Nah - just watch 48 hours. LK was able to undergo the cosmetic procedure. Scar tissue must have not been an issue. .
Itâs true officer Heymer did come into a very chaotic scene, which in my mind lends credence to the probability that there was no way he could have kept eyes on RG the whole time while RG was running around the crime scene. It just increases the margin for error.
Several officers looked very squeamish while testifying up on that stand. One in particular stood out.
Definitions matter⊠and active shooter was never a good definition for what happened in this case. Please stop using it unless you enjoy spreading a lie.
Oh, my mistake, thought you were describing RG
OoohâŠyeah - unless stuffed. Probably not stuffed though
This is one of the most disgusting posts Iâve ever read on CoTH. I would be banned if I replied to you in the manner you deserve.
Until you actually know any of the principles involved, perhaps you should back off profound statements such as this post. Disgraceful. Absolutely disgraceful and you know it.
I find it disgusting how RG wasnât investigated for possibly shooting LK himself, and for probably being the one with a gun to start with, so here we both are disgusted about RG. I donât think he saved anybody, I think he jumped MB and beat the living daylights out of him and either shot LK himself, or the gun went off during RGâs attack. I find it disgusting that you attempt to make RG into a hero, when heâs a drug addicted grifter, bully and stalked children online, besides bullying people at the barn, and I do not for one minute believe that heâs a former marine, and I do believe that heâs pretending to be military when he isnât. So thereâs all that, too.
Iâm getting whiplash here. You all have been insisting that Michael asked Lauren to leave many times. Michael himself apparently said he asked her to leave many, many, many times, you have all argued many times that Michaelâs girlfriend had every right to tell her to leave, but now one of you has suddenly decided that Michael DIDNâT want his girlfriend to tell her to leave and that the ONLY person who was allowed to tell her to leave was Michaelâs lawyer and they were all keeping it a secret on purpose so that the sheriff could surprise her, but please remind me who was part of the negotiations about Lauren leaving that took place right before the shooting?
So lots of people were telling Lauren they wanted her to leave, but the fact that they didnât use the term âevictâ in their conversations means that it was a secret that they wanted her to leave and the sheriff would be able to surprise her with a formal eviction notice. Do I have that right?
You really are amazing defending the indefensible. How many times in your life have you knowingly stayed where you KNEW you were not wanted, indicated your extreme fear of being in said place, begged for help to move, yet stayed and continued your orchestrated plan to destroy someone? Seriously? The Kanareks must be very proud of you. Maybe you groupies will be called as character witnesses in the civil trials! /s
The defense of all things Kanarek is close to cult like in the levels of ignoring common sense. It is strikingly similar to the undying support of a political figure of criminal repute (not a political statement, simply a current comparison of behavior).
Sorry, what exactly am I defending in my post? Seriously, using my exact words, please show me who and what I am defending.
Umm, exactly zero.
The Kanareks donât know me, and I doubt they would like me since I have stated multiple times that Lauren seem like a horrible human being.
There, I fixed it for you.
No, you do not have that right.
I realize you are addressing two posters who are more than capable of speaking for themselves, but itâs clear to me that asking her to leave verbally and her getting served a formal eviction notice are not the same thing.
[quote=âAmbitious_Kate, post:4180, topic:778966â]
Just saying just because someone doesnât complete their term of service doesnât mean they were dishonorably discharged, seemed that is what was implied. I agree with you here. I donât know what happen with the boyfriendâs military service(nor does anyone else it seems)and frankly donât care, but his stopping MB that day did save some lives(IMO). Again IMO and in the juryâs MB came that day with a gun to killâŠâŠI do hope his current girlfriend will be careful with her heart, her finances and her safetyâŠshe seems like a very nice,kind smart lady very much in love with a troubled man. Wish everyone involve well. I am not arguing the criminal case again, thatâs over and Jury said he did it but insane at the time⊠so I wonât reply to any one that makes up any other scenario or attacks me in any way.
I was told that one farm she was asked to leave (she wasnât even a boarder) installed security cameras after informing her she was unwelcome. Do you recall this or was I misinformed?
IMO and in the juryâs MB came that day with a gun to kill
Really? Seriously? What leads you to this assumption? We donât have any idea what the jury thought, but you do you, okay?
He had a second magazine in his pocket. Drop one and in with the other.
You must have missed where I already commented on you saying this. There is no proof anywhere that Michael had a second magazine in his pocket. A magazine is not a small thing that is easily missed and the police officer that first searched Michael says he did not find anything on him. I can see an officer missing a razor blade in a pocket but a gun magazine is not missable. If the police officer did not find it, it was not there.
I was told that one farm she was asked to leave (she wasnât even a boarder) installed security cameras after informing her she was unwelcome. Do you recall this or was I misinformed?
Yes, but I donât know if she was the reason cameras were installed. I know there are cameras there now.
You really are amazing defending the indefensible.
Sorry, what exactly am I defending in my post? Seriously, using my exact words, please show me who and what I am defending.
@eggbutt, how about providing specifics on who and what you accused me of defending?
Actually, I agree with your entire post. Best of luck with your situation.
Except youâre totally overlooking the fact that most reasonable people try to avoid a legal battle over over eviction, and try to resolve the situation without involving lawyers. Most reasonable people, when they have been asked to leave and when itâs clear they are unwelcome, leave. No need for lawyers or an eviction on your record. Thatâs what happened here. It was a last resort because LK dug her heels in and declared war when told she needed to leave.