Barisone Trial Starting Monday, 3/28

[atl_hunter]

I was thinking she had the eyelashes so she wouldn’t need to wear mascara. Then there’s no need to worry about running mascara should tears ensue. I actually thought it was a clever thing to do, but personally would have opted for a more natural look.

[RHdobes563]

@hut-ho78

@RHdobes563

@hut-ho78

@Knights_Mom

@Ambitious_Kate

@hut-ho78

Which the parties had yet to sign.

Ooh, Hut-ho! In with the insider information! You are slipping up!

Ha!

Nonsense. Listen to the ear witness again. He called to tell her of progress on the agreement for her to move out. She hadn’t heard or agreed before MB showed up and shot her.

I seem to remember that the “agreement to vacate” (engineered by MB’s “equine” lawyer and LK’s father and attorney) was delivered/served to LK on August 6th. (I seem to remember that at the time this was said I thought that 24 hours didn’t give them much time to pack. But then, I remembered they weren’t packing furniture/large items/multiple knick-knacks, etc.)

MB’s “equine” attorney (sorry, I forget his name) said ‘yes, it wasn’t filed, and it was meant to “scare” LK/RG to leave.’ Somewhere/someone said that this was actually a kindness, as an official filing would have put a Blot on LK’s record, making it harder to find a place to rent. Also, somewhere/someone said that “non-filing” was common in these situations. I wish the “equine” lawyer had NOT used the word “scare”, explained that it was common to serve non-filed agreements, and how LK’s/anyone’s credit could be damaged by an official filing.

Just my remembering to the best of my ability.

The agreement to leave was not written and the terms were not given to Lauren because the ear witness had not told her anything about it before she was shot. He called to tell her the terms.

The eviction notice was delivered on the 6th but it had not been filed. Without being filed, it was not enforceable. Once filed, then the court would issue an eviction with a time line and the sheriff would enforce it. That would take either 3 days if he could get the emergency eviction or 30 days from the court issuing an eviction.

I did not say the “eviction notice” was enforceable. What I did TRY to say was that they were giving LK an OUT, an opportunity to leave without a Dark Mark appearing on her credit record. My co-worker had 5-7 rental units once, and she ALWAYS checked credit reports and court reports when considering tenants. Certainly past (and maybe multiple) eviction notices of prospective applicants were considered, if there were any. My co-worker did not tell rejected applicants that they were turned down for “negative” records, but her “as you know, not everyone can be accepted for a rental house. Please feel free to apply again in the future” became a mantra.

*Edited for verb tense and a missing word.

[CindyB59]

Re: Facebook. I was suspended for a post I made on a 6,000 emergency vet bill. Asked if anyone wanted to buy a kidney. Obviously factiously. Took an appeal and 3 weeks to get it back. I “went against community standards”

I’ve reported obvious scammers from Nigeria and Camaroon. No action taken.

They are not consistent or logical in who/what is allowed

[Angela_Freda]

Oh, wow

[cheval_convert]

I wonder if Stravinsky used this as his inspiration for the opening to Rite of Spring. Just beautiful.

[MHM]

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

Yup. I always assumed it was a matter of them waiting until the criminal case was resolved, and even then, they would hesitate because she is a shooting victim, after all.

I think that safe sport usually waits until the criminal case is resolved before they take action. But that’s usually when the person they would suspend or ban is the perpetrator, not the “victim.” Perfect example, MB was put on the safe sport list as soon as he was arrested.

So that doesn’t explain why they have done nothing about the safe sport allegations against LK. Particularly with all the very extensive and public examples of her behavior, including all the bullying of other USEF members on Facebook, etc.

If that bullying behavior does not qualify as grounds for safe sport action, what does?

I will say that this entire situation is so completely unprecedented that the safe sport people may be sitting in their office staring at each other and trying to figure out the best course of action in this case.

[Sparrowette]

@CanteringCarrot

I actually find Bilinkas annoying. I’m not into his presentation and misproununciations. Not saying he’s “wrong” or a bad lawyer…just not my flavour. Which is fine. No time to watch, but will check in occasionally…to hear plenty of biased CoTH posters reporting

FYI
CoTH posts do not have to be unbiased. This whole thread is about facts, AND OPINION.

If you want only facts, stay away from all discussion boards.

[Angela_Freda]

There’s one way to keep her off showgrounds, clinics etc

[Jealoushe]

@MHM

If that bullying behavior does not qualify as grounds for safe sport action, what does?

I’m going to be following closely what happens here because I know of a similar situation in Ontario here, and we adhere to SS with Equestrian Canada. Someone using SM to try and get someone fired and ruin their reputation in a similar style. Would be good if they could be reported to EC.

[MorganSercu]

Well, as Ghazzu (sp) pulled up USEF does anyone think USEF will find a reason to boot her?

