Barisone Verdict Is In: Not Guilty By Reason of Insanity

[ekat]

@erinmeri

Not a lawyer - but at best they might intervene if someone incriminates themselves, no? (As on, I wouldn’t say that?)

Correct. They may step in and advise them of the consequences of a statement. They also might ask them if they are sure that’s their answer. But they wouldn’t craft the answer, nor would they direct a client to lie, or knowingly elicit a lie. (is: suborn perjury)

[RND]

@erinmeri

Bolding mine. Honest question, since you and I have occasionally seen eye to eye…

1. what is she to you if you “see her for what she is”?
2. how is posting about or ruminating about her behavior either “not deserved” or “hideous”?
3. how is ruminating on facts of the court “trashing her here [sic]”?

1. To be clear, I don’t know LK or anyone close or even not close to her personally. My opinions about her are based solely on what I have read here since MB shot her in August 2019. LK seems to be a seriously flawed human being who doesn’t seem to be interested in getting along with most people; instead, she seems to get a lot of satisfaction out of making people miserable. And she is very successful at that; look at how much attention all of you give her here 24 hours a day, seven days a week because you hate her, even though most of you don’t even know her.

2. If you don’t understand how horrific you all are for spending all day, every day here making up scenarios to fill in the blanks that you don’t know because the facts haven’t been made public, I don’t think there is anything I can do to help you understand. The hate that is generated by people who don’t even know LK is hugely disturbing. One of you constantly tells the people who aren’t in love with MB and his lawyer to “let it go” using snowflakes - that’s just so incredibly messed up. She doesn’t even recognize that she’s the one who needs to let it go and get a life.

3. The criminal court case is over - the jury gave their verdict and I have stated my opinion that I respect their decision. I don’t think I have commented on this since the verdict happened so I’m not sure why you are bringing that up here.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@FitzE

@CurrentlyHorseless

There is a screen shot of it back in a previous thread. I don’t take screenshots.

No worries; please provide the thread and post number since this post is the basis upon which your latest campaign is built. You always ask everyone else for posts; common courtesy dictates you would not demand of others what you yourself are not willing to provide.

I don’t “always ask everyone else” for post documentation, because generally I don’t expect to get it.

Sdel often provides screenshots of posts, even if not asked, and I express appreciation when she does.

[erinmeri]

@CurrentlyHorseless

I don’t “always ask everyone else” for post documentation, because generally I don’t expect to get it.

Sdel often provides screenshots of posts, even if not asked, and I express appreciation when she does.

And yet, you refuse to believe posts exist unless you are presented with them. That is the epitome of laziness and entitlement. Do your own homework.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@erinmeri

@CurrentlyHorseless

I’ve already said, I think the statement was written by her lawyer. It was not in response to a question “Do you edit or delete much on DM?”

It was a response to a demand she provide documentation of all her deletes and edits to posts on SM!

The response was something like:

Objection that the request is overly broad and burdensome. I generally don’t edit or delete much on SM, except in cases of duplicate posts or posts made in error.

I’m not an English professor, or a lawyer, but my interpretation is: ‘Well, I don’t edit or delete stuff, except when I do.’ The words are true because they contain a loophole big enough to drive a semi tractor through.

Disingenuous? Yes.
A non answer? Yes.
Perjury? IANAL, but I’m guessing no.

I’m not “purposely attempting to be slippery”. If you think my opinion is grossly stupid, that’s fine. But lay off pretending you know that I’m “attempting to be slippery”.

Do you imagine her lawyer would have recommended she commit perjury rather than admit to (gasp) editing SM posts?

If you’re not attempting to be slippery or obtuse, then yes, I do question your IQ. Why are you defending the indefensible? It is… odd. The “English Professor” reference was to how you behave and how you attempt to defend your assertions. Not a reference to what I believe your profession to be. English professors don’t typically craft word salad when articulating.

I’m not attempting to be slippery or obtuse.

