Mb civil suit rulings 11/15/2022

[Warmblood1]

@Rubyroo

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.

What is your point?

Also, what you are stating about an inpatient psychiatric institutions is inaccurate. It is not a hotel. You do not just check in. Qualifications include being a serious threat to self or others, or unable to care for one’s self to an extent of being a danger to self or others. Individuals are screened prior to entrance to evaluate if potential patients meet these standards.

Your family member may have participated in IOP, PHP, etc. Those are programs that have lesser requirements for hospitalization.

Regardless, none of this is in anyway representative of MB’s mental state prior to the incident. How others reacted or behaved is in no way an indication of MB’s mental health.

[Warmblood1]

@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?

You very clearly do not understand what I’m trying to say. You are also borderline seizing with all the contortions you are trying to make in this reply.

[Rubyroo]

@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.

State laws on holds only apply to involuntary commitments, which is not what we are talking about here. In my experience, those who voluntarily commit themselves are usually discharged within a week, and sometimes had to wait for a period of time and/or travel pretty far from home in order to find a hospital that had an open bed. In-patient psychiatric care is not the same quality wise as it once was, but in general anyone who wants help can get some form of help (again, not commenting on the quality of that help).

[hut-ho78]

@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.

The old SGF versus MB. MB invited her there, she was there longer than 30 days, he invited her back because “he needed the money.” Legal tenant/tenant rigjts. SGF is claiming MB didn’t have the right to do that under the lease. That is in the contract and contract law precedent. SGF is stating that just to separate from the case. Their stance is they didn’t give permission therefore it is not their problem. It will be interesting to see what the court does with that line of reasoning.

[Sdel]

@CurrentlyHorseless

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.

I think the duty you are missing here, and the one that the civil jury will hinge one, is the unspoken understood duty amongst human beings is that it is not kosher to engage in the manipulative plotting, false allegations, and invasive privacy violations LK engaged in……that one had the duty to refrain from engaging in such acts against someone, especially after acknowledging the effects of your behavior on the other individual.

[OntheFnce]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@lazaret

By asking her to leave, he well may have met his standard to take reasonable measures to avoid her injury. By choosing not to leave, she may well have waived his duty to her.

@Warmblood1

Here is the exact wording from @lazaret.

I found this shocking, but it’s what Lazaret said.

Not exactly sure why you find this shocking. Anyone who has taken basic law classes would understand this.

[Unfforgettable]

@hut-ho78

vindictively trying to ruin her future dreams of competing at FEI events

The only thing that ruined her “dream” is her lack of motivation. Had she put a tenth of the effort into her riding that she put into trying to “finish the bastard” rather than skipping lessons and not showing up for shows, maybe she’d have had a better chance. She showed no effort to actually get there. A dream is fine. To make it a reality takes dedication and work and focus.

[Kitty64]

Did he invite her back? Or was he coerced by her father to let her come back? I’m not sure that’s clear.

[hut-ho78]

What?

[Sdel]

@Warmblood1

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.

Everything else, plus the amendments claiming LK plotted to harm his physical well-being and the physical well-being of others in his care.

[hut-ho78]

@OntheFnce

@CurrentlyHorseless

@lazaret

By asking her to leave, he well may have met his standard to take reasonable measures to avoid her injury. By choosing not to leave, she may well have waived his duty to her.

@Warmblood1

Here is the exact wording from @lazaret.

I found this shocking, but it’s what Lazaret said.

Not exactly sure why you find this shocking. Anyone who has taken basic law classes would understand this.

Anyone taking basic law classes knows it is not ok to shoot someone for not leaving.

[ekat]

@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!

It’s just the formal filing of the amended answer that was approved at the hearing a couple weeks ago, that includes the new counterclaim of the illegal wiretaps.

Next, we should see an amended answer from LK’s attorneys.

[hut-ho78]

@Kitty64

Did he invite her back? Or was he coerced by her father to let her come back? I’m not sure that’s clear.

Dr Schlesinger said he brought her back because he “needed the money.” He has a great reason to not bring her back with the house in the condition it was so I don’t see how anything JK could say would be convincing.

[Sdel]

@Rubyroo

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.

Hahahahahahahahaha!

Do you know how long patients wait in the ER for a psych hold/commitment these days? Long enough that they are given a piece of paper to sign stating they won’t hurt themselves or anyone else and then sent out the door on a promise of seeing a doctor for outpatient management instead of waiting for the weeks it takes to get a bed in a facility and a proper evaluation.

[Kitty64]

Dr S made a fool of himself on the stand. I take anything he said with skepticism.

[Rubyroo]

@Warmblood1

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.

Self defense couldn’t be put forward at the criminal trial because there was absolutely no evidence of that at the time; are you saying that new evidence has come to light since the criminal trial ended showing that Michael did in fact act in self defense?

[eggbutt]

You have been incredibly generous with your knowledge and very patient with those of us who need more explanation. Thank you! Perhaps it is time to ignore posters who seem to have an agenda to misquote you and argue with your expertise. It isn’t worth it and the rest of us really need your knowledge.

[Rubyroo]

@Sdel

Hahahahahahahahaha!

Do you know how long patients wait in the ER for a psych hold/commitment these days? Long enough that they are given a piece of paper to sign stating they won’t hurt themselves or anyone else and then sent out the door on a promise of seeing a doctor for outpatient management instead of waiting for the weeks it takes to get a bed in a facility.

That is not at all the experience I had with a family member who was in and out of mental hospitals once or twice a month for over a year. Not sure why you are laughing - mental health issues are no laughing matter not only for the individual, but also for those close to the individual.

[Warmblood1]

@hut-ho78

@OntheFnce

@CurrentlyHorseless

@lazaret

By asking her to leave, he well may have met his standard to take reasonable measures to avoid her injury. By choosing not to leave, she may well have waived his duty to her.

@Warmblood1

Here is the exact wording from @lazaret.

I found this shocking, but it’s what Lazaret said.

Not exactly sure why you find this shocking. Anyone who has taken basic law classes would understand this.

Anyone taking basic law classes knows it is not ok to shoot someone for not leaving.

Self defense is a constitutional right.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@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.

Yes, I noticed the important phrase “may have” in your statement and my reference to your statement faithfully included the phrase “may have”.

I did not misquote you.