MB Civil Trial: JK/KK Contempt of Court?

[ekat]

@trubandloki

Could she have filed this civil case anywhere she wanted to?

The personal injury portion as a result of the shooting had to be filed where the shooting happened. But still, it was her choice to file it in the first place.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Ambitious_Kate

@CurrentlyHorseless

The woman from SS testified under oath that her visit was prompted by a referral from SS and that she was investigating MHG for child neglect and not investigating MB for child abuse.

Despite that direct sworn testimony from the CPS representative, you insist on continuing to blame LK for falsely reporting MB to CPS for child abuse.

SS is not CPS. When did CPS representative testify?

The CPS representative testified at the criminal trial.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Ambitious_Kate

@CurrentlyHorseless

Despite that direct sworn testimony from the CPS representative, you insist on continuing to blame LK for falsely reporting MB to CPS for child abuse.

What are you trying to say? LK DID falsely report MB to CPS for child abuse. I’m not “blaming” her. I’m calling her out for lying and making false reports.

However, CPS hasn’t testified to anything. I don’t think you are paying attention. Talking to you is like herding cats. Done with this one.

There is no evidence that LK reported MB to CPS for child abuse.

The CPS representative testified that her visit was prompted by a referral from SS and that she was investigating MHG for child neglect. She did not say she was investigating MB for child abuse.

You’re the one making false accusations.

[DownYonder]

@ekat

The personal injury portion as a result of the shooting had to be filed where the shooting happened. But still, it was her choice to file it in the first place.

And let’s don’t forget that she filed it before the criminal trial, when she and her pack of coyotes were so absolutely certain MB would be convicted of attempted murder and sent to prison. They assumed her civil case would be a slam-dunk in her favor, so in their minds, there was no downside to filing it.

And the fact that the verdict wasn’t enough to convince her to drop the case is quite telling about the way her mind operates. She is still intent on tormenting MB as much and as long as possible. That so totally goes along with NPD - I will win (because the alternative means that I have been rejected and that is an outcome too horrible to contemplate).

[trubandloki]

@ekat

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.

Good point.

@StB.YM, that was why I was asking. I realize that Lauren and her parents, Kirby and Jonathon, were already served in this situation where they are not complying in the civil case that Lauren filed. I was more wondering about moving forward in this case, if Lauren or her parents try to play that game of - you can not server me - how that might work out in this situation.

[ekat]

@trubandloki

Good point.

@StB.YM, that was why I was asking. I realize that Lauren and her parents, Kirby and Jonathon, were already served in this situation where they are not complying in the civil case that Lauren filed. I was more wondering about moving forward in this case, if Lauren or her parents try to play that game of - you can not server me - how that might work out in this situation.

You know, I am wondering if the request for the adjournment is so JK/KK can find legal representation of their own and get them up to speed. That would make future service a lot easier.

[trubandloki]

@ekat

You know, I am wondering if the request for the adjournment is so JK/KK can find legal representation of their own and get them up to speed. That would make future service a lot easier.

You are smart!
That is a good thought. I would think they would want their own counsel.

Which leads to another question, if that was why Lauren’s lawyer filed that adjournment thing for Kirby and Jonathon, wouldn’t it have made more sense to say the reason was so they could hire counsel? That seems like a fair and good reason to postpone something in a situation like this, just saying ‘please wait, we are not ready’ does not seem like the right way to do things.
But, we are talking about the same lawyer who bad mouthed a jury right after a trial.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@DownYonder

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.

The lawyers for SGF are saying that SGF itself did not directly give LK permission to be in the house. However, the issue is whether they indirectly gave her permission to live there, given they leased the facility to MB, and MB agreed to let her live there, in a “verbal, barter agreement”. They’re trying to claim that MB did not have the authority to agree to her living in the farmhouse because his verbal deal with her was not consistent with his lease of the facility from SGF.

Of course I haven’t seen the document. I’m going by what the SGF lawyers asserted in the filing.

I agree with you that based on the description of “a very crude lease agreement”, SGF is going to have a hard time establishing that Barisone did not have the authority to permit her to live in the house as a part of the deal. That’s up to the jury to decide in apportioning liability.

[ekat]

@trubandloki

You are smart!
That is a good thought. I would think they would want their own counsel.

Which leads to another question, if that was why Lauren’s lawyer filed that adjournment thing for Kirby and Jonathon, wouldn’t it have made more sense to say the reason was so they could hire counsel? That seems like a fair and good reason to postpone something in a situation like this, just saying ‘please wait, we are not ready’ does not seem like the right way to do things.
But, we are talking about the same lawyer who bad mouthed a jury right after a trial.

Thanks!

It seems odd to me too. I mean, the subpoenas were served back in July. It seems like JK, an attorney, has had time to a) hire an attorney for himself and/or his wife, and b) respond to said subpoenas even if it were to ask for more time. Ignoring subpoenas, and then having LK’s attorney ask for more time to not be held in contempt seems, on its face, dubious, especially since one of the parties IS an attorney.

[hut-ho78]

@DownYonder

@eggbutt

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?

