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

[hut-ho78]

@Knights_Mom

@Warmblood1

@lazaret

A jury can find that someone is at fault but if you’re unemployed, enjoying the same quality of life that you had prior, and are unwilling to prove pain and suffering by exposing your medical records the jury has nothing to award to you to make you whole. Thus civil cases are not one sided, it’s not just “this guy shot me and therefore owes me money” that the jury is deciding.

My guess is LK is going to claim loss of income bc MB ruined her chances of being an Olympic (or high caliber) rider and the income she could have earned from that. Not that she had a job currently earning income but potential job.

Does anyone remember what long term issue the surgeon testified LK might have? Were there long term issues?

Had LK just shut her trap after the shooting she may have been able to disprove any prior assertions of her behavior by showing good behavior. But that was beyond her scope.

Instead what she did is quadruple down causing the world to not only feel little or no empathy for her but to in fact have empathy for MB instead.

But had she behaved, had she worked hard to overcome, get better, get a legit sponsor, compete actively with very high $$$ top FEI horses she may have achieved her dream in 20 years.

But she didn’t do that. It wasn’t MB who killed her dream, it was LK herself. And this is easily proven.

She did not hold up to online taunting.

[Knights_Mom]

@hut-ho78

She did not hold up to online taunting.

Statement makes no sense.

[trubandloki]

@hut-ho78

The surgeon testified as to her thoracic injuries and loss of blood, the damage that was killing her and to which he was called ti repair for life saving issues.

And she, Lauren Kanarek, has posted more than once how her riding is going just amazingly and she is excelling at all she does.

[hut-ho78]

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

To consider NGRI, the jury had to believe beyond a reasonable doubt that the prosecutor proved that a man had committed the act. @CurrentlyHorseless is correct. Your description, while close, is off base.

You a lawyer? The charged was ATTEMPTED MURDER. An insane person is incapable of forming intent, therefore NGRI.

And I’m done with this.

Neither of us are lawyers. NGRI, not guilty by reason of insanity means the act was proven beyond a reasonable doubt but no crime was committed because the actor was insane at the time and could not have intent. The “act that would otherwise be a crime except he was insane at the time.” That is why he was acquitted of the crime even though the prosecutor met the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, the highest legal standard, that he committed the act.

Otherwise, he would have been found Not Guilty for attempted murder for LK just as he was for RG when LE found only 2 out of 3 shell casings.

[Sdel]

@KurPlexed

@Sdel

This also doesn’t make sense if he brought the gun for protection as well. You might need more than 2-3 bullets to effectively stop an attacking dog or person, especially when there is more than one threat and you are not in routine shooting practice.

Conversely, he could have just intended to take it down with him never intending to use it at all and didn’t even check how many bullets were in it or even thought it was empty. (Not advisable but people do)

RC testified that it was stored in the safe with the plastic insert in the gun. If he took the gun for self defense I think he would have looked while he loaded up the gun. The prosecution clearly attempted to imply that he opened a box of bullets and loaded the three bullets into the gun, even though RC testified that the magazines were stored as one already full and possibly the other having a few bullets left in it. If you look at it all, it looks like they were trying to make evidence fit a narrative.

[hut-ho78]

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

Plus, even if you thought he did shoot LK his being crazed at the time may excuse culpability as all the evidence points to LK driving him to it.

In the criminal trial, the finding that he was insane when he shot her does excuse him from criminal culpability.

In the civil case, she was undeniably injured by the gunshot wounds. If the jury in the civil case finds that he shot her, I don’t know whether a finding of insanity would excuse him from civil liability.

Also, if the issue of his having shot her is relitigated from the ground up in the civil case, Nagel may dispute the finding of his insanity.

The jury in the criminal case determined that he was insane when he shot her. They were not required to determine the cause of his insanity or LKs role in “pushing him over the edge”. It will be interesting to see if Barisone’s lawyers can prevail in making a case that LK “drove him to it”, as you believe.

Even if it were somehow inexplicably established that MB fired the weapon the CIRCUMSTANCES of that weapon being fired counts. Self defense, accidental discharge etc.

There just isn’t enough evidence to that, and a ton of evidence against it.