GR702 Violations

1. A violation is any act prejudicial to the best interests of the Federation, including but not limited to the following:
   a. Violation of the Code of Conduct or any rules of the Federation.
   b. Disqualification by a Licensed Competition.
   c. Determination that disciplinary action has been taken by an administrative agency, arbitration or other
   tribunal body, humane society, other National Governing Body, or a court of law. (impeachment? - MS)
   d. Acting or inciting or permitting any other to act in a manner contrary to the rules of the Federation, or in a
   manner deemed improper, unethical, dishonest, unsportsmanlike or intemperate, or prejudicial to the best
   interests of the sport and the Federation.
   e. Any act committed or remark made in connection with the competition considered offensive and/or made
   with the intent to influence or cast aspersions on the character or integrity of the licensed officials, (Did she do this? - MS) approaching a judge before or after a decision without first obtaining permission from the show committee or steward/technical delegate, inspecting a judge’s card without the judge’s permission, or public verbal abuse of competition officials.
   f. Physical assault upon a person and/or cruelty to a horse as defined in GR838.
   g. Failure to obey any penalty imposed by the Federation.
   h. Exhibiting any horse while in the care, training or custody of a suspended trainer.
   i. Riding, exhibiting, coaching or training for the benefit, credit, reputation or satisfaction of a suspended
   person.
   j. Failure to pay indebtedness to the Federation or indebtedness for hearing transcripts or other hearing
   expenses arranged through the Federation.
   k. Participating in any manner at a licensed competition while not in good standing or competing horses not
   in good standing at a licensed competition. (See GR137)
   l. Prescribing, dispensing, or administering a drug by a veterinarian which results in a finding of a prohibited
   substance. In the event a positive report is received by the Federation for a horse or pony to which a prohibited substance has been administered in any manner and the veterinarian is identified in any manner as the source of said prohibited substance, said violation will be addressed pursuant to GR412.
   m. Any action which is subject to Reciprocity by the Federation under the Federation Bylaws. (Yes? No? - MS)
   n Retaliation may be considered any adverse action taken by an individual against a person participating in a USEF proceeding. BOD 11/22/21 Effective 12/1/21

[Angela_Freda]

Thank you

[Sdel]

@MHM

So that doesn’t explain why they have done nothing about the safe sport allegations against LK. Particularly with all the very extensive and public examples of her behavior, including all the bullying of other USEF members on Facebook, etc.

Maybe they were waiting for something such as sworn testimony to support their decisions. Kind of like COTH. I imagine when the other side is quick to sue, that is an important thing to have.

[DownYonder]

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

My guess is they were NOT cooperating with the prosecution for the month in between those dates, while he was attempting to prepare for this trial. Because those two didn’t want to show up to testify.

I bet there are some interesting conversations in his office during that month, involving lots of expletives.

My thoughts are that if the prosecutor truly knew what he was dealing with, he may have been very tempted to drop the attempted murder charges and go for something much less serious and/or offer a much more generous plea deal to MB. And Team Kanarek were concerned about that possibility, so they played hard to get.

[Jealoushe]

@Sdel

Maybe they were waiting for something such as sworn testimony to support their decisions. Kind of like COTH. I imagine when the other side is quick to sue, that is an important thing to have.

Yes, I really think it’s the best position to wait for the sworn facts/evidence.

[Ambitious_Kate]

@Jealoushe

Most waterproof mascara won’t smudge when wet/crying. It’s hard to get off with anything other than baby oil.

This was an allusion to another grifter, Jealoushe. One with running mascara, so…

[RHdobes563]

I am NOT caught up yet (have to go out to ride my horse), but I want to comment briefly on the two expert witnesses yesterday.

A LOT of what they said went over my head, but it was obvious that they were both highly educated men. BOTH have been called on to witness (many times) for BOTH prosecution and defense cases. Indeed, Mr. Simring had done this IN Morris Township (County?)

I had to smile when Mr. Hasson was asked if he lectured, I think, nationally—he said that he had no interest in doing so. HOWEVER, an “adversary” (expert witness for the Other Side) in some case/situation/whatever invited Mr. Hasson to speak at some Special Event, which Mr. Hasson DID do.

[Tarlo_Farm]

Watching past testimony and looking at Michael. That man is SO broken.

I want to lay him down in a field of deep grass on a sunny day in a pasture of horses who will come stand over him and snuffle and nibble while he rests.

[Jealoushe]

@Ambitious_Kate

This was an allusion to another grifter, Jealoushe. One with running mascara, so…

I don’t understand what your’e saying.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

@Sdel

@MHM

So that doesn’t explain why they have done nothing about the safe sport allegations against LK. Particularly with all the very extensive and public examples of her behavior, including all the bullying of other USEF members on Facebook, etc.

Maybe they were waiting for something such as sworn testimony to support their decisions. Kind of like COTH. I imagine when the other side is quick to sue, that is an important thing to have.

BINGO. She pretty much telegraphed her intention with respect to launching a lawsuit if banned.

If they base a ban on the actual sworn testimony and evidence admitted as part of a criminal proceeding… it will be more challenging for her to try and sue anyone about being banned (from the forums or as a USEF member).

[RegentLion]

Which part of her testimony led to the ban? Was it using SM to intimidate or harass?

I don’t think lying on SM is illegal?