Mb civil suit rulings 11/15/2022

[Angela_Freda]

@Rubyroo

Whatever trauma and mental instability Michael was experiencing prior to his shooting Lauren, it wasn’t enough that anyone around him felt he needed help.

Didn’t he actually reach out to his own, long-term counselor though?
I could be mis-remembering, but I know he did periodically reach out to her and get “help”.
That’s said, this situation escalated quickly, and there might not have been time.

[Rubyroo]

@Sdel

If we are throwing the jury instructions out of consideration, then it is possible they simply wanted to make sure he got a mental health evaluation.

Again, does anyone think that a jury going rogue in this way is a good thing? They aren’t his mother; why would a jury do this to a complete stranger rather than follow the oath they took and follow the judge’s instructions? Are you proposing that enough members of the jury decided that Michael did NOT shoot Lauren, but thought he looked like he needed mental health help, so they NGRI’d him to being locked down in a mental institution for an indeterminate amount of time? Is it reasonable to think this was their thought process, and they thought this was actually being helpful to Michael?

@Sdel

How do you account for the fact that he was found straight up NG for RG as opposed to NGRI on those charges as well?

This one is easy. The jury determined that Michael did in fact shoot Lauren in an attempt to murder her but he was insane at the time (therefore an NGRI verdict), but they did not think there was enough evidence to show that he shot at Rob in an attempt to murder him (therefore the NG verdict).

You raise a good point: if the jury went rogue and decided that they were responsible for making sure he got help for his mental health issues instead of following the law and the judge’s instructions, why not come to the same verdict on the charges for Rob as they did for Lauren? That they came to different conclusions based on their verdicts indicates that they did indeed follow the judge’s instructions.

[Knights_Mom]

@Angela_Freda

@Rubyroo

Whatever trauma and mental instability Michael was experiencing prior to his shooting Lauren, it wasn’t enough that anyone around him felt he needed help.

Didn’t he actually reach out to his own, long-term counselor though?
I could be mis-remembering, but I know he did periodically reach out to her and get “help”.
That’s said, this situation escalated quickly, and there might not have been time.

Realistically speaking though, even Freud couldn’t counsel someone as to how to best deal with that situation other than to have her and her horses not be there.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Warmblood1

I think this contributes to LK’s own negligence and lack of duty to escape the situation as well as her direct contribution to the escalation of the situation.

Obviously, in retrospect, she should have left.

But I think it will be hard for Barisone’s lawyers to establish that she “had a duty” to leave, despite being a legal tenant. A reasonable person would not expect their landlord to show up in the middle of the afternoon and shoot them, two days after informing them that their presence was unwanted.

[Knights_Mom]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Warmblood1

I think this contributes to LK’s own negligence and lack of duty to escape the situation as well as her direct contribution to the escalation of the situation.

Obviously, in retrospect, she should have left.

But I think it will be hard for Barisone’s lawyers to establish that she “had a duty” to leave, despite being a legal tenant. A reasonable person would not expect their landlord to show up in the middle of the afternoon and shoot them, two days after informing them that their presence was unwanted.

She wasn’t a legal tenant. She may have had tenancy rights as far as the eviction process but she wasn’t a legal tenant.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Warmblood1

I think this contributes to LK’s own negligence and lack of duty to escape the situation as well as her direct contribution to the escalation of the situation.

Obviously, in retrospect, she should have left.

But I think it will be hard for Barisone’s lawyers to establish that she “had a duty” to leave, despite being a legal tenant. A reasonable person would not expect their landlord to show up in the middle of the afternoon and shoot them, two days after informing them that their presence was unwanted.

She wasn’t a legal tenant. She may have had tenancy rights as far as the eviction process but she wasn’t a legal tenant.

What is the difference to bring a legal tenant and having tenancy rights?

One doesn’t need a written lease to be a legal tenant.

[Warmblood1]

How many people struggle with severe mental health issues and those around them are unaware? A devastating amount of people suffer alone and in silence. It does not lessen the extent of their illness.

We do not know how those around MB reacted to his decline in mental stability before LK was injured. He had sought prior therapy which is the usual response outside of commitment. Commitment has its own set of strict stipulations which most people do not qualify for, even if in a mental health crisis. MB could have been extremely delusional and still not have qualified for inpatient commitment. People will also avoid commitment due to real life obligations such as their job and/or family. To insinuate that MB’s mental state was any less because there was not a certain reaction by friends or family is disingenuous and presumptive at best.

