Mb civil suit rulings 11/15/2022

[eggbutt]

@Rubyroo

Plenty of people here have stated that they think the jury only came to NGRI because they wanted to make sure Michael got help with his mental health issues. It’s been stated many, many times in these threads. It’s only become a problem now that someone is asking them to really think about whether that is the good thing they have been implying it is.

No, I don’t think “plenty of people” have stated that opinion and I don’t think it’s a problem. I think a certain few have quite loudly posted about jury nullification. Perhaps specifically ask those who actually made such statements and quote their post(s) and ask why they believe what they posted.

[Sdel]

@Rubyroo

It’s only become a problem now that someone is asking them to really think about whether that is the good thing they have been implying it is.

It’s not a problem. As for if it’s a problem for Michael, well the answer is that it shouldn’t be if Taylor was following the letter and spirit of the law.

If MB was continuing to be found to be a danger due to ongoing mental health issues by his doctors then he should absolutely remain committed. If he is not, then he should not be treated punitively by a continued inpatient commitment but ordered to follow the doctor recommended treatment plan.

It is only a problem if the judge and prosecutor are acting in a punitive manner to continue holding him against doctor recommendations.

But again, I will point you toward CH and HH’s explanation that because the judge gave the jury specific instructions on how to find that jury nullification is an impossible outcome for a verdict, especially in this case where the jury agreed with the defense experts that MB met the the standard to not be able to know right or wrong when LK’s behavior drove him to his mental break with reality.

[Warmblood1]

@3PonyFarm

@BigMama1, @Maria
Both of you are on fire! I need to put my tree up and hope my cats leave it up and order gifts online. I have a couple I have to make as my husband’s family likes to do homemade gifts.

I am looking for a good peanut butter fudge receipe if anyone has one.

I’ve been planning on making some Christmas gnomes. I know they aren’t original but I think they are adorable.

I’m buying some new ornaments this year and making my tree a blue, white and silver theme.

I also have done zero shopping. Plenty of cooking and eating though.

[DreadPirateRoberts]

@Rubyroo

I’m disappointed that no one has answered my questions regarding jury nullification (copied below for reference). Does anyone here think that juries going rogue and disregarding the oath they take is a good thing?

I suspect nobody wants to engage with you on this topic because they sense that the question may not have been asked in good faith.

For what it’s worth, many folks with more experience in law and philosophy than most posters here have debated the role of jury nullification in US criminal justice, and that discussion is, to my knowledge, ongoing. The complexity of the matter is part of why your simplistic question may not seem earnest. I don’t presume to have enough relevant knowledge and experience to wager an opinion on jury nullification, but here’s a peer-reviewed article that suggest the better question is not “good vs. bad” but “feature vs. bug” and that the answer lies somewhere between “a fortuitously fortunate bug” and “a feature”.

Now time for a refresh to get that ignore feature working again!

[Rubyroo]

@Sdel

It’s not a problem.

Thanks for your answer, I appreciate it. I have some follow up questions but like I said feel free to ignore if you don’t want to answer. I think you are saying that it is not a problem if the jury came to their verdict not based on jury instructions but based on their desire to help Michael with his mental health issues. Do you think it was right for the jury to presume that Michael is unable to get quality help on his own? Because of their verdict, Michael has no specified release date, and I posted earlier today two article that describe why the system sometimes keeps those found NGRI locked up for quite some time. If they really believed that he didn’t shoot Lauren and followed the judge’s instructions, Michael would be a free man today, able to take charge of his own treatment. Do you really think his current situation is better than that one?

[Rubyroo]

@DreadPirateRoberts

I suspect nobody wants to engage with you on this topic because they sense that the question may not have been asked in good faith.

For what it’s worth, many folks with more experience in law and philosophy than most posters here have debated the role of jury nullification in US criminal justice, and that discussion is, to my knowledge, ongoing. The complexity of the matter is part of why your simplistic question may not seem earnest. I don’t presume to have enough relevant knowledge and experience to wager an opinion on jury nullification, but here’s a peer-reviewed article that suggest the better question is not “good vs. bad” but “feature vs. bug” and that the answer lies somewhere between “a fortuitously fortunate bug” and “a feature”.

Now time for a refresh to get that ignore feature working again!

Thanks for your reply. I did ask in good faith and I did my best to get that across, but this is a tough crowd!

I guess in hindsight, instead of using the term “jury nullification” repeatedly, I should have avoided that term altogether and used common terms in my questions.

[Sdel]

@Rubyroo

Do you think it was right for the jury to presume that Michael is unable to get quality help on his own?

I think you are twisting things, and not asking in good faith. And no, I think the consideration wasn’t that he was unable to get quality help, I think they wanted to enforce that he got an evaluation and quality help if needed. I do believe the judge explained the consequences of an NGRI verdict with the jury before they went to in to deliberate.

[hut-ho78]

@BigMama1

@hut-ho78

48 hours. MHG testified otherwise.

@Rubyroo please note that HutHo is being misleading here - one assumes deliberately so since they have been corrected on this point multiple times.

In testimony MHG said she asked why they couldn’t just evict LK / RG, implying that they had not been served with a legal notice of eviction at that point. That is not the same as saying they had never been asked to leave.

MHG also said that she had once said something like if you are so unhappy here why don’t you go. She also said a lawyer was speaking to LK. However, her comment in court was why can’t we just tell RG and LK and the father that we are evicting you and you must leave because no one has.

