Barisone Verdict Is In: Not Guilty By Reason of Insanity

[BigMama1]

@hut-ho78

He ran to the police for a civil dispute.

I don’t know about you but if someone is threatening me, illegally recording my conversations, screaming outside my windows and sneaking around my property at night wearing a black veil, I’d be “running to the police” too. Sounds like much more than a civil dispute to most reasonable people.

[hut-ho78]

@ekat

I know an NGRI verdict is super rare, but I just don’t understand why it’s so hard to understand? Especially since many talking heads have discussed it on TV, in print, on line, on podcasts in the last two weeks. (Not to mention it’s been mentioned many, many times in this thread)

Ok. Fine. I will rephrase. I don’t know what MB thought he was shooting at but he sure tried to kill it.

[BigMama1]

@lazaret

No, actually, legally, the finding is he did NOT try to kill her specifically because he lacked the mental capacity to form the intent. If he couldn’t intend to kill her, then he cannot have tried to kill her.

Thank you. This needs to be repeated for those who just can’t or won’t understand it. The jury believed he shot her. They did not believe beyond a reasonable doubt that he attempted to kill her. They believed he lacked the capacity to form intent.

[hut-ho78]

@BigMama1

@hut-ho78

He ran to the police for a civil dispute.

I don’t know about you but if someone is threatening me, illegally recording my conversations, screaming outside my windows and sneaking around my property at night wearing a black veil, I’d be “running to the police” too. Sounds like much more than a civil dispute to most reasonable people.

And if they told you to see a lawyer and get an eviction, I bet you would be all over it.

[ekat]

Despite the multitude of explanations, you still don’t get the whole lack of intent component to the not guilty verdict?

[lazaret]

@hut-ho78

I don’t know what MB thought he was shooting at but he sure tried to kill it.

No, please try again. If he’d shot the bush, he wouldn’t have been guilty of attempted murder then either.

And we all know the outcome as to RG, who he clearly didn’t shoot at all.

[hut-ho78]

I believe the point of the insanity defense is he might have thought he was shooting at a bush or a monster or a target silhouette. He is not criminally liable because he was deemed not to know what he was doing.

However, it was a lethal force weapon and she nearly died of two fairly well placed shots from a small caliber weapon so he has to now be deemed sane and safe to himself and others to be released. The continuation of trying to hold her responsible for his sanity and actions does not help with that.

[ekat]

Might even call your lawyer, draw up an eviction notice to start the process, have it served, while negotiating with the other party’s lawyer another barn and transport to said barn, only to find said other party decided it “didn’t fit” her needs?

[Rhythm_Pace_Impulsion]

@hut-ho78

I believe the point of the insanity defense is he might have thought he was shooting at a bush or a monster or a target silhouette. He is not criminally liable because he was deemed not to know what he was doing.
However, it was a lethal force weapon and she nearly died of two fairly well placed shots from a small caliber weapon so he has to now be deemed sane and safe to himself and others to be released. The continuation of trying to hold her responsible for his sanity and actions does not help with that.

He was found NGRI of all charges relating to LK including the weapons charge. He didn’t have the mental capacity at the time to even understand it was a gun. For all we know he thought he was spraying bug spray or watering the lawn. NGRI means Not Guilty

[Jenerationx]

@MHM

However he got to the edge, it seems MB did not go over the edge until LK appeared on the scene and shoved him.

EXACTLY. Despite his mental health issues, he was a productive member of society for decades before LK showed up and moved in. She then plotted with RG and JK cheering her on to send him over the edge, and when he did snap, now some of you want to claim she bears no responsibility whatsoever for that?

@hut-ho78

No I’m saying I think she was in the wrong place at the wrong time, in the impact area, attracting attention, when he finally lost it.

Please let us know where there was any sign of MB “losing it” prior to LK showing up on the scene.

[Jenerationx]

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

He ran to the police for a civil dispute. He had to have an enforceable eviction to ask the police to put her out. Someone had to break the law. He did. He shot her twice. He tried to kill her. He is not criminally responsible because he was deemed insane by two mental health professionals who said he suffered from a delusion about her being a threat.

You know this.

I think we should use the dressage bull here:

Comment Aston le Taureau déroule une Reprise de Dressage ?

[roseymare]

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

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.

You know sometimes people just do things that make no sense. I have found it not worth my time to wonder why. Not that I don’t wonder but it just wears one down to try to make any sense of some people!

[ekat]

I’m just going to put this here in case anyone is interested in the legal definition in NJ:

NJ Rev Stat § 2C:4-1 (2013)

A person is not criminally responsible for conduct if at the time of such conduct he was laboring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing, or if he did know it, that he did not know what he was doing was wrong. Insanity is an affirmative defense which must be proved by a preponderance of the evidence.

“ The continuation of trying to hold her responsible for his sanity and actions does not help with that.”

MB’s future release is not in the least bit affected by a bunch of random people discussing the trial on a random forum.

[Graymaresrule]

A certain saying comes to mind.

Don’t try to teach a pig to sing. It’s a waste of time and annoys the pig.

[MorganSercu]

@Jenerationx

Please let us know where there was any sign of MB “losing it” prior to LK showing up on the scene.

I don’t see any comparison. Successful rider, business owner, with decades of hard work, history of paying his bills, many people who can testify to his being a decent man - generous & kind to many - despite not being to everyone’s liking versus Lauren Kanarek who has achieved exactly what despite all the benefits of an upper middle class family?

I want to take note that yes, Michael Barisone was divorced. It was probably not pleasant for either of them but no evidence that he stopped running his business, ceased paying his bills and lost all his riding & training skills.

Lauren also has a divorce in her past.

If the accusation is that getting divorced somehow nobbled him, pushed him over the edge, etc., then it stands to reason the same can be said of Lauren.

If getting divorced automatically leads to big problems, then why does Lauren get a pass?

She doesn’t. Her writing about his mental health issues, where she stated his medication was for something other than depression (as I recall, she stated or inferred it was due to a personality disorder) is far more likely to apply to Lauren than Barisone.

As I wrote then, the only medication of which I am aware that is used to treat a personality disorder is lamotrigine (Lamictal) and it isn’t tolerated by all patients with Borderline Personality Disorder. I believe she later removed that post.

Anyway, when she pointed the finger at Barisone, how many pointed right back at Lauren Kanarek?

[mbdsea]

I’m a lawyer, though a civil litigator. Because I can’t take it anymore, State v. Krol, 68 N.J. 236, 344 A.2d 289 (1975), is still good law. Knights Mom, ekat, and others are correct. The court held in Krol that NGRI specifically means that although the act occurred, i.e., the actus reus, there is no criminal state of mind, i.e., the mens rea. Without the latter, there is no crime. It’s totally different than the standards for negligence, recklessness, and (obviously) strict liability. I don’t know how much clearer I can put it, but it honestly is not open for debate, legally. It’s criminal law 101 that both are required.

I was initially sympathetic to LK. I do believe, though, the jury likely got it right, having heard the trial testimony. Keep in mind that watching a trial on video is VERY different than being live in the courtroom. (Having tried cases on Zoom during the pandemic, I can say this with certainty). A jury picks up on things you wouldn’t even imagine they would pick up on, but they do - often.

Standard Attorney Disclaimer - this is not legal advice. LOL.

[eggbutt]

Thank you!

[Knights_Mom]

Thank you.

[ekat]

Thank you.

[eggbutt]

Serious question…how many currently active posters actually know anyone involved with the Barisone/Kanarek situation? By “know someone” I mean you have had actual face-to-face conversations with the person.

I am curious what actual insight/involvement some of the currently prolific posters actually have or are they blowing smoke to provoke?