Mb civil suit rulings 11/15/2022

[eggbutt]

@Unfforgettable

Right up until LK sues the author.

Perhaps lawsuits are how she earns her $$. I wonder how the CBS suit is moving along? Perhaps they will ignore her filings, subpoenas, etc and allow her to waste her own $$ on a frivolous suit.

[Paint_Party]

@Unfforgettable

@Angela_Freda

I personally think someone should be working with MB (eventually) on a book about what has happened to him and how he managed to find the strength to fight this.

That would be awesome, and maybe even a movie.

Right up until LK sues the author.

While a first-person recounting would be an intriguing read, the easiest way to forego any nasty threats would be to have MB sell his story to a proven novelist, like a talented ghost writer who also works in fiction. Then the names and certain locations get altered yet the crux of the story remains the same, with the popular “based on a true story” tagline.

[trubandloki]

Question - I might have missed it, so excuse the question if it was obvious. What happened with the whole Kirby Kanarek (@Seeker1) and the transcripts? Was it one of the things that the scope needed to be more clear? But she will still have to provide the transcripts once the scope is clarified?

[ekat]

@trubandloki

Question - I might have missed it, so excuse the question if it was obvious. What happened with the whole Kirby Kanarek (@Seeker1) and the transcripts? Was it one of the things that the scope needed to be more clear? But she will still have to provide the transcripts once the scope is clarified?

Yes, that was one of the things where the scope has to be more clear. Since that original subpoena came from Mr Deininger, on behalf of MB, he now has 9 days to reissue a more narrow subpoena.

[trubandloki]

Thank you for clarifying.
The response kind of put them together.

So the magical transcripts will have to be produced.
Glad to know that Kirby Kanarek @Seeker1 will still have to produce the often bragged about transcripts.
And Jonathan Kanarek (@Inigo-montoya) will have to produce records in the same time frame, once the scope is clarified.

[Dragonfly90]

@Sdel

Juries certainly don’t have to follow the “rules” if they don’t want to. It’s just as likely they felt he needed mental health help and wanted to make sure that happened. So, there you go RI.

If true then MB should be furious at the jury. They felt he was innocent but condemned him to where he doesn’t know when or if he will be released? He could have just as easily gotten help without being in a position where a judge(who apparently by his comments has a feeling MB was faking insanity) has to rule when MB can be released. This theory is crazy, imo.

[Dragonfly90]

@Rel6

With the lower burden of proof on LK they may not feel like there is not much risk in having to re-present proof where as MB’s team might worry about having to reprove mental state?

Interesting. So LK can also question the results of the criminal trial and claim at the civil trial MB was not insane at the time of the shooting? Would this be similar to how while O.J was found innocent in the criminal trial, he was ordered to pay in the civil trial to the victims family?

[eggbutt]

There was significant evidence of OJ’s guilt due to excellent forensic evidence gathering. That is completely opposite to this case where there is zero evidence of Barisone shooting anyone. It could be a tough hill to climb if she goes that route with all Barisone’s team will be allowed to present that was barred from the criminal trial.

[Dragonfly90]

I don’t agree there was zero evidence against MB however thanks for a polite response! OJ criminal trial jury must have not accepted the extensive evidence and MB criminal jury accepted whatever evidence was presented. But I really don’t want to retrial the trial here.
More interested in how the civil trial will proceed.

[eggbutt]

That damn “if it doesn’t fit you must acquit” glove gambit.

[Sdel]

@Dragonfly90

They felt he was innocent but condemned him to where he doesn’t know when or if he will be released? He could have just as easily gotten help without being in a position where a judge(who apparently by his comments has a feeling MB was faking insanity) has to rule when MB can be released.

I think based on his 48 hours interview he would acknowledge that he needed help and an evaluation. He got that, and was deemed fine to enter an outpatient program. If he is furious at anyone, he should be furious with a judge who punitively decided to take a footnote, that was probably influenced by Kanarek lies, from people who had never treated him over his actual treatment team’s recommendation because they got showed up in a trial. And yes, judges and prosecutors take their records seriously. They don’t like it when the state loses.

