Barisone Verdict Is In: Not Guilty By Reason of Insanity

[MHM]

@ekat

That 26 minutes to get through his qualifications could quadruple.

Mr. B/Mr. D could have a full on mani/pedi by the time that’s over. Lol.

[ekat]

@MHM

When I said I hoped the civil trial would have a live stream, I didn’t mean that part. Lol.

My eye gets a little twitchy just thinking about it.

[Knights_Mom]

@trubandloki

@BrendaJane

Or perhaps the half of the house in Florida? (now, getting that in judgement would be ironic, wouldn’t it)

I have not looked it up, but learned it in these threads, Florida is one of a few states that does not allow the primary residence of a person to be awarded in a judgement. So Daddy’s house in Florida is safe.

It’s not daddy’s primary residence.

[trubandloki]

@Knights_Mom

@trubandloki

@BrendaJane

Or perhaps the half of the house in Florida? (now, getting that in judgement would be ironic, wouldn’t it)

I have not looked it up, but learned it in these threads, Florida is one of a few states that does not allow the primary residence of a person to be awarded in a judgement. So Daddy’s house in Florida is safe.

It’s not daddy’s primary residence.

I know this. They were talking about LK paying a judgement.
Daddy is not named in the lawsuit either.
It is Daughter’s primary residence and she is listed as an owner too. I was simply saying that even if LK loses and there is a judgement against her, she can not lose part of the house.

[Omgitsme]

Thank you for the clarification!

[Angela_Freda]

Why isn’t JK named?
Iirc, when LK created her suit she named sever Does who were basically holding pkaces, in a way, for people yet yo be named. So why can’t JK be added, NIW that his involvement is better understood?

[trubandloki]

@Angela_Freda

Why isn’t JK named?
Iirc, when LK created her suit she named sever Does who were basically holding pkaces, in a way, for people yet yo be named. So why can’t JK be added, NIW that his involvement is better understood?

I don’t know and I don’t know.
Legal smart people can answer the second question. Why LK was not named will have to wait until some time when people in the know can talk about stuff.

[BrownDerby]

@trubandloki

Can you see the two of them trying to outdo each other with their level of greatness, even though they are both on the same team?

It’s almost like a form of trolling, much like we see here.

[eggbutt]

@Knights_Mom

I should have walked away you say? NEVER.

No matter how tough the situation nor aggressive the opponent I do not walk away. Never have, never will.

Absolutely! It’s the “walking away” all these years that have allowed her to continue her behavior with zero accountability. Does anyone think her attack on GJ years ago was an isolated incident??? If she had such fun harassing a total stranger in such a vile, disgraceful way, she was probably having similar fun with other individuals who remained silent out of fear of stronger retaliation from her or her father.

So yes, speaking up loudly and frequently as long as this woman is capable of continuing her dangerous behavior is exactly what is reasonable and correct.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

@Knights_Mom

@RND

@BigMama1

And I kind of hoped you would read the responses to your post and realize how absurd you sound defending LK and accusing people of “trashing” her by simply discussing the things she has said and done.

I guess we are both disappointed, but only one

Your assertion that I defend LK is completely untrue, and you are incredibly lazy to accuse me of that when all you have to do is search my posts to see the truth. I am capable of acknowledging that LK is a terrible person while at the same time being able to understand how awful it is that a mob of people who don’t even know her are making up stories about her (yes, that’s what you are doing) on an online forum on which she is not even able to defend herself. I don’t disagree with the Moderators’ decision to ban LK, but they should have shut down all discussion about her at the same time. Allowing all of you to gossip and speculate about her and her family for the last two and a half years was bad enough; allowing the gossip and speculation to continue after banning her is absolutely disgusting.

Oh boo hoo. This is what happens what someone like LK decides to play games and abuse people. Those people then in turn don’t think highly of that abuser and they join together to discuss the matter.

You then cannot fault those same people for reacting like this. You should expect it. It’s the rules of society the rest of us have learned to live by and obey and the fact that LK didn’t abide by the rules of society means she must then have to deal with the repercussions.

