Barisone Verdict Is In: Not Guilty By Reason of Insanity

[ekat]

@IdahoRider

The jury found he was incapable of having intent, hence the “by reason of insanity” part of their decision.

With RG, no proof of any kind beyond a reasonable doubt.

Thank You! I’m not sure why this has to be stated yet again, but Thank You.

[McGurk]

I grew up in that part of NJ, and the public/private school divide is very different that in other parts of the country, especially the South, where the old segregation academies have rebranded themselves as prep schools.

Part of it has to do with the existence of townships and other small municipalities that fund and run their own school systems.

My township was famous for its excellent school system (excellent grad rate, lots of acceptances at Ivies and Seven Sisters, lots of AP classes and high AP test scores.) Lots of people bought a house in the township when their kids were school aged, and moved out as soon as they graduated, the property taxes being de facto private school tuition.

I believe the Kanareks are in Livingston Township and attended Livingston Township schools. If you look at the median income in Livingston, and the probable absence of rentals or other affordable housing, you have a de facto private school, very much like the ones I attended. The per capita income in Livingston in 2018 was $76,575, which is wealthy relative to New Jersey and the nation. This equates to an annual income of $306,300 for a family of four.

Private schools in that part of NJ tend to either parochial schools or highly specialized schools for learning difference or behavioral problems.

[eggbutt]

Irony: Barisone trial with a severely abused man while simultaneously the Depp trial is going on with a severely abuse man. Both trials involving hidden recordings.

[eggbutt]

@trubandloki

@CurrentlyHorseless

What was said earlier was that the recipient shared it on Facebook on private settings for a while then deleted it after some “Friends” turned out to be non friends.

I don’t remember reading this fact. Can you remind me where this was said? Here (COTH)? Who said it? In this thread? That is an interesting tid-bit that I feel silly having missed.

Yeah, this is curious! Where did this information come from? Enlighten us @CurrentlyHorseless please

[trubandloki]

Thanks @eggbutt. I was feeling silly for not remembering that tid-bit. I am glad I am not the only one who does not remember it. Hopefully @CurrentlyHorseless can enlighten us.

I see where someone says that Bob posted it on Facebook for a bit. I don’t see anything else about it being on Facebook.

[jvanrens]

Am I the only one wondering how many “tas” equals a flounce? One or two or do we require more?

[trubandloki]

@jvanrens

Am I the only one wondering how many “tas” equals a flounce? One or two or do we require more?

I did not know what “tas” meant.

[Fiesta01]

@CurrentlyHorseless

think the jury decision was the correct one, both for declining a straight not guilty because I think the evidence is MB did shoot her

What evidence? No forensic evidence at all and the testimony of two people who lied under oath. What’s your evidence? Please list numerically.

[eggbutt]

Don’t count on a response other than “they said so”.

[BrendaJane]

half the time the boss is asleep…
As long as he toes the line, the money keeps rolling.
If not, she’ll gut him with a rusty hoofpick.

[OntheFnce]

@lazaret

Absent the statement from these two that MB did the shooting, what evidence have you seen that the gun was ever even in his hands?

No fingerprints
No gunshot residue
No DNA
No footprints (due to rain and scene trampling)
Missing cartridge
No audio from the phone call
No evidence as to when the gun was removed from the safe (except the victims talking about a “missing gun” on Facebook)

So basically you think that because he had access to the murder weapon (maybe?) he must be the murderer.

I suggest you not quit your day job if this is how you reason through scenarios.

Also, calling jurors “insane” is definitely not professional conduct and it disrespects the judicial process. A lawyer’s job is to ensure that his client’s rights are protected to the full extent of the law. Insulting a jury who found against your client is not ethical.

But if you need a reference, it is a violation of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct, 8.4(d) “it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice.”

This!

[jvanrens]

I couldn’t decide if there should be an apostrophe or not. A coworker of mine back in the day would say TTFN as he left the office for the day, Ta Ta For Now.

[Scribbler]

@OntheFnce

@lazaret

Absent the statement from these two that MB did the shooting, what evidence have you seen that the gun was ever even in his hands?

No fingerprints
No gunshot residue
No DNA
No footprints (due to rain and scene trampling)
Missing cartridge
No audio from the phone call
No evidence as to when the gun was removed from the safe (except the victims talking about a “missing gun” on Facebook)

So basically you think that because he had access to the murder weapon (maybe?) he must be the murderer.

I suggest you not quit your day job if this is how you reason through scenarios.

Also, calling jurors “insane” is definitely not professional conduct and it disrespects the judicial process. A lawyer’s job is to ensure that his client’s rights are protected to the full extent of the law. Insulting a jury who found against your client is not ethical.

But if you need a reference, it is a violation of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct, 8.4(d) “it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice.”

This!

It’s however significant that the lawyer who said this was not involved in the case he is talking about. He is the civil litigation lawyer commenting on the results of the criminal trial he wanted to piggy back off. And he was commenting on the jury’s funding of NG insane.

I think that a lawyer actually involved in the case would not be allowed to say anything like this about his case. He has to respect the jury and judge decision or be polite and reasonable about the appeal he is launching.

A lawyer commenting on a case they weren’t involved in probably has more latitude to comment. Lots of lawyers give interviews and do podcasts or books about historical or high profile cases where they voice opinions.

[DownYonder]

@trubandloki

@jvanrens

Am I the only one wondering how many “tas” equals a flounce? One or two or do we require more?

I did not know what “tas” meant.

Ta - as in ta-ta, which is slang for “goodbye.”

Or, just “ta” can mean “Thanks.”

I believe Trubandloki was referring to the first meaning and wondering how many times one needed to utter “ta” to equal a “flounce”.

[BrendaJane]

but as a lawyer depending on the good graces of juries…
Unwise at best!

[lazaret]

@Scribbler

A lawyer commenting on a case they weren’t involved in probably has more latitude to comment

Yes, because he is not representing a party, he can comment, but you’re still not supposed to be a jerk and insult the court or the process.

[jvanrens]

Actually, that was me wondering how many times you had to say “ta” to equal a flounce, but no worries.

[OntheFnce]

@lazaret

@Scribbler

A lawyer commenting on a case they weren’t involved in probably has more latitude to comment

Yes, because he is not representing a party, he can comment, but you’re still not supposed to be a jerk and insult the court or the process.

NJ RPC 8.4 (d) It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to: engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice.

[DownYonder]

@jvanrens

Actually, that was me wondering how many times you had to say “ta” to equal a flounce, but no worries.

Oops, sorry for the misattribution!

[jvanrens]

Like I said, no worries! This whole thread is hard enough to keep track of who said what! LOL