[FitzE]

@ekat

I’m pretty sure she’s going to go with public area/no expectation of privacy.

I think this is going to be a hard sell. A private training facility/residence is not like a public square or shopping mall. The owner is allowed to ‘exclude’ people from that property in ways that cannot be done in truly public areas. There is also the concept of the people on the property being ‘invitees’ not the general public. Everyone on the property had to be ‘invited’ or allowed by MB, be they boarder, farrier, vet, or Stephen Colbert. No one can roll up to a facility like that and film or wander around and check things out or pet the horses, etc. It’s a private facility.

Furthermore, they are going to face an uphill battle claiming that no expectation of privacy attaches to calls made in his office. I don’t envy whomsoever has to cobble together a coherent response to all this.

[ekat]

@FitzE

I think this is going to be a hard sell. A private training facility/residence is not like a public square or shopping mall. The owner is allowed to ‘exclude’ people from that property in ways that cannot be done in truly public areas. There is also the concept of the people on the property being ‘invitees’ not the general public. Everyone on the property had to be ‘invited’ or allowed by MB, be they boarder, farrier, vet, or Stephen Colbert. No one can roll up to a facility like that and film or wander around and check things out or pet the horses, etc. It’s a private facility.

Furthermore, they are going to face an uphill battle claiming that no expectation of privacy attaches to calls made in his office. I don’t envy whomsoever has to cobble together a coherent response to all this.

Oh, I agree with you. It’s going to be a really hard sell. I don’t envy the person responding to this claim either.

It will be interesting for sure to see what they come up with.

[erinmeri]

Without disrespecting the filmmakers or the subjects or the content, this looks like thousands of pitch decks/websites I got as an acquisitions executive. I think there’s some gorgeous footage and the case does sound like a landmark, but I wouldn’t consider him a producer or film executive, rather a hanger on with links to an interesting story. Curious where this film will land… and whether it will look beyond the original case, but I think it’s hilarious that he has a film company website set up.

[IPEsq]

Lawyer here. The background / procedural posture at the beginning is not a finding of fact or a ruling. The judge here did find certain facts such as Barisone’s requests for production, as written, are overly burdensome and vague. He also found that LK had sufficient reason not to attend a deposition in person and that the defendants didn’t satisfactorily show that in person deposition is necessary. He also found that Barisone’s amended counterclaims were not barred as a matter of law. No findings were made as to the underlying claims in the case or the facts with respect to anyone’s particular injury, as those issues were not before the court at this time—only the motions before it, which dealt with other facts.

[erinmeri]

@IPEsq

Lawyer here. The background / procedural posture at the beginning is not a finding of fact or a ruling. The judge here did find certain facts such as Barisone’s requests for production, as written, are overly burdensome and vague. He also found that LK had sufficient reason not to attend a deposition in person and that the defendants didn’t satisfactorily show that in person deposition is necessary. He also found that Barisone’s amended counterclaims were not barred as a matter of law. No findings were made as to the underlying claims in the case or the facts with respect to anyone’s particular injury, as those issues were not before the court at this time—only the motions before it, which dealt with other facts.

Can we pin this too? Thank you!

[BigMama1]

@CurrentlyHorseless

No, BigMama, I do not agree that the judge is incorrect for stating that MB “was found guilty of attempted murder, but not criminally liable.”

That’s your position. I understand your position but disagree with it.

This is hilarious. You state in one post that you know he was not found guilty of attempted murder, but you can’t bring yourself to say that the judge was wrong when HE says MB was found guilty of attempted murder. The cognitive dissonance must be making your brain explode

Flat earthers also disagree with my position on the shape of the planet. It doesn’t make them less wrong, less willfully ignorant, and less obtuse.

