MB Civil Trial: JK/KK Contempt of Court?

[Warmblood1]

@Angela_Freda

@Sdel

No….the fact that he went to jail and MHG left made the matter moot, from CPS’s point of view. The SS ban was because of the felony charges. It is an open question as to if in the last three years SS has determined the claims were without merit or if they will pick it back up once the mental health commitment is concluded.

But if MHG retains whatever her custody arrangement was, doesn’t that suggest the allegations were unfounded, otherwise she might have lost that?

I’m tired, maybe that doesn’t make sense.

No, I agree with you. If CPS had evidence of child abuse, it would be pursued criminally. Just because MB went to jail and MHG left, doesn’t relieve them of criminal charges. That’s not how it works.

[StB.YM]

@Warmblood1

My guess is that since no physical evidence was produced with CPS, the allegation of harm towards children was dropped, and remaining “allegations for misconduct” is due to the shooting, since the permanent ban changed after the criminal trial. The fact that no evidence was produced regarding harm towards minors in the criminal trial may have influenced the change in ban status. I think if the ban were solely based on allegations of harm towards children then the ban would be totally dropped already. I think SS is considering the outcome of the Kroll hearing before another SS status change. I don’t think they want to remove the ban if for some reason MB is committed indefinitely or something like that. I don’t think indefinite commitment would ever happen, but it makes sense for a SS investigator to consider the Kroll hearing outcome.

From what I remember in the trial, in either the pre-trial hearing or on one of the trial days (before the jury was seated), the judge ruled that the prosecution could not bring up the cause of George Morris’s safe sport ban, because it was too prejudicial. I think that might have also been why the prosecution couldn’t really get into any SS allegations against MB (whether child abuse related or not), especially since whatever was filed against MB was just an allegation (not investigated and verified). I recall the judge also cutting off Bilinkas when he brushed briefly past the topic (because it would also be prejudicial). So from my ungrounded suspicion, not based on any evidence, there was some type of child abuse allegation in the safe sport complaint.

[Sdel]

@Angela_Freda

@Sdel

No….the fact that he went to jail and MHG left made the matter moot, from CPS’s point of view. The SS ban was because of the felony charges. It is an open question as to if in the last three years SS has determined the claims were without merit or if they will pick it back up once the mental health commitment is concluded.

But if MHG retains whatever her custody arrangement was, doesn’t that suggest the allegations were unfounded, otherwise she might have lost that?

I’m tired, maybe that doesn’t make sense.

No. CPS is limited resources and too many fires to deal with. Once MB was in a position that he was going to be unable to access the kids, I guarantee they closed the case without further investigation. This happened with my grandson once we took custody. CPS was begging us to so they could end the investigation.

[Warmblood1]

@Sdel

@Angela_Freda

@Sdel

No….the fact that he went to jail and MHG left made the matter moot, from CPS’s point of view. The SS ban was because of the felony charges. It is an open question as to if in the last three years SS has determined the claims were without merit or if they will pick it back up once the mental health commitment is concluded.

But if MHG retains whatever her custody arrangement was, doesn’t that suggest the allegations were unfounded, otherwise she might have lost that?

I’m tired, maybe that doesn’t make sense.

No. CPS is limited resources and too many fires to deal with. Once MB was in a position that he was going to be unable to access the kids, I guarantee they closed the case without further investigation.

No, I disagree. That’s like saying someone abused a minor and is off the hook because they left the dwelling. In many investigations, the one being investigated is asked to leave anyways until the investigation is complete. Absence does not absolves someone from criminal charges.

[LilRanger]

@Angela_Freda

What could be pursued, in this civil case or another, if the unfounded allegations were known to be unfounded when the calls were placed to ss and cps

Damages, defamation, that sort of thing. If it comes out during discovery that this is what happened it would be more evidence for his countersuit

[Sdel]

@Warmblood1

@Sdel

@Angela_Freda

@Sdel

No….the fact that he went to jail and MHG left made the matter moot, from CPS’s point of view. The SS ban was because of the felony charges. It is an open question as to if in the last three years SS has determined the claims were without merit or if they will pick it back up once the mental health commitment is concluded.

But if MHG retains whatever her custody arrangement was, doesn’t that suggest the allegations were unfounded, otherwise she might have lost that?

I’m tired, maybe that doesn’t make sense.

No. CPS is limited resources and too many fires to deal with. Once MB was in a position that he was going to be unable to access the kids, I guarantee they closed the case without further investigation.

