Barisone Trial Starting Monday, 3/28

[RND]

@clipper

In my opinion I believe every word out of Bilinkas mouth portrays him how he wants to be seen.

If he wants to be seen as an incompetent moron, he’s a master at his craft. This is how the example I talked about went (not exact quotes, so no quotation marks):

Bilinkas: I can’t put my client on the stand
Judge: You can. You choose not to.
Bilinkas: I choose not to

He’s not playing to the jury because they aren’t even in the room. He has so far come across as being very confused about the rules of criminal trials. I hope for MB’s sake he does better with his own witnesses when it’s his turn. He’s not a young guy; how can he be this clueless about the definition of hearsay in a court proceeding?

I’m not that impressed with the prosecution’s strategy so far either, but their guy at least seems to for the most part understand the rules he’s playing under.

Found the link to exactly what I was talking about:

Heated Exchange During Arguments Outside Jury Presence - NJ v. Michael Barisone...

[Sdel]

@RND

I’m not that impressed with the prosecution’s strategy so far either, but their guy at least seems to for the most part understand the rules he’s playing under.

No, the judge is doing it for him.

[3PonyFarm]

Even the legal experts from the legal channels have commented on the judge’s behavior. They think he should be quiet and let the man (Bilinkas) present his defense.

At what point does this behavior become problematic for the case if the jurors perceive that the judge is favoring one side over the other?

[BrendaJane]

I think we watched all a little too much Dallas and Dynasty (and assorted other revenge movies)

“Just because” is often enough, and then of course there are sociopaths…

[Sdel]

@3PonyFarm

Even the legal experts from the legal channels have commented on the judge’s behavior. They think he should be quiet and let the man (Bilinkas) present his defense.

He claims he’s doing it to protect the record. That is the prosecution and defenses job. It is their responsibility to object to evidence and testimony. It is the judge’s job to rule on the objections, not create them.

[RND]

@eggbutt

It is frustrating that Taylor has prevented the admission of all the documents showing how Jonathan Kanarek was part of the 3 person group planning the destruction of MB. Perhaps when Bilinkas calls Kanarek as a witness, Taylor will have to allow evidence. If not, it sure will be a basis for appeal.

I think Taylor’s justification that it doesn’t matter who drove MB insane, or how they did it, but what matters is proving that he was in fact insane at the time of the shooting makes sense considering NJ’s requirements for proving insanity as a criminal defense. The defense’s expert witness testimony (psychiatrist/psychologist) will be the key factor in proving that MB was insane at the time of the shooting. It doesn’t matter who drove MB over the edge or why they did it, they just have to prove that he was in fact driven over that edge.

You can look up the details of requirements for insanity defenses in NJ by a simple google search. Same for self defense; it’s not as simple as some would like to believe it is.

[Sdel]

@RND

I think Taylor’s justification that it doesn’t matter who drove MB insane, or how they did it, but what matters is proving that he was in fact insane at the time of the shooting makes sense considering NJ’s requirements for proving insanity as a criminal defense.

Then he is ignoring the self defense angle. It is the plot against MB that in part makes the incident self defense….it is the plot that may provide reasonable doubt as to the how the events played out on that day. The defense should be allowed to provide evidence for the full picture of that day.

[MHM]

All I can say is that if we’ve gotten this far after two days, this is going to be a really long thread by the time this trial is over.

[eggbutt]

@RND

@eggbutt

It is frustrating that Taylor has prevented the admission of all the documents showing how Jonathan Kanarek was part of the 3 person group planning the destruction of MB. Perhaps when Bilinkas calls Kanarek as a witness, Taylor will have to allow evidence. If not, it sure will be a basis for appeal.

I think Taylor’s justification that it doesn’t matter who drove MB insane, or how they did it, but what matters is proving that he was in fact insane at the time of the shooting makes sense considering NJ’s requirements for proving insanity as a criminal defense. The defense’s expert witness testimony (psychiatrist/psychologist) will be the key factor in proving that MB was insane at the time of the shooting. It doesn’t matter who drove MB over the edge or why they did it, they just have to prove that he was in fact driven over that edge.

You can look up the details of requirements for insanity defenses in NJ by a simple google search. Same for self defense; it’s not as simple as some would like to believe it is.

Perhaps it would be beneficial if Taylor stopped his objections and allowed both attorneys to present their evidence. The jury has a right to hear testimony without constant interruptions by Taylor causing confusion.

So far the only things proven by anyone are the cops supremely bungled the entire event from the first 911 days earlier call to the trauma center; and, Barisone’s staff/companions testifying Barisone’s disintegration of mental state. The jury has every right to know what caused that disintegration.

[hut-ho78]

@eggbutt

It is frustrating that Taylor has prevented the admission of all the documents showing how Jonathan Kanarek was part of the 3 person group planning the destruction of MB. Perhaps when Bilinkas calls Kanarek as a witness, Taylor will have to allow evidence. If not, it sure will be a basis for appeal.

The judge prevented the admission of the documents because MB had not seen them prior to shooting. They affected nothing concerning MB. No one knew about them until Discovery.

[RND]

@Sdel

Then he is ignoring the self defense angle. It is the plot against MB that in part makes the incident self defense….it is the plot that may provide reasonable doubt as to the how the events played out on that day. The defense should be allowed to provide evidence to the full picture of that day.

