Mb civil suit rulings 11/15/2022

[Knights_Mom]

@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.

And you would be wrong. Nothing to do with contract law as far as LK being a legal tenant. There was no contract or lease signed. She was eligible to be evictedin days under Holdover laws. There was coercion.
Coercion is not contractual. The property was a single family building.

[Warmblood1]

@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).

It does not matter if someone voluntarily commits. They must meet certain thresholds to be admitted into a psychiatric facility. The patient then forgoes certain individual rights and their care is at the discretion of the medical staff and overseeing doctor. Even with a 5150 involuntary hold, patients may be discharged after 72 hours. The only way one can leave, even if voluntarily committed, is when they are processed out by the facility and if the doctor does not agree with their discharge, they must leave AMA. The discharge is still a process and the patient does not get to leave immediately, voluntary or not. Discharges can take several days especially on a weekend. Voluntary and involuntary patients are treated the same outside of a 72 hour minimum for a 5150 hold once admitted inpatient.

[trubandloki]

@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.

I think you need to read up on the requirements of the charges associated with RG that MIchael was found not guilty on. The lesser only required that they find him guilty of pointing a gun in RG’s direction. So clearly they did not think that Robert Guy Goodwin/Jim E Stark/Superman dodged any bullets at all.

[hut-ho78]

Ok. I thought Dr Schlesinger did a great job, I mainly believed Dr Simring because that is the only way I can wrap my head around Mb throwing everything away over one client, especially as she did not seem to be making healthy and stable decisions at the time. Well, neither was MB.

That he might have gone there in an impulsive rage to shoot her, it’s just so irrational and self defeating, it must be delusional. There are too many difficult clients (and barn owners and trainers) and too much drug use in the horse industry for me to think he couldn’t manage her with charm, charisma, and aplomb if he were not already in some kind of a breakdown.

[OntheFnce]

@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.

If you took some law classes you might learn that your reply would be challenged in class.

[hut-ho78]

@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.

Yes, I agree. Self defense is. I refer you to lawyer Branca who breaks down the elements of self defense.

[3PonyFarm]

Thank you!

[Rubyroo]

@Warmblood1

They must meet certain thresholds to be admitted into a psychiatric facility.

This is simply not true in my experience as I have described. For voluntary commitment, stays of around a week were the norm in my experience, as opposed to the norm of 30 days decades ago. Yes, there is a discharge process that must be followed and it does not happen within minutes; I never disputed that.

[trubandloki]

@hut-ho78

The state expert concluded he was sane.

Right. The state expert thought Michael had a legitimate reason to be afraid of Lauren.

@OntheFnce

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

The problem here is that they do not teach it well in the Google Law School.

[BigMama1]

@Rubyroo

Was Michael not running a barn and earning a living up until the time of the shooting? That is what I stated; I said nothing about what the barn environment was like at the time prior to the shooting.

He was up until Lauren and Rob started their campaign of torture. That resulted in clients and staff leaving, everyone’s housing disrupted, and Michael being so distressed he was unable to sleep or work. The business definitely suffered because of LK’s actions before the shooting

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@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.

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.

I don’t think that she had a “duty to leave”, despite thinking she should have left.

I have said that, given the finding of insanity, I now interpret a lot of MBs otherwise inexplicable behavior prior to the shooting as resulting from his delusional mental state, and can believe that he may not have asked her leave, as LK and JK have asserted.

I’ll be very interested to see if evidence is presented in the civil trial that she was asked or told to leave prior to Aug 5. Even if such evidence is presented, I’ll be shocked if the jury then determines that she had a “duty to leave”.

Tarshis did tell her to leave on August 5th. I have seen no evidence that she was “repeatedly asked to leave” prior to Aug 5.

I agree that MB is pursuing self defense “as a justification” for shooting her; although I think he’s pursuing self defense in defending against her claim, not as part of his counterclaim.

I’ve never denied that self defense was a theoretical possibility. I’ve just said that it didn’t fly in the criminal trial and I don’t expect it to fly in the civil trial.

[Knights_Mom]

@hut-ho78

Ok. I thought Dr Schlesinger did a great job, I mainly believed Dr Simring because that is the only way I can wrap my head around Mb throwing everything away over one client, especially as she did not seem to be making healthy and stable decisions at the time. Well, neither was MB.

