Way too early to be making that decision, IMHO. After discovery that will be evaluated, of course. Most likely applicable as to SGF, as @ekat said
7 Likes
No, not all. I said earlier that I believe those conversations were confided to others until they reached LK and RG.
In my area, all parties have to agree to be recorded. One experienced manager was pursued harassed by a member of executive staff. She recorded it without his knowledge. No one touched her. He was fired. He did not sue for his job back. She did not sue the employer as they backed her up. The employer did not pursue disciplinary or legal action against her for violating recording regulations.
I have no idea how recordings will look here. I don’t know if they are legal or illegal or how the courts look at them. I suspect it depends on many variables.
I do not think LK and RG demonstrated finesse with any clandestine activities so I don’t think they were capable of surreptitiously leaving listening devices in private areas and then retrieving them prior to the sweep without being caught.
Edited to replace “confused” with “confided” to correct a typing error.
I don’t think they were alone in that considering testimony.
I wonder if 48 hours might have taken any video of the festivities that day. It could prove useful to Mr. Deininger.
8 Likes
I agree 
9 Likes
How do you reckon “KTeam” is trying to claim the recordings don’t exist if the recordings have been in the possession of the prosecution, the defense and now SGF?
If you’ve got the recordings themselves, what is the big deal about obtaining some amateur transcripts of the recordings?
1 Like
I’m kind of curious where RC and her lawyers are in all this. It appears they are just sitting on the sidelines and letting the other two defendants do the heavy lifting, which is cool. They don’t need to double up or triple upon stuff.
7 Likes
Besides the official motions that the judge must rule on before the trial begins, how much would a judge normally know about any given case? Since the K. family is known in legal circles in NJ, would this judge already know a lot about the case and the testimony/outcome from the criminal trial?
4 Likes
I really don’t understand. Do you think Mr Tarshis was confused about some other conversations when he testified that his very private, very privileged conversations with Michael ended up on Social Media? Please help me understand.
I’m not sure I get the relevance of this at all.
They sure weren’t admissible in the criminal trial. We do know how that court in that same county looked at them. But yes, there may be variables.
Except, they testified they did it. They bragged that they did it. Lauren was bragging two weeks ago on YouTube that she did it. Kinda hard to walk that back now. Like, climbing Mt Everest without a Sherpa hard.
And again, we don’t know, at this point that the sweep was capable of detecting an Amazon pocket voice recorder or 2 or 3.
25 Likes
Haha! Remember, these people had a grand plan beginning possibly as early as late 2018 to destroy Michael Barisone. I suspect those plans have been revealed in the documents and texts confiscated in discovery. I believe their plan went far astray when Lauren was shot in the struggle instead of Michael Barisone. I believe the civil trial will show the level of intense anger LK and RG experienced the morning of 8/7 and intensified when CPS showed up earlier than planned. RG’s frustration/anger at not being “allowed” to present his invoice to Michael seemed palpable during the trial to me. My opinion only.
16 Likes
Yes, I agree with Nagel’s characterization of the NGRI verdict and I think the judge will as well.
I do not think that the posters on these threads constitute a random sample of the population, as demonstrated by the fact that the impartial jury came back with a verdict of NGRI, while a poll of posters in these threads overwhelmingly “predicted” the verdict would be straight Not Guilty.
1 Like
It could be quite a big deal, if Kirby Kanarek is not a certified transcriptionist, has no ability to independently verify the recorded voices, and made errors in the transcripts that were then used to harass Michael Barisone, MHG, and whomever else Lauren Kanarek felt like harassing that week, like the way she flung the recordings at Ruth Cox on FB and taunted her with them.
Also could be a big deal if the transcript is the only thing that remains and the recordings themselves have disappeared.
I could think of other big deals, but you get my point, I’m sure.
19 Likes
C’mon man
18 Likes
Oh dear! I guess you haven’t read the hundreds of public posts on the YT threads echoing exactly what we’ve said here for 3 years! Bless your heart.
15 Likes
By “applicable to SGF”, do you mean SGF would ask to be dropped or excused from the lawsuit as not liable, and the suit continues against RC and MB?
6 Likes
Sorry. I had a typing error that my phone corrected to “confused” instead of “confided.”
1 Like
RC played a role and fully admitted her role. Good or bad, I don’t see she has much room to maneuver to avoid whatever liability is going to be assigned to her.
I guess she’ll say that she had no idea that the gun would be used to shoot someone, but I’d believe her in that.
That illegal recordings that record illegal acts are sometimes allowed for contestable actions that can end up in court. All states are different. This did not happen in New Jersey but in a state with even stricter recording laws.
1 Like
A) I don’t think the judge cares one way or another because it’s irrelevant and
B) you’re wrong.
For giggles, go check out YT video comments if you want a broader sampling of the general population.
34 Likes