But that’s not how self defense arguments work in NJ. You can’t plan ahead to shoot someone in self defense days prior to the shooting even if you know that person is plotting against you. I’ve posted details about this at least twice so I’m not going to do it again, but if you google “self defense in NJ” you will find links that explain it clearly.

[eggbutt]

@hut-ho78

@eggbutt

It is frustrating that Taylor has prevented the admission of all the documents showing how Jonathan Kanarek was part of the 3 person group planning the destruction of MB. Perhaps when Bilinkas calls Kanarek as a witness, Taylor will have to allow evidence. If not, it sure will be a basis for appeal.

The judge prevented the admission of the documents because MB had not seen them prior to shooting. They affected nothing concerning MB. No one knew about them until Discovery.

Right, just the planned, methodical destruction of his life by three individuals.

No one knew about the missing camera mysteriously reappearing 3 months later, wiped clean, did they? But, let me guess, you don’t have a problem with that do you? You don’t seem to have a question or problem about anything regarding this situation.

[soloudinhere]

@Sdel

He claims he’s doing it to protect the record. That is the prosecution and defenses job.

No, actually, this is the judge’s job. It’s even within his scope of power to question witnesses directly if it is for the purpose of protecting the record, which he has done several times.

This is very stormy waters indeed. Fundamentally the Judge serves to ensure that the defendant receives a fair trial. There is a distinction between “fair” and “perfect.”

I probably won’t take this one any farther; remember nothing I say is to be construed as legal advice.

[RND]

I really wish everyone watching the trial and commenting here would research the NJ requirements for pleading self defense and insanity in criminal trials, because there are very specific requirements that have to be proven for each of these defenses to be successful. Understanding those requirements goes a long way in understanding some of the things that have happened or have not happened so far in this trial and would answer a lot of the question that have been swirling around in this thread.

[hut-ho78]

@eggbutt

@hut-ho78

@eggbutt

It is frustrating that Taylor has prevented the admission of all the documents showing how Jonathan Kanarek was part of the 3 person group planning the destruction of MB. Perhaps when Bilinkas calls Kanarek as a witness, Taylor will have to allow evidence. If not, it sure will be a basis for appeal.

The judge prevented the admission of the documents because MB had not seen them prior to shooting. They affected nothing concerning MB. No one knew about them until Discovery.

Right, just the planned, methodical destruction of his life by three individuals.

No one knew about the missing camera mysteriously reappearing 3 months later, wiped clean, did they? But, let me guess, you don’t have a problem with that do you? You don’t seem to have a question or problem about anything regarding this situation.

I’m not speaking about the cameras. I am responding to your repeated questioning of the judge’s withholding this piece of evidence. The judge made it very clear that this piece of evidence was only wanted by the defense to make JK look bad and it had nothing to do with MB’s state of mind at the time of the shooting. The trial is all about MB and is to determine if MB is innocent of two counts of attempted murder and some gun charges by insanity and self defense. LK and JK and RG are not on trial. If it doesn’t pertain to MB’s state of mind prior to his shooting them, if doesn’t pertain to the trial. A plot that MB never heard about until after the shooting can’t affect his state of mind at the time of the shooting.

[eggbutt]

@hut-ho78

A plot that MB never heard about until after the shooting can’t affect his state of mind at the time of the shooting.

Even if that plot caused the deterioration of his mental health? He was the victim of the plot.

We’ll see how all this plays out.

[hut-ho78]

@RND

I really wish everyone watching the trial and commenting here would research the NJ requirements for pleading self defense and insanity in criminal trials, because there are very specific requirements that have to be proven for each of these defenses to be successful. Understanding those requirements goes a long way in understanding some of the things that have happened or have not happened so far in this trial and would answer a lot of the question that have been swirling around in this thread.

Right. There must be an immediate end great to human life and in New Jersey, there is a requirement to retreat, to avoid the conflict. There is no stand your ground. Edited to remove castle law from the prior sentence as it does exist in New Jersey per @soloudinthere.

Unless someone is breaking in your home or you have proven to the court that you are in danger from this person and the court has issued a restraining order they just walked through, then don’t shoot them or try to kill them by any other means. If you do, have it captured on camera that you were carrying legally and you retreated and feared for your life prior to shooting 1 or 2 or 3.

[hut-ho78]

@eggbutt

@hut-ho78

A plot that MB never heard about until after the shooting can’t affect his state of mind at the time of the shooting.

Even if that plot caused the deterioration of his mental health? He was the victim of the plot.

We’ll see how all this plays out.

It was not a plot to him if he didn’t know about it. If you just didn’t agree with the judge and explained that, then ok, you don’t agree with the judge. However, you repeat the plot again and again and leave out why the judge doesn’t allow it. So, either you missed the reason or didn’t understand it or it’s back to your own feelings against the Kanareks and that just is irrelevant to the situation between LK and MB.

[soloudinhere]

@hut-ho78

And in New Jersey, there is a requirement to retreat, to avoid the conflict. There is no castle law or stand your ground.

New Jersey is a castle doctrine state. There is no duty to retreat in your own home.

[MHM]

@hut-ho78

It was not a plot to him if he didn’t know about it.

Wait, what? A plot to do harm doesn’t matter unless the subject knows about it?

So a plot to rob a convenience store doesn’t matter if the clerk doesn’t know about it?