Mb civil suit rulings 11/15/2022

[Mondo]

@hut-ho78

Once again, I don’t think there was illegal recording. I think phones on persons were used (RG) and barn gossip. Friends told friends who told friends who told a friend of LK.

This is the polar opposite of what LK has admitted to and KK has claimed to have transcribed. IANAL, but I know enough about the law to know that your insistence that in order for the “illegal recordings” to be used, someone would have to have been charged, tried, and convicted for them to be of any use is nonsensical. Not to mention that the local police did absolutely NOTHING that might have hurt LK or made her look bad, not to mention the lack of forensic investigation. She TOLD THE POLICE she had recordings of a plot and the cops did NOTHING about it.

@hut-ho78

Right now, even if it is determined at a later date there were illegal recordings, there are no illegal recordings.

You know this…how? LK has insisted for years that these exist. Her friend, Nelly Shelly or whatever, claims to have heard them and to be in possession of them. Her mother, Kirby, claims to have transcribed them. It was only on the witness stand in the criminal trial that they tried to walk back claiming to have recordings. If they don’t exist, why are the attorneys for SGF asking for them?

[DownYonder]

@hut-ho78

Once again, I don’t think there was illegal recording. I think phones on persons were used (RG) and barn gossip. Friends told friends who told friends who told a friend of LK.

Methinks if that were the case, it would be the first time in the history of mankind that something passed verbatim, word-for-word from friend to friend to friend…

[Jealoushe]

Could it be that there are recordings but they determined they weren’t “illegal” and that’s why no charges/suit?

[Knights_Mom]

@hut-ho78

Right now, even if it is determined at a later date there were illegal recordings, there are no illegal recordings.

Awesome statement.

[trubandloki]

@Jealoushe

Could it be that there are recordings but they determined they weren’t “illegal” and that’s why no charges/suit?

Could it be that the prosecution did not want to charge their main witness with making illegal recordings?

Didn’t the ear witness have a conversation with the Kanarek family about how he could get illegal recordings admitted easily. (That was recorded by Robert Guy Goodwin/Jim E Starks secretly and the ear witness was clearly shocked to learn that the defense had a copy of that recording and knew about that conversation.) It seems weird that they were asking that question if all of their secret recordings were legal.

I think Michael’s counter suit does count as a suit about the illegal recordings, no?

[trubandloki]

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

Right now, even if it is determined at a later date there were illegal recordings, there are no illegal recordings.

Awesome statement.

I admit, that I am not even sure what that statement means.

[hut-ho78]

@trubandloki

@hut-ho78

@trubandloki

I am wondering why almost no one is talking about the wiretapping aspect of this that was successfully added. That is a huge deal. Hey @hut-ho78 and @CurrentlyHorseless, what are your thoughts on the counterclaim about wiretapping?

Are you really asking me to give my thoughts on this again? Once again, I don’t think there was illegal recording. I think phones on persons were used (RG) and barn gossip. Friends told friends who told friends who told a friend of LK.

Right now, even if it is determined at a later date there were illegal recordings, there are no illegal recordings. That is a crime. No one has been convicted or indicted of a crime. Even if recordings were not used in the criminal trial because they were “iffy” and risky to use, any recordings must be determined to be legal or illegal with charges brought, guilt accepted, and penalties determined.

Nome of this has happened. It looks like theater and harassment to me. I think the prosecutor already has all that is available and is handing it over.

I think LK talking trash on SM was just her normal blowing smoke.

But, the whole Kanarek family admits there are illegal, well, they leave off the world illegal, recordings. Kirby Kanarek (@Seeker1) bragged about making transcripts of them.

So you think the lawyer at the criminal trial who talked about private conversations between just him and Michael being posted by Lauren on the internet made that up?
How do you think Lauren knew that RC brought her gun? It is not like anyone was talking to Lauren at that point so how would barn gossip get to Lauren?

Lauren for sure does like to trash talk. You got that right.

BTW, just because no one was indicted for a crime does not mean a crime did not take place. You have been around the block for awhile (per your own posts) so you know this.

And yes, I really wanted your thoughts on this.

I have another question, do you think both Lauren Kanarek and Robert Guy Goodwin/Jim E Starks were lying when they said under oath at the criminal trial that they bought recording devices, including putting one in her locker. So, not on their person, recording anything and everything.

my answer to this is in the earlier response as to what I think. LK contradicted herself on this too. She told Rosanna they had them then in court she said they did not, they only told Rosanna that so she wouldn’t worry. Rosanna was so upset about that she joined in here for a bit.

So again, I don’t think there were illegal recordings. If there were any recordings not on the person of LK or RG and maybe on the locker or bench then that could be construed to be an area where one would not expect privacy. In a strict interpretation of the law and how earlier determinations have been made in court, that may or may not be considered a public area. However, a layman, non-lawyer, could claim no criminal intent because they thought it was a public area per the written law. It looks like a public area to me. I wouldn’t expect a private conversation to be private there.

I’ve typed all this before. Thanks for deeming it so important as to request it again but I would guess it’s boring others.

[eggbutt]

It really seems to some Lauren Kanarek is Mother Teresa, at least they seem to believe this woman has never done anything despicable although she, herself, admits doing many of these deeds. I don’t comprehend the blind allegiance to someone these folks insist they don’t know or support.

It is fascinating how so many of the evil personalities in this world are supported by people persuaded to doubt their own moral compass and support the evil, regardless what they know is factual.

[Maria]

You all need to go listen to arguments made outside of the juries presence. Legal/illegal recordings are talked about.

