Personally, I’m on Team Don’t Threaten To Take My Stuff
47 Likes
That is a great team, @Knights_Mom!
Your team is what made it come to light that so many of us were getting those nasty PMs, so I am personally very thankful for your team.
16 Likes
It makes you wonder how many people over the years have thought they were the sole recipients of such attention, and how many times that tactic has worked as a result.
14 Likes
Did she abuse MB as a child? Did she cause him to have 8 plus concussions? Is she responsible for his divorce or his girlfriend being replaced by a more capable and giving girlfriend? Is she responsible for giving him the gun used to shoot her or driving his truck with him in it to the house? Is she responsible for his 20 plus years of fragile mental status or his recent life upheavals (divorce, loss of business partner/barn manager)? Is she responsible for his over 50 men’s aging issues?
Has she ruined anyone? All the trash talk about her and her trash talk yet no one knows anyone who’s life she ruined or anyone she successfully sued?
Y’all make her out to be the bogey man.
Does anyone know why her parent’s have assault records? So they go drink whiskey on a Saturday night and have booze bar fights? Could they possibly have been relentlessly tracking down their daughter and getting between her and drugs any way they can?
So Lk is still riding and at what appears to be a good barn and MB has a chance to get help and rebuild his life. I wish them all well.
1 Like
Seriously? After the whole court case you ask this? Does “finish the bastard” not mean anything negative to you? You either need to take up day drinking or quit.
56 Likes
Oh please. Give. It. Up. He had managed to hold it all together AND be a success until LK came along as the straw that broke the camels back.
She admitted to proceeding on a course to “DESTROY HIM” and endeavored to do whatever it would take to achieve that goal.
SHE ADMITTED THIS in addition to announcing her talent for strategy and living life in a state of competitive chess.
So after all her proclamations and her “FINISH THE BASTARD!” do you really think anyone here is going to believe a single word you say? You who defends she who admitted under oath that she lies on social media? Like maybe you are lying now as a loyal sycophant?
Spare us. Don’t even waste your time typing the words. No one is buying it.
44 Likes
A jury of 12 impartial people determined that MB was NGRI, based on expert testimony. Expert testimony clearly stated that it was LK’s plans and actions to “finish the bastard” that caused his delusional break. So, I’m going to go with yes, LK ruined someone, specifically MB.
50 Likes
Actually no, she didn’t cause that. It was his delusional break, the delusion being that she was a threat.
1 Like
And even the prosecution’s witness said that she was a threat.
50 Likes
More than one testified to the level of fear on the farm….
34 Likes
She WAS a threat, and a blight on peace, and a psychotic crazy person! And, there is nothing to show that she has changed one iota.
46 Likes
So, there’s more than one way to structure a contingency.
What a lot of people interpret it to mean is that the attorney works for free and takes a big piece of the judgement amount if found in favor of their client. That certainly does happen.
What’s more likely though is there is an hourly rate + expenses and then a smaller fee out of the judgement amount, if any. Because the judgement amount is unpredictable, and you can’t ask to recover attorney’s fees if you don’t have any, the second approach makes more sense for typical litigation.
5 Likes
Again, how you can even think you can say what you’re saying as if LK wasn’t extremely over the top and beyond the norm tells us that reality is not your bedfellow.
20 Likes
I can’t imagine that anyone who saw MB’s physical appearance in the courtroom and reaction to the verdict could possibly believe that someone ended up in that state completely independent of a particular someone else.
The perceived environment on the farm was what it was. You can’t remove the precipitating factor and then say the outcome would have been the same. That makes zero sense.
26 Likes
I sometimes wonder, and will use hut as an example - Do you (general) suppose that Hut has people in their life that sneak around at night in all black, no shoes, and a veil? Does Hut have friends that find it appropriate to put listening devices all over the place where they keep their horse? Does Hut find it normal that someone admits (in court) that if their barn owner put in a surveillance system that they would disable it? Do the people in Hut’s life hang around after the barn has made it clear that they are no longer a good fit and should leave? Does Hut find it typical that someone admits to lying all over social media? Does Hut find it ok to send vial messages to someone about their kid dying? Does Hut send threatening messages to people who say things they do not like, insisting those people are lying when all along the person who is lying is them?
38 Likes
And was deemed wrong when the jury found MB insane. If she was a threat, it wasn’t a delusion.
1 Like
And you somehow, yet again, avoid understanding how that break occurred. Someone was terrorizing every resident at that stable, and it wasn’t MB!
22 Likes
Thank you for the apology.
ETA - never mind. After drafting this post then catching up on the thread more, I see you have promptly reverted back to lobbing out vague accusations, and claiming that there have been “ugly, nasty, and disgusting” posts about LKs parents. Maybe that was an accusation for me specifically? Maybe for multiple posters on the thread? I couldn’t quite tell.
Anyway… back to the actual comment I was replying to…
I understand what you are saying with respect to the parents not wanting their financial situation discussed. However, it’s indisputable that LK herself spoke quite a bit about her financial situation, and made claims about her family’s financial situation, during her participation on social media over the last two year. She initiated it.
