Mb civil suit rulings 11/15/2022

[Jealoushe]

A boarder would be an established customer though wouldn’t it?

[Knights_Mom]

@Jealoushe

A boarder would be an established customer though wouldn’t it?

Yes they would be.

[DownYonder]

@Knights_Mom

As for me and others, we have the answer. LK illegally placed recording devices.

And that’s why they couldn’t be used at the criminal trial and that’s why they are brought up by the Defendants in the civil proceeding.

I thought that Taylor wouldn’t allow them to be brought up during the criminal trial because MB didn’t positively know of their existence before the shooting incident, so they couldn’t have had an effect on his state of mind at the time.

And although MB may have suspected them, the bug sweeper he hired found no evidence of them and Taylor wasn’t going to allow a suspicion to be used as “evidence.”

Am I misremembering?

[Angela_Freda]

@DownYonder

I am thinking that even if Mr. B pressed her on that issue, Taylor would have shut him down (since a long gun was not relevant to the shooting incident, and he would probably have been concerned that it would look bad to a NJ jury to hear that LK owned - gasp - an AR-15).

Could be relevant in the civil trial, wrt her making threats and threatening statements.

[Rubyroo]

@Knights_Mom

The people who are at the barn because they are established customers sre told where and when they can access the property. People off the street do not have the same invitation. If you doubt my word I’ll give you the address of a barn in your area and you try waltzing in at 2 am and we shall see what happens.

I’m not talking about people off the street and what does 2 am have to do with this conversation? If you can expect that no one will ever walk in on you when you are changing your clothes in the tack room at your barn, that’s awesome for you, but that’s not the norm from my experience.

[Sdel]

@KurPlexed

@hut-ho78

But it was RG’s. Both the barn and the house.

So LK carried WC?

Not exactly. RG was at best working as a contractor. That does not make the barn/house his workplace.

If I hired someone to install some Sheetrock on my property, that does not give them the right to put upon a recorder and record me while they are not on site.

[Kitty64]

I can’t believe you are defending someone who put recording devices on someone else’s property. It’s like we are so far apart on expectations it’s impossible to bridge the gap.

[Knights_Mom]

@DownYonder

@Knights_Mom

As for me and others, we have the answer. LK illegally placed recording devices.

And that’s why they couldn’t be used at the criminal trial and that’s why they are brought up by the Defendants in the civil proceeding.

I thought that Taylor wouldn’t allow them to be brought up during the criminal trial because MB didn’t positively know of their existence before the shooting incident, so they couldn’t have had an effect on his state of mind at the time.

And although MB may have suspected them, the bug sweeper he hired found no evidence of them and Taylor wasn’t going to allow a suspicion to be used as “evidence.”

Am I misremembering?

You are not misrembering. The declaration of illegality was made by MBs attorneys and I’m sure they are aware of NJ law. Taylor already had a premise in which to disallow the recordings and it was an easy one for him. No need to be duplicative on that. But it was MBs attorneys who wanted them in. Schellhorn COULDN’T have them in based on he knew they were illegally obtained. At least that’s my understanding.

I’m sure Schellhorn would have LOVED to have them in if they proved conspiracy to commit murder being he lost the case in a big old hard way.

[Angela_Freda]

@Ambitious_Kate

I rememer reading her post about a Ruger. I remember it was a Ruger

I remembered it was a Ruger because my dogs brother is named Ruger

[Rubyroo]

@trubandloki

Are people knocking before they enter a locker room?

I replied to someone who mentioned undressing in a tack room. My subsequent replies have all been referring to privacy expectations (or lack thereof) in tack rooms.

The purpose of locker rooms (if you are talking about the kind you would find at a gym) is to provide people with a place to undress in relative privacy. The expectation of privacy is built into them, and no one needs to knock because the entrances are designed such that anyone can enter at any time while still preventing people on the outside to see what is going on inside the locker room. The purpose of a tack room is to store tack and equine supplies; they are not designed for the purpose of shielding naked people from those who are outside. Do people really not know all this?