Suppose it was established that MB brought the gun to the farmhouse (“just in case”, as in your scenario) and she was injured when it discharged accidentally.

Why isn’t MB still liable for her injuries for having brought the gun?

Because it may have discharged when SHE assaulted HIM.

There were forensics for this. No GSR on her clothes so the shooting did not occur at point blank range though it may have seemed that way to her when looking at the open end of the Ruger. She may have even lifted her hand in a stop motion.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Joanne

@CurrentlyHorseless

Why isn’t MB still liable for her injuries for having brought the gun?

Because we do not know for certain that he shot her.

That he shot her was proven “beyond a reasonable doubt” in the criminal trial. In the civil trial, it will only need to be proven “by a preponderance of the evidence”.

In no court proceeding is the standard of proof “for certain”.

RC did not shoot her. But I think RC will have some liability for her injuries just for having provided the gun. MB will have some liability for having taken the gun from the safe and brought a loaded gun to the farmhouse, even if it’s not proven that he shot her.

[lazaret]

Yes, but in order to raise collateral estoppel as an issue preclusion, in other words, if here someone is trying to say that it is a foregone conclusion that the defendant shot the plaintiff, the only way you can do so is if the person raising collateral estoppel was party to the first suit. The first suit was between MB and the state of New Jersey, so the plaintiff in the civil trial cannot raise collateral estoppel as to the foregone conclusion that the defendant shot the plaintiff, because the plaintiff did not litigate the previous suit.

[Knights_Mom]

@hut-ho78

There were forensics for this. No GSR on her clothes so the shooting did not occur at point blank range though it may have seemed that way to her when looking at the open end of the Ruger. She may have even lifted her hand in a stop motion.

Well thank you for admitting LK is a liar as she has repeatedly asserted with fervor that it was at point blank range.

[Knights_Mom]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Joanne

@CurrentlyHorseless

Why isn’t MB still liable for her injuries for having brought the gun?

Because we do not know for certain that he shot her.

That he shot her was proven “beyond a reasonable doubt” in the criminal trial. In the civil trial, it will only need to be proven “by a preponderance of the evidence”.

In no court proceeding is the standard of proof “for certain”.

RC did not shoot her. But I think RC will have some liability for her injuries just for having provided the gun. MB will have some liability for having taken the gun from the safe and brought a loaded gun to the farmhouse, even if it’s not proven that he shot her.

You will be proven wrong once again.

While it is true that in NJ NGRI is an assertive defense it is a sort of fail safe defense that MB was forced to use. MB does not remember what happened. Therefore, logically, he can’t really admit he did it (but was insane) as he has no memory of either doing it or not doing it. His primary defense was self defense as I’m sure he didn’t remember ever having any sort of plot to kill at any point of his life. But Taylor tossed that possibility out.

I have no doubt the jury didn’t believe the impeached witnesses AT ALL. If they did they would have returned a different verdict, especially for RG.

So it wasn’t proven beyond a reasonable doubt that MB did it. Had it been, there at least would have been a weapons verdict of NGRI regarding RG. But there wasn’t.

The jury settled on NGRI for LK. But I suspect that the thought of his getting help was as much as they recognized the trauma LK caused and the continued danger she poses to him.

[Sdel]

@Knights_Mom

Well thank you for admitting LK is a liar as she has repeatedly asserted with fervor that it was at point blank range.

Yes: That’s a Twist post 70, in case anyone wants to go review. She approached MB wanting to know how he was going “make things right”……came off the porch and went all the way over to the table where MB’s phone was found.

[trubandloki]

Why are we discussing the verdict at a trial that already happened and not discussing the fact that Jonathan Kanarek ( @Inigo-montoya ) sent an email letter to the judge instead of sending anything thru the lawyers, like anyone who has gone to law school for anything would know to do. There is no way that Jonathan Kanarek does not know that sending a note directly to the judge is inappropriate.

But then, Jonathan Kanarek is also the same lawyer who ignored a subpoena until past the deadline and a contempt filing happened. Another thing that anyone who has gone thru law school, no matter what type of law they participated in after passing the bar, would know is very disrespectful to the courts. Then he had a lawyer that does not represent him file to quash the subpoena, after the contempt filing.

