Barisone Trial Starting Monday, 3/28

[3PonyFarm]

Thank you!

[endlessclimb]

After the dust settles, can LK be held accountable for the harassment and intimidation/threats?

I understand why one would want to keep their head low right now, prior to this trial. But once it’s over, can she be taken to task about her behavior?

[Knights_Mom]

@3PonyFarm

@soloudinhere and other legal peeps, does the judge stating that LK cannot be charged for illegally recording because a lawyer told her that it was ok to do (or whatever the actual wording was) set any legal precident for future cases where someone who might be charged with that states they were advised by an attorney that it was ok to do?
Thanks!

I’m not a lawyer and don’t “know know” the answer but my guess is she could potentially be charged and as it’s unclear as to who told her and if there client/attorney privilege it matters not.

If you say that an attorney tells you that you can rob a bank and then you rob a bank, is the act not a crime? Of course it’s a crime. And potentially if it’s found an attorney said you could that attorney could get in trouble criminally and civilly for malpractice.

But I don’t “know know”.

[Angela_Freda]

Agree, I think we’re all suggesting they should have more quickly gotten hold of any recorded material, however it’s stored or can be secured (ie gotten).

[Knights_Mom]

@endlessclimb

After the dust settles, can LK be held accountable for the harassment and intimidation/threats?

I understand why one would want to keep their head low right now, prior to this trial. But once it’s over, can she be taken to task about her behavior?

Yes but to what end? To be involved with litigation and having her inserted into your life for years?

Blech!

[Libby2563]

@Knights_Mom

@Libby2563

Can someone please explain to me why they think the police should have seized the security camera? The camera itself isn’t evidence and it’s not common practice for police to seize physical surveillance systems. The footage is the evidence. This was a cloud-based camera with no internal storage so seizing the camera would not preserve any evidence or prevent its deletion. (Blink did not even offer any devices with a USB slot until 2021.) Police documented the existence and location of the camera with photos. What would having the physical camera sitting in an evidence room add to the case?

They mean to say seizing whatever footage the camera captured. Expressions don’t always keep up with technology.

I’m not sure that’s true of all posters. There were some comments up-thread about seizing the camera. Also some people have theorized that RG and JK returned to the house the next day in part to take the camera, which with a cloud-based camera would be pretty pointless.

[Angela_Freda]

@3PonyFarm

@soloudinhere and other legal peeps, does the judge stating that LK cannot be charged for illegally recording because a lawyer told her that it was ok to do (or whatever the actual wording was) set any legal precident for future cases where someone who might be charged with that states they were advised by an attorney that it was ok to do?
Thanks

And if her recordings weren’t legal, and she testifies about info in those recordings, that later are determined not to be legal… What ramifications are there?

[soloudinhere]

If I am aware that a client intends to commit a crime and that client discusses that intention with me, that communication is an exception to attorney-client privilege. Any conversations to further or cover up a crime are exceptions to privilege.

[MorganSercu]

Is the decision not to prosecute her for illegal recordings going to prove problematic in the future for others who do so in the county, or if LK does it again in a different jurisdiction?

[Knights_Mom]

Thank you.

[endlessclimb]

I don’t know. Some of this stuff is pretty cut and dried. To ding her monetarily would be rather satisfying.

[Angela_Freda]

@Knights_Mom

Yes but to what end? To be involved with litigation and having her inserted into your life for years?

Blech!

I think this is likely what has held others back, just being relieved to be rid of her in their lives

[LilRanger]

I interpreted that as:, it’s not relevant how she got them, she is not on trial so let’s not worry about that, and admit them.

And no, an unrelated case discussing this isn’t grounds for any sort of protection from liability, unless the prosecution gave her some assurances that wouldn’t happen.

[3PonyFarm]

Thank you

[Knights_Mom]

@endlessclimb

I don’t know. Some of this stuff is pretty cut and dried. To ding her monetarily would be rather satisfying.

It would cost you time, money and energy. And what you would recover wouldn’t cover it. Just not worth the time and effort AND she would feed on the drama of it all.

I’d just as soon starve her of the attention and move on to truly fruitful, healthy things.

[LilRanger]

@MorganSercu

Is the decision not to prosecute her for illegal recordings going to prove problematic in the future for others who do so in the county, or if LK does it again in a different jurisdiction?

I know you weren’t asking me, but no, the only impact of not prosecuting someone is political as DAs are elected.

[chancellor2]

Can I just ask, who the hell is boarding her horses now? Can you imagine? I wouldn’t want her as a boarder for ANY amount of money!

[MHM]

It seems like the court room lunch break has happened from around 12:30-1:30 for the first few days, for those who are planning ahead. Just FYI.

[Angela_Freda]

@Libby2563

I’m not sure that’s true of all posters. There were some comments up-thread about seizing the camera. Also some people have theorized that RG and JK returned to the house the next day in part to take the camera, which with a cloud-based camera would be pretty pointless.

Well, it was the day after. Was the PD done processing the scene ?
What determines they’re done?

If the recordings had been cloud based, at what point would those be “secured” and how does LE keep it from being deleted before they get a hold of it or secured?

[MorganSercu]

Thank you.

Proudly employed ‘Burger Flipper’