I just felt like he had rehearsed that part of the story enough that he thought he could keep it straight. Mr B sure did get under his skin though. He wasn’t ready at all for that.
13 Likes
Yes please!
1 Like
“Our property” may have been an overstatement but at least with a formal lease, the tenant generally has the right to the covenant of “quiet enjoyment” -(ok the irony is not missed by me…) …so it may have been a spin off of, or attempt to use, that concept. Of course since everyone seemed to be occupying everyone’s space on that property (physically and otherwise) it is had to figure where the boundaries of “our property” were…
6 Likes
I also think it’s an important vehicle for us as citizens to see what is going on with the people who we pay. If I was a taxpayer in Morris County and saw the shoddy police work in this case I wouldn’t be happy.
26 Likes
The most memorable moment for me was when RG practically shouted out about MB being “ON OUR PROPERTY” to murder us. He was incensed when he made that comment and the way he emphasized “ON OUR PROPERTY” - and the way he kept insisting MB was intent on murdering them - made me think, “Uh-huh. He is trying desperately to stick to a script.”
29 Likes
Some of those phrases were exactly the same as LK’s, like “the shooter shot at us”. There were more, but they were identical from both, which makes me think they watched LK’s testimony after the first day and instead of noting how, um, inconsistent she was coming across, they just jotted down phrases they liked for him to reuse. Oh, that was a good one! In their view. Other than phraseology, their stories did not match.
15 Likes
The only FEI ranking list LK is on is her own imaginary list.
16 Likes
Have any of the jurors spoken out publicly?
3 Likes
I noticed this too - I think anyone with examination experience latches on to things like this out of habit. Consistency of strange phrasing, rehearsed delivery, etc.
7 Likes
Or perhaps they agreed to do their own grooming (currying, brushing, etc.) in exchange for the discounted rate they were getting?
7 Likes
Hmmm. someone with a particular type of mental disorder could certainly think that an overheard comment of “get rid of them” meant “OMG, they intend to murder me.” When in fact, the comment meant “get them off the property.”
16 Likes
Trials are so different now. Back in the day when I spent considerable time in a courtroom, and part of my job was to note stuff like that, and jury reactions for my attorney, I never had to worry about the parties going home and watching themselves on YouTube, and scrubbing Twitter, etc for any reaction so they could try to polish up before the next day. I can’t imagine the extra challenges that presents.
I think Mr B did a good job of baiting RG into some of those repetitions and then standing there looking at his notes so the jury could soak it in. I would bet that the two of them still don’t understand what harm their testimony did and just think 12 random strangers were collectively “insane.”
31 Likes
I think that in the horse world there are many handshake agreements to discount board, keep a horse in a barn, keep a horse campaigning, get a certain horse and rider combo in the ring, etc etc. Money is off course important but so is keeping ones name out there.
Deals are made all of the time for these things. Many are on the up and up, some borderline ethical, some unethical and of course some both unethical and illegal. . And these deals even the ethical, legal ones often go south but the extent of this one is extreme. Edited to add not suggesting any of the barn deals in this situation were anything but on the up and up.
5 Likes
I’ve been a part of one trial where a witness’ testimony was disallowed after the judge questioned her directly as to whether she had viewed any testimony online (as witnesses are disallowed from the room prior to their testimony for a reason).
I suppose the witness could lie, but I imagine if the outcome of this one had gone a different way, that might have been challenged outright on appeal, and it would have been a good challenge.
7 Likes
Yes, he was quite angry and belligerent about Mr. B’s cross-exam. I thought that if Mr. B had been able to keep drilling down and pressing him, he (RG) might have cracked and gone into a full-blown meltdown. I wondered if he has anger-management issues and felt that he was right on the edge of a temper tantrum. That would have been something to see from Mr. Ex-Marine - I was glad there were armed deputies there.
20 Likes
not to mention it would have illustrated how MB got beat up so badly.
19 Likes
There are obviously big pluses to making trials so accessible. But it’s also problematic in many ways.
There was that one case, I think in Michigan, during the height of COVID, that was a zoom hearing on a DV charge. I don’t remember all the facts, but somehow the prosecutor and the judge caught on that the defendant was actually present with the victim while she was trying to testify, despite restraining orders and all of the other obvious issues. That was wild to watch.
20 Likes
It’s vaguely interesting what seems to trigger you, because you are the one who seems to be personally connected.
But not that interesting.
18 Likes
I loved the way Mr. B would look at the jurors at times with a WTF? expression. It was almost as though he was saying, “Can you believe how ridiculous that statement (from the witness) was?” Or “Can you believe this line of bull…”
28 Likes
Agree. I have also had those type of deals with BOs and/or trainers. And yes, sometimes they go south but if things got too strained, I left the barn. Life is too short to spend your days/nights in high anxiety about a contentious situation - esp. when your horse is involved.
9 Likes