NAL but I am guessing he is not included in any of these legal actions because:

1. 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;
2. 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. ]

That was me. Are you trying to get the thread shut down already by talking about another poster? I say he is a hero because he stopped a much larger man with a firearm. Had he not, LK would have likely bled out, he would have likely been shot, and MB may have continued to shoot people on the premises. He restrained him and continued to speak with 911 until the arrival of LE.

No matter what else he has done or not done in life, he stepped up then.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@DownYonder

@ekat

The personal injury portion as a result of the shooting had to be filed where the shooting happened. But still, it was her choice to file it in the first place.

And let’s don’t forget that she filed it before the criminal trial, when she and her pack of coyotes were so absolutely certain MB would be convicted of attempted murder and sent to prison. They assumed her civil case would be a slam-dunk in her favor, so in their minds, there was no downside to filing it.

And the fact that the verdict wasn’t enough to convince her to drop the case is quite telling about the way her mind operates. She is still intent on tormenting MB as much and as long as possible. That so totally goes along with NPD - I will win (because the alternative means that I have been rejected and that is an outcome too horrible to contemplate).

Why would she drop a personal injury suit in response to a verdict of NGRI? The verdict establishes that be shot her, and while he is not criminally responsible for having shot her due to the finding of insanity, the injury is exactly the same as if he had shot her while sane.

MB has escaped a criminal conviction. Why should she drop her civil suit on the injuries he caused?

[2tempe]

Not arguing your post but I have to wonder why JK/KK would not have decided long ago to have separate counsel for themselves. Given their less than perfect relationship with daughter, her behavior and issues, their financial risk (or possibility of gain) and the fact that Dad himself has the legal knowledge to know that they were going to get brought into suit one way or another. None of this should be a surprise…

EDITED to add: Just looked at the doc filed by MB’s attorneys: on notice are 4 other law firms: One is representing SGF, then there is Nagel Rice, John P Graves, and Lane M. Ferdinand, the latter two having their own firms. Who is represent who among these 3?

[trubandloki]

Would a simple response of “I lied on social media, I have never transcribed any tapes” work for Kirby Kanarek in response to this subpoena?

Or does the fact that some part of them was transcribed for the SS complaint sort of ruin their ability to say that never happened?

[eggbutt]

[ekat]

@2tempe

EDITED to add: Just looked at the doc filed by MB’s attorneys: on notice are 4 other law firms: One is representing SGF, then there is Nagel Rice, John P Graves, and Lane M. Ferdinand, the latter two having their own firms. Who is represent who among these 3?

John Graves represents Ruth Cox ( or did in the beginning ). Lane Ferdinand is also listed as her counsel.

[ekat]

@2tempe

Not arguing your post but I have to wonder why JK/KK would not have decided long ago to have separate counsel for themselves. Given their less than perfect relationship with daughter, her behavior and issues, their financial risk (or possibility of gain) and the fact that Dad himself has the legal knowledge to know that they were going to get brought into suit one way or another. None of this should be a surprise…

I find this aspect entirely mystifying myself.

@trubandloki

Would a simple response of “I lied on social media, I have never transcribed any tapes” work for Kirby Kanarek in response to this subpoena?

Or does the fact that some part of them was transcribed for the SS complaint sort of ruin their ability to say that never happened?

The transcript(s) happened for sure as evidenced by the SS complaint. How Kirby chooses to address that will be interesting.

And none of that excuses blatantly ignoring a subpoena. I’m interested in what excuse Jonathan and Kirby Kanarek have for that.

[trubandloki]

@ekat

And none of that excuses blatantly ignoring a subpoena. I’m interested in what excuse Jonathan and Kirby Kanarek have for that.

Travel in a third-world country with no contact with the outside world?

I mean, Jonathon and Kirby Kanarek do seem to travel quite a bit. Maybe they wanted a new experience.

[eggbutt]

@ekat

And none of that excuses blatantly ignoring a subpoena. I’m interested in what excuse Jonathan and Kirby Kanarek have for that.

Maybe they’ve been too busy at the soup kitchen, bible study, or supervising the renovation of their FL estate. Subpoenas obviously are not a priority in their lives. It must be a Florida thing.

For people so averse to the behavior of a certain politician, they sure do follow his tactics.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@DownYonder

@eggbutt

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?

NAL but I am guessing he is not included in any of these legal actions because:

1. 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;
2. 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. ]

I think RG should be considered a hero for subduing an active shooter at the risk of his own life. He very likely saved LKs life and may have prevented MB from shooting others or committing suicide.

To satisfy your curiosity:

1. I’m not trying to convince anyone, just posting my opinion on a discussion forum.
2. I object to the term K-Klan for its repulsive connotations. I am not “hoping to sway” the Kanarek family to “keep him around”. It’s none of my business whether the LK/RG relationship continues and, as I don’t know either of them, I don’t care one whit as to whether they remain a couple or not.
3. Referring to a partner of either gender as “kept” is insulting (as you no doubt intend).
4. What is your definition of “an informant for the other side”? Someone who responds to subpoenas from all attorneys? Is someone, not a party to the suit, supposed to be condemned for a) ignoring subpoenas or for b) complying with subpoenas, whichever decision they take?

[cutter99]

Just !!!