Dressage - Michael Barisone

[YankeeDuchess]

@Scribbler

I no longer recall whether these were posts direct to COTH or links posted here to FB by the plaintiff in the civil lawsuit. But certainly there were posts showing paranoid ideation, as well as some that said plaintiff had deliberately pushed B to the breaking point and was going to take his farm and destroy him. I would expect the legal team for B to have been saving these since Day One, and the legal team for the plaintiff to have tried for a bit of social media cleanup over the past year and a half.

My sense is that these posts might not do a lot to mitigate criminal charges. But if the civil case to award damages was being tried by a jury, those posts are not going to help the plaintiff. Civil cases with juries can reach unexpected results based on the likeability of the parties.

The discovery request being discussed in this thread is not by Barisone lawyers or the Kanarek lawyers but by SGF LLC, which has a suit against Barisone.

If there is evidence from any source that Barisone knew or should have known that the house was rented to someone “showing paranoid ideation”, perhaps that would establish that Barisone should have ended the training relationship or asked her to leave, and by failing to do that was he was responsible for the shooting occurring on the property.

By paranoid ideation, are you referring to the post in which she said he was going to kill her?

[Angela_Freda]

Before she deleted A bunch? Because she did that too.

[YankeeDuchess]

@AnotherRound

I would bet it does. That would be interesting. If LK Went to the trouble to file a civil suit and MB asked for clarifications on his side of it, she just didn’t bother to respond to let him win the civil suit, lol, that would be special but not unexpected.

It is not MB who is requesting the information. It is SGF LLC, which is a separate entity from MB, even though MB is a partner or part owner of SGF LLC.

LK could drop her suit against SGF and concentrate on just MB.

[Angela_Freda]

@YankeeDuchess

If there is evidence from any source that Barisone knew or should have known that the house was rented to someone “showing paranoid ideation”, perhaps that would establish that Barisone should have ended the training relationship or asked her to leave, and by failing to do that was he was responsible for the shooting occurring on the property.

And maybe he did/tried to/was trying to??
None of us really know, do we?

[LilRanger]

Why would she do that?

[YankeeDuchess]

@vxf111

@clanter

I was involved in wrongful injury law suit, when the other party failed to respond to requests from the judge the case was dismissed with prejudice ending the affair completely

Judges don’t serve requests so this doesn’t 100% make sense to me. At some point a case can be non prossed if the plaintiff completely falls off moving it forward but generally that takes a lot more than one overdue discovery response.

@vxf111

@eggbutt has posted two documents. One looks like a request, but the second (post 165) is a document apparently written by the SGF lawyers, but uses language to the effect that LK is “ordered” to produce copies of posts within 10 days of the order, which is dated Feb 6.

I did not see any judge’s name. Was that a draft by the SGF lawyers as to what the lawyers are requesting the judge to order?

Anyway, there is one document that uses the word “order” and gives a deadline, beyond just a request.

[YankeeDuchess]

@Angela_Freda

Before she deleted A bunch? Because she did that too.

When I searched for her posts, the number reported was about 500. I have no way of knowing whether and how many she deleted or were lost by the system.

In general, you can’t delete posts after the thread is locked, right.

And do you remember all the QFP ing that went on? What was the purpose of all that QFPing if not to try to stymie her deleting of posts?

[Angela_Freda]

Here deleting was why the QFP started.

[YankeeDuchess]

@Angela_Freda

@YankeeDuchess

If there is evidence from any source that Barisone knew or should have known that the house was rented to someone “showing paranoid ideation”, perhaps that would establish that Barisone should have ended the training relationship or asked her to leave, and by failing to do that was he was responsible for the shooting occurring on the property.

And maybe he did/tried to/was trying to??
None of us really know, do we?

I said that if there were actual evidence that Barisone had asked her to leave, that would be beneficial to SGF. If he asked to leave, but there is no evidence that he did, that is not as useful, because, as you say, none of us actually know.

[YankeeDuchess]

@LilRanger

Why would she do that?

I’m not saying that she would. But if she didn’t want to bother with the SGF request or bother with suing SGF in general, she could drop them as a defendant and just sue Barisone and Cox.

[YankeeDuchess]

@Angela_Freda

Here deleting was why the QFP started.