Say hello to the repercussions.

Had she not opted to lie repeatedly on this forum she could have been here herself. But once again the norms of the culture here were something she was not concerned with. She sought to dominate and ridicule instead. Often by lying. Then she stated in open court that she lies which violated the terms here.

Again, no one else’s fault but her own.

So then you in all your righteous indignation decide that we too should be punished by not being permitted to discuss the very same matter being discussed on social media AROUND THE WORLD.

The fault is hers alone and no, she by right is the one suffering consequences of her own words, actions and deeds.

So in the words of wisdom taught to us as children… tough noogies.

There has been lies said by posters about her as well and baiting-a whole lot of baiting. In fact, she didn’t start trouble with you, you did. She just went too far responding. But then, you continued it. Either one of you could have walked away but when you saw it provoked her, you doubled down and continue to do so even now that she is banned.

I never threatened her. I wrote that I remembered seeing a post of hers. She then deluged me with threatening PMs. Several of them. She attempted to demean me. I posted them. Then others spoke of their threatening, haraasing, coercive PMs.

LK has been wrong in her behavior here. She was banned for lying. The fault is all hers and hers alone.

Your continued defense of her does not paint you in a good light.

I should have walked away you say? NEVER.

No matter how tough the situation nor aggressive the opponent I do not walk away. Never have, never will.

You did not write “I think I remember a post in which you stated you owned two Rugers”,

You wrote “LK posted on FB that she owned Rugers” at the time it was known the gun involved was a Ruger, and it was not clear who owned it.

You had multiple occasions in which you could have said, ‘Oh, I thought you said Ruger, but maybe I misremembered.’, but you did nothing but continue to insist you had evidence “in a vault”.

That she posted on FB that she owned Rugers was not true. You continued to fling around the untruth after she corrected you. You refused to admit you might have misremembered.

You are outraged that she threatened to sue you for libel, but only now, after 2.5 years have phrased it as “I remember .,”

That last bolded phrase — that’s the stupid, arrogant mantra that both LK and MB had that led to the tragedy.

[trubandloki]

@CurrentlyHorseless

You refused to admit you might have misremembered.

I guess that is no different than you refusing to admit so many things that you refuse to admit. Right?

Are all the other people who also claim they saw that post also wrong too?

[cheval_convert]

It’s kind of like a public service announcement.

[Sdel]

@CurrentlyHorseless

That she posted on FB that she owned Rugers was not true. You continued to fling around the untruth after she corrected you. You refused to admit you might have misremembered.

It’s not necessarily not true. We just can’t seem to definitively prove it yet. Why? Because:

1. She would post things and then delete it. This has been testified to.
2. The only source saying it wasn’t there is her. She testified that she lies on SM.

But someone can prove it. FB can. I can assure you, if FB has been subpoenaed and produced that post it’ll come out in the civil trial. Maybe they just haven’t been subpoenaed about it yet. Although I have a sneaky suspicion that if it comes to light, it won’t be quite such a definitive statement as “own”, it’ll be another coy insinuation of possession that gives her plausible deniability.

[DownYonder]

Re: JK’s involvement.

IIRC, during Dr. Schlessinger’s testimony, when he was emphatically trying to assert that MB was faking amnesia, he said something like “MB was afraid Lauren was going to kill him. Was that a delusion? MHG was afraid Lauren’s father was going to kill her (MHG). Was that a delusion?”

Does anyone know where he got the information about MHG being afraid of JK? He didn’t interview her, did he? Or did he get that info from MB?

Either way, it sure sounds as though there is some evidence that JK was involved enough to create a high level of fear and anxiety in MB/MHG. And although such evidence was not allowed into the criminal trial, it will surely come out in the civil cases - correct?

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@ekat

@MHM

Uh oh.

Does that mean the mustache could reappear? Or was he strictly involved in the criminal case?

Thank you very much for all the information on the legal matters. Greatly appreciate it!

You’re welcome.

