Well, that is interesting.
1 Like
It’s called a Scriveners error. If everyone knows you intended a certain thing, then you get credit for the typos. In this case they are obviously meaning the shooting and are not purposefully trying to mislead the parties on the facts.
8 Likes
For those alleging that MB violated his lease, do you know for a fact that the agreement contained language prohibiting barter? How do you know that? Have you seen the document? (Inquiring minds want to know.)
I’m thinking that “a very crude lease agreement” would likely NOT include that kind of language. And if it wasn’t specifically prohibited in the agreement, it isn’t fair to say he violated the lease.
8 Likes
Ah, thanks. So it is a myth that inaccuracies in legal documents can invalidate them?
1 Like
No, they can, at least I think they can, just some kinds are “forgiven”. It has to do with intent behind the error.
8 Likes
IIRC, it was not established during the criminal trial that LK reported MB to CPS for child abuse. And - also IIRC - she vehemently denied multiple times on SM that she had ever contacted CPS. She was apparently THINKING about it, as evidenced by the search history on her phone, but the record does not indicate that she actually called them.
She did however contact Safe Sport, and whatever she said to them was enough for them to think a child may be “at risk” at HH - and specifically, MHG’s child. SS then apparently referred the case to CPS. And as others have pointed out, the fact that CPS went straight to the barn and asked to speak to MHG indicates they had been given specific information about the child who was supposedly at risk (i.e., her parent’s name and place of residence).
9 Likes
And specifically, according to the contempt request from Barisone’s lawyer, that specific information included a recording/transcript of a conversation.
11 Likes
Aren’t these contempt filings against LK, JK, and KK from the lawyers for SGF?
3 Likes
JK - contempt - from SGF lawyers - request to delay decision
KK - contempt - from MB lawyers - request to delay decision
LK - motion to compel - from SGF lawyers - not requested to delay decision
5 Likes
Thank you @Sdel for clarifying that!!!
I suppose it does not matter which lawyers are pointing out that Lauren Kanarek, her father Jonathan Kanarek, and her mother Kirby Kanarek are not following thru on the case that they filed.
6 Likes
I still find it intriguing about RG’s absence in these filings. He was front and center of much of the planning, building damage, harassment, etc, so why is he exempt from legal action? As I recall it was made clear if RG was around, he was recording conversations. It would be interesting to hear recordings he made of LK and JK conversations.
Legal peeps, why would RG be exempt from everything at this point other than the fact he doesn’t have a pot to pee in?
8 Likes
Well, that would be why no one dragged him into the suit as a defendant. But remember, we don’t know if he’s been subpoenaed yet. It’s entirely possible he and his subpoena are quietly cooperating and not giving a reason to be held in contempt.
15 Likes
[quote=“CurrentlyHorseless, post:376, topic:775980, full:true”]
First, the woman who testified was not from SS, she was from CPS.
Second, please point out where I said LK reported MB to CPS. I have been referring to the SS report when discussing this matter.
9 Likes
I wonder if the adjournment request came because certain parties realized they can’t keep dodging handing over records or sitting for a deposition. Or if they’re just trying to push the the date back even more as a delay tactic.
I also wonder if MB can sit for a deposition while at AK or if he has to have his Kroll hearing first. Might that be a possibile reason why the plaintiff’s party is delaying? Because they want his deposition first? I’m not educated enough about these matters.
3 Likes
It has been brought up many times that Lauren likes to avoid being served, which makes my head swirl on its own (in a ‘who does that’ sort of way). But I now have questions on that topic since this point about the whole Kanarek family is being served with things.
In a situation like this case, where it is her case that she filed and the other side’s lawyer is trying to serve her with something, what happens if she plays her “I am too good to be served” game?
She is claiming that her or her parent’s will be at Michael’s closed hearing. Can Lauren, Kirby, and/or Jonathon be served while at the courthouse?
Are there other ways to serve Lauren, Kirby, or Jonathon? Can they be served thru their lawyers in the case? How would that work for Kirby Kanarek and Jonathon Kanarek since the plaintiff’s lawyer in this case is technically Lauren’s lawyer, not their lawyer?
Edit to fix bad typing, clearly my brain wanted server instead of serve, everywhere.
8 Likes
I think logistically it would be a nightmare to arrange, even by Zoom. I don’t think AK is set up to give MB a closed, confidential space to give a deposition.
That being said, if that’s the case, they should plead that in court, not ignore subpoenas. And it’s not something LK and her attorney has said in their reasoning for her not showing up for her own in person deposition.
LK knew he was behind bars when she filed the suit in New Jersey. So she gets to live with the complications. (In my opinion).
8 Likes
Could she have filed this civil case anywhere she wanted to?
1 Like
I think they were already served because the court filings included a notarized proof of service for KK and JK.
7 Likes
NAL but I am guessing he is not included in any of these legal actions because:
- Since he has no job, no income, no trust fund, and no assets (that we know of), it would be a waste of time and money to go after him;
- He is cooperating with attorneys for MB, SGF, etc.
And those are not mutually exclusive.
I am also reminded of the fact that one or two parties on these threads pretty consistently pushed the narrative that RG should be considered a “hero” for his actions on Aug. 7, 2019. I kept wondering at the time (and still wonder) who they were trying to convince. Were they hoping to sway the K-Klan so they would keep him around? And if so, why are they so very interested in making sure RG continues to be “kept”? Were they/are they worried that he may become an informant for the other side?
[Edited to fix a typo. 
]
6 Likes
Not in the courthouse, but the parking lot would be fair game. Their attorneys of record can be served instead of individual, personal service.
True. We know SGF served JK a with a subpoena for records and/or a deposition. We also know Mr Deininger served KK for the transcripts and/or deposition.
However, it’s possible RC’s attorneys want to jump in the mix, or Mr D wants to serve JK a with something, or other similar possibilities.
7 Likes