And guess what? Mr. B has those illegal recordings. Not just the ones recorded from LK’s helmet in her locker. Could be from the rock, the porch, the office…

Sorry jelly belly…nelly belly… belly belly…shelly belly

[Knights_Mom]

If a recording is intentionally made by a party who is not engaged in the conversation, unknown by those engaged in the conversation, it is illegal. The expectation of privacy would exist in that facility.

[Maria]

@eggbutt

It really seems to some Lauren Kanarek is Mother Teresa

spitting out diet coke.

Bawhahahahahahahahahahahaha

[hut-ho78]

@Mondo

@hut-ho78

Once again, I don’t think there was illegal recording. I think phones on persons were used (RG) and barn gossip. Friends told friends who told friends who told a friend of LK.

This is the polar opposite of what LK has admitted to and KK has claimed to have transcribed. IANAL, but I know enough about the law to know that your insistence that in order for the “illegal recordings” to be used, someone would have to have been charged, tried, and convicted for them to be of any use is nonsensical. Not to mention that the local police did absolutely NOTHING that might have hurt LK or made her look bad, not to mention the lack of forensic investigation. She TOLD THE POLICE she had recordings of a plot and the cops did NOTHING about it.

@hut-ho78

Right now, even if it is determined at a later date there were illegal recordings, there are no illegal recordings.

You know this…how? LK has insisted for years that these exist. Her friend, Nelly Shelly or whatever, claims to have heard them and to be in possession of them. Her mother, Kirby, claims to have transcribed them. It was only on the witness stand in the criminal trial that they tried to walk back claiming to have recordings. If they don’t exist, why are the attorneys for SGF asking for them?

I thought we went over this and there was actual agreement that her evidence of a plot was knowing of discussions “to get rid of her” which before the shooting looked very benign but after she was shot twice with a gun imported from out of state )which could have been sent back out of state with the owner had the police not timely rushed the scene and secured the weapon) could certainly be construed to have a much more sinister meaning.

I haven’t seen LK or KK admit to illegal recordings or transcriptions of the same either on SM or in court. The illegal recording conversation is coming from commenters on SM and MB’s defense attorneys who are vigorously defending him aka doing their jobs.

[hut-ho78]

@Knights_Mom

If a recording is intentionally made by a party who is not engaged in the conversation, unknown by those engaged in the conversation, it is illegal. The expectation of privacy would exist in that facility.

The expectation of privacy is key in this. To me, a locker room open to several people, boarders, visitors, employees, contractors, etc. of which only two may be in a private conservation is not a place one would expect privacy. You may think differently. It’s what will happen in the court that matters.

[hut-ho78]

@eggbutt

It really seems to some Lauren Kanarek is Mother Teresa, at least they seem to believe this woman has never done anything despicable although she, herself, admits doing many of these deeds. I don’t comprehend the blind allegiance to someone these folks insist they don’t know or support.

It is fascinating how so many of the evil personalities in this world are supported by people persuaded to doubt their own moral compass and support the evil, regardless what they know is factual.

Oh, the irony.

[hut-ho78]

@trubandloki

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

Right now, even if it is determined at a later date there were illegal recordings, there are no illegal recordings.

Awesome statement.

I admit, that I am not even sure what that statement means.

Innocent until proven guilty. Illegally recording is generally considered a crime in New Jersey.

[Kitty64]

Yuck! That’s just gross. If I’m in a store that says video surveillance or similar, I understand I may be taped. But in a private barn? Are you also ok with the gym bros/influencers taking pictures of people to post online and make fun of? If LK was concerned about the going’s on in the barn, guess what? She should’ve left!

[Angela_Freda]

@hut-ho78

She told Rosanna they had them then in court she said they did not, they only told Rosanna that so she wouldn’t worry. Rosanna was so upset about that she joined in here for a bit.

That was about the cameras (video), not the audio devices.

@hut-ho78

The expectation of privacy is key in this. To me, a locker room open to several people, boarders, visitors, employees, contractors, etc. of which only two may be in a private conservation is not a place one would expect privacy. You may think differently. It’s what will happen in the court that matters.

The law matters. And that’s been very clearly explained.
His farm is private property.

[BigMama1]

@hut-ho78

The expectation of privacy is key in this. To me, a locker room open to several people, boarders, visitors, employees, contractors, etc. of which only two may be in a private conservation is not a place one would expect privacy. You may think differently. It’s what will happen in the court that matters.

And Michael’s office? Should he not have an expectation of privacy in there? Or do you really believe that a recorder placed in Lauren’s locker could magically record a phone call taking place in the office behind closed doors?

[Scribbler]

@Jealoushe

Could it be that there are recordings but they determined they weren’t “illegal” and that’s why no charges/suit?

Illegal is a multi tiered word or concept.

Usually when recordings are declared to be illegally obtained in a given jurisdiction the main consequence is that those recordings can not be used as evidence in court.

It’s rare that you hear of a private individual actually being punished for illegal recordings. The exception is when someone puts hidden cameras somewhere creepy like public toilets or cothing store change rooms.

Police are sometimes disciplined for illegally obtained phone wiretaps if it’s seen as a pervasive issue of misconduct.

[Sdel]

@Mondo

She TOLD THE POLICE she had recordings of a plot and the cops did NOTHING about it.

Yes, and she specifically said she had recordings of the conversation between RC and MB about the gun on FB. I believe RC also testified to the general conditions of where that conversation took place. It was not in front of the locker and no one else was around. Bragged multiple times on FB that her recorders (plural) were never found.