Barisone Trial This Month

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

Let’s remember that I once posted I had read a FB post of LKs which mentioned her having a certain type of gun. That comment of this memory of mine of that posting unleashed a barrage of lies, threats and insults by her upon me in PMs which I then exposed to the light of day on this forum only to discover I wasn’t the only recipient of such negative attention.

Did I shoot her? Nope.
Did I say MB was innocent? Nope.
Did I say she deserved to get shot if that’s what happened? Nope.

So to many of the readers here, casting LK solely as a benign character in this twisted story of events remains unconvincing and disingenuous at best.

Now her advocates may not like this fact but it exists and is reality nevertheless.

As I recall, you posted that she owned a Ruger (the type of gun used in the shooting), full stop.

I most certainly did post I recalled seeing a FB post of hers where SHE stated she had a Ruger. What’s your point?

This post was about how she responded.

My point is that if she had not posted that she owned a Ruger, your post asserting that would not be true statement.

If you don’t trash talk, why were you responding to my question?

Because it tagged no one and as it appeared immediately under and right after my post it seemed a logical conclusion.

If you were not addressing me then state so here.

I was still addressing cutter. However, now we are conversing, once you let the forum know you had received PMs from LK, why do you keep repeating it? Also, had you given any thought that a shooting victim who had been trash talked while in a coma might be overly sensitive to comments that she owned and brought the weapon used to shoot her? When you responded back to her, did you explain you just noticed it and you were not implying it was her fault she got shot or did you respond defensively in return?

Why do I keep repeating it? Because I want to. Because it happened. Because it’s the truth. I thought you wanted the truth to prevail? I know I do. Always.

I did not do a psychological analysis of a stranger on the internet in order to determine a treatment plan and strategy.

I witnessed an event and stated what I witnessed.

I never said the weapon that caused her injury was absolutely her particular Ruger. Where would you get such a thing?

Personally if my loved one was involved in an event that became a topic of discussion on social media, I would do all I could to make sure they weren’t involved at all on social media in order to lessen any emotional or psychological upset.

How did you get from “implying” to “absolutely”? In the middle of people trash talking her, did you actually mean to imply she brought the gun used to shoot her? Or just make a completely innocent comment of what you observed on social media?

I’ll leave it up to you to decide. You will anyway.

I’ve been perfectly clear and concise.

Here is my understanding:

LK has acknowledged owning a gun or guns, but not to owning a Luger.

Early on, it was not 100% clear who owned the gun used in the shooting.

You posted that she posted on FB that she owned a Luger. That suggests that the gun used in the shooting was owned by her.

You keep complaining that she has “threatened you”. If you posted the untrue statement about her supposedly admitting publicly that she owned a weapon of the type used in the shooting, I can she that she would consider that a libelous statement.

Was her “threat” a statement that she would or might sue you for libel? Truth of the statement is an excellent defense against a charge of libel, so if you’re certain what you wrote is true, you can literally laugh off her “threat”. You only need to feel threatened if what you posted was not true.

Again you are wrong. In various ways.

I believe to my core that I saw her post where she stated she had 2 guns and that one was a Ruger. So did a number of other people state they saw the post. Therefore my statement is not libelous.

Aside from this initial point the other requirements of libel remain unfulfilled.

Additionally, to extrapolate that my statement implies anything such as your fantasy that I said she was shot with her own gun is a fresh, new, never before used comment born of imagination and desperation.

As for my feeling threatened: I luckily learned a few things vacuuming under lawyers desks for 31 years. I was very annoyed at the attempt to bull**** me in order to shut me up and I immediately thought of how many others who lacked “vacuuming” experience might believe these strong arm tactics and so I publicly posted of those PMs 3 weeks after to disprove a post which laughably alleged that certain behaviors were not done by LK.

You’re making my point. If you’re confident that nothing you posted was libelous, then her PMs to you would have been mere BS that a person confident that they had not committed libel would have laughed off snd ignored.

