MB Civil Trial: JK/KK Contempt of Court?

[trubandloki]

@ekat

Edit to add: @trubandloki - can I get a pair of those reading glasses please? Maybe that will help clarify this answer.

I have some amazing reading glasses and will gladly share with you, but I do not think that even a good pair of reading glasses will help that post make any sense.

[Knights_Mom]

@DownYonder

Do judges usually consider motions in the order in which they are listed on their schedule (on the web site)?

And what happens if they get to one that is so complicated it is taking up way more of their time than they thought? Do they proceed with it until they make a decision? Does that sometimes mean that the other cases on the schedule may get pushed back? Or do they reschedule the complicated one so they can continue on down the list of other proceedings scheduled for that day?

Nope. It’s whatever parties are ready to go.

[ekat]

@trubandloki

I have some amazing reading glasses and will gladly share with you, but I do not think that even a good pair of reading glasses will help that post make any sense.

Darn. Thanks anyways.

[MorganSercu]

@CurrentlyHorseless

it wasn’t quite as simple as just finding 5 stalls all on one farm, and there was another horse coming in from quarantine that Wednesday, all of that was already underway before MBs lawyer told her to leave on the 5th.’

So she’s unhappy, frightened for her life but arranging to have another horse shipped there instead of GETTING OUT.

Yeah. Sure.

This will be very interesting to the jury (juries?) seated for the civil cases.

[jvanrens]

@CurrentlyHorseless

Based on that, the statement that MB “never asked her to leave” is not strictly true. I find it understandable that JK may have used “MB never asked her to leave” as short answer to the question rather than say, ‘well, LK had already begun negotiations for the terms of her departure, given that she and RG were pretty enmeshed with MB due all the sloppy, verbal agreements, it wasn’t quite as simple as just finding 5 stalls all on one farm, and there was another horse coming in from quarantine that Wednesday, all of that was already underway before MBs lawyer told her to leave on the 5th.’

I’d say he flat out lied. He’d been working with ST on an exit plan for LK for about a week (if my memory serves). So, yeah, he lied.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@cutter99

Apparently @CurrentlyHorseless went to the Jonathan Kanarek School of Truth and Honesty!

You know what we call this in my neck of the woods- SEMANTICS!

@CurrentlyHorseless

@ekat

@CurrentlyHorseless

I did not say he never lied. I said I found him credible. More credible than LK. More credible than Eggbutt.

What about here? I mean technically you didn’t say that IM never lies, just that you were not aware of any. What about the lies that have been pointed out here in this thread?

MB said in the 48 Hours interview that he had told LK to leave “many, many times”. JK said in the 48 Hours interview that MB “never asked her to leave.”

My best understanding from the evidence from the trial, including the text from MHG saying “we haven’t asked them to leave” on when? the third? is that MB did not tell them to leave prior to the 5th.

Based on that, the statement that MB “never asked her to leave” is not strictly true. I find it understandable that JK may have used “MB never asked her to leave” as short answer to the question rather than say, ‘well, LK had already begun negotiations for the terms of her departure, given that she and RG were pretty enmeshed with MB due all the sloppy, verbal agreements, it wasn’t quite as simple as just finding 5 stalls all on one farm, and there was another horse coming in from quarantine that Wednesday, all of that was already underway before MBs lawyer told her to leave on the 5th.’

It appears both the statements by MB and LK fail to match the exact facts. I’ll be interested in learning from the civil trial which statement is the comparatively larger misrepresentation.

Of course if there’s a “misrepresentation” by MB, he’s not legally responsible for “his conduct” since he has been determined to be delusional, insane.

I have not said IM “never lies”. I said I found him credible and with access to inside information.

JK is lawyer, yes? @FitzE is a lawyer, yes?

My understanding is that lawyers especially adept at “semantics” and “rhetoric” use those tools as weapons to win cases or win arguments.

@ekat has been using “semantics” to pretend she disagrees with my interpretation of the verdict for weeks. Lawyers gotta do what lawyers do.

