I know I know… I guess I’m just very curious WHO ELSE would have access to both sides? Who else would know all the people involved?
Just a curiosity thing. Not holding to an opinion… Just want to be a fly on the wall sometimes.
[/quote]
My thought is that maybe it’s someone who was not directly involved in the criminal case, but is involved in the civil case.
I posted my recollection, and never said that my recollection was infallible. I’m sure I misremember lots of details more important than SM vs FB in a post from December.
Whether you decided to waste time chasing down posts was your call.
Yes, I know you can PM on COTH. But the recipient would need to have an account, and many, many more people have FB accounts than COTH accounts. Also, I don’t see the recipient of the letter, even if she has a COTH account, sharing with 20 COTH users without knowing who the users are IRL.
On what basis do you know that IM is wrong about MB hating MHG more than anyone on the planet?
On what basis do you think he lied in saying he doesn’t edit his posts?
If you don’t want to believe what he had posted is true, that’s cool. For myself, I do believe what he posts.
I would guess JK knows most, if not all the people involved and may have believed he had inside sources on both sides who would share info with him
I have a legal question. If someone testifying for the prosecution is in depositions, can they have their personal attorney with them while they’re giving the deposition?
The prosecution and defense probably have to agree first, but I suspect they would.
Honestly no hired professional is going to be online texting trash talk about a client under an alias. That means no lawyer no medical expert no policeman or health inspector etc. It would be a career killer to be caught doing this middle school rubbish.
IM could be a family member, a friend, or an alternate persona for a COTH poster, banned or not, who has purchased one of those clever IP address hiding services that are widely and legallyadertised all over YouTube.
Honestly, yes lawyers are invested in winning cases and earning fees. But the endgame is to continue winning cases and earning fees. They are pretty careful not to overstep for a client such that their own career is damaged. They understand win some/lose some, and any given case is just one of many.
Also lawyers speak, are listened to, and have a public impact in the course of their work in court and behind the scenes. There is zero reason for a lawyer to want to get on an anonymous chat group of laypeople and huff and puffunder a pseudonym. Or for a medical expert to do so. They simply are not emotionally invested enough plus it would be a huge hit to be caught doing so.
I follow lawyers on Twitter twho use their own names to discuss events cases politics in the news. But that’s a different thing. Also it might conceivably influence public opinion. There is nothing to be gained by arguing with a bunch of horse ladies on COTH. We aren’t involved in the decision any more than the true crime fans on the trial live chat.
I don’t know who IM was. They turned out to be wrong about so man things andflned out so spectacularly at the end, that it hard matters. I doubt it was JK. I doubt too many retired lawyer fathers descend to trash talking anonymously on their junkie daughters SM chat groups.
I know we love our chat group but honestly our opinion doesn’t matter in the larger picture.
Now I bet there are lawyers using aliases to have all kinds of discussions on their own hobby chat groups, about coin collecting or sail boats or prog rock bands of the 1970s, or even horses. But not going on anonymously to rrant about an active case.
IMHO the leak to JK would be the actual DA. He’s the political piece, will have access to the ADAs (Schellhorn) file, which has all the documents from the defense through discovery.
Thank you!
Except, sometimes, personality traits can run in families.
Like uhm, his posts show edits?
Because there is proof that he edited at least one post to remove stating that LK would ride with MB again. The post he made recently, after the verdict. It is quoted.
As far as the MHG topic. I have never met MB, but I would guess that though MHG is not one of his favorite people in the world there are at least three people he puts above MHG on his hates most in the world list.
When you look at things through a certain angle maybe you’ll see that it was MHG going that enabled him to join with someone who seems to hold him sacred. That’s a win win in my book, despite the initial devastation with MHGs going.
Sometimes darkness shows you the light.
I dare say, especially after reading The Letter, that really applies here.
Yeah. It’s possible. But by and large most men in their 70s are less likely to take to SM and trash talk. And most retired lawyers are going to recognize that SM trash talk is doing the victim no favours at this point.
Obviously anyone in LK’s family or friends network would have either first or second hand knowledge of how the prosecution was developing the case and the prosecutor obviously knows a lot about the person on trial. I don’t think there’s anything especially privileged in what IM said especially as so much turned out to be wrong or wishful thinking. IM was an interesting performance that was designed to seem knowledgeable and, at first, a bit objective. But alot of what they said turned out to be wrong, and they dissolved in pure partisan rage at the same time LK locked down her SM platforms. So it was an interesting performance but ultimately nothing.
I don’t give IM the benefit of the doubt nor anyone involved from that side.
I can entirely see anyone from that family and friends posting because they would be compelled to. Made to.
I had a friend very much like LK once and if you didn’t line up in formation when she declared war you were instantly persona non grata.
I can think of one male in LKs life who seems very likely to trash talk people and lie online. However nothing I’ve seen of him convinces me he could write coherent paragraphs
If a post has [edit] in it, I thought that indicated the mods edited it, not the poster.
I will provide you screen shots of the post I know about (most likely not until tomorrow, I can’t do screen shots on this device), the change is not from the mods. I do agree, the edit in the brackets usually means the moderation staff had to remove something. The amount of times the mods have had to do that for IM is pretty impressive, but that is not what I am talking about. IM edited a very recent post after always blasting us with his “I don’t edit things” mantra.
Anyone can include brackets around the word [edit] in their own post, or edit their own post with no brackets and no trace, other than the little pencil icon at the top of the post.
If the edit is done shortly after the original post, the pencil icon might not appear. I don’t know the exact time frame for that to happen. Ten minutes? Twenty minutes? I don’t know if it is the same every time.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
