Barisone Verdict Is In: Not Guilty By Reason of Insanity

[EmilyM]

@eggbutt

Ignore/Mute works amazingly well. Once a poster shows you who they really are, believe them! Or in other words, if they post once and don’t get the reaction they want and post the same post again, it’s time to ignore.

[edit]

I’ve learned that ignore fails when the ignored poster quotes someone and another poster then quotes the preceding post including the original that ignoree quotes. basically the protection fails once we get into a long quote train

[hut-ho78]

@Omgitsme

My guess is if the friend actually heard any of the “bombshell” recordings, she was interpreting them through the LK lens.
Like if someone said “let’s get rid of her” in the context of removing her from the farm, she would hear “let’s kill her” and ignore the context.

Once she was shot twice, those comments could certainly seem to take on a more sinister meaning even if there was not meant to be.

[MHM]

@EmilyM

@eggbutt

Ignore/Mute works amazingly well. Once a poster shows you who they really are, believe them! Or in other words, if they post once and don’t get the reaction they want and post the same post again, it’s time to ignore.

[edit]

I’ve learned that ignore fails when the ignored poster quotes someone and another poster then quotes the preceding post including the original that ignoree quotes. basically the protection fails once we get into a long quote train

The best ignore feature is the one that involves self control rather than a BB setting. But it can be very hard to apply it all the time, especially when someone is being exceptionally ridiculous.

[RHdobes563]

@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.

I may just have to make Mr. Bilinkas above my desktop picture!

RE: The gun.

I could make a post saying I own two saddles popular in the 70’s and 80’s, a Passier and a Stubben. Later, I might check and find that the Passier is actually a Crosby. I go back and change “Passier” to Crosby. Being of the “LK persuasion”, I might say, “I DON’T own a Passier—find the post where it says that!” Or, I might delete the post totally and say, “FIND a post where I say I own a Passier!”

After two and a half years of LK saying one thing and then rewriting it, the “I never lie”, etc., I can easily believe she did something like that above with the “models” of her guns. She might NOT have ever owned a Rutger, but she MIGHT have written (at least once) that she DID.

[trubandloki]

My general thought is that a person who threatens everyone and anyone who says something they do not like means it when they post something on social media that can appear to be threatening.

[hut-ho78]

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

@trubandloki

@CurrentlyHorseless

KM never backs down, even if saying “It’s possible I misremembered the make of gun in a FB post” would avoid threats of s libel suit.

So you are asking @Knights_Mom to lie on the forum? Don’t we have enough people doing that already?

Except that Facebook post was screen shot and posted here numerous times and it was two Walthers not a Ruger or a Luger. So people were mistaken or lying about what they saw on Facebook. They might be believable if they said LK posted twice, once about Walthers and once about Rugers of Lugers but no, just a “misrememberance” of a Ruger.

So who is lying here? Could it possibly be gasp the Ruger claims? I think CH is very generous to say misremember. That makes her quite generous in assigning motives for these threads. LOL!

That was a different post. Do note the screenshots I posted above of others who saw it too. Also I have yet more screenshots attesting to what I saw.

But nice try. Almost.

Ok not really, but I didn’t want to crush you.

Credibility regarding Ruger/Lugers is long gone, especially yours.

You are very knowledgeable in other areas though.

[trubandloki]

@Knights_Mom, I think you are very credible.

[MHM]

@trubandloki

My general thought is that a person who threatens everyone and anyone who says something they do not like means it when they post something on social media that can appear to be threatening.

That’s true.

But someone who is generally stirring up trouble, refusing to get off the property, sneaking around in the dark in a ninja outfit, ignoring rules about barn hours, recording private conversations and using them to needle people, filing complaints with the fire and building inspectors, and making bogus safe sport reports could certainly be considered a threat without even factoring in anything on social media.

Especially after a background check has turned up an extremely extensive arrest record in multiple states.

[Jenerationx]

I somehow got 2K posts behind. I give up on catching up at this point.

Has MB been transferred yet? Any news on when the civil case might start up?

[trubandloki]

@Jenerationx

I somehow got 2K posts behind. I give up on catching up at this point.

Has MB been transferred yet? Any news on when the civil case might start up?

MB has not been transferred yet.

The civil case has been kicked back in gear. Not much action yet. Our amazing legal minds say these types of cases take years.
There are some deadlines that are current now with the civil case but I do not remember what they are. Hopefully someone else can tell you those.

[MHM]

@Jenerationx

Has MB been transferred yet? Any news on when the civil case might start up?

MB had not been transferred as of yesterday, Monday. I have not seen an update about it today.

I believe the depositions are scheduled to start in August, and it sounds like they might take quite some time.

[hut-ho78]

@trubandloki

@hut-ho78

@trubandloki

@CurrentlyHorseless

KM never backs down, even if saying “It’s possible I misremembered the make of gun in a FB post” would avoid threats of s libel suit.

So you are asking @Knights_Mom to lie on the forum? Don’t we have enough people doing that already?

Except that Facebook post was screen shot and posted here numerous times and it was two Walthers not a Ruger or a Luger. So people were mistaken or lying about what they saw on Facebook. They might be believable if they said LK posted twice, once about Walthers and once about Rugers of Lugers but no, just a “misrememberance” of a Ruger.

So who is lying here? Could it possibly be gasp the Ruger claims? I think CH is very generous to say misremember. That makes her quite generous in assigning motives for these threads. LOL!

Are you trying to say that there is a better chance that a bunch of people are making up having seen the post than LK posting something and then deleting or editing it?

Yes because it keeps happening again and again.

[trubandloki]

LK deleting, editing, and lying did happen again and again and again.

[MHM]

@hut-ho78

Yes because it keeps happening again and again.

Yes, LK keeps editing and deleting posts again and again, that is certainly true.

[MHM]

Jinx!

[Jenerationx]

Yes… she went in and edited posts here even months or a year and a half later, typically leaving a “why isn’t this thread closed?” outraged comments at the time… even though it was her own post that bumped a long dormant topic back up.

[MHM]

@Jenerationx

Yes… she went in and edited posts here even months or a year and a half later, typically leaving a “why isn’t this thread closed?” outraged comments at the time… even though it was her own post that bumped a long dormant topic back up.

Yes, let’s not forget that the poor moderators here even had to come up with a new method of locking and archiving old threads to stop that from happening all the time.

[trubandloki]

It is an interesting theory that stories that keep coming up again and again with no evidence might not be true. Gosh, the list of those between Hut and CH is pretty long.

[MHM]

Yes. Definitely some common themes as well.

[FitzE]

CH has been pushing this story line for some time now:

@CurrentlyHorseless

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.

So, to be clear, CH is explicitly saying, the BFF I luuuuuurve you bestie did not say she had heard the recordings. CH is also explicitly saying that posters here made that up and it’s not true.

Then @Omgitsme posts this.

@Omgitsme

You were saying?

Where’s our grammarian now to parse this sentence and ‘do’ English for us the way lawyers and courts ‘do’ English?

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Omgitsme

Said friend admitted in a post she had heard the tapes. No, I don’t have a screenshot.

No, she didn’t. Not if you (gasp) read the whole sentence.

Oh, and ‘admit she misremembered’ when she stated, ‘No, the friend didn’t say that.’?