Truth of the statement is an absolute defense. Your belief “to your core” that is was true is not as bullet proof, if the statement was not true.

When she informed you that the statement was not true, did you retract it and apologize, or double down?

I would think that retraction and apology would reduce the likelihood of a successful libel action, if you were ever worried about that.

Yours is a circular, senseless sputtering of gobblygook and nonsense. Your conclusion is nonsense and your path there, bizarre.

I apologize to her for her threatening me? NEVER. Plus she never admitted the lies.

It was Mod1 who verified that what LK said was not truthful.

I can post the whole thing again. Shall I? You know, so memory is freshened. You seem to have forgotten.

I did not ask whether you apologized to her for threatening you.

I asked if, when she informed you that despite your belief “to your core” that she had posted on owning a Ruger, that she did not own a Ruger and did not post to that effect, whether you accepted her information, or continued to maintain the truth of your post.

[eggbutt]

Off the top of my head I can imagine LK, RG, JK, RC, the ear witness, the man in the driveway, ALL people at the farm that day, CPS, IM, BI, medical personnel, MHG and her father, all the owners of Hawthorne Hill, perhaps MH’s kids for a start, GJ, Haleybot, Schellhorn mentioned 15 witnesses as I recall and Bilinkas mentioned 30. That said, I honestly believe Schellhorn has fairly recently taken a hard look at the case and all the discovery and may have more witnesses at this point.

[Sdel]

Don’t forget the two kids mentioned in the suit against the police. If that is in any way true, that should pull on the jury pretty heavily.

[eggbutt]

Yes, and perhaps LK’s employers, previous trainers and barn owners, neighbors…who knows?

[Knights_Mom]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

Let’s remember that I once posted I had read a FB post of LKs which mentioned her having a certain type of gun. That comment of this memory of mine of that posting unleashed a barrage of lies, threats and insults by her upon me in PMs which I then exposed to the light of day on this forum only to discover I wasn’t the only recipient of such negative attention.

Did I shoot her? Nope.
Did I say MB was innocent? Nope.
Did I say she deserved to get shot if that’s what happened? Nope.

So to many of the readers here, casting LK solely as a benign character in this twisted story of events remains unconvincing and disingenuous at best.

Now her advocates may not like this fact but it exists and is reality nevertheless.

As I recall, you posted that she owned a Ruger (the type of gun used in the shooting), full stop.

I most certainly did post I recalled seeing a FB post of hers where SHE stated she had a Ruger. What’s your point?

This post was about how she responded.

My point is that if she had not posted that she owned a Ruger, your post asserting that would not be true statement.

If you don’t trash talk, why were you responding to my question?

Because it tagged no one and as it appeared immediately under and right after my post it seemed a logical conclusion.

If you were not addressing me then state so here.

I was still addressing cutter. However, now we are conversing, once you let the forum know you had received PMs from LK, why do you keep repeating it? Also, had you given any thought that a shooting victim who had been trash talked while in a coma might be overly sensitive to comments that she owned and brought the weapon used to shoot her? When you responded back to her, did you explain you just noticed it and you were not implying it was her fault she got shot or did you respond defensively in return?

Why do I keep repeating it? Because I want to. Because it happened. Because it’s the truth. I thought you wanted the truth to prevail? I know I do. Always.

I did not do a psychological analysis of a stranger on the internet in order to determine a treatment plan and strategy.

I witnessed an event and stated what I witnessed.

I never said the weapon that caused her injury was absolutely her particular Ruger. Where would you get such a thing?

Personally if my loved one was involved in an event that became a topic of discussion on social media, I would do all I could to make sure they weren’t involved at all on social media in order to lessen any emotional or psychological upset.

How did you get from “implying” to “absolutely”? In the middle of people trash talking her, did you actually mean to imply she brought the gun used to shoot her? Or just make a completely innocent comment of what you observed on social media?