No, I disagree. That’s like saying someone abused a minor and is off the hook because they left the dwelling. In many investigations, the one being investigated is asked to leave anyways until the investigation is complete. Absence does not absolves someone from criminal charges.

Then they would have worked it up in the two and a half years he was in jail. They didn’t. Probably because “attempted murder” was by far and away going to wind up with more time than anything they could work up. Besides, I’m pretty sure that allegation had to do with the gun being missing….which was covered in the criminal trial, so why would CPS use their resources investigating it?

[Warmblood1]

@StB.YM

@Warmblood1

My guess is that since no physical evidence was produced with CPS, the allegation of harm towards children was dropped, and remaining “allegations for misconduct” is due to the shooting, since the permanent ban changed after the criminal trial. The fact that no evidence was produced regarding harm towards minors in the criminal trial may have influenced the change in ban status. I think if the ban were solely based on allegations of harm towards children then the ban would be totally dropped already. I think SS is considering the outcome of the Kroll hearing before another SS status change. I don’t think they want to remove the ban if for some reason MB is committed indefinitely or something like that. I don’t think indefinite commitment would ever happen, but it makes sense for a SS investigator to consider the Kroll hearing outcome.

From what I remember in the trial, in either the pre-trial hearing or on one of the trial days (before the jury was seated), the judge ruled that the prosecution could not bring up the cause of George Morris’s safe sport ban, because it was too prejudicial. I think that might have also been why the prosecution couldn’t really get into any SS allegations against MB (whether child abuse related or not), especially since whatever was filed against MB was just an allegation (not investigated and verified). I recall the judge also cutting off Bilinkas when he brushed briefly past the topic (because it would also be prejudicial). So from my ungrounded suspicion, not based on any evidence, there was some type of child abuse allegation in the safe sport complaint.

Totally agree. However, I don’t think the SS ban is based on those allegations. I think the child abuse allegations are unfounded because they weren’t pursued criminally and the SS ban is based on the shooting, especially with the status change after the NGRI verdict.

[Warmblood1]

@Sdel

Then they would have worked it up in the three years he was in jail. They didn’t. Probably because “attempted murder” was by far and away going to wind up with more time than anything they could work up. Besides, I’m pretty sure that allegation had to do with the gun being missing….which was covered in the criminal trial, so why would CPS use their resources investigating it?

Because there was supposedly allegations of misconduct towards children, made by LK in the SS document. Obviously I don’t know for certain without seeing the SS complaint. I agree that if there was evidence of these allegations that charges would have already been filed. They wouldn’t just drop them because MB was already in jail.

[iridedressage]

In my state it would take more than that visit to lose custody. If they had stayed and were substantiated, they would have put in services and probably made her move from the farm. But since she left the case was probably closed as “Unable to Complete”. Now if someone where to call Children’s services on her in Florida, then Florida would contact NJ for the records for history and then go from there.

[Sdel]

@Warmblood1

@Sdel

Then they would have worked it up in the three years he was in jail. They didn’t. Probably because “attempted murder” was by far and away going to wind up with more time than anything they could work up. Besides, I’m pretty sure that allegation had to do with the gun being missing….which was covered in the criminal trial, so why would CPS use their resources investigating it?

Because there was supposedly allegations of misconduct towards children, made by LK in the SS document. Obviously I don’t know for certain without seeing the SS complaint. I agree that if there was evidence of these allegations that charges would have already been filed. They wouldn’t just drop them because MB was already in jail.

Her response to RC was the the missing gun endangered children and to brag about having recorded that conversation. CPS said it was a neglect issue not a misconduct issue. Unsecured guns around kids is “neglect” not misconduct. She made other claims about MB and adults, on this forum, that would fall under misconduct.

[StB.YM]

@Warmblood1

Totally agree. However, I don’t think the SS ban is based on those allegations. I think the child abuse allegations are unfounded because they weren’t pursued criminally and the SS ban is based on the shooting, especially with the status change after the NGRI verdict.

I agree as well

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@StB.YM

@Warmblood1

My guess is that since no physical evidence was produced with CPS, the allegation of harm towards children was dropped, and remaining “allegations for misconduct” is due to the shooting, since the permanent ban changed after the criminal trial. The fact that no evidence was produced regarding harm towards minors in the criminal trial may have influenced the change in ban status. I think if the ban were solely based on allegations of harm towards children then the ban would be totally dropped already. I think SS is considering the outcome of the Kroll hearing before another SS status change. I don’t think they want to remove the ban if for some reason MB is committed indefinitely or something like that. I don’t think indefinite commitment would ever happen, but it makes sense for a SS investigator to consider the Kroll hearing outcome.

