Yes, someone has bought out RC’s half of the horse. But in the beginning, at the time the lawsuit was filed, it seems like it would have been a nice little package deal huh?
2 Likes
If only if only. If only he had her sign a contract (Tarshis testified she did not). If only he evicted her. If only he trained her. If only she stayed on NC with the lovely trainer that helped her.
It was a plethora of bad decisions by all.
You had and hopefully still have great insurance coverage.
Anyone else notice how certain posters always voice the least desirable (for MB) outcome in any prediction of future events?
It’s almost like wishful thinking on their part since the trial didn’t go as they hoped. Or, they have confidence in the unprofessionalism of Taylor and believe he will continue to ignore laws and continue his punitive actions against MB.
25 Likes
I’m sure someone has already answered (since I’m 200 posts behind still), but I’m assuming it’s a reference to Radar O’Reilly in MASH.
8 Likes
Well, I finished reading the New Jersey disciplinary report for 2021. I am both horrified and gratified by what I read. Horrified as to some of the things that police officers were documented as doing and gratified that there were consequences for those actions.
There’s always talk about ‘police unions’ being able to protect law enforcement from all consequences, but it doesn’t appear to be true. There WERE several reports where something was cited as the ‘fourth instance’ of the violation, and I imagine that the police union/contract gave them multiple that amount of “protection.” But eventually, it looks as though “enough is enough.” I AM amazed that some officers were just suspended and not terminated, but a few of those suspensions were 365 days.
There were so many disciplinary actions that it made me wonder how many there could be in a more populated state.
I came across a simple but very interesting disciplinary report. The officer got an 8-day suspension, obviously not terminated, but the exact wording was this:
"Description: While off duty, Officer XXX (I’m leaving out his name here) engaged in a physical altercation. When his weapon became dislodged, it unintentionally discharged."
Wow. Just think about that. A physical altercation/fight, and then a gun accidently goes off. What are the odds?..
24 Likes
If only he trained her?
Wow.
That’s right up there with IM saying she would let MB train her again. A visit into WTF Land.
27 Likes
I posted this report in order to very clearly show the gamut of police failure to adequately perform their duties. After reading this I’m sure you can see that it is not beyond reasonable comprehension that any number of things are possible in regard to police procedure or action in the MB/LK event.
21 Likes
It really does read more like wishful thinking than any kind of reality check.
DIdn’t Taylor say he could be released by the program any time they said he finished the steps, but other wise he’d see him in 6 months? He’s just waiting for the program to be put into place, isn’t he? I could be wrong, just what I’m remembering.
How does that translate into being detained in NJ? And where in NJ? In his truck?
I don’t know where CC-non-rider gets the idea he would be released with any kind of conidtions staying in NJ. Why NJ? He doesn’t live in NJ, plus, he’s not on parole, he wasn’t convicted.
CC sounds like she’s making up scenarios out of thin air. Since when do people not get to go home when they are released from an inpatient facility?
18 Likes
It’s the desire to be punitive and to keep on punishing him. Finish the bastard is ingrained into the supporters as well. I bet they don’t realize the depth of their indoctrination. Otherwise why would you care about people you don’t supposedly know?
15 Likes
Yes, their leader is whispering in their ear and they just say it, even if a thinking person wouldn’t go there. Or, maybe they did come up with it all on their own, depends on how indoctrinated they are.
8 Likes
You actually think she would have respected a contract? 
What in her past history gives you that idea?
And as for evicting her, just look how she reacted once the first step was officially taken; she dialled things up to Defcon 3.
But sure, pretend she would have left gracefully and quietly if only there was a piece of paper lol.
41 Likes
Making this deduction would require Lauren Kanarek to have some self awareness and in my opinion, based on her posting history, she is totally not picking up what she is putting down.
I am sure in her mind she could just get some trainer to come in and do her bidding, because that is how it works.
Something I find interesting on this topic…
Lauren Kanarek and her followers and family have spent endless keystrokes exaggerating every detail of her injuries and treatment. Helicopter ride, some made up number of days in the ICU, flatlined twice, the vast number of surgeries, etc. But I have yet to see them tossing out some crazy number on what all that cost them.
