MB Civil Trial: JK/KK Contempt of Court?

[DreadPirateRoberts]

@Fiesta01

@DreadPirateRoberts Wah wo. I’ve never fought a pirate before. I’m thinking I’ll have to doff my hat to you and go sailing home. Very quickly.

No need! While I was distracted by the prospect of a little friendly competition, @Mondo claimed the bunny robe. Clever Mondo! The robe suits you, too.

I suppose I will have to settle for living bunnies snuggled on my lap while I wear a more plain and tattered robe (Buttercup is partial to houserabbits, in spite of the damsel mare’s distrust of lagomorphs).

[Sdel]

@Syrynx

That’s my understanding after watching the trial as well. The evidence has not shown who pulled the trigger. Not by a long shot. (seriously no pun intended)

Not only that, the civil trial will be asking different questions than the criminal trial asked.

[Knights_Mom]

@trubandloki

Time for one of our regularly scheduled reminders of why this thread was started. Maybe there will even be some decisions today and the person in charge of vacuuming will make sure we get to know what is going on. Fingers crossed that today is the day, right?

(Elephant added for the cuteness factor, can never go wrong with a cute elephant.)

So far in the civil trial brought by Lauren Kanarek there are a bunch of road blocks, all caused by Lauren Kanarek and her parents Jonathan Kanarek ( @Inigo-montoya ) and Kirby Kanarek ( @Seeker1 ) . Both parents have been posting on this very forum that they are involved in this situation so it seems strange that in a case brought by their daughter they are now claiming they have nothing worth adding.

Jonathan Kanarek (Inigo-Montoya here on COTH) failed to answer a discovery subpoena and now has a contempt request out there.

Kirby Kanarek (Seeker1 here on COTH) also failed to answer a discovery subpoena and now has a contempt request out there.

Jonathan Kanarek is not only a lawyer himself but is also the father of Lauren Kanarek who claimed right here on this forum that she has a top 10 global law firm on speed dial who will have a team of senior level lawyers answer any question she has immediately, so it seems like if Jonathan was dealing with something that he did not understand that Lauren could call up her top 10 global law firm to get an answer, no?

But darn, I think the basics of answering a subpoena in a timely manner is taught to all lawyers, no matter their specialty so I would think that Jonathan knows enough to know that it makes him, his wife, and his daughter look pretty bad that he ignored that subpoena in a case filed by them (well his daughter). And then he added to it by lying here on the forum saying he had answered and it was just lost.

But wait, there is more and it is not a set of free Ginsu Knives. He then had his daughter’s lawyer file something even though his daughter’s lawyer does not represent him or his wife who is in the same situation as he is. I have to assume that she takes her legal advice from her darling husband, the lawyer of the family.

Lauren Kanarek, who was impeached at the criminal trial, also admitted under oath that she lies. Some of the other things Lauren Kanarek admitted to under oath at the criminal trial include her plan to ruin Michael Barisone and that she said the infamous line of “finish the bastard”.

“but you knew that already”

Who DOES that?

[3PonyFarm]

I checked the site where you can watch the court proceedings remotely but forgot it did not have a schedule, just listed what was currently happening.

[Fiesta01]

@DreadPirateRoberts

No need! While I was distracted by the prospect of a little friendly competition, @Mondo claimed the bunny robe. Clever Mondo!

Congratulations, @Mondo. Well played. @DreadPirateRoberts Please send some houserabbits my way, and I’ll try to console myself for losing out on the robe. An even dozen to start would be fine.

[Knights_Mom]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@BigMama1

@CurrentlyHorseless

In the civil case, the plaintiff only needs to establish that he shot her by a preponderance of the evidence, a lower standard than was required in the criminal trial. I don’t understand why you think that a different jury will fail to determine that he shot her, based on the lower standard of proof. The civil trial doesn’t require proof to an absolute standard either.

