Barisone Verdict Is In: Not Guilty By Reason of Insanity

[MHM]

@rothmpp

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

It was an awfully interesting way for David to react, I thought

I thought it was either damage control or he truly feels lied to and used by that family.

Or both.

[rothmpp]

Yes. I had a much different view of him from the interview than from his time testifying.

[ekat]

Even his first tv interview, I was still super annoyed with him. But this one was pretty much perfect for the position he was in (except for saying MB walked to the house that day).

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

According to IM, SGF has already stated in writing that RG is owed money for renovations. I’m betting SGF, or their insurance company, would love to get the civil suit settled.

Why do you believe IM has actual information about this?

Because I’ve seen no contradictions with verifiable facts with anything else he has stated.

Also, it would extremely sensible and rational for SGF to offer to settle amicably with RG if that would make LK more likely to accept a settlement and let them out of the suit.

If MB had approached RG showing any degree of respect and attempted to settle the dispute clearly caused by the lack of written contracts, just discussing the disagreement in good faith and trying to agree to a payment, perhaps LK might have moved her horses and the whole tragedy could have been avoided.

Instead, MB calls them squatters and scumbags on the 911 calls. RG can’t sue for payment because he’s unlicensed and doesn’t have a contract. He doesn’t like being stiffed, and gets back at MB by calling the building department. Each party insisting on “the win” resulted in a massive loss for both.

What’s the opposite, more rational approach? Early on, offer RG a reasonable amount for the renovations in dispute.

If you were a lawyer for SGF, or for their insurance company, trying to minimize the financial damage of the civil suit, would you call RG a squatter and scumbag druggie, or offer him $8,000 for renovations he provided in a situation in which your leasee screwed up by not having a contract (or permits)?

I think it is completely rational for SGF to offer RG payment for the disputed work, and therefore I believe IM when he stated that they did.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@ekat

Oh I know. The adjuster was very clear on that. So it seems fruitless to sue MB, SGF, or anyone for any of that.

Just because you have insurance, doesn’t mean they have to pay a claim. Just because someone is suing MB, doesn’t mean his insurance company has to believe he is liable for anything and start writing checks. Most insurance companies don’t like to part with their money and they’ll find a million and one reasons to not pay a claim.

The liability insurer has to pay the claim, or defend against the law suit, or settle.

[ekat]

Yes. And I have good friends who make a lot of money defending lawsuits for an insurance company. They’d rather pay attorneys than claims.

[MHM]

@ekat

Even his first tv interview, I was still super annoyed with him. But this one was pretty much perfect for the position he was in (except for saying MB walked to the house that day).

Maybe he’s been reading the YouTube comments AND reviewing the game day tapes.

[Scribbler]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

According to IM, SGF has already stated in writing that RG is owed money for renovations. I’m betting SGF, or their insurance company, would love to get the civil suit settled.

Why do you believe IM has actual information about this?

Because I’ve seen no contradictions with verifiable facts with anything else he has stated.

Also, it would extremely sensible and rational for SGF to offer to settle amicably with RG if that would make LK more likely to accept a settlement and let them out of the suit.

If MB had approached RG showing any degree of respect and attempted to settle the dispute clearly caused by the lack of written contracts, just discussing the disagreement in good faith and trying to agree to a payment, perhaps LK might have moved her horses and the whole tragedy could have been avoided.

Instead, MB calls them squatters and scumbags on the 911 calls. RG can’t sue for payment because he’s unlicensed and doesn’t have a contract. He doesn’t like being stiffed, and gets back at MB by calling the building department. Each party insisting on “the win” resulted in a massive loss for both.

What’s the opposite, more rational approach? Early on, offer RG a reasonable amount for the renovations in dispute.

If you were a lawyer for SGF, or for their insurance company, trying to minimize the financial damage of the civil suit, would you call RG a squatter and scumbag druggie, or offer him $8,000 for renovations he provided in a situation in which your leasee screwed up by not having a contract (or permits)?

I think it is completely rational for SGF to offer RG payment for the disputed work, and therefore I believe IM when he stated that they did.

RG stated under oath that he only did enough work to offset the horse board. Other testimony supported that. Whatever people believed 2 years ago, the idea that RG is owed substantial sums for work done in Spring and summer 2019 has likely been exploded. Civil suits can and often are amended as new facts come to light. Out of everything this particular claim is likely to fade out.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@ekat

IM also said this, just last night: they “…could even see a scenario where LK would train with him again”.

I haven’t been around here that long but I’m not sure IM is a reliable narrator.

Yes, that was part of the general point that, contrary to the assumptions of most posters here, LK would not be better off if he had been sentenced to 30 years in prison.

You don’t believe him because you assume LK suffers from zero sum thinking (MB being worse off makes me better off), but such thinking is flawed.

You suffer from zero sum thinking. Maybe LK doesn’t.