That he might have gone there in an impulsive rage to shoot her, it’s just so irrational and self defeating, it must be delusional. There are too many difficult clients (and barn owners and trainers) and too much drug use in the horse industry for me to think he couldn’t manage her with charm, charisma, and aplomb if he were not already in some kind of a breakdown.

You would be a member of the smallest itsy bitsiest minority then as unilaterally people across social media believe otherwise based on what they’ve seen and heard.

[Kitty64]

Wherever you are is the exception in my opinion. If you’re talking about a drug/alcohol rehab hospital, that’s a different situation. It’s very difficult to get a hospital bed for acutely ill individuals. I’m not saying they aren’t out there, just very uncommon. As others have said it’s more common to keep people out of psych hospitals.

[Rubyroo]

@BigMama1

He was up until Lauren and Rob started their campaign of torture. That resulted in clients and staff leaving, everyone’s housing disrupted, and Michael being so distressed he was unable to sleep or work. The business definitely suffered because of LK’s actions before the shooting

Do you know how many clients and how many staff members left prior to the shooting and how close to the shooting they left? It’s hard to know how long the turmoil was really going on because some say it was months and some say it was days and it’s not clear where those who are saying these things get their information to know whose information is reliable and whose isn’t.

If his business was suffering for a long time, it’s even more unfortunate that he wasn’t given the support needed to handle the situation in a more mature, business-like fashion that might have given his clients the confidence to wait it out until Lauren was out of there for good.

[hut-ho78]

@Knights_Mom

@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.

And you would be wrong. Nothing to do with contract law as far as LK being a legal tenant. There was no contract or lease signed. She was eligible to be evictedin days under Holdover laws. There was coercion.
Coercion is not contractual. The property was a single family building.

Yes it was a single family building by International Building Code as it was permitted as a two family building. In reality it has an illegal 3rd apartment in the basement with only one egress.

There was no lease agreement except verbal. There was no lease expiration date. There was no holdover situation.

This article on holdover explains it and goes more in depth over the eviction process in New Jersey than even the state helpful guidance document I posted back in Woman Shot at Barisone Farm.

Rights of Squatters in New Jersey

[Rubyroo]

@Kitty64

Wherever you are is the exception in my opinion. If you’re talking about a drug/alcohol rehab hospital, that’s a different situation. It’s very difficult to get a hospital bed for acutely ill individuals. I’m not saying they aren’t out there, just very uncommon. As others have said it’s more common to keep people out of psych hospitals.

Not drugs or alcohol; mental health issues.

[hut-ho78]

@trubandloki

@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.

I think you need to read up on the requirements of the charges associated with RG that MIchael was found not guilty on. The lesser only required that they find him guilty of pointing a gun in RG’s direction. So clearly they did not think that Robert Guy Goodwin/Jim E Stark/Superman dodged any bullets at all.

Agree. Not beyond a reasonable doubt, the highest standard.

[lazaret]

You would be deliberately misunderstanding and paraphrasing what I said incorrectly, though.

[Knights_Mom]

@hut-ho78

@Knights_Mom

@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.

And you would be wrong. Nothing to do with contract law as far as LK being a legal tenant. There was no contract or lease signed. She was eligible to be evictedin days under Holdover laws. There was coercion.
Coercion is not contractual. The property was a single family building.

Yes it was a single family building by International Building Code as it was permitted as a two family building. In reality it has an illegal 3rd apartment in the basement with only one egress.

There was no lease agreement except verbal. There was no lease expiration date. There was no holdover situation.

This article on holdover explains it and goes more in depth over the eviction process in New Jersey than even the state helpful guidance document I posted back in Woman Shot at Barisone Farm.

https://legalbeagle.com/6685021-rights-squatters-new-jersey.html

There was absolutely a Holdover situation due to the drugs, threats, harassment, disorderly conduct and criminal records of the grifters.

[Sdel]

@hut-ho78

Yes, I agree. Self defense is. I refer you to lawyer Branca who breaks down the elements of self defense.

Branca classified the verdict for this case as jury nullification.