Seriously? Are we honestly back to this? You’re free to continue your “speculation,” - but, perhaps it’s best to at least begin at the current state of affairs. The fact that MB shot me under the guise of “just wanting to talk,” - then shooting at Robs head & running over to him to make sure he didn’t miss (even though he thankfully, did) are considered “known facts.”
Do YOU have contradicting information which others do not?
The court of public opinion means little, if anything, in terms of the trial. Will her name get dragged though the mud? Sure, as will all the sordid details of all the ways she allegedly contributed to the dispute, plus her long history of alleged questionable behaviour. But that has already been dragged out for everyone to see, and she is the one who dragged a lot of it out herself. Legally, I doubt any of it is relevant. No matter how wacko or horrible your client / tenant may be, there isn’t much legal justification for shooting them.
Well, this clears some things up. If you’re actually the person that was shot, why on earth are you posting about this topic at all? Rhetorical question, no need to answer.
Also, I am compelled to point out that you saying all this does not make it “known facts” but it does make it clear how you intend to testify.
Bless your heart. You really, really are consumed with me and who you think I am for some reason. Makes me wonder why you constantly repost/quote or stalk me. Fascinating.
Why would you be shocked?
She’s a whackadoodle. Not that I would ever recommend shooting anyone, contemplating it, or threatening it.
But let’s just say that I understand.
And, being provoked by a whackadoodle day in and day out for any period of time is not a good place to be. There are worse defenses.
Carry on!
At this point in time, no witness should be disclosing anything not approved by either the state of NJ or by the defendants’ attorney. There are facts of this case which I myself do not know. If you consider all that I do know, it should seem a scary, scary prospect that the state knows even more (via discovery, phone & computer evidence, witnesses for the prosecution, etc) than even I’m aware. The most information I receive is when I say something like, “So, it is what I thought re: x, y , z,” and the DA says, “I can’t answer that, but, I will tell you, you’re on the right track there.”
If I’m on the right track about anything I’ve questioned, which is info considered “too risky to disclose,” that’s scarier to me than the shooting itself. Scarier, more disturbing, far sicker than anything most might imagine.
Well, that’s not his defense, so… idk, perhaps “phone a friend,” or “use a lifeline,” option?
If he - or anyone else on that farm where actually being “provoked,” or anything similar, you would already know that’s his “defense.” Except… see, it’s not. I guess evidence to the contrary was just too overwhelming to even attempt a defense such as that, so full of provable lies - just as I’ve said since thread number 1.
I know exactly who you are. We’ve been through this. You are the one who has (stupidly) mistaken screen names for people you think you know. Try & remember that next time you take part in pm’s on this forum. On second thought, at your age, it’s probably time for a nap.
I’ve quoted probably 4 other people in the last 10 minutes, you’re not special. Well, maybe you are. A special brand of “special.”
Has his defense strategy been made public?
I’ve said this all at least 50 times prior to now. It’s also not a secret. Has there been a hearing I’m unaware of which the defendant has made a claim to the contrary?
Further, you have zero knowledge wrt my “intentions.” I’m wondering why you continue to post on this topic. There literally could not be less information anyone is going to share with you at this point, aside from that which has been shared already by me. You can choose to believe what I’ve said. Or, remain welcome to believe in fairy tales. It’s of exactly 0 consequence to me.
Ouch. I may actually miss my nap over this cut. 
Here’s the honest truth, although I’m sure we’ll get a strong rebuttal from you…
No one cares how much money you have, how many horses you have, what trainer(s) you use, where you live, what you eat, or probably what you have to say on a frequent basis. What is important to most humans is how we treat each other. Are we kind, genuine, considerate, humble, pleasant to be around? The list of positive human attributes that make one likeable is endless. I know that goes against your grain of needing to be the center of the universe, but honestly few care. You are a curiosity with few contributions to society in your life. With all you supposedly had to offer, you seem to be a sad, shell of a person. Just my thoughts. COVID-19 has caused many of us to reflect on what is important. Being genuine is high on my list.
Have a nice life, Lauren. Sincerely. Do better.
Seriously, if you are indeed the person shot (there’s no debate that someone was shot), I’m assuming you have a lawyer. Does your lawyer know you’re posting about this incident? I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that they’d prefer you not be.
Are you trying to contaminate the jury pool? Could be interpreted that way. You aren’t helping your cause.
I’m also pretty confident the DA would prefer to not be quoted on an online forum and surprised if a DA would even say “you’re on the right track.”
Just sayin’
Just give up. I see you typing. You’re getting yourself nowhere.Except, perhaps, out of the boredom & monotony of whatever it is you call a “life.” Please, Seggbutt - find a hobby. I hear bridge is fun!
I have a personal aversion to illogical arguments, hence my continuation to post on this topic.
You are correct that I have no knowledge of your intentions, nor do I have any factual evidence that you are who you say you are, much less any knowledge of the actual events under discussion.
Believing you or believing in fairy tales are not the only two choices.
Proof by emphatic assertion doesn’t fly with me, nor does it in a court of law.
So … I guess I should assume that Michael’s letter was intended to “contaminate a jury pool?” FYI- a jury has not been selected & once one is, they’ll be sequestered. I honestly don’t need your advice on “what isn’t helping my cause.” I was shot. You were not. Contemplate “causes,” in departments of activities of which you have some (or ANY) experience. This maybe above your “pay grade.”
Oh good. At least I now know what will “fly with you.” I was extremely worried about that!
Again, what letter? Did he write to you or a journalist who published something we aren’t aware of? That would be new news, wouldn’t it? Oh, I get it, this must be another one of those things you aren’t able to discuss but love to bring up.
You have absolutely no knowledge of whether I’ve ever been shot or not.
Now I am just messing with you for fun; you make it too easy but I’ll give myself credit for not picking on your excessive and incorrect use of quotations. Whoops! I guess I won’t! 
Many people are in possession of this letter. Clearly, you are not one of them.
Wow…the George Floyd jury wasn’t sequestered, but you believe the potential trial in a small NJ township will be significant enough to sequester. Goodness, you do think you are so important. Fascinating.,
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