I honestly think the answer to the question under oath about edits and deletes was written by a lawyer to be a non answer or a disingenuous answer, if you prefer, that would not expose her to a perjury charge.

Do you honestly think a lawyer would advise her to say something that exposed her to a charge of perjury just to avoid saying “Yes, I edit and delete stuff on SM”?

[eggbutt]

[erinmeri]

@RND

• To be clear, I don’t know LK or anyone close or even not close to her personally. My opinions about her are based solely on what I have read here since MB shot her in August 2019. LK seems to be a seriously flawed human being who doesn’t seem to be interested in getting along with most people; instead, she seems to get a lot of satisfaction out of making people miserable. And she is very successful at that; look at how much attention all of you give her here 24 hours a day, seven days a week because you hate her, even though most of you don’t even know her.
• If you don’t understand how horrific you all are for spending all day, every day here making up scenarios to fill in the blanks that you don’t know because the facts haven’t been made public, I don’t think there is anything I can do to help you understand. The hate that is generated by people who don’t even know LK is hugely disturbing. One of you constantly tells the people who aren’t in love with MB and his lawyer to “let it go” using snowflakes - that’s just so incredibly messed up. She doesn’t even recognize that she’s the one who needs to let it go and get a life.
• The criminal court case is over - the jury gave their verdict and I have stated my opinion that I respect their decision. I don’t think I have commented on this since the verdict happened so I’m not sure why you are bringing that up here.

LOL, I don’t hate Lauren Kanarek anymore than I hate you. I don’t know her. I can, at the same time, dissect her behavior and her own words and discuss the events testified to in court. Doesn’t make me a jerk. It makes me just the same as you(since you claim no affiliation): someone whose attention was brought to this case and who formed opinions. Those opinions, based on her own behavior here, as well as court testimony and evidence, aren’t biased inasmuch as I try to limit my own implicit bias. Pretty sure my behavior isn’t “horrific”. But, nice try!

Edited: “my” not “mu”.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@ekat

@CurrentlyHorseless

I agree LK is responsible for the answer. I assumed she had a right to legal counsel and the lawyer would ghost write for the client.

An ethical lawyer might read her answer, ask her if she is sure, maybe advise to rethink it, but would NEVER ghost write an interrogatory answer for their client as that would be, well, perjury.

From the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 33:

The interrogatories must be answered:

(A) by the party to whom they are directed…

And

Each interrogatory must, to the extent it is not objected to, be answered separately and fully in writing under oath.

And:

The person who makes the answers must sign them, and the attorney who objects must sign any objections.

OK. Thanks. BTW, the demand that she provide documentation of all her edits and deletes on SM was objected to, on the grounds of being overly broad and overly burdensome.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@ekat

@erinmeri

Not a lawyer - but at best they might intervene if someone incriminates themselves, no? (As on, I wouldn’t say that?)

Correct. They may step in and advise them of the consequences of a statement. They also might ask them if they are sure that’s their answer. But they wouldn’t craft the answer, nor would they direct a client to lie, or knowingly elicit a lie. (is: suborn perjury)

Let me rephrase: she would have had a lawyer review her answer who should have alerted her if the lawyer thought it opened her to a charge of perjury.

[Danvers]

I was taken when Mr. B. started picking at his nails during certain testimonies… was puzzled… thought, what is that all about… that is odd. and then when he started biting at an non existing hang nail… seeing this picture makes me think he was holding back laughing or a snide remark - pretending to bite a hang nail hides his mirth -

[MHM]

@RND

One of you constantly tells the people who aren’t in love with MB and his lawyer to “let it go” using snowflakes

Clearly you still fail to grasp the significance of the snowflakes.

But that’s fine. You do you.

[erinmeri]

@CurrentlyHorseless

OK. Thanks. BTW, the demand that she provide documentation of all her edits and deletes on SM was objected to, on the grounds of being overly broad and overly burdensome.