It is free if you have no reportable income.
I agree that it is not cheap for anyone basically middle class or above.
What I found the most amusing by the comment that you are responding to is - If having the Name On The Door train Lauren Kanarek was that much of a requirement then it seems like she would have left a very long time before anything happened at all. So, having Michael train her was not the issue, not the real issue, it is an excuse for them to make a fuss.
16 Likes
[quote=“Sdel, post:4955, topic:778966, full:true”]
I think that that the main reason LK was hoping to get DeeDee (was that his name?) in a settlement is not so much because she wants or needs the horse but rather because it would give her such great emotional satisfaction to hurt MHG by taking away one of her possessions, esp. since said possession was playing an integral part in enhancing MHG’s career as a rider. And LK would also get great emotional satisfaction in hurting RC for supporting her arch rival. It’s just another way to torment her adversaries.
29 Likes
Do you know for a fact that he hadn’t tried? Did that come out in testimony?
Somehow I doubt she would willingly sign a contract esp. since she has made a life’s career out of avoiding any sort of personal responsibility.
16 Likes
We are talking about the woman who made a scene when asked to sign a standard release.
Had you forgotten that part?
32 Likes
When it first rolled out I paid $78/month for a very good plan. Now I pay almost $200 for the same policy 
3 Likes
Since LK apparently has a deep-seated emotional need to keep acquiring horses even though she doesn’t have unlimited means to care for them (despite her claims), I can totally see how she may have decided that the perfect solution is to get the farm. She could then continue to live in the house as the Duchess of HH, and keep all her horsies “for free,” and with a nice facility like that, it wouldn’t be hard for her to find some trainer to manage the place. She could even get big gun trainers in there for clinics, so she could hobnob with those at the top of the sport. And she could even figure out a way to pay herself and RG for being the “farm managers” (assuming she can keep the barn full of paying clients and keep the bills paid).
It’s exactly what the Lundberg’s (is that their name?) did - own a farm but have someone else manage it and run it. The main difference is that they live elsewhere and apparently didn’t involve themselves much (or at all) with the operation of the farm. And this type of arrangement is not at all uncommon (I’ve boarded in similar situations where I rarely saw the actual farm owner).
And yeah, I know all the pitfalls - the difficulty of keeping good help (esp. with an erratic and emotionally unstable owner), the difficulty of attracting well-heeled boarders to keep the cash flow going, the spiraling costs of feed, hay, labor, taxes, maintenance, insurance, etc. But somehow I doubt she has any worries about any of that - after all, if things get dicey, there is always Daddy to help her get out of trouble.
Yep, she no doubt had it all figured out in her mind. “Don’t worry about another new horsie, Daddy. We will get the farm and then I can keep them for free.” 
12 Likes
Re: coverage through the exchange under the ACA.
There are four levers that affect your cost - 1.)the previous claims experience in that zip code 2.) the underwriter - Aetna, Cigna, UHC, whoever and their claims/admin cost 3.) your plan level 4.) the amount of subsidy you are granted based on your income level.
If you are in a rural area that has had high claims experience, that is small risk pool, high cost - your premium is going to be higher. If there’s only one insurer that covers your area, then smaller risk pool, higher claims cost, higher premium. The plan level is a big consideration - it you want a traditional co-pay plan with a low deductible, you are going to pay a LOT. Because guess who selects those plans? Sick people, or people who anticipate high claims experience. Much more cost effective to have a high deductible plan and an HSA. As far as the subsidy, I know several people who are paying less that $100 a month for a Bronze plan through the exchange, because of the subsidy.
Completely idle speculation: I would be shocked if LK didn’t have some kind of health insurance. Since she doesn’t qualify as an Adult Dependent Child, she probably had coverage of her own, through the healthcare marketplace, at a very low cost because she has little reportable income.
Yes, it means her family would have to pay the deductibles and up to the out of pocket maximum, which can be thousands.
Back to your regularly scheduled programming!
12 Likes
