Barisone Verdict Is In: Not Guilty By Reason of Insanity

[erinmeri]

@CurrentlyHorseless

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

And yet, you defend her and question not her, but others? Odd.

[Sdel]

@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.

No it’s not. The SM platform keeps a record. It’s all just a subpoena away.

[RND]

@eggbutt

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.

So, just like I said, the snowflakes mean “let it go”. Thanks for confirming that.

[eggbutt]

@RND

So, just like I said, the snowflakes mean

Thank you for totally proving the point.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@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…

Guilty as charged; I do by implication often suggest that documentation would be pertinent. That’s quite different to “demanding” posts be produced, though.

You’re also right that I remain skeptical unless proof is provided. Doesn’t everybody?

[ekat]

@CurrentlyHorseless

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.

Every civil lawyer objects to almost every question on an interrogatory, just as a matter for the record in the case. But the party still has to answer it.

[FitzE]

@CurrentlyHorseless

I think the lawyers probably coached her on use of “I do not recall”.

This is one thing upon which we do agree. She took very readily to the various ways to qualify the veracity of a statement or deny knowledge without a clear denial. Also why she started writing ‘upon information and belief’ even in SM posts. Though, for the latter, I think it was also to give herself a gloss of legal knowledge.

What lawyers don’t do is craft things as ham fisted as ‘I don’t [x] except for when I [x].’ Most lawyers are a whole lot better than that, unless we are making a judgement about the quality of legal advice one might be receiving.

[ekat]

@CurrentlyHorseless

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.

That is a much better way to say it.

[erinmeri]

@RND

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?

It means, nice try to try and change your intent and to try and imply that I should be ashamed of what I wrote. It was in response to this:

@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.

But, you like to come out fists swinging. What was the title of your unsolicited message to me? “Jesus Christ what is wrong with you!” Pot meet kettle.

[Danvers]

I am learning so much legal stuff here - thank you @ekat -

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@erinmeri

@CurrentlyHorseless

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

And yet, you defend her and question not her, but others? Odd.

I don’t defend the nasty, obnoxious stuff she has done! I just disagree with the posters on here who say the untenuous, explosive situation that escalated during the summer of 2019 was 100% her fault.

Others, including MB, MHG and RC made plenty mistakes of omission and commission.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@FitzE

@CurrentlyHorseless

I think the lawyers probably coached her on use of “I do not recall”.

This is one thing upon which we do agree. She took very readily to the various ways to qualify the veracity of a statement or deny knowledge without a clear denial. Also why she started writing ‘upon information and belief’ even in SM posts. Though, for the latter, I think it was also to give herself a gloss of legal knowledge.

What lawyers don’t do is craft things as ham fisted as ‘I don’t [x] except for when I [x].’ Most lawyers are a whole lot better than that, unless we are making a judgement about the quality of legal advice one might be receiving.

Hamfisted is one thing; making you exposed to a perjury charge is quite another.

[erinmeri]

@CurrentlyHorseless

I don’t defend the nasty, obnoxious stuff she has done! I just disagree with the posters on her who say the untenuous, explosive situation that escalated during the summer of 2019 was 100% her fault.

Others, including MB, MHG and RC made plenty mistakes of omission and commission.

And yet - nobody here is saying it’s 100% her fault. They are saying that the evidence is overwhelming that she drove a man to his breaking point - on purpose and with glee - and that led to her being shot. Is she 75% culpable? 80%? Who cares. She did it on purpose and with glee and did it with unrelenting abandon.

[RND]

@erinmeri

It means, nice try to try and change your intent and to try and imply that I should be ashamed of what I wrote. It was in response to this:

@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.

But, you like to come out fists swinging. What was the title of your unsolicited message to me? “Jesus Christ what is wrong with you!” Pot meet kettle.

You seem a bit paranoid regarding my opinion of you and I’m not sure why. I didn’t change my intent; you just didn’t like my clarification. I can’t do anything about that - it’s your choice to be paranoid or to believe me. You have made your choice and I can’t really care about that.

The only fists that are swinging right now are on your part. You presented questions to me and I answered them; if you choose to get all hot and bothered by my answers, that’s on you, not me.

[eggbutt]

@CurrentlyHorseless

You’re also right that I remain skeptical unless proof is provided. Doesn’t everybody?

Um, no. Most people have curiosity to find information on their own. I’m guessing you were not on a debate team in college.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@erinmeri

@CurrentlyHorseless

I don’t defend the nasty, obnoxious stuff she has done! I just disagree with the posters on her who say the untenuous, explosive situation that escalated during the summer of 2019 was 100% her fault.

Others, including MB, MHG and RC made plenty mistakes of omission and commission.

And yet - nobody here is saying it’s 100% her fault. They are saying that the evidence is overwhelming that she drove a man to his breaking point - on purpose and with glee - and that led to her being shot. Is she 75% culpable? 80%? Who cares. She did it on purpose and with glee and did it with unrelenting abandon.

People on here have said, explicitly, that it is exactly 100% her fault.

If you don’t believe me, fine. I’m not looking it up.

[eggbutt]

@erinmeri

And yet - nobody here is saying it’s 100% her fault.

I do.

[erinmeri]

@eggbutt

do

Well you and I have a history of disagreeing from time to time! And that’s a-ok by me!

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@erinmeri

@RND

The only fists that are swinging right now are on your part. You presented questions to me and I answered them; if you choose to get all hot and bothered by my answers, that’s on you, not me.

What makes me hot and bothered, in your words, was your nasty PM that was unsolicited and out of line. But you do you!

Then what problem do you have with me? I’ve sent you no PMs.

[erinmeri]

@CurrentlyHorseless

People on here have said, explicitly, that it is exactly 100% her fault.

If you don’t believe me, fine. I’m not looking it up.

Then stop asking others for receipts. If your memory is sufficient, then so is that of others. Sheesh!