The officer testified that the casing locations didn’t mean anything. Couldn’t tell anyone where anyone was standing. Even the bullet trajectory didn’t mean a whole lot by itself. However, the testimony makes it clear MB was not by the bush, could not physically have shot the gun at LK the way it was testified to, RG and LK’s testimony didn’t match, and somehow the left arm RG had twisted (and broke) behind MB’s back while he was sitting on him and LK was beating him about the head and the dog was biting everyone was miraculously underneath an unconscious MB next to the gun when the first officer arrived.
And somehow RG told LK to call 911 and then took the phone from LK to talk to 911 while he was tackling, choke-holding, rendering MB unconscious and arm twisting/holding down MB and yelling at her to put the dog up and telling 911 he won’t take the gun from an unconscious man.
The area being pointed at is where the officer found everyone. Look how far away he supposedly tossed that magazine he separated from the gun and the gun was thrown the opposite direction to the gravel pile.
Look at just how narrow that porch is. And keep in mind, there was a loveseat crammed up on it too. If RG had his hand on the door, there was no where for him to be that wasn’t in front of that glass pane. Do we really think he dodged by falling across the path of the bullet?
Wow. You don’t know how OFFENDED I am by your “your fake story” and “because you don’t like the facts.” REALLY offended.
No, I am just incredibly nosey, being a retired municipal worker. As I have stated many times before, I like to watch forensic shows (I’m watching one right now), and I have gotten used to the ‘supposed investigative procedures’ that these shows are always portraying.
I was thinking that because of the “kerfuffle” that must have happened after the shooting, that some disciplinary action, maybe even if just ‘verbal’, or reinforcement of proper investigative technique. Afterall, Michael Barisone was not just your average landlord with a tenant problem. There were eyes on this from much further away than just New Jersey, and I’m sure the local LEO were not expecting it. There was a big magnifying glass aimed on them, I’m sure, after everything.
As a former municipal worker, IF someone requested to speak to a supervisor, a supervisor was ALWAYS found. Sometimes not the one they asked for (“I want to speak to a WATER department supervisor right now!”), but we (the clerical staff) could find ANOTHER supervisor with enough knowledge to be able to handle the questions/situations. We never EVER shrugged off a citizen’s request to speak to someone more important that we were, although many times a supervisor told a citizen the exact same things we had just told that citizen.
Do you know that OUR police clerks can lose their jobs if they make a mistake when doing reports? They are not police officers but do handle complaints from people who “walk in.” LOSE their jobs. Over, possibility, a small mistake. It’s why the not-testing-for-GSR after the shooting, taking RG’s word who ‘was the shooter’, disregarding MB’s earlier request to speak to a supervisor, etc. just totally got to me.
I betcha the LEO of Morris Township are probably decent guys, but their casual response to MB’s calls and requests for help wasn’t professional. I’m sure that they didn’t expect the events of August 7th to happen, but that’s not really an excuse.
Although, I only vaguely knew of Michael Barisone through Stephen Colbert, the ‘equestrian’ background instantly drew me to find out ‘what happened.’ I haven’t been this curious (and incredulous) about an ‘athletic’ incident since Spider Sabich.
When I was much, MUCH younger, I used to write. At one time, I was writing an anthology of stories about women. Each of them was based on a personal trait or aspect of mine. I was trying to describe these different women’s characteristics to my cousin and stated that one, Thorn, was more “all of me.” Off the cuff I said to my cousin, “ALL that I am is Thorn. Thorn speaks for JUSTICE, and I SPEAK for Thorn.”
That’s what I want. Justice.
Edited: to fix grammar, to be more concise, and to add the three new sentences in the beginning. The original is quoted below, if interested.
As far as the cameras, the defense asked the Heymer if RG had made any statements about the camera. It was objected to as heresy and Taylor rules that the officer could not answer with any statements attributed to RG. The officer admitted to having put in his report that there was a camera that had possibly recorded the shooting. However, we know from the Miranda hearing that the officer had already said that RG had directly said that the shooting was on camera.
So what happened here? Or what didn’t happen and why? I just don’t get all that. How could they have been so - lax isnt the right word. So purporsefully negligent? Its so wierd.
When the second officer arrived he testified RG was running around the yard, for minutes, chasing after the dog, behind the gravel pile, (where there is a pond). He wasn’t completely focused on RG at the moment.
The look on the officers face immediately after testifying that RG was partially in the residence so he partially came out of the residence…held for a long minute too.
That was officer Wurtemberg, the second to arrive on scene, who testified that he never took his eyes off of RG and that RG never went all the way into the house, that he leaned in just to put the dog inside the door.
Heresy? Did you mean hearsay? There was also testimony that the cameras on-site recorded to the cloud, not to the camera, so retrieving the cameras for evidence would not have provided any footage. They did not seek any footage from the cloud later though.
I think people are trying to put it into proportion. So as much as she overstated there is an attempt to dial it back.
Simply describing what was done and why in a flat tone can sound like understating (what the heck, auto spell?) in comparison to the build-up (and outright lies) LK was spreading about online.
I think Rosie was an earlier participant in the scene than we realize. Did she come barreling out of a door at Michael, who knew she had recently bitten RC and had a habit of biting people, and he was aiming for Rosie, and LK attacked him? Was LK attacking him and RG let Rosie out and he was firing at Rosie?
We’ll never know but I think she had a bigger role than not.
That is not true. I’ve never made him out to be an evil villain. I agree with the jury that he was insane at the time he shot her. I disagree with her behavior being the cause or sole cause of his insanity.