[ekat]

I don’t believe him because that statement isn’t grounded in reality, not because I suffer from anything.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@ekat

Yes. And I have good friends who make a lot of money defending lawsuits for an insurance company. They’d rather pay attorneys than claims.

I thought the majority of civil cases were settled rather than litigated, but I could be wrong.

[MHM]

@CurrentlyHorseless

You suffer from zero sum thinking. Maybe LK doesn’t.

Yes, because all her actions have shown a tremendous amount of rational behavior and ability to compromise.

(^ Sarcasm.)

[Scribbler]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Scribbler

As a Canadian my impression of American civil lawsuits is that the evidence can extend very widely, nothing is off the table. Juries will vote on emotion. Lawsuits can be quite crazy and full of narcissistic behavior and accusations. . Also very often they end up with an undisclosed negotiated settlement to avoid publicity.

Launching a full civil suit is a huge undertaking. Threatening to do so is however almost cost free and is part of the arsenal of every grifter.

I made the acquaintance once of a horse owner who later turned ought to be a nightmare. She was bright enough to launch and file her own suits for things like copyright infringement etc and crazy enough to weaponize it. She didn’t win but she made her victims spend money they didn’t have on legal advice.

I heard about this second hand years later. I’d met her looking for a lease years previous, got the craycray vibes from her, and walked away.

Anyhow in the OJ Simpson case there was widespread public sentiment he was guilty and jurors on the civil trial knew that. Things are different for LK here.

The bolded; LK is not threatening a civil suit. It was filed in the fall of 2019.

I am aware that LK filed a suit in 2019. I am of course curious to see if it is followed up on. That will be another 3 ring circus for sure.

My comments about grifters were more general. I’d however argue that for those with slightly deeper pockets, filing a suit can in many situations be a negotiating or strategical move that does not proceed to actual trial.

Things no doubt appear very different today than in 2019.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Scribbler

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

According to IM, SGF has already stated in writing that RG is owed money for renovations. I’m betting SGF, or their insurance company, would love to get the civil suit settled.

Why do you believe IM has actual information about this?

Because I’ve seen no contradictions with verifiable facts with anything else he has stated.

Also, it would extremely sensible and rational for SGF to offer to settle amicably with RG if that would make LK more likely to accept a settlement and let them out of the suit.

If MB had approached RG showing any degree of respect and attempted to settle the dispute clearly caused by the lack of written contracts, just discussing the disagreement in good faith and trying to agree to a payment, perhaps LK might have moved her horses and the whole tragedy could have been avoided.

Instead, MB calls them squatters and scumbags on the 911 calls. RG can’t sue for payment because he’s unlicensed and doesn’t have a contract. He doesn’t like being stiffed, and gets back at MB by calling the building department. Each party insisting on “the win” resulted in a massive loss for both.

What’s the opposite, more rational approach? Early on, offer RG a reasonable amount for the renovations in dispute.

If you were a lawyer for SGF, or for their insurance company, trying to minimize the financial damage of the civil suit, would you call RG a squatter and scumbag druggie, or offer him $8,000 for renovations he provided in a situation in which your leasee screwed up by not having a contract (or permits)?

I think it is completely rational for SGF to offer RG payment for the disputed work, and therefore I believe IM when he stated that they did.

RG stated under oath that he only did enough work to offset the horse board. Other testimony supported that. Whatever people believed 2 years ago, the idea that RG is owed substantial sums for work done in Spring and summer 2019 has likely been exploded. Civil suits can and often are amended as new facts come to light. Out of everything this particular claim is likely to fade out.

You didn’t get my point. From the pure financial interest of SGF, offering RG $8,000 (to make up a number), along with the respect of taking his claim seriously, could have a huge financial return in getting SGF dropped as a respondent in LKs suit against them as owner of the property on which she was shot.

[Scribbler]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@ekat

Yes. And I have good friends who make a lot of money defending lawsuits for an insurance company. They’d rather pay attorneys than claims.

I thought the majority of civil cases were settled rather than litigated, but I could be wrong.

But obviously you need lawyers to settle. Every step of the way requires lawyers.

[ekat]

I really have to ask. What respect is RG owed? Respect is a two-way street. How did he earn any?

[SillyHorse]

@ekat

IM also said this, just last night: they “…could even see a scenario where LK would train with him again”.

I haven’t been around here that long but I’m not sure IM is a reliable narrator.

Can you in any way imagine Michael Barisone choosing to have anything to do with LK ever again? C’mon, IM, be serious.

[MHM]

@ekat

I really have to ask. What respect is RG owed? Respect is a two-way street. How did he earn any?

He did all that laundry!

[ekat]

Insurance companies don’t just write checks and settle stuff. They investigate the heck out of any claim to determine if their insured actually had any liability under their policy and they fight like cats and dogs to find a way out of parting with their money.

[ekat]

This is true.