a violation of the Code for a Participant to be or have been subject to any disposition or resolution of a criminal proceeding, other than an adjudication of not guilty, including, but not limited to: an adjudication of guilt or admission to a criminal violation, a plea to the charge or a lesser included offense, a plea of no contest, any plea analogous to an Alford or Kennedy plea, the disposition of the proceeding through a diversionary program, deferred adjudication, deferred prosecution, disposition of supervision, conditional dismissal, juvenile delinquency adjudication, or similar arrangement.

In reading the SS code, I find this paragraph interesting, and a little concerning:

“Effect of Criminal or Civil Proceedings

Because the standards for finding a violation of criminal law are different from the standards for finding a violation of the Code, the resolution of a criminal proceeding without a Criminal Disposition is not determinative of (but may be relevant to) whether a violation of the Code has occurred. Conduct may violate the Code even if the Respondent is not charged, prosecuted or convicted for the behavior that could constitute a potential violation of the Code, is acquitted of a criminal charge, or legal authorities decline to prosecute. Apart from the application of the Code as it relates to Criminal Charge(s) and Disposition(s), the Center’s resolution will not be precluded merely because (a) a civil case or criminal charges involving the same incident or conduct have been filed, (b) criminal charges have been dismissed or reduced; or © a civil lawsuit has been settled or dismissed.”

It’s concerning because they say right there that their decision won’t be based on any criminal disposition including an acquittal. That seems concerning for more people than just MB.

It’s interesting because of the blurb about a civil lawsuit. Would they (could they) hold off on doing anything until the civil suit is over?

I know very, very little about SafeSport. And based on my very basic googling today, it appears a lot of their processes, procedures, and investigations are a mystery to a lot of people. Am I wrong there?

[hut-ho78]

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

@Sdel

@hut-ho78

@Sdel

@CurrentlyHorseless

She didn’t believe in her heart of hearts that she would actually be shot. How was she supposed to know he was delusional and insane if MHG and RC had not noticed?

Then the plot was non existent and she’s made it all up for attention and to justify her actions.

LK said on SM words to the effect of once she was shot the interpretation of the meaning of the tapes changed. I interpreted that to mean they were in actuality trying to get her off the premises but the same words could be interpreted as a murder plot.

Only to someone looking to justify their bad behavior to others. No one outside the situation has put any stock in this murder plot. The prosecution never even implied it was a planned attack in their opening/closing statements. Never implied that RC brought the gun at anyone’s direction for a specific purpose. Made no attempt to issue conspiracy charges for RC/MHG. In fact, the prosecution used an entirely different source than LK claims to have for the words “get rid of her” in terms of an eviction. SS/USEF have not acted on them either.

So, all of this tells me, that those tapes are not as advertised, at all, by any rational person’s interpretation. Of course, certain mental conditions feature a tendency for making stuff up and justifying behavior for things that aren’t real.

I agree with much of what you say but not the part where she used it to justify her actions. Again, it’s not paranoia if you get shot. It’s very understandable she and her family could think it is a conspiracy, especially because RC brought the weapon.

I think they were trying to say words to the effect of get rid of her meaning get her out not get rid of her as in Becket - will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest.

They had also decided to ruin her with his connections at USEF and USDF so not just her trying to ruin him.

Kind of puts all of the agencies in a pickle since she was shot. My guess is they will monitor everyone and if he is deemed completely safe, reinstate him. I really hope he can recover and the verdict is one which allows that.

I hope she keeps riding and training. It seems like this was important to her. I’ve seen so many people get discouraged with just high vet bills or bad trainers or over horsed. This would be tough the overcome.

It is paranoia and so much more if you get shot while assaulting someone and beating their head in violently.

Just saying.

And as you know, there is no evidence of that whatsoever.

[smoofox]

@hut-ho78

[

Thank you for another example of how you treat anyone with a different opinion.

Hmmmm… Yes, I have a discussion and share my concerns and opinions as well. That is how a forum works.

[skydy]

It’s “wont to do” actually, though people do mistakenly write want. I’ve done it and I know better.

[eggbutt]

@ekat

my very basic googling today, it appears a lot of their processes, procedures, and investigations are a mystery to a lot of people. Am I wrong there?

You are correct and that has been one of the issues folks have with the program.

[hut-ho78]

@Knights_Mom

@eggbutt

Why didn’t/couldn’t RG have negotiated with the farrier to do the work and he or LK would pay him themselves that day?

Because that doesn’t uphold the tale of woe of LK.

Uncalled for.

[BigMama1]

@Knights_Mom

You seem to think he went straight from VB to MHG. That would be an error.

As has been corrected here numerous times. It’s frustrating when people keep posting the same false information over and over when they know it’s false.

[Knights_Mom]

@hut-ho78

@Knights_Mom

@eggbutt

Why didn’t/couldn’t RG have negotiated with the farrier to do the work and he or LK would pay him themselves that day?

Because that doesn’t uphold the tale of woe of LK.

Uncalled for.

Not to me it isn’t. My statement is an accurate representation to the pattern of behavior displayed by LK and the words spoken by LK. She plays the victim card regularly.

[eggbutt]

Does anyone recall IM saying they knew everything about the USEF complaints and had read the SS report or did I hallucinate that? I wondered when their post was made if they had made such statements.

[erinmeri]

@ekat

In reading the SS code, I find this paragraph interesting, and a little concerning:

“Effect of Criminal or Civil Proceedings

Because the standards for finding a violation of criminal law are different from the standards for finding a violation of the Code, the resolution of a criminal proceeding without a Criminal Disposition is not determinative of (but may be relevant to) whether a violation of the Code has occurred. Conduct may violate the Code even if the Respondent is not charged, prosecuted or convicted for the behavior that could constitute a potential violation of the Code, is acquitted of a criminal charge, or legal authorities decline to prosecute. Apart from the application of the Code as it relates to Criminal Charge(s) and Disposition(s), the Center’s resolution will not be precluded merely because (a) a civil case or criminal charges involving the same incident or conduct have been filed, (b) criminal charges have been dismissed or reduced; or © a civil lawsuit has been settled or dismissed.”

It’s concerning because they say right there that their decision won’t be based on any criminal disposition including an acquittal. That seems concerning for more people than just MB.

It’s interesting because of the blurb about a civil lawsuit. Would they (could they) hold off on doing anything until the civil suit is over?

I know very, very little about SafeSport. And based on my very basic googling today, it appears a lot of their processes, procedures, and investigations are a mystery to a lot of people. Am I wrong there?

You could also argue the other way. I had someone steal my ATM and pin. I had video evidence that was passed on (through proper chain of command - i.e. not me) to the NYPD. They (DA) declined to prosecute for a whole host of reasons, despite the fact that evidence was cut and dry. If a prosecutor declined to prosecute, but someone was clearly guilty, that doesn’t mean the person is innocent.