Edited spelling

[lazaret]

The operative word in my statement was may have.

in other words, see my tombstone: it depends.

And that’s enough of being misquoted for one day.

[Knights_Mom]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Warmblood1

I think this contributes to LK’s own negligence and lack of duty to escape the situation as well as her direct contribution to the escalation of the situation.

Obviously, in retrospect, she should have left.

But I think it will be hard for Barisone’s lawyers to establish that she “had a duty” to leave, despite being a legal tenant. A reasonable person would not expect their landlord to show up in the middle of the afternoon and shoot them, two days after informing them that their presence was unwanted.

She wasn’t a legal tenant. She may have had tenancy rights as far as the eviction process but she wasn’t a legal tenant.

What is the difference to bring a legal tenant and having tenancy rights?

One doesn’t need a written lease to be a legal tenant.

This has been explained in the past. You participated in the conversation.

And as a former landlord tenant clerk I assure you that I know a lease is not necessary.

[Warmblood1]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Warmblood1

I think this contributes to LK’s own negligence and lack of duty to escape the situation as well as her direct contribution to the escalation of the situation.

Obviously, in retrospect, she should have left.

But I think it will be hard for Barisone’s lawyers to establish that she “had a duty” to leave, despite being a legal tenant. A reasonable person would not expect their landlord to show up in the middle of the afternoon and shoot them, two days after informing them that their presence was unwanted.

Obviously in retrospect, she shouldn’t have attacked someone’s family, livelihood, reputation, business, ability to provide for one’s self, made physical threats to multiple individual’s safety including gun violence, violated a wiretapping act, showed intent of forging and accessing private documents, or have inherently brought risks towards individuals including children by actively using drugs, having a partner who actively used drugs, accompanied with a known history of stalking, harassment and physical altercations.

She had a duty to leave when she was repeatedly asked to leave. You can play dumb and pretend she was never asked to leave but I’m certain the civil trial will prove otherwise.

You are also continuously refusing to believe self defense was not a possibility, which WOULD permit him to shoot her, even though MB’s counterclaim clearly spells out that self defense is on the table for justification.

[Angela_Freda]

@Knights_Mom

Realistically speaking though, even Freud couldn’t counsel someone as to how to best deal with that situation other than to have her and her horses not be there

Exactly so

[hut-ho78]

@Sdel

If we are throwing the jury instructions out of consideration, then it is possible they simply wanted to make sure he got a mental health evaluation.

How do you account for the fact that he was found straight up NG for RG as opposed to NGRI on those charges as well?

There was reasonable doubt for attempted murder of RG since he wasn’t shot but with LK being shot twice no reasonable doubt there.

He missed RG and after his tight shot pattern center of mass on LK it could be construed as a warning shot. Maybe since ED only heard two shots fired and there were two shell casings found the jury believed that RG was close enough to the line of fire to think he was shot at. Maybe RG was dodging and running and attacking the shooter AFTER SHOTS WERE FIRED AT LK and a moving target is harder to hit, while LK had merely stood there in shock and just put her hand out in a plea to say don’t shoot.

[hut-ho78]

@Sdel

@hut-ho78

@Sdel

@eggbutt

It has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Michael Barisone shot anyone.

No it hasn’t. And nothing about the verdicts indicates that they felt Michael was responsible for anything. In fact, the expert testimony they relied on was exclusively about how LK mentally terrorized MB.

It was that MB suffered from a delusion that LK was dangerous and out to get him.

You forget that the state expert agreed that her SM posts did contain coded messages and were designed to scare him. And that she also admitted during her testimony to the same….”the queen must be sacrificed”….and all. And he testified that a reasonable person would be justified in being afraid of that behavior.

The state expert concluded he was sane. The jury rejected the state expert and believed the defense expert.

[Rubyroo]

@Warmblood1

How many people struggle with severe mental health issues and those around them are unaware? A devastating amount of people suffer alone and in silence. It does not lessen the extent of their illness.