I’ll leave it up to you to decide. You will anyway.

I’ve been perfectly clear and concise.

Here is my understanding:

LK has acknowledged owning a gun or guns, but not to owning a Luger.

Early on, it was not 100% clear who owned the gun used in the shooting.

You posted that she posted on FB that she owned a Luger. That suggests that the gun used in the shooting was owned by her.

You keep complaining that she has “threatened you”. If you posted the untrue statement about her supposedly admitting publicly that she owned a weapon of the type used in the shooting, I can she that she would consider that a libelous statement.

Was her “threat” a statement that she would or might sue you for libel? Truth of the statement is an excellent defense against a charge of libel, so if you’re certain what you wrote is true, you can literally laugh off her “threat”. You only need to feel threatened if what you posted was not true.

Again you are wrong. In various ways.

I believe to my core that I saw her post where she stated she had 2 guns and that one was a Ruger. So did a number of other people state they saw the post. Therefore my statement is not libelous.

Aside from this initial point the other requirements of libel remain unfulfilled.

Additionally, to extrapolate that my statement implies anything such as your fantasy that I said she was shot with her own gun is a fresh, new, never before used comment born of imagination and desperation.

As for my feeling threatened: I luckily learned a few things vacuuming under lawyers desks for 31 years. I was very annoyed at the attempt to bull**** me in order to shut me up and I immediately thought of how many others who lacked “vacuuming” experience might believe these strong arm tactics and so I publicly posted of those PMs 3 weeks after to disprove a post which laughably alleged that certain behaviors were not done by LK.

You’re making my point. If you’re confident that nothing you posted was libelous, then her PMs to you would have been mere BS that a person confident that they had not committed libel would have laughed off snd ignored.

Truth of the statement is an absolute defense. Your belief “to your core” that is was true is not as bullet proof, if the statement was not true.

When she informed you that the statement was not true, did you retract it and apologize, or double down?

I would think that retraction and apology would reduce the likelihood of a successful libel action, if you were ever worried about that.

Yours is a circular, senseless sputtering of gobblygook and nonsense. Your conclusion is nonsense and your path there, bizarre.

I apologize to her for her threatening me? NEVER. Plus she never admitted the lies.

It was Mod1 who verified that what LK said was not truthful.

I can post the whole thing again. Shall I? You know, so memory is freshened. You seem to have forgotten.

I did not ask whether you apologized to her for threatening you.

I asked if, when she informed you that despite your belief “to your core” that she had posted on owning a Ruger, that she did not own a Ruger and did not post to that effect, whether you accepted her information, or continued to maintain the truth of your post.

I vehemently maintain the truth of my post.

And as my vacuuming experience has taught me how to obtain proof of such, I have.

Am I perfectly clear now?

[trubandloki]

I wish I had more vacuuming experience!

[trubandloki]

I assume a whole bunch of the police department will be called too, right?

Will LK’s friend who was given the video and audio tapes to hold be called?

[Sdel]

What is going to be even more fascinating will be all the details. The ballistics, the bullet trajectories, if that 3rd bullet really grazed her before hitting the door, why only the 3 bullets, the timing of the multiple 911 call, who is the lawyer that was notified before the parents (ear witness, MCPO, someone on scene?), how much money was owed, if those recordings are included, and if those sinister documents she was refusing to sign were just a standard liability release…and oh, so much more to find out….

And yes, the friend on FB who said she had seen and heard all the recordings…

[trubandloki]

What about the two working students? Will they call them?

Will LK’s NC trainers and barn owner be called? What about her FL trainer?

Edit to add:
What about MB’s clients? Will they be called?

[rothmpp]

@CurrentlyHorseless

You posted that she posted on FB that she owned a Luger. That suggests that the gun used in the shooting was owned by her.

See, there is the difference in perception. I saw that FB post. I read it as her basically threatening him.

