Good point. I meant to write “attempted murder” - must have had a brain skid. LOL.
3 Likes
Maybe it is discipline related or a regional term but I see and hear the term “riding career” used pretty frequently for hobby riders as well.
Although I do agree it doesn’t fit too well in this case even using that definition.
1 Like
I seriously doubt he would approve of her tagging along! Helgstrand is primarily a sale barn. Now that Lars manages the US facility, he could make changes in what the staff can do off property. IDK but for sure Lars would know of and be sensitive to the news!
4 Likes
Afternoon tea at the Empress Hotel, Victoria, British Columbia.
I’ve heard it’s the best this side of the pond.
6 Likes
I have a question or three for the legal eagles here.
Since MB could not remember what happened, how could Mr B possibly claim NG, other than NGI? Without forensics, how could he claim that MB did not do it? (I seem to remember from reading all my crime novels, that the SODDIT defense, some other dude did it, isn’t allowed without some corroborating evidence of who the dude was.) But the insanity defense seems to admit that he did shoot her… although not with intent so it was not murder, just a gun that went off while he was holding it and hit someone.
Could he have pleaded NG, with two people claiming that he did intentionally shoot LK? I am not sure that this would have worked, and Mr. B could not have known how poorly LK and RG would perform on the witness stand. If they had had their stories practiced and coordinated, there would have been nothing to hang a NG plea on, correct?
I wonder how many TV crime shows like L&O will use this story as a plot line.
Well, then I guess that notion of LK’s came from the same place as the idea that buying a horse from MB came with free lifetime board….,
1 Like
What is “it”? I don’t know what your post is asking.
Well two people claimed he attempted to murder RG and he was found not guilty on that charge, no insanity required. But I assume the legal experts agreed he had a better chance of getting off with NGRI. They couldn’t have known how completely unreliable the victim and her manservant would be as witnesses.
8 Likes
He has been so frigging cool during this trial, not to mention luscious eye candy!!
2 Likes
Absent some evidence indicating some other guy could have done it - was present, a witness saw someone else there, etc, if the only witnesses are saying he did it, and he can’t remember either way - there’s not a lot of choice.
It’s a tough sell to a jury to say that the only witnesses are just out and out lying, unless you truly can prove there’s any possibility there was someone else.
It would really be a Hail Mary and I doubt the judge would allow it (see also the disallowance of self defense that was issued by Taylor prior to jury instructions)
There really wasn’t much choice here - if the defendant doesn’t remember and the witnesses say X happened, our judicial system is founded on witness statements as evidence and it is what it is.
ETA: the kind of people who can keep horses in a Helgstrand barn are their top top clients. We’re talking billionaires, not someone taking 5 lessons a week.
8 Likes
If the LK side was trying to throw around the term riding career with the implication that she lost income due to her injuries, that is obviously completely ridiculous. But the casual jury member who knows nothing about horses might be unlikely to know any better.
3 Likes
Ok….backing up to the cameras….was it testified to as there were zero recording period….completely wiped, or was it just the recording before the shooting was missing?
I don’t remember and don’t want to go looking….
2 Likes
MB does not remember the event of the shooting, but he remembered the weeks leading up to it.
People close to him have testified how he became unraveled by it.
Hence the insanity defense.
Of which the lack of memory is probably a part as well.
5 Likes
I believe RG claimed he turned the cameras off before MB showed up, so there would have been no recording of the encounter.
Whether that was true or not is an entirely different question, of course. But the camera was working shortly before MB arrived, because RG got a photo notification on his phone at something like 1:42 PM that day.
6 Likes
Bilinkas wanted an option of self defense but Taylor wouldn’t allow it. There was no proof of anyone shooting LK, but since MB apparently took the gun he was assumed to be the shooter. Dang, those pesky forensic tests sure would have been so helpful. Of course I have thought from day one it was self defense and am even more committed to that theory since the trial. I was not aware of the groin bites prior to the trial. I will always believe that dog was sicced on MB and a fight ensued with the gun being fired in the struggle. My theory posted here always put LK and IM in a frenzy. There is no way I believe one word from LK/RG.
36 Likes
Yes but LK/IM said there were recordings from the day before of RC and the dog and they were supposedly only placed the day before. It could just have been yet another lie. I’m having a hard time placing the installation of the cameras on the day before the shooting. Why I asked if they testified to a completely blank cloud or just missing recordings from the shooting.
The morning had the FM/BI there with RG walking through with the inspector. At some point in the afternoon they were meeting with the lawyer. We have a time as to generally when RC was bit. We also have a few CotH posts saying the house cams showed things from a few days before the shooting…
I know they say cameras were purchased the day or two before the shooting…maybe those were replacements for the devices MB had found….and not the house cameras…
5 Likes
I think after two weeks and 5000 posts, I’m going to start a new thread, since this one seems to be getting a little wonky and slow to load. Not to mention hard to navigate.
On the upside, it feels like this might be the longest run of threads we’ve ever had on this subject without a moderator shutting them down for bad behavior! Yay for us. 
32 Likes
RG testified to getting a video snippet at 1:42 pm and then turning off the phone because it was alerting too much while he was doing laundry, which makes zero sense with the outside camera.
I believe it was Mr B on cross that showed him a screenshot of that 1:42 alert. 911 call was at 2:13, I think?
7 Likes
We don’t need a new thread. This thread is fine.
5 Likes
I’m no legal eagle but I love putting my opinion out there with the best of them so here’s my take on this. The State has to prove guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. There were no good forensics to prove this but there was the fact that Kanarek was shot and as you say, the words of two witnesses. In my opinion, evaluating this case simply from a Did-he-shoot-her point of view, I doubted the words of the witnesses because they dissembled so much in their testimony and because they had shown motivation to “destroy” Michael Barisone, according to their own testimony. Also, the fact that the camera footage was missing made me wonder if Goodwin was telling the truth about turning off the camera or whether the camera caught a completely different scenario which he did not want to come to light, and he deleted the footage. Wasn’t there some testimony that the police did not even collect the cameras until two months later? I’m fuzzy on that point. But the point I am trying to make is yes, if in the absence of other evidence you had two witnesses reporting a crime, it would normally be enough. I don’t think it was enough in this case because the witnesses were not impartial, and were well capable of lying. Their previous stated intention to destroy Barisone made me have a reasonable doubt as to whether their version was true. I thought it was very possible that other scenarios could have easily happened resulting in say, a self-defense situation, an accidental shooting, or even an accidental shooting by Robert Goodwin during a tussle.
How many jurors would think the same thing? The practical thing to do for Barisone’s lawyer is to take the other tack, and go for the charge of Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity. I do believe Barisone was Insane and incapable of intent when he went to the farmhouse, but I personally had doubts about whether he did it or not. I’m certainly not saying it couldn’t have happened the way the witnesses said, but I just have too many doubts.
16 Likes
