MB Civil Trial: JK/KK Contempt of Court?

[BigMama1]

@CurrentlyHorseless

I’m having trouble getting it to work on an iPhone. I will experiment further, but so far I can only laboriously delete the part of the quote I want to eliminate.

It works just fine on an iPhone. Highlight the part you want to quote, then click the reply arrow in the lower right hand corner.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@ekat

@hut-ho78

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’m not sure I get the relevance of this at all.

I think that HutHo is saying that she knows of a case in which a woman who was being harassed secretly recorded her harassing boss, and despite it being a two party consent state, the woman successfully won her case, and the harasser couldn’t pursue her for having recorded him illegally.

I’ve read that in some cases, recordings that would otherwise be illegal may not be illegal if the person recording has evidence that it is illegal activity that is being discussed. That’s also what IM seemed to be saying.

[ekat]

@hut-ho78

The dispute is whether or not they recordings were legal or not

I said this:

@ekat

Recorders were hidden, recordings were made. That’s pretty undisputed at this point.

I said nothing about their legality.

@hut-ho78

Since they haven’t been released to the public, until they are, none of us know if they even exist. They could be more of LK spouting off on SM.

We do know they exist. 81 of them have made their rounds through discovery.

@hut-ho78

If the recording device was in the locker and the court seems that to be a public area or in the pockets, say a phone or other, attached to LK and/or RG, then they are theoretically legal.

That’s going to be a tough sell since the locker is nowhere near the places private conversations took place, and doesn’t even match Lauren’s sworn testimony. Or Rob’s admission on the one recording that made it into the criminal trial. But, maybe the odds will be in your favor.

[eggbutt]

This has been discussed for years. How often have you taken literally something someone said in frustration and decided it was truth? I expect much of the “bombshell” conversations LK/KK were so giddy about were simply frustrated conversations. But you and IM know best I suppose. No one seems too concerned about their surreptitiously obtained recordings anymore except the people who recorded them. Nothing is more indicative of a plan to do harm than the text to two men to FINISH THE BASTARD, in my opinion.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@ekat

Also could be a big deal if the transcript is the only thing that remains and the recordings themselves have disappeared.

Huh? The recordings were in the possession of the police and court system, the defense and have been turned over to SGF.

If the recordings have disappeared, (from all those archives) that’s a huge deal. But amateur transcripts are worthless to anybody if the recordings themselves have vanished.

[ekat]

@hut-ho78

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

If they contained recordings of criminal acts, we might have heard about it in the criminal trial. Just saying.

[eggbutt]

IF the police were given ALL the recordings.

[Sdel]

@ekat

If they contained recordings of criminal acts, we might have heard about it in the criminal trial. Just saying.

Yep, better hope those conversations match up to their respective reports

[3PonyFarm]

Earlier this year, around May I think, there was a case mediator scheduled for October. I believe someone explained what that is but in my covid fogged brain I cannot find the reply.

Would someone be able to explain that again please? Thanks!

[ekat]

@CurrentlyHorseless

Huh? The recordings were in the possession of the police and court system, the defense and have been turned over to SGF.

Do you have personal knowledge that the transcripts Kirby prepared prior to August 7th were from recordings that were already disclosed or are you guessing? I’m guessing that it’s possible her transcriptions don’t match the 81 disclosed recordings.

@CurrentlyHorseless

If the recordings have disappeared, (from all those archives) that’s a huge deal. But amateur transcripts are worthless to anybody if the recordings themselves have vanished.

If the Kanareks disappeared the recordings prior to August 7th, but upon completion of Kirby’s transcription, that would be interesting, no doubt.

[ekat]

@3PonyFarm

Earlier this year, around May I think, there was a case mediator scheduled for October. I believe someone explained what that is but in my covid fogged brain I cannot find the reply.

Would someone be able to explain that again please? Thanks

It’s a status conference to see where discovery is at.

[LilRanger]

@Fiesta01

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?

It may depend on the culture of the courthouse and how amny judges are there. Criminal and civil judges may not have much opportunity to discuss things with one another. It also depends on the judges themselves, some keep quiet, others need to process with a friendly ear.

[3PonyFarm]

Thank you!

[ekat]

@CurrentlyHorseless

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.

I really wasn’t asking that but thanks for your input.

[ekat]

@hut-ho78

Sorry. I had a typing error that my phone corrected to “confused” instead of “confided.”

That doesn’t really help me. Now you’re saying Mr Tarshis confided his personal, privileged conversations out there in the barn so Lauren could put them up on social media? God someone should revoke his bar license if that’s the case.

[ekat]

@3PonyFarm

Thank you!

You’re welcome!

[LilRanger]

@CurrentlyHorseless

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?

Yes

[Knights_Mom]

@hut-ho78

@Knights_Mom

Remember this is the family who took “I had a good life” to mean “Yeah that’s right I shot her and tried to kill her”.

I don’t think they were alone in that considering testimony.

Considering the outcome… public opinion…

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@eggbutt

This has been discussed for years. How often have you taken literally something someone said in frustration and decided it was truth? I expect much of the “bombshell” conversations LK/KK were so giddy about were simply frustrated conversations. But you and IM know best I suppose. No one seems too concerned about their surreptitiously obtained recordings anymore except the people who recorded them. Nothing is more indicative of a plan to do harm than the text to two men to FINISH THE BASTARD, in my opinion.

I agree with you that if the actual words spoken are ever revealed, it’s likely there will be multiple possible interpretations.

Just like someone could text “Finish the bastard” in a fit of frustration after learning that someone had gratuitously instructed her farrier to not shoe her horses just to mess with her.

[eggbutt]

Perhaps, but one would think more context would be given in said text, especially to dad. And since we didn’t hear from the farrier at the trial because his testimony wasn’t going to be admitted due to apparent relevancy, we don’t know why Michael told him to not shoe the horses, do we? The simple explanation is Michael was tired of paying the farrier on LK’s behalf. I wonder why RG didn’t just negotiate with the farrier to do the work that day and LK pay him via Venmo like she always paid her NC farrier?

And what makes you think Michael’s instructions to the farrier were “gratuitous”?