@CurrentlyHorseless

I have been bitten by dogs, although never badly. If I were afraid of being bitten by a particular dog, my means of self preservation would be to not put myself in the area the dog considered its territory rather than to obtain and bring a gun.

The dog’s territory? It was MB’s house. In what universe does the dog of someone occupying a portion of the house get to determine if the main occupant (until chased out several days before) gets to enter the space?

You said you’ve never been badly bitten. That alone will skew your perception. There is a whole thread on the OT board about a poster who is determining what to do about her unpredictable dog that has bitten several people. Read some of the stories on that thread and maybe you’ll understand why a dog with a reputation can make someone make choices that you might not.

[eggbutt]

Oh, I forgot SS for both sides.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

First, I would not be afraid of a dog that had been on the property for months. But if I were, I would communicate by phone, text, email, or through a lawyer that I had already engaged on the issue.

That’s what sane, nonviolent people do, instead of packing heat.

And you find it “unbelievable”.

[RND]

@Angela_Freda

Clearly your bias prevents you from cogently discussing this.

This is perhaps the least self-aware statement ever written, anywhere.

[eggbutt]

And yet, even with allegedly “packing heat” MB was severely bitten. Uh-huh.

[eggbutt]

On an episode of Matlock, a dog was a witness.

[trubandloki]

@CurrentlyHorseless

First, I would not be afraid of a dog that had been on the property for months. But if I were, I would communicate by phone, text, email, or through a lawyer that I had already engaged on the issue.

Feel lucky you have never been afraid of a dog that you previously knew.

I never considered I needed to communicate with a dog via phone, text, email, etc. to get into my very own house. Strange way you think.

Another witness question - Will the people that LK says have contacted her to say MB is abusive be called?

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

Let’s remember that I once posted I had read a FB post of LKs which mentioned her having a certain type of gun. That comment of this memory of mine of that posting unleashed a barrage of lies, threats and insults by her upon me in PMs which I then exposed to the light of day on this forum only to discover I wasn’t the only recipient of such negative attention.

Did I shoot her? Nope.
Did I say MB was innocent? Nope.
Did I say she deserved to get shot if that’s what happened? Nope.

So to many of the readers here, casting LK solely as a benign character in this twisted story of events remains unconvincing and disingenuous at best.

Now her advocates may not like this fact but it exists and is reality nevertheless.

As I recall, you posted that she owned a Ruger (the type of gun used in the shooting), full stop.

I most certainly did post I recalled seeing a FB post of hers where SHE stated she had a Ruger. What’s your point?

This post was about how she responded.

My point is that if she had not posted that she owned a Ruger, your post asserting that would not be true statement.

If you don’t trash talk, why were you responding to my question?

Because it tagged no one and as it appeared immediately under and right after my post it seemed a logical conclusion.

If you were not addressing me then state so here.

I was still addressing cutter. However, now we are conversing, once you let the forum know you had received PMs from LK, why do you keep repeating it? Also, had you given any thought that a shooting victim who had been trash talked while in a coma might be overly sensitive to comments that she owned and brought the weapon used to shoot her? When you responded back to her, did you explain you just noticed it and you were not implying it was her fault she got shot or did you respond defensively in return?

Why do I keep repeating it? Because I want to. Because it happened. Because it’s the truth. I thought you wanted the truth to prevail? I know I do. Always.

I did not do a psychological analysis of a stranger on the internet in order to determine a treatment plan and strategy.

I witnessed an event and stated what I witnessed.

I never said the weapon that caused her injury was absolutely her particular Ruger. Where would you get such a thing?

Personally if my loved one was involved in an event that became a topic of discussion on social media, I would do all I could to make sure they weren’t involved at all on social media in order to lessen any emotional or psychological upset.

How did you get from “implying” to “absolutely”? In the middle of people trash talking her, did you actually mean to imply she brought the gun used to shoot her? Or just make a completely innocent comment of what you observed on social media?

I’ll leave it up to you to decide. You will anyway.