We could also discuss the fact that Lauren Kanarek, who filed this lawsuit, is refusing to sit for her deposition. Add that her lawyer either does not know what she has said in the past or thinks everyone else does not care that her past response to anyone who asked for information was - find it yourself - but her lawyer is now saying it is not fair to ask others, just ask Lauren.

We can’t ignore the fact that Kirby Kanarek also ignored her subpoena and also has a contempt filing.

[trubandloki]

I forgot, asking for their phone records might lead to the lawyers seeing their shopping lists. Now that sounds like a real sound legal reason to limit discovery.

[erinmeri]

Since some people are still asserting the verdict means that the jury believed for certain that MB did in fact shoot LK, which we CANNOT POSSIBLY KNOW, and because numerous explanations of jury nullification have not worked, here is an explainer:

The Law You Won't Be Told

In short, the jury can decide whatever it wants and not be punished for it.

[erinmeri]

@trubandloki

I forgot, asking for their phone records might lead to the lawyers seeing their shopping lists. Now that sounds like a real sound legal reason to limit discovery.

When your shopping lists include recording devices, cameras, and possibly “exploding bullets”…

[OntheFnce]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

Plus, even if you thought he did shoot LK his being crazed at the time may excuse culpability as all the evidence points to LK driving him to it.

In the criminal trial, the finding that he was insane when he shot her does excuse him from criminal culpability.

In the civil case, she was undeniably injured by the gunshot wounds. If the jury in the civil case finds that he shot her, I don’t know whether a finding of insanity would excuse him from civil liability.

Also, if the issue of his having shot her is relitigated from the ground up in the civil case, Nagel may dispute the finding of his insanity.

The jury in the criminal case determined that he was insane when he shot her. They were not required to determine the cause of his insanity or LKs role in “pushing him over the edge”. It will be interesting to see if Barisone’s lawyers can prevail in making a case that LK “drove him to it”, as you believe.

Even if it were somehow inexplicably established that MB fired the weapon the CIRCUMSTANCES of that weapon being fired counts. Self defense, accidental discharge etc.

There just isn’t enough evidence to that, and a ton of evidence against it.

Suppose it was established that MB brought the gun to the farmhouse (“just in case”, as in your scenario) and she was injured when it discharged accidentally.

Why isn’t MB still liable for her injuries for having brought the gun?

I highly doubt LK is going to win anything in this case. Point being, in NJ civil suits the jury is limited to 6 jurors and 5 jurors have to be in agreement. She brought the case and the burden of proof is on her. A whole lot of the sidebars that were not admitted will be in he civil suit.

[Sdel]

@OntheFnce

A whole lot of the sidebars that were not admitted will be in he civil suit.

And when it does I think it’ll trigger an earthquake as to just how unjust the criminal trial and imprisonment of MB really was.

[Knights_Mom]

@trubandloki

Why are we discussing the verdict at a trial that already happened and not discussing the fact that Jonathan Kanarek ( @Inigo-montoya ) sent an email letter to the judge instead of sending anything thru the lawyers, like anyone who has gone to law school for anything would know to do. There is no way that Jonathan Kanarek does not know that sending a note directly to the judge is inappropriate.

But then, Jonathan Kanarek is also the same lawyer who ignored a subpoena until past the deadline and a contempt filing happened. Another thing that anyone who has gone thru law school, no matter what type of law they participated in after passing the bar, would know is very disrespectful to the courts. Then he had a lawyer that does not represent him file to quash the subpoena, after the contempt filing.

We could also discuss the fact that Lauren Kanarek, who filed this lawsuit, is refusing to sit for her deposition. Add that her lawyer either does not know what she has said in the past or thinks everyone else does not care that her past response to anyone who asked for information was - find it yourself - but her lawyer is now saying it is not fair to ask others, just ask Lauren.

We can’t ignore the fact that Kirby Kanarek also ignored her subpoena and also has a contempt filing.

I discussed the verdict because that poster/those posters keep asserting the relevance of the previous verdict upon the upcoming case.

[Angela_Freda]

Didn’t she go from half to fully Bronzed since the shooting?

[Knights_Mom]

Yes.