If lawyers try to use a post that she deleted, but was QFPd before she deleted the original, the QFP
version would be useless in court because the QFP er can go in an alter the quote as much as they want.

That is why QFPing has always been completely pointless.

[ake987]

I don’t make an effort to hide my identity on COTH, it’s probably pretty easy to go through my post history and figure out who I am on other SM. Apparently, LK did and started “laugh” reacting to my FB pictures. My assumption (dangerous, I know) is she did this because I commented on some of the previous threads on this subject in ways not favorable to her. It creeped me out.

[Angela_Freda]

Not Pointless to the conversation here, which is the point of the forum. QFP or quoting in general helps keep the conversation clear, who and what one is speaking to, for example.

No one expects the Spanish Inquisition or posts from here to be used in a trial, QFP or not. And a trial is not why anyone quotes someone.

@YankeeDuchess

If lawyers try to use a post that she deleted, but was QFPd before she deleted the original, the QFP
version would be useless in court because the QFP er can go in an alter the quote as much as they want.

That is why QFPing has always been completely pointless.

Its Interesting you always seem to comprehend comments just a hair off.

[Angela_Freda]

Who has the time, not to mention the inclination, to Sleuth that all out? Wow.

[Angela_Freda]

@YankeeDuchess

I said that if there were actual evidence that Barisone had asked her to leave, that would be beneficial to SGF. If he asked to leave, but there is no evidence that he did, that is not as useful, because, as you say, none of us actually know.

No. You actually didn’t

@YankeeDuchess

If there is evidence from any source that Barisone knew or should have known that the house was rented to someone “showing paranoid ideation”, perhaps that would establish that Barisone should have ended the training relationship or asked her to leave , and by failing to do that was he was responsible for the shooting occurring on the property.

[trubandloki]

@YankeeDuchess

In general, you can’t delete posts after the thread is locked, right.

What makes you think this?

[vxf111]

I don’t know who is quoting what on here.

From the civil docket it looks like SGF served discovery requests on LK. Apparently she did not respond (or did not fully respond). So SGF moved to compel discovery. The motion was granted and the court ordered LK to resond to the requests. Now we don’t know whether she did respond or didn’t respond after the order was entered because that’s not reflected either way on the docket. The only way we’d know is if someone files a motion and/or attaches the discovery to a filed document (or refers to it in a filed document).

I’m not interested in speculating why someone wouldn’t respond to discovery (or wouldn’t timely respond). There are all sorts of reasons, some understandable and some not. It’s hardly uncommon, even for a plaintiff. Absent some other circumstances it’s not usually a reason for a case to be immediately, summarily dismissed with prejudice. If a plaintiff goes radio silent for a long enough time the judge can dismiss the case for failure to prosecute. And if a plaintiff fails to respond to discovery, a potential sanction is dismissal of the case. But it would be extremely unusual for either to happen simply because a plaintiff is a couple weeks/months late in serving discovery responses (absent something else going on in the case that would trigger immediate imposition of these pretty serious options).

[MHM]

@trubandloki

@YankeeDuchess

In general, you can’t delete posts after the thread is locked, right.

What makes you think this?

It looks like now you can still go in and edit or delete a post in a locked thread. That did not used to be the case, did it? It seems like in the past iterations of the board, once it was locked, you could not do anything with your post.

[YankeeDuchess]

@Angela_Freda

Not Pointless to the conversation here, which is the point of the forum. QFP or quoting in general helps keep the conversation clear, who and what one is speaking to, for example.

No one expects the Spanish Inquisition or posts from here to be used in a trial, QFP or not. And a trial is not why anyone quotes someone.

@YankeeDuchess

If lawyers try to use a post that she deleted, but was QFPd before she deleted the original, the QFP
version would be useless in court because the QFP er can go in an alter the quote as much as they want.

That is why QFPing has always been completely pointless.

It’s impressive that your response to comments is always spot on.

QFP

[YankeeDuchess]

@MHM

@trubandloki

@YankeeDuchess

In general, you can’t delete posts after the thread is locked, right.

What makes you think this?

It looks like now you can still go in and edit or delete a post in a locked thread. That did not used to be the case, did it? It seems like in the past iterations of the board, once it was locked, you could not do anything with your post.

I assumed that after the thread was locked, you couldn’t post new posts, delete posts, or edit posts.