Unfortunately, yes, he could. I cut and pasted this from MB’s answer to the suit, and similar language is used in his counterclaim.

“Defendant was not competent at the time of the alleged incident and, as a result, should have no liability to Plaintiff for her injuries, by reason of Barisone’s mental state and/or condition which included but was not limited to battered-person-syndrome cause by Plaintiff’s campaign of emotional battery against Defendant and/or persons in his care.”

So yes, we could see him again, and quite frankly, as bad as he was the first time, can you imagine him with the blowhard jury-hating attorney doing the questioning?

Interesting. In the criminal case, the defense needed to establish that he was insane, and tried to claim that the breakdown was caused by LKs actions.

In the civil case, it looks like simply being delusional does not excuse his liability; he needs to establish they she caused the breakdown, at least in part.

I know “the majority” here has already rendered their verdict that she was the 100% cause of his breakdown (although that conflicts with evidence of child abuse snd CPTSD). But in the civil trial, he’ll need to establish that her behavior caused the mental break.

[jvanrens]

@erinmeri

@MHM

wonder if somebody will end up doing a big podcast on the whole thing. I’m not much of a podcast person, but I could make an exception in this case.

I honestly didn’t think this would be such a compelling case but I think it is now. Whether there is room in the market with 48 hours doing a story remains to be seen. I might be hallucinating, but I think someone broached doing a podcast on these threads.

Yes, someone did. Somebody warned them they better have liability insurance, because, lawsuits will likely ensue.

[SillyHorse]

@Knights_Mom

What if its not behind their backs?

Let’s see… if they’re listening (or reading) secretly (or think they are, lol) it would depend on whether the people talking know that the people being talked about are listening (or reading).

Hypothetically, of course.

[erinmeri]

@CurrentlyHorseless

I know “the majority” here has already rendered their verdict that she was the 100% cause of his breakdown (although that conflicts with evidence of child abuse snd CPTSD). But in the civil trial, he’ll need to establish that her behavior caused the mental break.

The experts testified he had underlying mental illness and that she exacerbated it. You’ve heard of triggers, no? You understand that environmental and external factors can trigger episodes, no? Nobody is arguing that she was 100% the cause of his break - we are saying that the testimony at trial and the evidence discussed dang sure seem to show that she purposely, relentlessly, and viscously harassed him to the point of him having a break. Her behavior was the trigger. Would he have had that breakdown if she had not so relentlessly pursued her goal to “finish the bastard”? I saw no testimony or evidence to indicate he would have. She seems to be the primary stressor in his life at that time. Did you not watch the trial? Sheesh!

ETA: Even the mustache said something to the tune of “it’s not paranoia if it’s real.” NOBODY seems to contest that she harassed and threatened him, other than her and RG.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@trubandloki

@Wilbury_Pie

Usually the truth gets blurred in the retelling. Human nature, which is why I never really believe what’s being said behind other peoples backs. Even if it’s factual, it could lack important context.

That is why people so commonly include a screen shot of the things that LK has posted or said when discussing things here.

LOL. Who was it (Sdel?) who posted that LK said under oath in a deposition that she never deleted anything she posts, then when someone provided the screenshot, her actual statement was that she “generally” does not edit or delete, except in cases of duplicate posts, or material “posted in error”?

Someone claimed she had lied under oath by saying that she never edited it deleted posts (obviously she does). But the actual screenshotted statement of what she said under oath had “except for material posted in error”, which covers whatever she wants it to cover. She did not lie under oath. The answer was probably written by her lawyer.

[DownYonder]

@CurrentlyHorseless

…in the civil trial, he’ll need to establish that her behavior caused the mental break.

Hmmm. He did seem to be coping with things until LK’s increasingly erratic and bullying behavior pushed him over the edge. Things were tolerable when they were at DEFCON 5, but then her actions were concerning enough to trigger a move to DEFCON 4, and from there, DEFCON 3, DEFCON 2, and finally DEFCON 1 followed in very short order as she ratcheted up the pressure.