MB Civil Trial: JK/KK Contempt of Court?

[hut-ho78]

@ekat

@Angela_Freda

I don’t recall the bold being the case?

He did say he was driving back from court that afternoon and had to pull over. I assumed he meant back to his office, but

I’m good to agree driving from his office and calling to present the 2nd barn that she had to approve. ED testified he was told by JK that LK had to approve.

[hut-ho78]

@lazaret

He specifically said he did not recall but given the location he hazarded that he was likely returning to his office from a court appearance in a neighboring town.

Thank you.

[ekat]

@hut-ho78

I’m good to agree driving from his office and calling to present the 2nd barn that she had to approve. ED testified he was told by JK that LK had to approve.

Not the 2nd barn though. He never testified to that, and the barn Mr Tarshis and Jonathan agreed to was declined, so whatever he negotiated, which we do not yet know, was option 3 at best.

[hut-ho78]

@cutter99

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Ambitious_Kate

@hut-ho78

Because she is traumatized by being shot twice and flatlining twice. PTSD.

I am so tired of these [edit] of Lauren’s on this board. Whether you know her or not, you’re feeding her her narcissistic supply with your obfuscation and purposeful, obtuse, [edit] inability to follow along with the facts. Its like a cult who joiners who have all the excuses in the world why she shouldn’t take responsibility for her behaviour, and who have no problem ignoring what she does and says, and rewriting what she did, all because she suffered trauma.

I’ve had all kinds of emotional and physical trauma, PTSD during parts of my youth and young adulthood, brought about by Lauren Kanarek types I"ve worked with, and by a couple of men, a very abusive husband, neglectful parents, and a r**pe. I’ve gotten therapy about it all at various times. I’ve worked through it, and I don’t carry it with me. I can talk about it, and about the horror of these things, but here’s the key: I don’t perseverate about it. I don’t cater to my emotions about it, I don’t hold onto it into my daily life, I don’t wear it like a designer bag. You sycophants of Lauren’s wear HER trauma like a designer bag! You claim you don’t know her, but you parrot her and her family’s behaviour and re-writing of the facts, sometimes even before they act it out themselves, swirling your capes so everyone sees your banners of her trauma!

Yes, some of my trauma was with me and affected my functioning for many years until I could move it out of my present life, but even when it did affect me, I didn’t put it out front, make it a raison d’etre. I struggled with the PTSD in various ways until I sorted it all out, but not while making the people around me constantly aware of it, and never ever used it as an excuse to abuse other people, or look for vindication or law suits. I havn’t ignored my traumas; I can see red flags in abusive men a mile way, and I can see narcissistic rage in work managers looking for their supply quick enough to find another job and get out of their sphere, but I don’t wear my trauma like a badge and make those around me feel they have to excuse my behaviour because of it. I own my own behaviour and what I make of life.

Its sad and pathetic to watch someone like Lauren take no responsibility for herself in any shape or manner, and even more inexcusable for those strangers on this board to obfuscate for her, and be purposefully obtuse and slow to comprehend the conversation on this board as Lauren’s co-dependent sycophants.

There’s no excuse for using one’s trauma to create drama and bring attention and pity to yourself, and there’s no excuse for abusing other people because of what happened to you. And there’s not one single excuse for you to use Lauren’s trauma as a banner to spread her hate and excuse her and her family’s toxic abuse in the name of her flatlining. Lauren abused people long before anything happened to her. Rewriting her story in your heads to make her out to be a victim is what cult leaders get you to do for them. You sound like zealots who drank the Lauren koolaide, and people are laughing, here, that you just don’t get it.

She is a victim: She was shot twice in the chest and nearly died. The fact that Barisone’s NGRI verdict means there was no crime because he was not capable of having intent does not undo the physical or mental wounds from being shot.

And that’s what the civil suit is about.

[edit]

So basically, according to you and your co-hort, there are degreees of victim hood, and unless you are shot twice and flat line twice, no compassion or sympathy are necessary???

Alrighty then!

Hey everyone else on this thread- just remember when people show you who they are, believe them!!!

Incorrect. I’ve been called out for feeling sorry for MB and for predicting NGRI may be the best verdict and the reason why he didn’t accept the plea as he could then rebuild his life upon release and get back to teaching.

[smoofox]

@hut-ho78

@Sdel

@ekat

@Sdel

Well, in order to do that (have a deposition without documents), does that mean they have some sort of record from another source that they can ask about?