[BigMama1]

@IPEsq

No findings were made as to the underlying claims in the case or the facts with respect to anyone’s particular injury, as those issues were not before the court at this time—only the motions before it, which dealt with other facts.

Most of us have no problem understanding that. Despite your excellent explanation, a few will still refuse to grasp it.

[Sdel]

@erinmeri

Curious where this film will land… and whether it will look beyond the original case, but I think it’s hilarious that he has a film company website set up.

From the website:

Based upon the landmark settlement reached in that case, the company produced its first film entitled Boy Scout’s Honor which has been selected for screening at the Portland Film Festival on October 12, 2022. The Company has worldwide distribution of Boy Scout’s Honor with Gravitas and Wide. The Company is currently working on several new documentary film projects.

[erinmeri]

@Rel6

From the New Jersey Statutes for Insanity Defense:

“A person is not criminally responsible for conduct if at the time of such conduct he was laboring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing, or if he did know it, that he did not know what he was doing was wrong. Insanity is an affirmative defense which must be proved by a preponderance of the evidence.”

Directly from the NJ Courts Model Jury Charges (basically where judges get the words they read to tell the jury what to consider and how to evaluated the case):

"If you find that the State has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt any essential element of the offense, or the defendant’s participation in the offense, you must find the defendant not guilty and you need not consider the evidence as to the defendant’s insanity.

If you find that the State has proved beyond a reasonable doubt each essential element of the offense, and the defendant’s participation in the offense, you must then consider the evidence as to the defendant’s insanity."

A not guilty verdict is “the person did not do the act.” A NGRI verdict is “the person did the act, but is not legally responsible because of their mental state.” The jury only moves on to considering insanity if the jury thinks the individual committed the act.

The first question on the verdict sheet for the attempted murder of LK charge was probably something like “do you believe that MB attempted to murder LK.” If the jury checks no, that is a not guilty verdict and they stop. If the jury checks yes, they are likely instructed to continue to a second question that said something like “if yes, do you believe that MB was laboring under such a defect of reason from disease of the mind as not to know the nature and quality of the act, or if MB did know it, that he did not know that what he was doing was wrong.” A check no there is a guilty verdict. A check yes is NGRI.

So whether the jury found MB to have committed the act can be assumed from the NGRI verdict according to the model jury instructions and statute definition of the defense (so no need to take out any disagreement on me!) But, what is more interesting is how that affects the civil case. There is probably a check box on a verdict sheet proving whether the jury found him to have committed the acts, but those are sealed and handed to a court security officer once the judge reads them. Jury proceedings are closely guarded and generally not subject to subpoena. Again, if the civil court decides not to carry over any of the findings it won’t matter anyway and LK has to prove everything. If the civil court decides some of the issues were already decided in the criminal case and those decisions are binding (like whether MB shot LK), the court has to find a way to determine whether a final decision was made and apply it in the case. Not sure how that is going to happen either.

A NGRI verdict is so rare to begin with (and shows the strength of MB’s criminal case) that it doesn’t surprise me this exact circumstance is even rarer. My guess is we won’t get a lot of answers on this specific issue until discovery concludes and it moves onto to motions for summary judgement - probably early next year given the glacial pace of LK and co.

Thank you! But what you have outlined above assumes people follow instructions without fail and that they have no biases that may exert pressure on their decisions. Having served on a jury in a similar case (inasmuch as it involved a non-fatal shooting), I have seen the machinations of a jury. Isn’t it true that it is reasonable to think that a jury might have found the fundamental facts of the case confusing and were not convinced that he shot her, but found the NGRI verdict the easiest path to a verdict? (i.e. jury nullification)?

I don’t think we (g) can assert that the jury’s findings mean that the state proved he shot her. I certainly didn’t find their argument compelling and remain unconvinced that him shooting her is any more likely than her being shot in a scuffle. We haven’t heard from the fact finders.