Mb civil suit rulings 11/15/2022

[Sdel]

@CanteringCarrot

I mean, I think that LK is full of it when it comes to not being able to travel due to a weakened physical state and finances*, but otherwise it has been court procedure to conduct business virtually, and that isn’t a big deal.

Maybe the attorneys should have included her YT comments about riding 6 horses a day and being better than she was at MB’s. Maybe they felt it was better to hold that back for some other time though.

[Sdel]

So, we essentially have the judge granting the discovery from the prosecution, granting the amended claims (so the judge is agreeing that LK admitted to illegally wiretapped MB) and then kicking the can/giving JK/KK more rope to hang themselves with in regards to their discovery.

[eggbutt]

Hmmmm, is is possible Nagel wrote the document for him??? It sure sounds exactly like his spin. Yeah, I suspect fingers are busily making corrections to the misstatements as we speak. What is it with NJ? Truly remarkable!

[Knights_Mom]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@trubandloki

@CurrentlyHorseless

But we can end our tiresome back and forth. I’ll just cite the judge’s ruling whenever you assert that MB was found not guilty.

Should I cite the Judgement of Acquittal form? I think it is more legally binding than this document you are puffing your chest about. Or are you just ignoring that?

I am aware and have never disputed that NGRI is an acquittal. It’s an acquittal based on the “not criminally responsible for his conduct due to insanity” part of the NGRI verdict.

@Knights_Mom has asserted that the judge is “wrong”, just like she has asserted Hut-Ho and I’ve been wrong on this. That’s what I’m puffing my chest about.

I have not heard back from @Ekat and @lazaret on whether they are still sure the issue of whether Barisone shot her will be relitigated, given what the judge has stipulated as the background of the civil case. .

I continue to assert that you and the judge are wrong as Guilty but Insane is not allowed or no longer allowed in NJ.

We all know what the verdict was. Well most of us do.

[trubandloki]

@CurrentlyHorseless, how are you explaining away the other mistakes in the document?

Edit to add an S on mistake to make it mistakes.

[Knights_Mom]

@trubandloki

@CurrentlyHorseless, how are you explaining away the other mistake in the document?

You mean like the straight NOT GUILTY verdict as to shooting at RG?

[eggbutt]

I wonder how quickly that acquittal form was put in front of Sceusi and how quickly he reamed his clerks?!

[trubandloki]

@Knights_Mom

@trubandloki

@CurrentlyHorseless, how are you explaining away the other mistake in the document?

You mean like the straight NOT GUILTY verdict as to shooting at RG?

Oh, I should edit my post to have an s on mistake so it says mistakes.

I was referring to the part I referenced earlier. Though, your example is even better than mine.

[Rel6]

Quick correction: the judge is not agreeing that LK admitted to illegally wiretapping MB. The judge is agreeing to allow MB to proceed with the legal claim that LK unlawfully wiretapped MB. There is difference. The judge isn’t agreeing with any factual assertions about the claim, but allowing MB to proceed with it.

In answer to your other question, basically no facts have yet been determined as it related to this lawsuit. With the exception of a bench trial (judge acting a jury for a trial) the judge’s role is almost never to determine facts. There will be motions where only the law will be argued, but in terms of determining facts in a dispute - only a jury can do that (mostly). So the background language is giving context to the rest of the motion, but are not the facts as legally determined in this specific lawsuit (if that makes sense).

[Sdel]

@Rel6

So the background language is giving context to the rest of the motion, but are not the facts as legally determined in this specific lawsuit (if that makes sense).

So…anything written in the background section is meaningless, essentially?

[Knights_Mom]

Not if it’s parroted in the Judges reasoning in his order.

[Rel6]

I would not consider anything in a judge’s order meaningless. It is an odd posture given that some of the main factual allegations have already been litigated in criminal court, and I genuinely have no idea how that is going to play out. I’ll be interested to see what I’m guessing is inevitable briefing on that issue.

[hut-ho78]

[hut-ho78]

@Angela_Freda

@Rel6

It adds another thing MB is alleging against LK. So he is now alleging she also violated NJ’s Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act. I don’t remember all the original causes of action he alleged in the complaint, but this adds another.

Basically - if before he alleged 2 causes of actions (or legal theories for why she is liable to him), now he is alleging 3

But if, in the course of discovery, you learned this, even after statute of limitation had been reached… Seems ya can’t pursue something until you know about it… and he’s been incarcerated or in a mental institution those whole time, making that kinda challenging…

Except he saw all her social media and pulled out media he saw after the shooting to provide to the psychiatrist. So he knew when working with Dr Simring right after the shooting. Remember how Dr Simring claimed better perspective because he had first and timely access?

[trubandloki]

@Rel6

I would not consider anything in a judge’s order meaningless. It is an odd posture given that some of the main factual allegations have already been litigated in criminal court, and I genuinely have no idea how that is going to play out. I’ll be interested to see what I’m guessing is inevitable briefing on that issue.

Um. How does one know where to draw the line on the truthfulness of the “factual allegations” that “have already been litigated in criminal court” when the judge’s writings include this line? There is no debating that all the charges against Roberty Guy Goodwin/Jim E Starks were found Not Guilty. So … Um…

I think this is the type of thing that @sdel is wondering about, how to figure out what is facts and what is just writings.

[Sdel]

@Rel6

I’ll be interested to see what I’m guessing is inevitable briefing on that issue.

So, I’m other words, there will most likely be some evidence presented that things are not what they seemed and highlighting the bias and incorrect factual basis that went into that part of the background.

[jaj]

Are you up to about three posts now on this?

[Sdel]

@trubandloki

@Rel6

I would not consider anything in a judge’s order meaningless. It is an odd posture given that some of the main factual allegations have already been litigated in criminal court, and I genuinely have no idea how that is going to play out. I’ll be interested to see what I’m guessing is inevitable briefing on that issue.

Um. How does one know where to draw the line on the truthfulness of the “factual allegations” that “have already been litigated in criminal court” when the judge’s writings include this line? There is no debating that all the charges against Roberty Guy Goodwin/Jim E Starks were found Not Guilty. So … Um…

I think this is the type of thing that @sdel is wondering about, how to figure out what is facts and what is just writings.

And that she was lawfully on the porch. I thought that was one of the many facts being disputed (specifically by SGF) in this case, so how can the judge make that statement, especially if there has been no evidence presented to the judge to base the fact on.

[Jealoushe]

@jaj

Are you up to about three posts now on this?

huh?

[hut-ho78]

@trubandloki

@CurrentlyHorseless

But we can end our tiresome back and forth. I’ll just cite the judge’s ruling whenever you assert that MB was found not guilty.

Should I cite the Judgement of Acquittal form? I think it is more legally binding than this document you are puffing your chest about. Or are you just ignoring that?

The acquittal document also states Murder-attempt.

I too thought I’m New Jersey that the lesser charge if the attempted murder wasn’t successful and the victim lived after being shot twice, flatlining at least twice, extensive and invasive emergency surgeries was aggravated assault.

He was acquitted of the crime, not the act. The act that caused the injuries he was proven to have committed.

NGRI. The prosecutor met the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, the highest standard, that he committed the act that would otherwise be a crime except the defense met the burden of proof by a preponderance of evidence that he was insane at the time.

Then IANAL.