Given her testimony at trial, that she lies on social media, I think it’s pretty understandable that folks following the case are now curious if what she has said for years is true. Your description of it was more charitable… that LK had potentially had wildly exaggerated certain things. Be that as it may, it’s hardly surprising that folks following this case did some basic researching of public information that pops up immediately on Google. It’s hardly extensive cyber sleuthing. And now, we are discussing it on one small obscure Internet forum in a topic devoted to the case. And that’s really not cyberstalking, nor is it defamation.
I will say, I haven’t followed this case for years like others have. I only got interested recently, when it finally went to trial. I’d briefly interacted with LK previously on other threads, and had formed some general opinions about her, based on her posting style. She is a rather polarizing individual. But I honestly came into this discussion with zero opinions on her parents.
That neutral opinion shifted, however, and I got curious by the many different characterizations of JK that I have seen on these threads. My curiousity was further peaked, after hearing some of what Mr. Bilinkas had to say during the trial about how JK was actually deeply involved in whatever this “plan” of LK and RG’s was.
You mentioned you work/worked in the financial industry. Good for you. I used to work in corporate finance, and got an MBA a while ago. Good for me. Anyway, if JK is someone who has followed the tried and true standard formula with respect to working hard over the course of his lifetime, rising to the upper tier of earners at his company, doing some careful and thoughtful financial planning for retirement, and started saving and investing in a disciplined diversified manner at as young of an age as was possible, and he and KK have now amassed an estate north of 12 million (that’s the point at which estate tax kicks in now, I believe - you might know better than I though)… good for him. Seriously. I fully respect people who live their lives like that. Live within their means, and dutifully invest for 30 years straight, believe in dollar cost averaging, maximizing company matching, maximizing tax benefits from things like Roth 401k and Roth IRA plans, etc etc etc.
But all that seems a bit at odds with the description/characterization of an adult parent who is closely involved in some nefarious plan with LK and RG as of the summer of 2019. That was what was alleged at trial. This whole alleged nefarious plan was theoretically supposed to have resulted in a significant cash payout of some kind from MB.
If JK has established a multimillion dollar estate the good old fashioned way… why does he even need to be involved in some unsavory plan with his daughter and RG? That just doesn’t make sense to me. A person who has lived their life carefully planning and saving in a predictable and thoughtful no nonsense way, would likely be encouraging their daughter to settle down, and follow a more reasonable and financially prudent path, dontcha think? The people I know who get all excited about their Roth accounts, are proud of having started to save early, pride themselves on driving older cars or living in a modest home, and living within their means… these are not the same people as folks who come up with weird plans involving lawsuits and big payouts.
I hope you can get past our mutual animosity for a moment, and see what I am saying. It just all seems rather weird to me - these rather different characterizations of JK.
Back to your comment, that I am replying to.
Trusts can DEFINITELY make all sorts of common sense for people that have amassed estates that are over $12 million in value, especially if the person has heirs. ‘Spendthrift’ trusts can make particular sense if the heir/beneficiary is an adult child that has lifelong addiction issues, or another life struggle, and may be subject to action from creditors at some point, or may be someone who is especially prone to making risky financial choices. Those sorts of trusts are often set up with the grantor acting as trustee while still alive, and the beneficiary limited to only accessing income from the assets in the trust. However, in certain situations, sometimes the trustee can approve distributions beyond the trust income to the beneficiary for specific purposes… such as the purchase of a home. The assets in a spendthrift trust are typically invested in a manner that aims to preserve wealth over the long term, and provide sustainable financial security for the beneficiary. Yada yada yada.
I have no trouble imagining that a thoughtful parent might wish to set up such a thing for a vulnerable and at risk adult child. Good for that parent if that is what they did.
But again… if the parent did do such a thing for their child… which is something a responsible, thoughtful and caring parent might do… then why would that same parent get personally involved with egging on a weird and nefarious “plan” which was some sort of an attempt to squeeze MB for cash? The parent had already set up a sustainable trust for the benefit of the adult child. There should be no need for these additional nefarious plans with respect to lawsuits.
Anyway… I still am having trouble reconciling these various puzzle pieces of information. The different characterizations of JK just don’t quite fit together, in my view. Maybe the case will actually eventually go to trial as part of the civil litigation LK initiated. Maybe not. If it does go to trial, then whatever the situation is with JK, and he and the family’s finances? It will very likely be laid bare for the entire world to see. And my limited curiosity about this aspect of this case on this one thread, in this small forum? That will be the least of these people’s privacy concerns.
So maybe if they are truly worried about maintaining their privacy, they should have a good long heart to heart with their daughter and her lawyer, and decide whether or not it really is wise to push forward at this stage with this civil litigation. What are the possible benefits? What are the possible risks? Is it really the best use of their time and emotional energy at this point? 
Last thing. I said you could crawl back under your BRIDGE. Not rock. The bridge was a billy goat’s gruff reference 
16 Likes
MB physical appearance and demeanor at his arraignment did not look anything like the way he was during the trial. I think 2.5 years in jail affected him mentally and physically.
4 Likes
Still waiting on the list of people y’all say she ruined.