I’ve been perfectly clear and concise.

Here is my understanding:

LK has acknowledged owning a gun or guns, but not to owning a Luger.

Early on, it was not 100% clear who owned the gun used in the shooting.

You posted that she posted on FB that she owned a Luger. That suggests that the gun used in the shooting was owned by her.

You keep complaining that she has “threatened you”. If you posted the untrue statement about her supposedly admitting publicly that she owned a weapon of the type used in the shooting, I can she that she would consider that a libelous statement.

Was her “threat” a statement that she would or might sue you for libel? Truth of the statement is an excellent defense against a charge of libel, so if you’re certain what you wrote is true, you can literally laugh off her “threat”. You only need to feel threatened if what you posted was not true.

Again you are wrong. In various ways.

I believe to my core that I saw her post where she stated she had 2 guns and that one was a Ruger. So did a number of other people state they saw the post. Therefore my statement is not libelous.

Aside from this initial point the other requirements of libel remain unfulfilled.

Additionally, to extrapolate that my statement implies anything such as your fantasy that I said she was shot with her own gun is a fresh, new, never before used comment born of imagination and desperation.

As for my feeling threatened: I luckily learned a few things vacuuming under lawyers desks for 31 years. I was very annoyed at the attempt to bull**** me in order to shut me up and I immediately thought of how many others who lacked “vacuuming” experience might believe these strong arm tactics and so I publicly posted of those PMs 3 weeks after to disprove a post which laughably alleged that certain behaviors were not done by LK.

You’re making my point. If you’re confident that nothing you posted was libelous, then her PMs to you would have been mere BS that a person confident that they had not committed libel would have laughed off snd ignored.

Truth of the statement is an absolute defense. Your belief “to your core” that is was true is not as bullet proof, if the statement was not true.

When she informed you that the statement was not true, did you retract it and apologize, or double down?

I would think that retraction and apology would reduce the likelihood of a successful libel action, if you were ever worried about that.

Yours is a circular, senseless sputtering of gobblygook and nonsense. Your conclusion is nonsense and your path there, bizarre.

I apologize to her for her threatening me? NEVER. Plus she never admitted the lies.

It was Mod1 who verified that what LK said was not truthful.

I can post the whole thing again. Shall I? You know, so memory is freshened. You seem to have forgotten.

I did not ask whether you apologized to her for threatening you.

I asked if, when she informed you that despite your belief “to your core” that she had posted on owning a Ruger, that she did not own a Ruger and did not post to that effect, whether you accepted her information, or continued to maintain the truth of your post.

I vehemently maintain the truth of my post.

And as my vacuuming experience has taught me how to obtain proof of such, I have.

Am I perfectly clear now?

If you have proof that your post is true, not just something you believe, why did LKs threats of suing you for libel bother you at all?

[trubandloki]

@CurrentlyHorseless

If you have proof that your post is true, not just something you believe, why did LKs threats of suing you for libel bother you at all?

I can not say how that person feels but I can answer this for myself and I am sure many others.

Most of us do not have an international top 10 law firm on call for everything we want to do in life, since most of us almost never need to use a lawyer in our day to day life. Being sued, even if we are 100% right would cost us money. Money we might not actually have. It also would cost us time away from our jobs, time we might not have.

Threatening to sue someone is a form of control. Period.

[eggbutt]

Seriously, are you discussing the trial or continuing a multi-thread dispute?

[RND]

@eggbutt

I answered your post saying the threat of subpoenas and ruining someone’s business may be intimidating to some. We have no idea how, or if, LS responded to LK privately. I doubt it because she is a professional. It’s all malarkey.

That’s fine that you replied to my post, but the question I posted was presented to a specific poster who is not you.

I didn’t ask how, or if, LS responded to LK privately.

I DID ask MorganSercu what SHE thought was so intimidating about LK’s response. All I’ve gotten is a bunch of people who are not MorganSercu answering questions I did not ask.