[Knights_Mom]

@Rubyroo

@Knights_Mom

The people who are at the barn because they are established customers sre told where and when they can access the property. People off the street do not have the same invitation. If you doubt my word I’ll give you the address of a barn in your area and you try waltzing in at 2 am and we shall see what happens.

I’m not talking about people off the street and what does 2 am have to do with this conversation? If you can expect that no one will ever walk in on you when you are changing your clothes in the tack room at your barn, that’s awesome for you, but that’s not the norm from my experience.

I’m not arguing the changing in the tack room at all. Never mentioned it. That was someone else. The expectation of privacy I’m talking about is being in an area and having a private conversation without a 3rd party not involved in the conversation illegally recording you.

[Jealoushe]

In live on my own farm and even I worry about this at time from pop ins ahhaha

[Rubyroo]

@Kitty64

I can’t believe you are defending someone who put recording devices on someone else’s property. It’s like we are so far apart on expectations it’s impossible to bridge the gap.

I’m not defending anyone; I’m discussing expectations of privacy in tack rooms.

I don’t find anyone on either side of this case likable in any way, so please don’t think I am ever defending anyone here.

[eggbutt]

@Knights_Mom

I’m sure Schellhorn would have LOVED to have them in if they proved conspiracy to commit murder being he lost the case in a big old hard way.

There is no way Schellhorn/Taylor wouldn’t have brought the illegal recordings in if they proved Michael was conspiring to murder LK. By now we all, except for just a few deniers, know the recordings are nothing burgers as far as bombshells for Ms Kanarek and her crew. The grasping for straws continue.

[Knights_Mom]

@eggbutt

@Knights_Mom

I’m sure Schellhorn would have LOVED to have them in if they proved conspiracy to commit murder being he lost the case in a big old hard way.

There is no way Schellhorn/Taylor wouldn’t have brought the illegal recordings in if they proved Michael was conspiring to murder LK. By now we all, except for just a few deniers, know the recordings are nothing burgers as far as bombshells for Ms Kanarek and her crew. The grasping for straws continue.

Even further, I bet they are damning to LKs case which explains all the foot dragging.

[Angela_Freda]

@CurrentlyHorseless

There is lots of stuff in the recordings that is ambiguous.

How would you know, have you heard them?

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Knights_Mom

I’m sure Schellhorn would have LOVED to have them in if they proved conspiracy to commit murder being he lost the case in a big old hard way.

No one was charged with conspiracy to commit murder. Just attempted murder and weapons charges.

[Sdel]

@Knights_Mom

I’m sure Schellhorn would have LOVED to have them in if they proved conspiracy to commit murder being he lost the case in a big old hard way.

Well, RC supposedly brought the gun SPECIFICALLY for the event. And MHG SPECIFICALLY asked her to bring it. According to all the FB and CotH posting. MB was just supposed to be MHG’s fall guy it seems…and that’s why LK could possibly train with him again and would have been willing to help him out if he rolled on MHG.

[Jealoushe]

@eggbutt

By now we all, except for just a few deniers, know the recordings are nothing burgers as far as bombshells for Ms Kanarek and her crew.

Why do they want the transcripts so bad then? Unless they feel the Ks will use this as ammo for something in the trial?

[hut-ho78]

No one thinks there was a conspiracy to commit murder. However, once LK was shot, incautious figures of speech could certainly take on an ominous tone. I don’t blame her for thinking it was a conspiracy. Also, if she was stressing and defensive to the point of thinking everyone was against her and felt they were after her, she might have thought she was recording nefarious goings on even though they may turn out not to be.

I think this all was a mass hysteria meltdown of epic proportions where everyone was freaked out, telling tales, making everything as lurid as possible and MB and LK were way too fragile for that kind of environment. She was acting out and he went insane and shot her twice.

It was a downward spiral of bad decisions that went bad in a terrible way. It was not one or the other, it was both.