Barisone Trial Starting Monday, 3/28

[Ambitious_Kate]

I love how RB said he only did enough work each month to cover the (was it 2500?) Cost of board they owed and no more. The house was a wreck, no insulation? Walls stripped? And he’s explaining why some days he did no work at all. What a moench!

And then LK comes on here crying that MB owed them 30k! No he didn’t, sweetie. RG says he didn’t do any extra work than was necessary to cover board.

[soloudinhere]

@MHM

And I don’t quite understand how a judge can cast a casual eye on “some perjury.” Is that like only being somewhat pregnant?

Let me see if I can explain in simpler terms. This is a pretty classic example that you’d find in a textbook or a class.

Steve is a witness in a civil suit for damages against Becca. A department store is suing Becca for the alleged theft of a necklace. Steve takes an oath sworn by the court commissioner. He thereafter testifies that he saw Becca try on the necklace and then walk out of the store without paying for it. When the store’s attorney asks Steve what he was doing at the store, Marcus responds that he was buying some jewelry as a gift for his wife. In actuality, Steve was shopping for jewelry as a gift for his girlfriend .

Steve has probably not committed perjury here, because Steve’s reason for being at the store really doesn’t have anything much to do with Becca’s theft of the item. It’s testimony to explain how he came to be a witness to the event. Steve’s lie here sucks, but it is not material to the outcome, so Steve is probably not guilty of perjury.

Now change the scenario such that Steve says he did NOT see Becca walk out of the store with the necklace, because he doesn’t want to admit that he was there and buying jewelry for his girlfriend instead of his wife.

Steve’s lie here can introduce doubt that Becca committed the action, so it is material and now Steve has just committed perjury.

These are simplified and it’s civil instead of criminal but the principle is the same.

There is no “some perjury” but there is a question of whether a lie goes to the level of materiality that impacts the outcome.

[MHM]

@Sdel

Is that a detail that you would expect to notice in that kind of situation though? After FLEEING through a doorway into a house?

Quite possibly not.

But I will say that different people can react to high stress situations in very different ways.

Particularly if they have had a lot of previous experience with certain high stress situations based on their colorful life experiences.

[Warmblood1]

If RG is not familiar with guns, how did he know the slide being back indicated an unloaded gun?

[Djones]

I don’t know.

I do know that I consider such observations to be indicative of someone WHO DOES know guns, as opposed to someone who doesn’t.

[3PonyFarm]

Does it make any difference to any charges being filed of the illegal recordings if witness first says an attorney told them it was not illegal and the defense can show that wasnt the case?

[MHM]

@Warmblood1

If RG is not familiar with guns, how did he know the slide being back indicated an unloaded gun?

Excellent question.

[Ambitious_Kate]

@erinmeri

Summary of his testimony (feel free to correct me if I am misspeaking):

• LK was in ER and trauma called him (thoracic surgeon) - they were having trouble with her.
• He arrived a minute later and she was hypotensive. Heart had stopped once but was resuscitated. Lost half her blood volume by that point. “Significant amounts of ongoing bleeding”.
• Rushed to surgery within minutes to stabilize and stop bleeding.
• Was already on a ventilator and had bilateral chest tubes and also had already partially opened her chest to attempt to clamp her aorta to prevent bleeding out but hadn’t succeeded by time he arrived.
• Anesthesia, trauma, thoracic teams and numerous nurses present for surgery, which initially focused on controlling active bleeding and clamping aorta to redirect blood to head to keep her alive. Was given blood products.
• After stabilizing, two injuries to lung - upper and lower lobes - both “raw and blowing air”, which were repaired.
• Removed aortal clamp and observed for 30m to ensure she was okay.
• As closing, realized there was an injury to her breast implant. Removed it and installed drain.
• Injuries would have been fatal had they not been repaired during surgery.
• Afterwards, was having difficulty ventilating so trauma surgeons had to make an incision with an open dressing for swollen bowel (?) to make room for her lungs to properly ventilate and was transferred to ICU.
• Did not find bullets or other foreign bodies internally upon follow up surgical and radiographic exploration.
• 2 injuries to upper left chest and at least one on her back near scapula.
• Incision was 12-16 inches from below under left breast “pretty medial” and went all around to the back.
• Other injuries from interventions included the attempt to open chest by Trauma team.
• Trauma service was primarily responsible for monitoring. Was on vent for 8-10 days and a bronchoscopy was performed to remove mucus.
• No ongoing thoracic surgical interventions required before she she was discharged and indicated she intended to return to NC.
• Was hospitalized for 19 days.