IANAL.

[BigMama1]

How was it sarcasm when he was pretending all along to not be one of the Kanareks?

[ekat]

@CurrentlyHorseless

IANAL.

Clearly.

[ekat]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@ekat has been using “semantics” to pretend she disagrees with my interpretation of the verdict for weeks. Lawyers gotta do what lawyers do.

Thanks for letting me know you think I’m only pretending to disagree with you. I’ll be more clear going forward.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@BigMama1

How was it sarcasm when he was pretending all along to not be one of the Kanareks?

Did he ever say, sarcastically, “Of course I’m JK /s”? Not that I saw. Please provide the screenshot if you think he did.

How has he “pretended … to not be one of the Kanareks?”

He has declined to drop his anonymity.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@ekat

@CurrentlyHorseless

IANAL.

Clearly.

Finally, a clear endorsement from @Ekat!

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@ekat

@CurrentlyHorseless

@ekat has been using “semantics” to pretend she disagrees with my interpretation of the verdict for weeks. Lawyers gotta do what lawyers do.

Thanks for letting me know you think I’m only pretending to disagree with you. I’ll be more clear going forward.

That would be great, @Ekat.

[I_dratherbe]

@DownYonder

Do judges usually consider motions in the order in which they are listed on their schedule (on the web site)?

And what happens if they get to one that is so complicated it is taking up way more of their time than they thought? Do they proceed with it until they make a decision? Does that sometimes mean that the other cases on the schedule may get pushed back? Or do they reschedule the complicated one so they can continue on down the list of other proceedings scheduled for that day?

Down in my neck of the woods on motions day everyone who had a motion scheduled to be heard would gather in the courtroom at one time, the judge or his clerk would call out each case and ask both lawyers how long they needed. Then the short easy motions would be heard first, and the more complicated ones that needed more time would be heard after. Oh, and one particular judge really hated petty discovery disputes and would hear those last after telling the parties to go out and try to settle it among themselves in the meantime. Sitting around the courthouse all day until 3 or 4 in the afternoon to get your motion heard is not the most productive use of your day

[EADoug]

Well, they are on the calendar for today… fingers crossed we get some more info later.

[DownYonder]

@Knights_Mom

@DownYonder

Do judges usually consider motions in the order in which they are listed on their schedule (on the web site)?

And what happens if they get to one that is so complicated it is taking up way more of their time than they thought? Do they proceed with it until they make a decision? Does that sometimes mean that the other cases on the schedule may get pushed back? Or do they reschedule the complicated one so they can continue on down the list of other proceedings scheduled for that day?

Nope. It’s whatever parties are ready to go.

@I_dratherbe

Down in my neck of the woods on motions day everyone who had a motion scheduled to be heard would gather in the courtroom at one time, the judge or his clerk would call out each case and ask both lawyers how long they needed. Then the short easy motions would be heard first, and the more complicated ones that needed more time would be heard after. Oh, and one particular judge really hated petty discovery disputes and would hear those last after telling the parties to go out and try to settle it among themselves in the meantime. Sitting around the courthouse all day until 3 or 4 in the afternoon to get your motion heard is not the most productive use of your day

It looks like only one of the motions scheduled for Sceusi today will have oral arguments. Doesn’t that mean that His Honor simply reads the motions, etc., and issues his decision? So attorneys don’t even bother going to the courthouse in those situations - correct?

Edited to add that I would pay good money to hear oral arguments between Deininger/Silver versus Nagle.

[trubandloki]

What does PG hearing mean?

[ekat]

@trubandloki

What does PG hearing mean?

Pending I think is how that court uses it

[trubandloki]

PG is an abbreviation for pending? Oh court people are weird.

[BatCoach]

It’s like a fun game of “find the contradiction”

[eggbutt]

Friday, September 23, 1st day of Fall and at least 1/3 of the posts are dominated by, you guessed it, the resident pot stirrer. IGNORE please.