She also testified to a text from July that MB said he would make LK so miserable she would beg to leave, he had done it before and knew how.
I’m not the one being misleading here.

[Unfforgettable]

I’m wondering if during the civil trials the topic of LK being so afraid of MB will arise. Will it then be brought to attention that for someone so fearful it seems odd she would purchase a home so close to his Florida farm? After being “attempted murdered”?

[Sdel]

@Unfforgettable

I’m wondering if during the civil trials the topic of LK being so afraid of MB will arise. Will it then be brought to attention that for someone so fearful it seems odd she would purchase a home so close to his Florida farm? After being “attempted murdered”?

Or that Daddio has said more than once that she would possibly train under him again….

[3PonyFarm]

The gnomes are cute! I used to make several kinds of cookies but now only do one kind. I love sugar Christmas cookies but last year my friend’s horse knocked the gate off the hinges and she called me for help while i was making them. I turned off the oven and ran over. When I got back, the cookie santa’s faces were all sunken in. Icing them did not help so they got tossed.

[hut-ho78]

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

No. That was eviction for disorderly conduct, the emergency 3 day rule. A holdover is when the lease term expires and the renter stays on. In New Jersey it becomes a month to month. One would think 30 day eviction notice but the article also mentioned a 90 day notice for other than eviction.

Ok call it that. Long story short, still an eviction. 3 days works for me. She still wasn’t leaving.

And the definition of Holdover isn’t that. It is the desire to get the tenant out for cause, not for non payment.

A holdover isn’t an eviction. It is simply a status. The lease has run out. They can raise the rent and present new terms. You can stay month by month umt they want you out.

I processed Holdovers and evictions for over a decade. You are wrong.

In my state a landlord can file a Holdover petition for cause as well but I’m not in NJ.

Again, Holdover is a status, not a process. The process is eviction.

[Rubyroo]

@Sdel

I think you are twisting things, and not asking in good faith. And no, I think the consideration wasn’t that he was unable to get quality help, I think they wanted to enforce that he got an evaluation and quality help if needed.

I am really not trying to twist things and I am genuinely curious about this line of thinking. You say you don’t think the jury thought he would be unable to get quality help on his own, but they wanted to make sure that he got quality help. I don’t see how both of those things can be true and make sense. Either they were confident in his ability to get quality help so they should have set him free, or they were concerned he wouldn’t get quality help so they sent him back into lockup, this time at a state run mental institution (which I don’t think are generally well known for provided quality care).

I don’t need to continue this topic. It’s not going anywhere productive anyway, but thanks for your participation.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Sdel

But again, I will point you toward CH and HH’s explanation that because the judge gave the jury specific instructions on how to find that jury nullification is an impossible outcome for a verdict, especially in this case where the jury agreed with the defense experts that MB met the the standard to not be able to know right or wrong when LK’s behavior drove him to his mental break with reality.

This is not my explanation of anything, @Sdel.

[Sdel]

@Rubyroo

You say you don’t think the jury thought he would be unable to get quality help on his own, but they wanted to make sure that he got quality help. I don’t see how both of those things can be true and make sense. Either they were confident in his ability to get quality help so they should have set him free, or they were concerned he wouldn’t get quality help so they sent him back into lockup, this time at a state run mental institution (which I don’t think are generally well known for provided quality care).

This is a twist of what I said.

[MHM]

@Sdel

@Unfforgettable

I’m wondering if during the civil trials the topic of LK being so afraid of MB will arise. Will it then be brought to attention that for someone so fearful it seems odd she would purchase a home so close to his Florida farm? After being “attempted murdered”?

Or that Daddio has said more than once that she would possibly train under him again….

Yes, JK’s comments on that subject really let the air out of the tires on the “deathly afraid” story.

Tires? Sails? Whatever. That dog won’t hunt.

[BigMama1]

@Rubyroo

Ii didn’t realize that the concept of jury nullification has been discussed ad nauseam here, so my apologies.

Literally every angle of the case and verdict and every possible scenario has been discussed ad nauseum over the past three years. If you have trouble sleeping tonight there are thousands and thousands of posts to go through

[Rubyroo]

@BigMama1

Literally every angle of the case and verdict and every possible scenario has been discussed as nauseum over the past three years. If you have trouble sleeping tonight there are thousands and thousands of posts to go through

Oh I know that, but that’s not what I was asking about today. Thanks for trying to be helpful though.

[3PonyFarm]

@ekat and @lazaret, on today’s filing on the last page under Certification, the sentence that says “this matter is still under investigation” what does that refer to? Thanks!

[hut-ho78]

@BigMama1

@Rubyroo

He could have started the eviction process long before the ninja nonsense began.

He could have and - in hindsight - should have. But he was clearly under the misapprehension at first that he was dealing with a normal, reasonable person, someone who would leave when it was clear she was unwelcome, without needing to get lawyers and police involved to forcibly evict her from his property.

When she didn’t leave, he still tried to be professional, helpful even, and arranged for a place she and all her horses could go.

And yet she continued her campaign of terror, escalating her efforts to destroy him until he literally snapped and suffered a mental breakdown. I guess that’s what you get for trying to be nice and professional. Pretty sure he won’t ever make that mistake again.

Nice and professional?

Make her so miserable she would beg to leave.

Ruin her ability to compete at FEI through his friends at USEF and sent a complaint to SafeSport.

How nice and professional to shoot her and not to evict her?

Well I hope he doesn’t do it again. I hope he uses the law to its fullest extent from now on.