Barisone Verdict Is In: Not Guilty By Reason of Insanity

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@ekat

@CurrentlyHorseless

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 only quoted one paragraph out of one of his defenses, so your statement above is not quite that simple.

Also, when you say “he needs to establish”… remember, we talked about contributory negligence? LK’s actions, and how they contributed to his, have a far different meaning in the civil case than in the criminal case. What (general) you call victim-blaming or shaming in the criminal case becomes establishing contributory and comparative negligence in the civil case.

Just wanted to mention that, again.

I fully agree on the issue of contributory negligence.

My main point here is that while I agree that LK and RG contributed to creating the explosive situation, I disagree with most here that in creating the explosive situation (not the mental breakdown, but the situation), the actions of LK, RG (and JK?) were exactly 100% of cause.

Lots of posters have said flat out that 0.0% of the fault can be laid at the feet of anyone other than LK, RG, JK. I think without the acts (of commission and of omission) of RC, MB, MHG, the shooting would not have occurred.

Do you agree that to reach the NGRI verdict, the jury in the criminal trial did not need to determine the cause of the delusional behavior, simply that he was delusional?

I 100% agree that given the role of contributory negligence in the civil trial, LKs negligent behavior is relevant. But was she negligent in failing to realize he was delusional, when RC and MHG also seem to have failed to realize that? Was she negligent in failing to leave before noon on the 7th when her demand to vacate in 30 days was served on the sixth?

[DownYonder]

@ekat

State brings on Stache to rebut those two. The only way he could rebut was to say, Everyone was afraid, she wasn’t just terrorizing him. It was a key part of the State’s case, and in direct rebuttal to the defense witnesses. So Mr S went there. It probably wasn’t wise, but it was allowed by the rules of evidence, unlike some of the things Mr B tried to pull off. And the Stache followed him right through.

Hence Mr. B’s expression in the photo above.

[MHM]

That is a great picture. It looks like he’s thinking, “I can’t believe he’s saying that! This is fantastic!!“

[Angela_Freda]

@erinmeri

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.

Until faced with their SM posts in which they did it.
Then they claim its no big deal.

[Angela_Freda]

@CurrentlyHorseless

The John Does 1-20 were place holders for people LK might sue, so I doubt she’ll be specifying JK.

Way to miss the point.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@trubandloki

@CurrentlyHorseless

@FitzE

@CurrentlyHorseless

The answer was probably written by her lawyer.

Meh. You’re giving way too much credit here. It was just a clumsy lie to cover up a bald faced lie. Nothing new, SOP, same different day.

How is it a “lie” to say, in response to a court request that you document all the deletions and edits you’ve made on your thousands of SM posts,

1. This request is overly broad and too burdensome, and
2. I “generally” don’t edit or delete, except when I do edit or delete, that is, when I have posted in error.

We all know she edits and deletes. If you don’t want to produce all that stuff, what would have said (as LK or her lawyer)?

What does the part of the sentence that I underline mean to you @CurrentlyHorseless?

Same thing it does to you, but I take into account the modifying clause that that you haven’t underlined. Interpreted as a whole sentence, it means “For the most part, I don’t edit or delete, except when I do edit or delete”.

There was another instance in which one of her friends said something like, ‘I would not have believed he would make an attempt on your life even if I heard the audio recordings’.

That FB post was bandied about as ‘one of her friends said she heard the audio recordings.’

No, the friend didn’t say that. You can’t evaluate a part of a sentence, discarding the modifier clauses.

[ekat]

@CurrentlyHorseless

Do you agree that to reach the NGRI verdict, the jury in the criminal trial did not need to determine the cause of the delusional behavior, simply that he was delusional?

No, I don’t agree at all. If that were true, you don’t need a parade of experts and other witnesses testifying to what led to his state of mind, as Judge Taylor repeatedly reminded everyone watching.

When LK’s dad and Mr Tarshis negotiated an exit, with a barn and trainer ready for her, she refused because it “didn’t suit” her needs. Her negligence at that moment led to the notice she was served with. And then, she spent the next two days ramping up the “finish the bastard” plot, by taking even more actions against MB. That’s on her, 100%.

[MHM]

@Angela_Freda

Until faced with their SM posts in which they did it.
Then they claim its no big deal.

Yes, it was interesting how LK was all up in arms about posts here on the BB, and was threatening to sue KM and God and everybody.

Even though on the witness stand she dismissed it all as “just social media.”

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Angela_Freda

@CurrentlyHorseless

The John Does 1-20 were place holders for people LK might sue, so I doubt she’ll be specifying JK.

Way to miss the point.

Educate me. What was the point?

MB is countersuing LK. Can he “counter sue” JK if JK is not part of the original suit?

[trubandloki]

@CurrentlyHorseless

Lots of posters have said flat out that 0.0% of the fault can be laid at the feet of anyone other than LK, RG, JK. I think without the acts (of commission and of omission) of RC, MB, MHG, the shooting would not have occurred.

