MB CIVIL SUIT UPDATE #10 K’s Request to Adjourn (delay) DENIED 11/01/22

[Omgitsme]

I don’t believe SAL actually visited her. Someone sent her pictures of LK in the hospital (LK or RG?) I’ll see if I can find the screenshot where she mentions it.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@trubandloki

@CurrentlyHorseless

@trubandloki

@CurrentlyHorseless

The administrative committee from AKFC that was charged with making the recommendation on release recommended he not be released.

I know you like to add things to facts to make them different than the actual facts but the admin committee is not who makes the decision there. They were a foot note, not who wrote the report. All of the medical staff that had treated Michael said he was not a risk to himself or others.

Good try though…good try.

I’m pointing out that the sense of the hearing that I got from reading the report of Nancy Jaffers was quite different from the sense one gets from reading the report by Lara Osborne.

I was pointing out that both the state and the defense experts maintained their assessment from the trial — Simring that he continued to be delusional and the state that he was not delusional.

From Jaffers, I understood that the committee from AKFC that was charged with making a recommendation as to his release recommended no release at this time. I don’t know whether they evaluated him personally, read reports from staff who had evaluated him, and/or were on his routine card team.

You were disputing the summary provided by HH; her summary was consistent with the Nancy Jeffers article, although not consistent with the report of Lara Osborne.

You are incorrect.
The committee had no representative at the hearing. They could not be cross examined by anyone.
The committee’s comment was, as has already been said multiple times but you are ignoring it, a footnote.
The doctors from the hospital who testified, and could be cross examined, all said that Michael was not a risk to himself or others.

I didn’t say the committee had a representative at the hearing. I said they submitted a recommendation.

The defense expert, Simring, testified that MB continued to suffer from delusions. Yes, he recommended intensive outpatient treatment rather than commitment, but he said that MB had not recovered from the delusions.

[Omgitsme]

“I have pictures” implies to me that she saw pictures but didn’t see LK herself.

ETA: I am incorrect. I have been having memory issues and will stop posting until I can get my head on straight! Over here misunderstanding and forgetting stuff left and right.

[trubandloki]

@CurrentlyHorseless

The defense expert, Simring, testified that MB continued to suffer from delusions. Yes, he recommended intensive outpatient treatment rather than commitment, but he said that MB had not recovered from the delusions.

He also said that Michael was not a threat to himself or others, which is the ONLY thing they are supposed to be deciding at a Krol hearing.

The committee’s footnote should not have been taken into account because they could not be cross examined. The courts are only supposed to take into account what the doctors who actually treat Michael, who were there to be questioned, had to say. The law gives the patient the right to cross examine witnesses. The judge ignored the rules and did his own thing.

https://law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/2013/title-30/section-30-4-27.14

@Omgitsme

“I have pictures” implies to me that she saw pictures but didn’t see LK herself.

I do not read that into that statement.
Isn’t ShellyBellyBestie the one who bragged about going to be at Lauren’s bedside?

[Angela_Freda]

How about sharing a link so we can read for ourselves?
Playing telephone game leads to a very skewed narrative.

[Angela_Freda]

I’m pretty sure Nelly Belly Bosom Buddy raced there, wasn’t allowed to see her, and went back with (insert ) materials… Per her own Facebook post or comment.

[trubandloki]

@Angela_Freda

I’m pretty sure Nelly Belly Bosom Buddy raced there, wasn’t allowed to see her, and went back with (insert ) materials… Per her own Facebook post or comment.

This is what I remember too.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@trubandloki

@CurrentlyHorseless

The defense expert, Simring, testified that MB continued to suffer from delusions. Yes, he recommended intensive outpatient treatment rather than commitment, but he said that MB had not recovered from the delusions.

He also said that Michael was not a threat to himself or others, which is the ONLY thing they are supposed to be deciding at a Krol hearing.

The committee’s footnote should not have been taken into account because they could not be cross examined. The courts are only supposed to take into account what the doctors who actually treat Michael, who were there to be questioned, had to say. The law gives the patient the right to cross examine witnesses. The judge ignored the rules and did his own thing.

https://law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/2013/title-30/section-30-4-27.14

@Omgitsme

“I have pictures” implies to me that she saw pictures but didn’t see LK herself.

I do not read that into that statement.
Isn’t ShellyBellyBestie the one who bragged about going to be at Lauren’s bedside?

Simring testified that based on examination he thought MB was still suffering from delusions. That was taken into account. It’s the judge who determines whether the subject is a danger to himself or others, based on the expert testimony.

I don’t see where it says other information could not be taken into account.

I think the judge acted appropriately; you think the judge acted inappropriately.

[trubandloki]

@CurrentlyHorseless

Simring testified that based on examination he thought MB was still suffering from delusions. That was taken into account. It’s the judge who determines whether the subject is a danger to himself or others, based on the expert testimony.

I don’t see where it says other information could not be taken into account.

I think the judge acted appropriately; you think the judge acted inappropriately.

The only thing the Krol hearing is supposed to be finding is - A danger to themselves or others. Period. And all the medical professionals said he was not. Even Dr. Simring.
I personally do not know anyone who does not have some delusions.