We do not know how those around MB reacted to his decline in mental stability before LK was injured. He had sought prior therapy which is the usual response outside of commitment. Commitment has its own set of strict stipulations which most people do not qualify for, even if in a mental health crisis. MB could have been extremely delusional and still not have qualified for inpatient commitment. People will also avoid commitment due to real life obligations such as their job and/or family. To insinuate that MB’s mental state was any less because there was not a certain reaction by friends or family is disingenuous and presumptive at best.

We know based on testimony that at least several of those around Michael knew he was failing mentally. We also know that his girlfriend helped him file grievances against Lauren with Safe Sport and USEF. We also know that Ruth Cox gave him her gun. Regarding the bolded (bolding mine), anyone can commit themselves to a mental hospital any time and a bed will be found somewhere for that person. No one has to “qualify” for it. I know this based on experience with a family member who was on government issued health insurance.

[Unfforgettable]

@Warmblood1

She had a duty to leave when she was repeatedly asked to leave. You can play dumb and pretend she was never asked to leave but I’m certain the civil trial will prove otherwise.

Exactly. And she had a duty to leave when she initially became unhappy with the situation, as opposed to doing all the twisted and vicious things she did. If you don’t like a situation, you have the freedom to leave it. Lots of other barns, plenty of spots to nap.

[hut-ho78]

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

Self defense was one of the pleas in the criminal trial. It did not go anywhere in the criminal trial because the defense provided no evidence of self defense.

MB could not aid in that defense solely because he had no recollection of the event. Had he remembered what happened self defense would have been admittable without being a bar to insanity.

It depends on what he remembered. If he remembered going there to shoot her and then shooting her without cause then that would be all three saying “he came, he shot LK twice.”

(I’m very sorry for your loss. Losing a parent is something no one is ever ready for.)

[hut-ho78]

@Warmblood1

@CurrentlyHorseless

I was shocked by Lazaret’s statement that by staying after MB asked her to leave, LK may have waived MBs duty to her to refrain from shooting her.

You and I both know Lazaret never stated this. You just continue to have no problem misconstruing someone’s words even though you’ve been asked to stop.

You really are not being as clever as you think you are with your posts.

? Yes. Lazarus used as an example of a verbal altercation progressing to a physical altercation as an example. There is no evidence that happened so Lazaret did indicate as CH understood. I don’t think that was her intent but it came across that way.

[3PonyFarm]

@ekat, there is an amended answer filing by Mr. D. It is very long and addresses the recordings. If you or @lazaret have time, could you look at it and explain what it means for the case? Thank you!

[Kitty64]

Maybe where you live that is the case. Availability of psych beds can vary widely, as can state law on “holds”. Many years ago psych hospitals were everywhere. I think they’re less common now.

[hut-ho78]

@Warmblood1

LK held several mental health diagnoses prior to her encounter with MB, those being much more severe in nature than MB’s depression, yet MB’s depression is constantly harped upon and presented as an indication that MB would lose sanity despite LK. Not realistic at all.

What I also find interesting is that the Mustache’s testimony states that MB was not delusional because MB’s fearfulness of LK was a rational response. Even if the mental health diagnosis for MB was conflicting amongst experts, the experts acknowledge LK’s campaign against him and why that would provoke someone in the way MB was provoked. I think this contributes to LK’s own negligence and lack of duty to escape the situation as well as her direct contribution to the escalation of the situation.

I could go play in traffic on the interstate and sue someone for hitting me with their car, but a jury would see that I held responsibility in the event and that my own actions were negligent.

I’m having trouble tracking this logic. So you are saying that LK who did not shoot anyone is known to have more diagnosed mental health issues than MB who shot LK but it’s all LK’s fault because having mental health issues she provoked a man with mental health issues?

If she is more mentally unstable than MB then perhaps he should have calmly evicted her instead of vindictively trying to ruin her future dreams of competing at FEI events. Also, if she is more mentally unstable then MB then why is she held to a higher standard of behavior?

If you want to say they were both mentally unstable and were a bad combination, that makes sense but blaming the one you call less capable of acting in a rational manner responsible for all bad behavior? Maybe I don’t understand what you are trying to say?

Edited to add this. If MB stood at that site and fired rounds in that direction every day at that time and LK ran out in the line of fire, he would still be at fault for basic gun safety, pointing a weapon at her and then for firing at her. It’s not like traffic at all.