Because I don’t think the preponderance of the evidence shows he shot her. And neither do the majority of people following and commenting on the case. No reason to think a jury won’t reach the same conclusions as hundreds of members of the public.

Assuming there will be fewer sidebars and lines of questioning shut down by the judge, the jury will get to hear much more detail that wasn’t allowed at the criminal trial. And much of that casts far more than reasonable doubt on LK and RG’s version of events.

I don’t think the majority opinion expressed on the forum is representative of the wider public. The 48 Hours episode took it as given that he got the gun out of the safe and that he shot her. The jury from the criminal trial was chosen from the local population with both sides able to make objections. And you think that the jury was not a representative sample of the public, but the group of posters her is?

They quoted Bilinkas explaining that the NGRI verdict meant that “he was not responsible for his conduct”. Bilinkas artfully declined to describe the nature of the “conduct” for which he was not legally responsible. I’m less delicate, so I’ll say it. He shot her. He shot her. He shot her.

The jury will probably get to hear MB testify in the civil trial, as he doesn’t have the right to refuse to testify without the jury holding it against him. In the criminal trial, he also had protections against prejudicial evidence coming into the record.

Delusions cannot heal themselves.

The majority EVERYWHERE disagrees with you on EVERYTHING.

This cannot be legitimately disputed. It just can’t.

[Knights_Mom]

@SillyHorse

@Omgitsme

“Good enough” should not be a descriptor for law enforcement.
“Good enough” is reserved for trivial matters. I’m not gonna argue the same tired stuff but that I will absolutely argue.

Bravo!!!

[Knights_Mom]

@CanteringCarrot

I think people are asking for you to look at this objectively, and you can’t/won’t. Which is not surprising, but if you took all of the names out of the situation, and looked at the evidence, it isn’t exactly an airtight case. Sure the jury reached a certain conclusion, and that’s worth noting, but look at the actual evidence. When I say evidence I’m not talking about “he said/she said” arguments and testimonies, I’m talking about forensics. There’s no doubt that LK ended up with 2 bullets in her. How they got there is up for debate (no, really, it is). Since there is no video of the incident (allegedly… That’s a whole 'nother can of worms) we have to rely on other evidence. Was everyone tested for GSR? The ballistics…other documented pieces of evidence. Can we, without any doubt, be 100% sure that MB shot LK? Not based off of opinion, but based off of the evidence. Again, not based off of opinion.

That’s what people are getting at. While the evidence may be sufficient for some to form an opinion, or feed their bias, is it objectively conclusive? If all other details were withheld and someone brought this before you solely with the forensics, does it 100% confirm what did or didn’t happen? This isn’t a “For me, yes, it does” this isn’t about opinion or belief, it’s about fact and being able to demonstrate exactly what transpired on evidence alone.

Regardless of what I “think” happened, the evidence doesn’t 100% validate that MB shot LK. There are some discrepancies and the argument has some holes in it.

Of course someone is going to come here and say, “Well, why didn’t they go straight for not guilty at the trial then?” It’s entirely possible that they felt it too risky of a strategy. That does not equate to the admission of guilt. There are quite a few things at play in a criminal trial with a jury including admissibility and the juries perception. These are “lay people” and there’s a few things to consider when coming up with a plea. Choosing a safe strategy doesn’t always mean that a other plea would’ve been “false” so to speak. Or that the one chosen was wrong. Sometimes it really comes down to choosing the safest route for your client. Sometimes the truth cannot be accurately depicted due to what is allowed in court/by the judge and due to how the jury may see it or have to work amongst themselves.

It’s a entirely possible that many jurors felt that MB was straight up not guilty, but had to reach a compromise with someone/those that weren’t sure, or weren’t comfortable with that. As we’ve seen on here, some people don’t live in reality and lack the ability to be objective, or even process and accept fact, so this can happen within a jury as well. We don’t know.

How some of you can be so sure, is puzzling.