Given the frequency she edited and/or deleted posts here, and given the 19,000 posts to go into - who WOULDN’T find that broad and burdensome? It’s her literal MO

[Sdel]

@CurrentlyHorseless

OK. Thanks. BTW, the demand that she provide documentation of all her edits and deletes on SM was objected to, on the grounds of being overly broad and overly burdensome.

It doesn’t mean anything. The objection is standard and every lawyer just throws it in to preserve a record. It does not mean that it will not be produced or wasn’t produced.

If she did not provide the copies the defense will get around to getting a subpoena and having FB or whatever provide it directly.

[RND]

@erinmeri

LOL, I don’t hate Lauren Kanarek anymore than I hate you. I don’t know her. I can, at the same time, dissect her behavior and her own words and discuss the events testified to in court. Doesn’t make me a jerk. It makes me just the same as you(since you claim no affiliation): someone whose attention was brought to this case and who formed opinions. Those opinions, based on her own behavior here, as well as court testimony and evidence, aren’t biased inasmuch as I try to limit my own implicit bias. Pretty sure my behavior isn’t “horrific”. But, nice try!

Edited: “my” not “mu”.

I did not mean to call out anyone specifically when I said that some here are behaving horrifically; I used the term “you” the first time because I was addressing your post, and my subsequent "you"s were meant generically. If you see yourself in my words and feel the need to defend yourself, that’s on you.

[erinmeri]

@RND

I did not mean to call out anyone specifically when I said that some here are behaving horrifically; I used the term “you” the first time because I was addressing your post, and my subsequent "you"s were meant generically. If you see yourself in my words and feel the need to defend yourself, that’s on you.

Lol. Nice try.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@erinmeri

@CurrentlyHorseless

I don’t “always ask everyone else” for post documentation, because generally I don’t expect to get it.

Sdel often provides screenshots of posts, even if not asked, and I express appreciation when she does.

And yet, you refuse to believe posts exist unless you are presented with them. That is the epitome of laziness and entitlement. Do your own homework.

No. I never said “no such post exists”. That doesn’t even make sense. I said of the one particular post that I was referring to, the post had been misinterpreted.

Do you think I would dream of instructing FitzE to “document” that I “always ask everyone else” for post documentation? No, I wouldn’t.

[erinmeri]

@CurrentlyHorseless

No. I never said “no such post exists”. That doesn’t even make sense. I said of the one particular post that I was referring to, the post had been misinterpreted.

Do you think I would dream of instructing FitzE to “document” that I “always ask everyone else” for post documentation? No, I wouldn’t.

And yet ypu do - whether directly or by implication. You in fact DO demand proof and also refuse to believe anything without it…

[eggbutt]

@RND

One of you constantly tells the people who aren’t in love with MB and his lawyer to “let it go” using snowflakes - that’s just so incredibly messed up. She doesn’t even recognize that she’s the one who needs to let it go and get a life.

Actually, the let it go and snow flake reference isn’t for anyone to let any point of view go…it is a reminder to not engage the few posters who love to snag on to a thought to provoke and regardless what is presented to them as fact, they will continue with their lost cause. So, let it go and don’t respond/engage to hopefully stop the decent down the rabbit hole. There comes a time when conversing with someone and you recognize the person is saying the same thing over and over and over again. That’s when it is time to let it go and move on.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@erinmeri

@CurrentlyHorseless

OK. Thanks. BTW, the demand that she provide documentation of all her edits and deletes on SM was objected to, on the grounds of being overly broad and overly burdensome.

Given the frequency she edited and/or deleted posts here, and given the 19,000 posts to go into - who WOULDN’T find that broad and burdensome? It’s her literal MO

Finally, we agree. It would be virtually impossible to document all the edits and deletes.

[RND]

@erinmeri

Lol. Nice try.

What does this even mean? Do you have no intelligent response to me so this is what you come up with? Wouldn’t it be smarter to just ignore my post if you can’t come up with something relevant to say?