I went and checked out the SM right after the shooting, before any of it was pulled down or locked from the public. That’s what had me wondering what the heck she did that put someone over the edge. It was clear that she was vindictive, and well… just unhinged.
Then the GJ thing came to light, and I’ve never seen anything like it. Over an ex boyfriend?
Then we see the parents defending all of her behavior. If I did 1/2 the things she has, my mother would be mortified.
I truly have no idea, but I can tell you how judges in my area of the law would look upon a general email about a case sent directly to them.
If it’s from a citizen, the judge would forward it to the parties in the case and if the person was basically irrelevant, all would disregard.
However, making the inference that the email was sent to the judge to do any of the following:
would all be viewed extremely unfavorably.
The fact that the sender is currently the subject of either a motion to quash OR a contempt of court citation in relation to the case in question makes the communication categorically inappropriate and the judge CAN consider that.
But further - judges don’t usually like people thinking that anyone is their friend when it comes to legal proceedings. It goes to the very heart of their ethics as a judge, and putting them in a compromising position doesn’t usually go over well.
Of course I know none of the parties involved or what relationships they may have to each other. This is speaking in generalities with the judges I have dealt with. We all know each other but it would be a grave, grave error to assume that any prior dealings or friendly interactions with a judge would entitle me to access to that individual in the context of a case. It’s absolutely out of bounds.
Ask Girl Joey about this and get back to us.
LK told GJ that GJ was responsible for her child’s death because GJ was engaging in acts of a sexual nature instead of supervising her child in a pool. LK then announced this to the world. And now you expect people to feel deep compassion for LKs parents moments of fear and grief for their daughter LK who lived and is now just fine?
Really?
Gj’s child died. LK did not die. I’d say that is quite different. I’m surprised you even have to ask. I think it’s quite disingenuous to act as though MB “murdered” LK when LK gets to keep on living. It royally insults those who have actually lost someone as well as the actual victims of murder. Not to mention the dramatics of it being completely unnecessary.
Thanks for the great reply. Obviously I’m no expert but I also thought it put the judge in a compromising position and no one enjoys that.
I should add subsequent to my earlier post that it’s possible that the judge did not ever personally see the email. Many, if not most, judges, have their communications read first by a clerk or other assistant who responds to ex parte communications with the appropriate dissuasion and disclosure so as to avoid any appearance of impropriety. I don’t know what the NJ advisory board has to say about this specifically but in my state that is what happens. An email to a judge would be returned notifying the sender that the judge cannot consider any information sent, the communication is improper, and to seek legal advice from an attorney.
ETA: this is especially true in jurisdictions where “everybody knows everbody” and it is difficult to preserve the appearance of impropriety without such a system, with so many means to engage in unsolicited communication in the technological age.
Without the repetitive posts of certain people, this thread would be much shorter. PLEASE everyone, use all your strength and ignore them. We move along very nicely without them and there is no need to engage them.
This exactly. As unimaginable as it is for most of us that one would mock a stranger for the death of their minor child, the sexualisation of the event was chilling. Like, movie-level depraved behaviour. The lack of empathy seems alarming and an indication of something profoundly and fundamentally wrong here.
Some of our judges read their own email, some didn’t. It all depends on the email address used. So it’s possible the judge saw it first and also just as possible the judges law clerk or even secretary saw it first. But for sure the judge learned of it.
Definitely learned of its existence, just commenting that it’s possible they were not aware of the content until the point that it was shared with all parties in proper disclosure. I’ve worked in jurisdictions where the judges mostly read their own mail, and others where they don’t. Obviously they read their own personal email and answer their own personal cell phones. That last one turned out to be a problem in a case I worked on that ended in the judge getting a new phone number and a parent getting a week in jail on contempt charges after they kept trying to get the judge removed from the case by tricking them into answering calls on their personal cell phone.
Really? Ick psycho parents!
That’s right. He didn’t email it over to what’s his name, the name escapes, me sorry, the one representing LK. That’s interesting. Edited to add: Nagle.
That’s right. The judge didn’t send JK"s email over to Nagle, he sent it to Silver. I think that’s very telling. Sliver notes that he distributed the ex parte email from Jonathan Kanarek to all the parties invovled, as he was directed to do. Someone, the judge or his staff directed Silver to distribute the email. Not Nagle.
Technically speaking, the judge has to only provide the communication to the “other side” eg the side that is disadvantaged by the communication. That party is the party with the right to respond.
I’m making assumptions here but that’s what the between the lines says to me.
Que? That’s quite a reach. You think his email was to talk to the judge about whether or not his subpoenas, from the court were real? And that he wanted to know if they were just harrassment? Why would any reasonable person, whether they had a law degree or not, think subpoenas asking for material germaine to a civil lawsuit were harassment?
Why do you think the parents are getting a “subpoena harassment treatment”? How does that work? That is quite the bizzarre post. [edit]
sometimes when I have a little free time I watch Court Cam on youtube and I’m reminded just how insane the day to day life of litigation actually is.
I would love for MBs attorneys to conclude their closing argument to the jury with something like this “To our respected members of the jury: As you go to deliberate know that you hold within your hands the power to decide futures, right past wrongs and set and uphold standards of law and behavior our Founders created. These standards are a guideline of proper and lawful behavior. Rightfully done. Truthfully done. Whatever decision you come to you must ignore the criticisms of others. Criticisms such as what the plaintiffs counsel said regarding jury in the previous trial, calling them insane themselves. You must come to your decision independent of what others might say of you. You must decide within the boundaries of law that will be explained to you and together render not just one verdict, but a series of them.”
In part anyway.
and why would anyone who currently had a motion to quash filed by not-their-counsel be asking a judge for advice from not-their-counsel?
But I have to say asking a judge whether something where there is a publicly available docket is real certainly would be a first in my experience. I mean, if it’s not real, why is there a judge assigned? Baffling.
It was the excuse used to try and play off the irregular ex parte communication as legitimate. A ruse.
He is involved up to his eyeballs, so I think there is an argument to be made that he should be a party.
Sheilah
Indeed there is. And being a legit party makes JK extremely vulnerable. Given that there are many acts done by JK which may very well speak to culpability there is virtually nothing that JK can allege MB did to HIM in a counterclaim.
That would be my play. But heck I’d have to ask my attorney as I’m just a vacuumer.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