From what I remember in the trial, in either the pre-trial hearing or on one of the trial days (before the jury was seated), the judge ruled that the prosecution could not bring up the cause of George Morris’s safe sport ban, because it was too prejudicial. I think that might have also been why the prosecution couldn’t really get into any SS allegations against MB (whether child abuse related or not), especially since whatever was filed against MB was just an allegation (not investigated and verified). I recall the judge also cutting off Bilinkas when he brushed briefly past the topic (because it would also be prejudicial). So from my ungrounded suspicion, not based on any evidence, there was some type of child abuse allegation in the safe sport complaint.

But the CPS person testified that she was there to investigate MHG for child neglect, and was not there to investigate child abuse.

[Angela_Freda]

@Sdel

Then they would have worked it up in the two and a half years he was in jail. They didn’t. How do we know they didn’t? Probably because “attempted murder” was by far and away going to wind up with more time than anything they could work up. Besides, I’m pretty sure that allegation had to do with the gun being missing….which was covered in the criminal trial, so why would CPS use their resources investigating it?

But if they thought he’d done something to the kids, it would have been around their mom, and they wouldn’t drop the investigation of her, just because MB was in jail.
If they were there wrt mhg neglect of the kids, but she still has partial custody…

Which suggests to me it was false.

[Sdel]

@Angela_Freda

But if they thought he’d done something to the kids, it would have been around their mom, and they wouldn’t drop the investigation of her, just because MB was in jail.
Which suggests to me it was false.

All I can draw on is my own experiences…and that is once the “problem” is removed in a permanent manner, the investigation gets dropped. In my case it was court orders custody/guardianship and in MB’s case it might have been jail and MHG leaving the area.

[Angela_Freda]

@Sdel

All I can draw on is my own experiences…and that is once the “problem” is removed

But the “problem” wasn’t MB if the claim was neglect (the missing gun ) by mhg?

@CurrentlyHorseless

But the CPS person testified that she was there to investigate MHG for child neglect, and was not there to investigate child abuse

[Sdel]

@Angela_Freda

@Sdel

All I can draw on is my own experiences…and that is once the “problem” is removed

But the “problem” wasn’t MB if the claim was neglect by mhg?

@CurrentlyHorseless

But the CPS person testified that she was there to investigate MHG for child neglect, and was not there to investigate child abuse

Yes, the problem may have been the “unsecured gun”….which was permanently solved/explained with the incident and subsequent criminal investigation.

[Angela_Freda]

But the gun wasn’t missing.
So it was a false claim.
And having access to the office, LK likely, could have known full well it was false, that all guns on site were secured in a safe.

[Sdel]

@Angela_Freda

But the gun wasn’t missing.
So it was a false claim.
And having access to the office, LK likely, could have known full well it was false, that all guns on site were secured in a safe.

Who knows who had the gun. It could be 50/50 as to who did. There is enough doubt either way, it’s just comes down to what you believe. I’ve made it pretty clear about what I believe. Maybe CPS investigated a little bit more because of the incident than they otherwise would have…maybe they didn’t and let the police do it to save their resources. I just don’t see them spending a lot of time investigating someone who has left the state/situation and didn’t have primary custody of her kid based on how quickly they have always been to wash their hands when I have dealt with them.

I personally think the CPS thing was a surprise to LK. Based on the searches testimony, I think she was still toying with the idea of getting them involved some way, or at last thought there would be a more swift reaction….or that CPS would follow up with her first based on her report.

[iridedressage]

What’s interesting to me is that the children weren’t even there, yet the worker came out the day after the complaint was filed. Usually if a child is not in direct danger there is a 72 hour timeframe to investigate. And since she left the state so quickly, if she was considered the only AP there is no way the could have completed the investigation. They could have reached out to Florida to open a case there, but apparently decided that was not necessary.

[Angela_Freda]

@iridedressage

What’s interesting to me is that the children weren’t even there, yet the worker came out the day after the complaint was filed

Maybe because the kids were there when it was reported to SS, but the kids got sent away between when SS got the info, and sent the allegation to CPS?

@Sdel

I personally think the CPS thing was a surprise to LK. Based on the searches testimony, I think she was still toying with the idea of getting them involved some way, or at last thought there would be a more swift reaction….or that CPS would follow up with her first based on her report

It may have been a surprise to her, because she didn’t get them involved, iirc, safe sport did?

Maybe I’m misremembering.
I’m tired…