MB Civil Trial: JK/KK Contempt of Court?

[AbbyGRP]

Depends on the judge, but in my experience in NJ, fridays were for motion hearings. However, that does not mean they need to make a decision about the motion immediately or even that day. Lots of judges will take a few weeks to think about the arguments, consider the law, and make edits to the written opinion. It does not surprise me that nothing has been posted to ecourts yet. It could be awhile before anything is posted.

[AbbyGRP]

Actually case management conferences in NJ are typically with the judge.

[AbbyGRP]

This is for mediation, not case management conferences. Those are status updates, so they are typically done with the judge.

[trubandloki]

Thanks for the information @AbbyGRP.

[Maria]

No forensics. No tests on hands for gunshot residue. Oppsie, how did that magazine get in the police car? Very Very Very Very Very Very Very Very Very VERY shoddy police nonwork.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@cheval_convert

That is one possible scenario. As 48 hours pointed out, what happened after MB arrived at the house is unclear. The police failed in their duty to properly investigate the crime scene leading to this ambiguity. You choose to believe LK’s story, but, for me, having dealt for 25 years with this type of personality, I have a very difficult time believing the word of a narcisisstic, self-admitted liar, drug addict. I could not in good conscience find MB guilty of anything. You have the police and their lack of proper investigation to blame for that.

I do believe LK and RG in terms of what they said on the stand under oath.

LK has admitted to lying on SM. I’m not endorsing that, but it is not the same thing as lying under oath in a criminal trial. Lots of people lie on SM.

Suppose MB had actually killed LK and RG, so neither was able to testify.

With the evidence of the chain of custody of the gun, the forensics at the scene (bullet casings, two dead bodies, the ear witness), do you think the verdict would have been different? I don’t.

I do believe their testimony on the stand. But I don’t think their testimony was necessary for the NGRI verdict.

[LiberalSnowflake]

@Fiesta01

It sounds like you fit in great (although my robe is turquoise blue). I vote for our mob being like a group of kangaroos. So much more civilized than the other options.

Edited to delete draft message I hadn’t finished.

Just catching up, and as an Aussie I can say that the collective noun for a group of kangaroos is actually a mob, so you’re winning on both counts.

My bathrobe is navy floral, but we don’t have a basement.

[cheval_convert]

Here’s the thing, the person I dealt with sat on a stand in a court of law, swore to tell the truth, and then very convincingly lied through her teeth, complete with tears. My husband sat in court and watched the performance. His words, “If I didn’t know the truth, I would have believed her. She can never live with us again.” So, you can believe them all you want, but knowing the personality, “I would not believe her if her tongue were notarized”. (I cannot remember which Coth member had the quote in their signature line or I would credit them with it.)

[ekat]

@AbbyGRP

This is for mediation, not case management conferences. Those are status updates, so they are typically done with the judge.

They have a mediator listed on it though?

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Sdel

@Warmblood1

No one knows how the shooting happened. Therefore, self defense can not be ruled out. That is an assumption you are making, not fact.

There is no point in continuing to argue with them. They are unable or unwilling to acknowledge that the criminal trial was a sham with what was allowed to be entered into the record, one wholly designed to railroad the jury into a certain decision. Now that I think of it, maybe that is why certain people purposefully are being obtuse….they know how much of a sham it was.

Just ignore them and they can get their rude awakening again at the conclusion of the civil trial.

Interesting. You are now saying that the criminal trial was a “sham”, and that the jury was “railroaded” into “a certain decision”.

That decision was NGRI. It looks like you finally understand what a verdict of NGRI means.

I do not think the criminal trial was a sham. I said I agreed with the jury on all of its verdicts even back in April when you were declaring the verdict to be a great exoneration of MB.

[eggbutt]

@Maria

No forensics. No tests on hands for gunshot residue. Oppsie, how did that magazine get in the police car? Very Very Very Very Very Very Very Very Very VERY shoddy police nonwork.

Indeed! I was completely gobsmacked watching the two police hearings at what they admitted they did NOT do and they offered no explanation! It was one eff-up after another! (FUBAR). Then Bilinkas began comparing their notes against their official reports and it all became much worse!! Schellhorn kept trying to explain and make excuses for the officers! No wonder by the time of the actual criminal trial Taylor decided he would closely monitor and prevent too much incompetence to be introduced! For anyone with a scintilla of LE procedures and training, it was nauseating. Full disclosure - I used to type my police training officer husband’s daily trainee reports with super detail on requirements versus accomplishments. This training was for patrol officers and defined covered initial crime scene processes, subduing all participants and witnesses, and protecting the integrity of all evidence, in addition to all other patrol officer training. Very intense OTJ 8 weeks!

There is no way anyone can say this incident was or wasn’t self defense based on the piss-poor performance of the MCPD.

[trubandloki]

@CurrentlyHorseless

two dead bodies

Did I miss something? There were two dead bodies at the scene? So strange that two extra dead bodies at the scene did not come up at all at the trial.

Screen shot so no one can claim that is not what they said.

[AbbyGRP]

It’s possible they will try mediation again at the same time. In my experience, case management conferences are conducted by the judge, or if they are for new dates only, maybe court staff. There are generally some issues on which the judge needs to issue a new order during these conferences. Typically mediators do not handle case management conferences.

[eggbutt]

If it’s remote it could be streamed but it isn’t likely, is it?

[ekat]

@AbbyGRP

It’s possible they will try mediation again at the same time. In my experience, case management conferences are conducted by the judge, or if they are for new dates only, maybe court staff. There are generally some issues on which the judge needs to issue a new order during these conferences. Typically mediators do not handle case management conferences.

Ahhhh. Thank you so much. The explanation is greatly appreciated!

[ekat]

@eggbutt

If it’s remote it could be streamed but it isn’t likely, is it?

I have no idea. It wouldn’t be public here.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@cheval_convert

Here’s the thing, the person I dealt with sat on a stand in a court of law, swore to tell the truth, and then very convincingly lied through her teeth, complete with tears. My husband sat in court and watched the performance. His words, “If I didn’t know the truth, I would have believed her. She can never live with us again.” So, you can believe them all you want, but knowing the personality, “I would not believe her if her tongue were notarized”. (I cannot remember which Coth member had the quote in their signature line or I would credit them with it.)

Yes, some people are capable of lying under oath as well as on SM.

In this case, my saying I believe their testimony on the stand comes in large part from the fact that their testimony fits in logically with all the other evidence — the chain of custody of the gun, MB being enraged at the appearance of the CPS worker, the ear witness, the fact of his insanity, the fact of her having been shot.

I’m not saying I believe her testimony simply because I would believe anything she says. In this case, their statements as to what happened fit extremely well with all the other facts.

[KurPlexed]

@CurrentlyHorseless

Is it amusing to you to deliberately distort the meaning of what I wrote, KP?

Very! What comes around, goes around. (Oh. I got this metaphor correct! Yay me. )

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@trubandloki

@CurrentlyHorseless

two dead bodies

Did I miss something? There were two dead bodies at the scene? So strange that two extra dead bodies at the scene did not come up at all at the trial.

Screen shot so no one can claim that is not what they said.

Thanks for the screen shot.

Please read the preceding sentence to the one you highlighted. That’s what you missed.

[eggbutt]

See, this is a shining example of why some posters should be ignored. What an asinine post.