My thoughts:

So now we are spreading the fault around to even more people, which makes it even less MB’s fault. This is a good thing. Those others are not named in the lawsuit so go right ahead and blame it on them too.

[ekat]

@Angela_Freda

Way to miss the point.

To truly answer your question, only MB and his legal team would know why they didn’t include anyone else in their counterclaim back when they filed it. To do so now would take specific pleadings, a whole lot of showing by them on why the court should allow it, and a court order.

Side trivia note: John Does 1-10 and ABC corporations 1-3 were placeholders for any other owner/operator/agent of the farm should they be found, and John Does 11-20 were specific to any additional or alternate gun owners.

[Knights_Mom]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Angela_Freda

@CurrentlyHorseless

The John Does 1-20 were place holders for people LK might sue, so I doubt she’ll be specifying JK.

Way to miss the point.

Educate me. What was the point?

MB is countersuing LK. Can he “counter sue” JK if JK is not part of the original suit?

Defendants can be added by paying additional money in my state so maybe in NJ too.

[trubandloki]

@CurrentlyHorseless

Interpreted as a whole sentence, it means “For the most part, I don’t edit or delete, except when I do edit or delete”.

My thoughts:
Right, for the most part. Which is the part we are stating is a lie.
For the most part Bob edited posts, in mass, everywhere. Posted a rant and then deleted or edited the rant. When the except negates the beginning the rest of the sentence is a lie.

[ekat]

@Knights_Mom

Defendants can be added by paying additional money in my state so maybe in NJ too.

From what I read, appears only during the first 14 days after MB filed his counter, without a showing of need and how it won’t prejudice the case going forward to the court. And then everybody gets to object, and the court rules.

[Angela_Freda]

@ekat

John Does 11-20 were specific to any additional or alternate gun owners

Why do that if you’re certain what gun was used, and where it came from?
That’s interesting.

[Knights_Mom]

Good to know. Different than my state from what I know.

[trubandloki]

@Angela_Freda

@ekat

John Does 11-20 were specific to any additional or alternate gun owners

Why do that if you’re certain what gun was used, and where it came from?
That’s interesting.

I would guess it is because at the time they were not actually certain.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@trubandloki

@CurrentlyHorseless

Lots of posters have said flat out that 0.0% of the fault can be laid at the feet of anyone other than LK, RG, JK. I think without the acts (of commission and of omission) of RC, MB, MHG, the shooting would not have occurred.

My thoughts:

So now we are spreading the fault around to even more people, which makes it even less MB’s fault. This is a good thing. Those others are not named in the lawsuit so go right ahead and blame it on them too.

LK is suing MB because he shot her, injuring her. MBs lawyers are countersuing, saying LK, by her behavior contributed to the situation in which she was shot, so some % of the fault lies with LK. the damages awarded LK would be reduced by whatever % is determined to be her fault.

If LKs lawyers establish that xy% of the fault is attributable to people other than LK, then (1-xy)% is the contributory negligence of LK.

IM has said that the main target of the suit is the insurer for SGF on the grounds they leased the facility to someone with a history of psychiatric issues (documented in the criminal trial by the defense) and because SGF permitted illegal guns on the property.

So why is LK suing MB, and not just SGF? Probably because SGF has a counterclaim against MB, saying if they, SGF, are held liable, they’re think MB should pay.

But you don’t trust anything IM says, so you probably don’t believe SGF is the primary target of the suit.

IANAL, so I honestly don’t know whether a finding of insanity excuses the shooter from civil liability in the same way that it excuses the shooter from criminal culpability.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@ekat

@CurrentlyHorseless

Do you agree that to reach the NGRI verdict, the jury in the criminal trial did not need to determine the cause of the delusional behavior, simply that he was delusional?

No, I don’t agree at all. If that were true, you don’t need a parade of experts and other witnesses testifying to what led to his state of mind, as Judge Taylor repeatedly reminded everyone watching.

When LK’s dad and Mr Tarshis negotiated an exit, with a barn and trainer ready for her, she refused because it “didn’t suit” her needs. Her negligence at that moment led to the notice she was served with. And then, she spent the next two days ramping up the “finish the bastard” plot, by taking even more actions against MB. That’s on her, 100%.

She was served with a demand to vacate in 30
days on Aug 6, and she was negligent in not leaving by noon on the 7th? Even though she was literally on the phone with her tenancy lawyer while she was shot?

You call that negligence?

[SillyHorse]

@DownYonder

Mr. B also seemed to enjoy listening to Dr. Stache “opening doors.”

His expression during that testimony was priceless!

Looking at this photo, I’m reminded of how early on in the trial quite a few readers here were worried that Mr. B wasn’t up to the challenge of defending MB. I admit I was a little worried, too. Boy, were we wrong. Mr. B is a god.