No cross by Bilinkas.

So why was she bleeding from the aorta? Was it from trying to open up her chest?

[Roser123]

@Ambitious_Kate

So why was she bleeding from the aorta? Was it from trying to open up her chest?

I was actually wondering the same thing.

[Angela_Freda]

@fordtraktor

MB was kind of in a corner behind that bush. a chair behind him, not much room. In the testimony to the prosecutor and affirmed here more or less, Lauren says she “stomped” off the porch toward him and got past the corner of the bush. It would have been hard for him to get out of that corner on the patio. Here is where the self-defense claim lies: she had something in her hand (RG’s cell phone) and came around and surprised him, he was already scared and COULD have thought she had a gun, and BOOM. I think that is the theory of the case there. Or it should be, lol.

She had very recently gone at him, stopping h from getting in his vehicle to leave, etc.
I can totally see that the way she came at him on 8/7 triggered a very troubling memory of that

[MHM]

@Ambitious_Kate

And then LK comes on here crying that MB owed them 30k!

Wasn’t she saying $50K at one point? Or an even bigger number? I don’t remember the exact amount, and I’m not going to weed through thousands of posts to find it. But I seem to recall it was a more substantial number than $30K.

[MHM]

Ah, I see. Interesting.

Thanks very much for taking the time once again to explain it for the rest of us.

[RegentLion]

Thanks for giving such a nice explanation. That explains why the judge (in the discussion at the end of today when everyone left) didn’t seem terribly concerned.

[RND]

@Fat_Dinah

So far, I don’t see that what the defense has elicited challenges the crime: that MB shot LK. (It seems the prosecution ha s abandoned any share related to RG being shot at with intent.) He has produced testimony that portrays them as “bad” people, especially LK’s lying/fabricating. But unless he can offer testimony for an alternate scenario, such as MB testifying he was attacked and the gun was fired unintentionally in the struggle, then LK and RG’s version of facts is unchallenged. A lawyer can’t offer an alternate theory of the crime without evidence.

I was just stating what the laws in NJ require in order to prove self defense or insanity. Whether Bilinkas is able to prove any or some or all of those things when he presents his defense can’t be known at this time. The success (or lack of success) of the insanity defense will depend on the mental health expert(s) who evaluated MB after the shooting.

[soloudinhere]

Whether the recording was legal or not doesn’t matter so much as whether the recording is relevant, in this case - which is what the judge was getting at.

If the illegal recording somehow contradicts the testimony, it can possibly be entered for the purpose of impeachment (which really isn’t a popular thing to do), if the statement it impeaches is relevant - see what happened in the OJ Simpson trial with the Furhman tapes, for example.

[Roser123]

@MHM

Wasn’t she saying $50K at one point? Or an even bigger number? I don’t remember the exact amount, and I’m not going to weed through thousands of posts to find it. But I seem to recall it was a more substantial number than $30K.

Yes, it was a much higher number, which doesn’t make sense if RG was just doing enough work to exchange for the one horse’s board.
When LK brought up the amount she paid for the horse from MB, she seemed to be adding that amt into what he owed her (and also not paying board and training on that horse).

[3PonyFarm]

Thank you, you are very good at explaining the legal stuff.

[Ambitious_Kate]

So if she ran 8nto the house to tell rob not to come out here, then,

A) how did rob see MB shoot her?
B) why didn’t she stay in the house? What, she came back out to lie in the driveway?

[Angela_Freda]

@LexInVA

We heard that MHG did say something to LK about leaving and MB shot it down by yelling at her, because it wasn’t her place to make that call. That popped up a few times

Yes at a meeting LK called, supposedly held on 4/27/19

[soloudinhere]

Everyone’s getting a very detailed education in criminal law

In all seriousness, thank you for the nice words.