MB Civil Trial: JK/KK Contempt of Court?

[trubandloki]

@hut-ho78

Maybe I wasn’t clear because several are puzzled. I think MB leaned on and confided everything in detail (all mental health professionals discussed his powers of recall except for the incident itself) and I agree he may not remember that) to possibly MHG who then leaned on and confided everything to her dad or RC or JH or someone, who then confided everything or confronted LK and RG with every detail. It could be a pot stirrer or someone saying you need to leave and this is why and no one wants you here and this is what they are really saying.

I find it a stretch than LK and RG were capable of successfully placing and retrieving listening devices in private areas without being seen. I could be wrong. Y’all could be right in your belief they could and did. It is a possibility of which we have differing thoughts.

OH, interesting theory. Quite the imagination.
Did you forget that Lauren Kanarek admitted to being able to get into Michael’s office?

[erinmeri]

I think it is a gargantuan leap to peg the “leaks” on barn gossip when testimony revealed the existence of recordings (confirmed by LK and RG), LK repeatedly boasted about said recordings here and on Facebook, and her mother repeatedly wrote here that she had transcribed them.

Furthermore, testimony revealed that the tension around LK and RG’s presence on the farm extended well beyond MB and MHG…. so it is unlikely that anyone MB confided in would go shoot their mouth off to LK or RG.

The most likely scenario based on evidence, testimony and social media crowing is that LK posted information online that she was only privy to because she recorded people without their knowledge or consent in areas of the facility that they had reason to believe were private.

[ekat]

@trubandloki

OH, interesting theory. Quite the imagination.
Did you forget that Lauren Kanarek admitted to being able to get into Michael’s office?

And remember how she laughed and boasted about Michael and MHG sitting in his truck to try to have a conversation that wouldn’t be recorded?

[Sdel]

@trubandloki

OH, interesting theory. Quite the imagination.
Did you forget that Lauren Kanarek admitted to being able to get into Michael’s office?

And that she would disable the cameras he was intending to install. I wonder if the music and Ninja garb was designed to hide her presence in the barn while she was attending to her cameras. I think that was the real reason behind the fire marshall call. Kind of hard to go collect your recordings and replace your batteries when people are sleeping in the barn and office.

[Long_Time_Lurker]

@DownYonder

But - can Deininger, Silver, etc., request that Nagel not be allowed (not sure of the correct legal term) to represent LK in the courtroom due to his derogatory comments about the jury in the criminal trial?

Why would they want to do that? Isn’t it to their advantage if the plaintiff is poorly represented?

[ohnoO]

Wasn’t there a “sweeps” technician testifying at the criminal trial that said he found many recording devices? I don’t recall a number.

[ekat]

@LilRanger

When you’re asking for special dispensation, especially in a case you filed in the venue of your choosing, you have to do a bit more. Also, as I’m sure you’ve heard from many, most people who get COVID don’t die, or even get long COVID, so yes, she has to show why she has a higher risk than your average person.

Remember, there hasn’t been a finding that she has any long term effects of having been shot. The court is starting at zero, and discovery hasn’t concluded.

@lazaret

The increased cost argument doesn’t really apply if you are the one who brought the suit.

As plaintiff, you must be prepared to engage in the legal process, a big piece of which is discovery.

Thus, it doesn’t matter if depositions in general are expensive. The judge knows you are paying to depose people for your side of discovery. If any one of those people was asked to appear in person, your argument that you should be treated differently is pretty null and void.

On the whole though the law allows for in person depositions and you have to have a very good reason besides “it’s cheaper” if the person deposing you wants you to appear in person. You can’t force them to incur costs to send their lawyers to you for your own convenience if you’re the plaintiff.

I’m bumping these in case anyone missed them the first time. I can’t possibly spell these answers out better than what these two posters did.

[LilRanger]

@CurrentlyHorseless

No, there’s no concrete evidence of increased risk on her particular case. It’s just a reasonable presumption.

No evidence means no basis for that part of her argument. I’m arguing as the opposing counsel here, I do get what you’re saying, but that’s not enough when there is a prescribed way depositions happen, and someone is asking to change that way and another doesn’t want the change to happen. LK has the burden to show evidence of why this change should happen in the face of opposition.

One not understanding why evidence is needed/agreeing with LKs stated reasons, as an onlooker, has no bearing on how this will go down, frustrating as that can be.

And the fact that the party who initiated this lawsuit now has chosen to change their residence so as to make it inconvenient and costly to appear in person where the actions took place isn’t compelling either.

[DownYonder]

@trubandloki

Kirby Kanarek is who said they made the transcripts. That is why Kirby Kanarek is being asked for them.

I think it is fair to assume that someone in the Kanarek family still has access to them if Lauren Kanarek is claiming to have sent them to AK and to 48 hours.

I am really behind again, but didn’t LK claim to have also sent the transcripts to SafeSport?

[ekat]

@DownYonder

I am really behind again, but didn’t LK claim to have also sent the transcripts to SafeSport?

Even better, Mr Deininger stated that he has seen part of a transcript in the SS report, hence, his (currently ignored) subpoena.

But I do believe she said she did as well.

