I wondering if the rest of the family will end up pleading guilty to avoid the death penalty.
I got the impression that taking the death penalty off the table for the whole clan was part of the guyâs plea deal.
1 Like
I wasnâtâŠ.it was the lead in to the idea that LK might not have been the direct subject of an eviction because under NJ law that is tough and usually a long drawn out for tenants. And the part about the lease is from the civil case not the article.
Horses in training/boarding however are probably not covered under NJ tenant laws.
1 Like
I believe there are still quite a few twists and turns coming up in the Barisone case that will surprise many!
When they make a lifetime mini movie about this tragedy, who will play the leads?
2 Likes
I thought it removed the death penalty against just him but I could be wrong. Very weird to participate in a murder with your family and later have to possibly face them in court to testify against them. I hope he is kept safe for their trials. There was speculation that the sheriffâs arrest could interfere with prosecuting their cases but I think with the one guyâs testimony it will eliminate that possibility.
Would you guess on a trial happening or a plea deal for the Barisone case?
The article that @eggbutt posted above (the second one, after I said I could not read the NY Times article) it says that his agreement included taking the death penalty off the table for him and his whole family.
2 Likes
Thanks! I will check it out!
How do you know this? Thatâs her story. MBâs side of the story has never been published. Thatâs what trials are for.
30 Likes
Iâm GUESSING he will demand a jury trial. Nothing more than a WAG on my part.
4 Likes
I donât know for certain but the fact that nobody else was charged with assault is a large clue.
I admit, Iâve been conceiving of it this way, too. I figure the MB side will mount their best defence, but I never considered it was anything other than he shot them and now they have to see what level of crime heâll be convicted of after taking into account all the evidence.
4 Likes
If a defendant is going to argue that an incident was clear-cut self-defense, their attorney will almost always present that argument in unambiguous terms as soon as possible. If they can convince the prosecutor that itâs self-defense, best case scenario is that the charges are dropped altogether. But even if they canât persuade the prosecutor, in most states (not sure about NJ), if they can convince the judge that they have a strong case for self-defense, they have a better chance of getting their client released pending trial.
At the bail hearing, Barisoneâs lawyer didnât do that. He argued that Barisone was afraid of Kanarek and Kanarekâs behavior "may have culminated in a situation that was completely out of hand,â
While the defense attorney may at some later date start arguing self defense, so far he appears to be arguing mitigating circumstances. Self defense and mitigating circumstances are very different things. A successful self-defense argument would likely have a much better result, so the fact that they apparently have not yet claimed self-defense indicates that they probably wonât.
Did the defense attorney argue self-defense in court or in court documents that I missed?
5 Likes
My memory isnât 100% but I think I remember statements about a dog biting and ??someone lunging at him??? I read it a long time ago. But there were references that seemed to lean toward a narrative of aggressive behavior on everyoneâs part.
7 Likes
Wasnât the original lawyer at the bail hearing pretty underwhelming? And replaced by a different lawyer in fairly short order?
7 Likes
Great info, thank you. My impression was also that they were not going for a self-defence argument, but a mitigating circumstances angle to reduce the charges/penalties as much as possible. But, I will say again, I am not savvy about US criminal law. Your summary was very helpful!
2 Likes
Underwhelming is an under statement.
5 Likes
Nj iirc, doesnât do bail or bondâŠat all.
But correct me if Iâm confusing it conflating things.
2 Likes
Iâm not familiar with NJ law so I had to look it up.
NJ has âessentially eliminatedâ cash bail but they do release most defendants pending trial. It looks like they do not release defendants who are possibly facing life sentences and Barisone was charged with two first degree attempted murders so no, it looks like he probably wouldnât have been released in any case.
Still, if he was going to argue that he was acting in self-defense, his lawyer should have presented that defense at the hearing. So it is likely that Barisone is not arguing about the facts laid out by the prosecutor as to what happened, but is instead trying to claim mitigating circumstances about why it happened.
Defendants do sometimes switch defense strategies before trial so itâs possible that they will eventually claim that Barisone was acting in self-defense and was defending himself from an attack or from a perceived attack, but thatâs usually going to be the first and best defense lawyers will argue so if they havenât already, they probably wonât.
3 Likes
He changed attorneys after the first appearance so maybe itâs possible his 2nd attorney will use that defense even if 1st attorney wasnât going to. And if I remember My Cousin Vinny correctly, isnât the first appearance or arraignment where you only answer GUILTY or NOT GUILTY and nothing else?
7 Likes