It may be due to my professional background, where I have to prove/have proof and research that supports every word that I say, so maybe I’m overly critical, but I just can’t say, definitely, that MB shot LK. Someone could begin poking holes in that statement and I’d be grasping around trying to provide the evidence…which isn’t all there. This case isn’t alone, and this type of stuff has happened before.

I believe it comes down to MB being unable to aid in his own defense due to his lack of memory.

Normally the prosecution would say “On August 7, 2019 you went into the pizza parlor and ordered a pepperoni pizza. When it came out and the worker gave it to another customer you became agitated and shot the worker twice center mass”.

A person with memory could then say “I did not. At that time I was next door at McDonalds and I ordered a McWhopper which I then ate in my car”.

MB can’t aid in his defense. He can’t tell his version. He doesn’t have a version he can remember. Therefore his defense choices are limited.

That’s all it is. And this has been discussed ad nauseum and understood except for the few posters desperate to make a circle, a square. (Not you CC, u r awesome)

[DreadPirateRoberts]

@Fiesta01

@DreadPirateRoberts Please send some houserabbits my way, and I’ll try to console myself for losing out on the robe. An even dozen to start would be fine.

Thanks to Bob Barker (and the close quarters of the Revenge limiting the number of souls it can comfortably accommodate), I’m afraid our rabbits are in short supply to fulfill your request for a dozen. We do provide lap rabbits to any visitor on the Revenge, however. When we’re next in port perhaps I’ll manage to put up a rabbit robe avatar of my own, and do come aboard sometime to meet the buccaneer bunnies.

[Knights_Mom]

Lagomorph Luxury Lingerie!

[Maria]

Just for you bunny lovers

[Jealoushe]

I appreciate you sharing and clarifying your thoughts in reply to my query

[Fiesta01]

No worries. I would be most grateful for some time with a lap rabbit, however. Luckily, it just so happens that my humble hovel sits on a beach between two harbors. The small craft harbor has more than enough depth for the Revenge and would be most welcome there.

Also, and not a word to anyone about this, the deep seaport at the other end of the beach hosts large ships. Yes, even larger than the Revenge!! These salty merchants would never even miss, say, a goodly portion of their cargo. Not that I would ever personally condone pilfering, you understand, but I wouldn’t object to a small percentage of the take. You know, a finder’s fee?

Anyway, whenever the Revenge hits the waters of SoCal, please hoist your bathrobe and we can probably do some business, uh …I mean we can pet some lap rabbits. Absolutely nothing illegal about that!

[trubandloki]

@eggbutt

That said it is believed by many that they did give Taylor and Schellhorn letters embellished with their fears of Michael’s release

I wonder if those letters included the fact that Jonathan Kanarek ( @Inigo-montoya ) said on this forum, before the trial and after the verdict that Lauren would like to train with him agian?

[Jealoushe]

@trubandloki

I wonder if those letters included the fact that Jonathan Kanarek ( @Inigo-montoya ) said on this forum, before the trial and after the verdict that Lauren would like to train with him agian?

Didn’t he say he could see a situation where she would train with him again? Or am I misremembering that?

[trubandloki]

@3PonyFarm

I checked the site where you can watch the court proceedings remotely but forgot it did not have a schedule, just listed what was currently happening.

Oh, I forgot about this idea. That it might be there to see.
Can you (again, I know it is again) share the link to the site?

[yaya]

I think the eCourts site said the Case Mgmt Conf is remote and starts at 2pm.

[MHM]

@eggbutt

Public service reminder: if you begin seeing posts of someone you know you have on your ignore list, check your user preferences to verify the ignore time has not expired. Re-ignore with the expiration set to infinity if desired.

Or just refresh your page. That has worked for me several times. Yay.

[MHM]

@yaya

I think the eCourts site said the Case Mgmt Conf is remote and starts at 2pm.

Tick, tick, tick…

[EADoug]

Anyone else push a meeting justincase something goes live?