I’ve signed them in various countries, it’s what you do at a riding facility, and no-one’s tried to murder me yet - even though they pretty much all had shovels!
She said so many people had come to her wanting to help Barisone that she decided to institute the page. The goal at the moment is to raise $300,000. While others have helped out to this point, she is footing many bills herself.
I have heard people say “punkin” and it makes me want to slap them.
Even if they did give permission, they would have to notify and post that surveillance was happening so that nobody had a reasonable expectation of privacy. Even a workplace can’t just record employees without disclosure. Unless of course the elderly couple was a part of the recorded conversations… that pesky “one party consent” again.
OMG… finally caught up. Maybe I won’t see 800 new posts by the end of whatever day this is now.
General question…if this was true how did this not come out during the trial? I did watch it when it was happening but my memory is not what it used to be so forgive me if I missed it but I think if it were this big a deal, I’d have remembered.
I got the impression that the working students that Lauren Kanarek called friends were gone before the majority of the Finish The Bastard show started. I believe they were gone in 2018.
So if Schellhorn had asked MHG about a murder plot being discussed, Mr. B would have asked her (during cross), what she was referring to. And she would have explained that folks were venting their frustration but there was absolutely no “murder plot.” Mr. B may have even asked (if there indeed was a murder plot), how they planned to carry it out, with what weapons, and how they planned to dispose of the bodies (gasp, was MB was going to bury them himself, with the shovel in the back of his truck?). It would quickly become abundantly clear to the jury how ridiculous those allegations were.
And Mr. B would then have asked if LK or her “representative” had been present during the meeting where such discussion took place. MHG would have responded “No, it took place behind closed doors in MB’s office.” Mr. B would have then asked, “So the office was bugged?” MHG: “We assume it was.” Mr. B.: “So no one gave consent for the K’s to record that conversation - which they were not a part of. Which brings into question the legality of said recording.”
Of course, Schellhorn would have objected as soon as Mr B tried to introduce questions about the legality of the recording, and Taylor would have shut Mr. B. down. Because God forbid, you can’t have it become a part of the public record that the K’s were violating wiretapping laws - because then someone (investigative reporter maybe?) might start wondering why they weren’t facing felony charges.
(Musings while I wait for the dog to finish her breakfast…)
Your dog eats slowly.
Or maybe your dog gets lots more food than mine do. I am not telling my dogs that you were able to type that much while your dog ate… there would be a protest that I am not feeding them enough.
You may be right, although what I most remember about the discussion regarding ED was whether the fact that RG was there and recorded the meeting without advising ED violated attorney client privilege. I could certainly be misremembering though. There have been so many talking points to sift through, and LollyPop’s nonsensical posts tend get jumbled together in one’s brain.
Even when not using, addicts’ timelines & recollections tend to be a bit scrambled. More so than average. Most people’s memories get progressively blurry through time. Start off while under the influence and it is more pronounced.
Oh dear, my dogs free feed all day with treats from our dinner at night. When we go out we always bring them something, with their favorite being 20 piece chicken nuggets to share! Yeah, not spoiled.