And again, they are not supposed to take into account things that the patient is not able to cross exam.

They could not cross exam the foot note.

So yes, the judge did not follow the rules. Like it or not, the judge did not follow the rules. Just like the rule that the next hearing after the Krol hearing has to be no more than 3 months after the Krol hearing but for some reason the judge made it for 6 months later.

[Angela_Freda]

Without seeing what you’re referencing, none of us can help you see where you’ve gone wrong, or that you are actually correct.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@trubandloki

@CurrentlyHorseless

Simring testified that based on examination he thought MB was still suffering from delusions. That was taken into account. It’s the judge who determines whether the subject is a danger to himself or others, based on the expert testimony.

I don’t see where it says other information could not be taken into account.

I think the judge acted appropriately; you think the judge acted inappropriately.

The only thing the Krol hearing is supposed to be finding is - A danger to themselves or others. Period. And all the medical professionals said he was not. Even Dr. Simring.
I personally do not know anyone who does not have some delusions.

And again, they are not supposed to take into account things that the patient is not able to cross exam.

They could not cross exam the foot note.

So yes, the judge did not follow the rules. Like it or not, the judge did not follow the rules. Just like the rule that the next hearing after the Krol hearing has to be no more than 3 months after the Krol hearing but for some reason the judge made it for 6 months later.

Yes. It’s the judge who is supposed to determine whether or not the subject is released based on his assessment of whether the judge considers him a danger to himself others or property.

The judge took into account the report from AKFC and the expert testimony. The judge made his determination based on that everything in front of him.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Angela_Freda

Without seeing what you’re referencing, none of us can help you see where you’ve gone wrong, or that you are actually correct.

Are you unable to google it for yourself?

[Angela_Freda]

I’m asking to see what you are referencing.
I’m sure I can find plenty. But I’m trying to see what you are discussing.

Are you unable to share that?

[trubandloki]

@CurrentlyHorseless

Yes. It’s the judge who is supposed to determine whether or not the subject is released based on his assessment of whether the judge considers him a danger to himself others or property.

The judge took into account the report from AKFC and the expert testimony. The judge made his determination based on that everything in front of him.

I will say it one more time (and you will clearly ignore the facts one more time).

The judge is supposed to only take into account the things that are actually discussed at the hearing, where the patient has the ability to cross exam.
Period.
A random footnote by people who never interacted with or treated the patient are not supposed to be considered.
Period.
And danger to property? When did that join the list.
Immediate danger to themselves or others, the only thing that is supposed to matter at the Krol hearing.
Period.
All of the people who interacted with and treated Michael felt he was not a danger to himself or others.
Period.

Judge Taylor clearly likes to make his own rules.

[Knights_Mom]

@trubandloki

@CurrentlyHorseless

Yes. It’s the judge who is supposed to determine whether or not the subject is released based on his assessment of whether the judge considers him a danger to himself others or property.

The judge took into account the report from AKFC and the expert testimony. The judge made his determination based on that everything in front of him.

I will say it one more time (and you will clearly ignore the facts one more time).

The judge is supposed to only take into account the things that are actually discussed at the hearing, where the patient has the ability to cross exam.
Period.
A random footnote by people who never interacted with or treated the patient are not supposed to be considered.
Period.
And danger to property? When did that join the list.
Immediate danger to themselves or others, the only thing that is supposed to matter at the Krol hearing.
Period.
All of the people who interacted with and treated Michael felt he was not a danger to himself or others.
Period.

Judge Taylor clearly likes to make his own rules.

Consider the possibility that Taylor was contacted by someone with an agenda and warned it would be in his best interest to rule in a way not conducive to MBs immediate release. It seems clear that Taylor is being overly cautious for a reason of self preservation.

[DownYonder]

@3PonyFarm

There was an update on the GFM that MB was moved to Greystone.

Yes, excellent news although I wish they would have provided him with some kind of onboarding literature so he knows what to expect regarding policies and procedures. I would think it could be of benefit to help incoming patients with the transition.

But what a relief it must be to him to be out of AK and in a facility where he will receive counseling and treatment and be afforded more liberties.

[Omgitsme]

You know, I think you’re right. So much information and confusing posts makes it hard to keep up

[Sdel]

@trubandloki

I know you like to add things to facts to make them different than the actual facts but the admin committee is not who makes the decision there. They were a foot note, not who wrote the report. All of the medical staff that had treated Michael said he was not a risk to himself or others.

I wonder if the admin committee is who LK sent the “transcripts” to in order to meddle with MB’s evaluations. Also, I wonder if this board was some kind of board of directors. Those usually have at least one or two investor type people on them to help make the financial decisions. Could there have been Wall Street lawyer connections?

[Omgitsme]

You know, I think you’re right.
Of course that doesn’t mean that’s what actually happened but I do remember her saying something like that. But then she wasn’t allowed to see her and left.

[Sdel]

@Omgitsme

You know, I think you’re right.
Of course that doesn’t mean that’s what actually happened but I do remember her saying something like that. But then she wasn’t allowed to see her and left.

We know RG was away….did he meet up with her?