[Sdel]

@DownYonder

@trubandloki

Kirby Kanarek is who said they made the transcripts. That is why Kirby Kanarek is being asked for them.

I think it is fair to assume that someone in the Kanarek family still has access to them if Lauren Kanarek is claiming to have sent them to AK and to 48 hours.

I am really behind again, but didn’t LK claim to have also sent the transcripts to SafeSport?

Yes, but having sent them to AK and 48 hours shows a timeframe of a recent possession and control. If you just relied on SS, well, that was three years ago and it’s a reasonable argument that they are now “gone”.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@ekat

@CurrentlyHorseless

My point was that Nagel’s request for the the virtual deposition was not based on anything specific to LK, but rather on two considerations that affect everyone universally.

1. Zoom depositions are more efficient and cost effective.
2. Travel involves some additional risk of Covid.

Support for these two considerations is obviously available without requiring exhibits specific to LK.

And,again, you missed my (and Mr Deininger’s And @lazaret, and @LilRanger) point. That’s not how this works.

@CurrentlyHorseless

Presumably the plaintiff will need to depose Barisone. Can he decline to be deposed as long as he is in AK?

Presumably they will at some point. And since he has no freedom of movement yet, it would be foolish to ask.

@CurrentlyHorseless

Has Barisone been subpoenaed, but his lawyers have quashed the subpoena on the grounds he is in AK?

It would be hanging out there in the public record if they had.

OK, so the subpoena would not be public record if responded to, but the the motion to quash would be a court record? (I find it odd that “quash” is official legal terminology.)

Since it is not known at what point Barisone will be “available to be deposed”, I can see some basis for KK and JK not wanting to move fast on their depositions. That doesn’t make their ignoring the subpoenas OK, but it would be human nature to think, ‘Gee, Barisone didn’t testify at the trial, and can’t be deposed for who knows how long, what’s the rush to depose us?’

[ekat]

@CurrentlyHorseless

OK, so the subpoena would not be public record if responded to, but the the motion to quash would be a court record? (I find it odd that “quash” is official legal terminology.)

Correct. And I love that word!

@CurrentlyHorseless

Since it is not known at what point Barisone will be “available to be deposed”, I can see some basis for KK and JK not wanting to move fast on their depositions. That doesn’t make their ignoring the subpoenas OK, but it would be human nature to think, ‘Gee, Barisone didn’t testify at the trial, and can’t be deposed for who knows how long, what’s the rush to depose us?’

Maybe the judge won’t find them in contempt for that line of thinking. As an attorney, as Jonathan Kanarek is, I wouldn’t try it.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Sdel

@trubandloki

OH, interesting theory. Quite the imagination.
Did you forget that Lauren Kanarek admitted to being able to get into Michael’s office?

And that she would disable the cameras he was intending to install. I wonder if the music and Ninja garb was designed to hide her presence in the barn while she was attending to her cameras. I think that was the real reason behind the fire marshall call. Kind of hard to go collect your recordings and replace your batteries when people are sleeping in the barn and office.

Except that the court testimony was that the audio recorders were disclosed to Barisone and to the police and removed prior to the fire marshal and building inspector coming out.

[Sdel]

@CurrentlyHorseless

Except that the court testimony was that the audio recorders were disclosed to Barisone and to the police and removed prior to the fire marshal and building inspector coming out

Ok…so she needed them out to be able to replace the ones they found.

[ekat]

@CurrentlyHorseless

Except that the court testimony was that the audio recorders were disclosed to Barisone and to the police and removed prior to the fire marshal and building inspector coming out.

Can you please provide a link? I’m interested in that as I don’t recall it. Thank you.

[DownYonder]

@CurrentlyHorseless

[Nagel] threw in that LK was potentially at higher risk of harm from Covid exposure due to the injury to her lungs (a major impetus for the personal injury suit). I think he threw that in more to get in a dig at Barisone— ‘Look the guy shot her and caused permanent damage to her lungs and now you’re insisting that she undertake avoidable travel during a Covid surge’.

I think he threw it in to try to influence the judge. IOW, he wants to make sure the civil trial judge repeatedly hears or reads that “MB shot LK” - and will therefore develop a negative opinion of MB right from the outset.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Sdel

@CurrentlyHorseless

Except that the court testimony was that the audio recorders were disclosed to Barisone and to the police and removed prior to the fire marshal and building inspector coming out

Ok…so she needed them out to be able to replace the ones they found.

My interpretation is that the audio recorders were found to be there; and she admitted to the police having placed them there, and the audio recorders were removed, all prior to the building inspector coming out.

[DownYonder]

@ekat

@DownYonder

I am really behind again, but didn’t LK claim to have also sent the transcripts to SafeSport?

Even better, Mr Deininger stated that he has seen part of a transcript in the SS report, hence, his (currently ignored) subpoena.

Really? He has a copy of the SS report? Wow, I thought SS never released that kind of stuff. Would that have taken a subpoena?

[ohnoO]

I remember at some point in the criminal trial people (Mr D., maybe) were trying to get a piece of equipment to work to hear some recordings. I believe it was after a recess before the jury came back. Was it those recordings?