Maybe? I mean, we know they have stuff because we saw Lauren read from one text between her and her dad. And we know 70 (I think) audios were turned over after the criminal trial concluded. We know someone posting under the name Seeker claimed to be Kirby and claimed to have transcribed the tapes. So, odds are good they have more stuff we don’t know about they can question about.

I guess the point I’m trying to make, it seems pretty silly to be refusing to sit for a deposition, turn over documents, and throwing a temper tantrum on SM about lying/their existence or not because there is another part of the record out there….

Are you saying that LK is throwing a temper tantrum on SM? Elsewhere than here?

???
LK has thrown tantrums here, there and everywhere… most recently in the YouTube discussions…complete with snobbery and insults. Long before August 7, 2019… to the present.

Many of us have had traumatic events and PTSD. We do not need total strangers holding us up as a paragon of awesomeness for our suffering and making excuses for us… and excusing any and all bad behavior as being due to PTSD. We move on… we are not obsessed with revenge and plots and conspiracies… we move on. We try not to let these things consume our lives. We do not repeatedly brag about comas or flat-lining or anything else that may have happened as a way to show we have suffered more than anyone else and are thus justified in engaging in inappropriate behavior. We make no excuses. We do the best we can and move on…

[Knights_Mom]

@cutter99

@hut-ho78

Because she is traumatized by being shot twice and flatlining twice. PTSD.

What explains her behavior before she was shot? She was not some paradigm of a kind and caring person before she was shot!

She took the personal information of a man she felt wronged her, because she was not the center of his universe, and used that information to cause him to be declared legally insane on August 7, 2019.

FINISH THE BASTARD!

Yeah, she was so traumatized that she came here, threatened others repeatedly, was caught in bold faced lies constantly, was rude and out and out cruel to people until she was finally banned.

As much as you would like to portray LK as an innocent victim, she has proven by her own testimony, as well as what she has said on multiple social media platforms, she is anything other than innocent.

All this legal wrangling is just more of her attempts to play 3D chess with other people’s lives.

I, for one, cannot wait for the civil trial. The skeletons are just jangling in the closet and they cannot wait to come out and speak their truth!

So much THIS.

[BlueDrifter]

It is not often I hear a word I don’t know (obstreperous), that has such utility!

[hut-ho78]

@ekat

@hut-ho78

I’m good to agree driving from his office and calling to present the 2nd barn that she had to approve. ED testified he was told by JK that LK had to approve.

Not the 2nd barn though. He never testified to that, and the barn Mr Tarshis and Jonathan agreed to was declined, so whatever he negotiated, which we do not yet know, was option 3 at best.

What happened to option 2? Option 1 is declined. Option 2 was ED’s option. How did we get to Option 3?

For that matter, how many FB friends offered to come get her and her horses?

She should have left, he should not have shot her.

[ekat]

@lazaret

of further interest, the state’s Supreme Court decision on that matter pretty explicitly noted that, in laymans terms, if you choose to use a remote deposition, then you need to lie in the bed that you made as far as the limitations of such and that claims to dismiss a deposition based on pretty much anything to do with the remote nature of it are not going to be entertained by the Court.

They also ordered in the initial order that one party’s preference for a remote deposition does not override another party’s preference for in person, and vice versa.

Frankly, I am not barred in the states of NJ or FL (nor do I wish to be) but cases like this with so many interesting challenges to be made are kind of why I became a lawyer. I do hope Deininger and Bilinkas have some fun flexing their legal minds. They clearly have good ones.

The world of technology sure does change things, doesn’t it? Then add in COVID and the courts’ needs to to adapt to that technology is definitely interesting to follow.

Balancing the availability of things like ZOOM, against the best interest of a case in whole is certainly something to consider.

I agree that Deininger and Bilinkas to seem quite up to the challenges in this case. I am very curious how they will respond to that latest filing.

[Sdel]

@lazaret

A possible sanction is dismissal with prejudice if the action is deliberately meant to obscure testimony or impede the judicial process.

For the sake of argument, would MB’s claims be preserved in some way, either by allowing his counterclaim to stand or by preserving statute of limitations to re-file to bring suit against Kanarek?

[Knights_Mom]

@hut-ho78

Good to know the civil trial is not saying JK is responsible. I guess that is just forum speculation. I don’t think it’s clear the defense teams are entitled to JK’s and KK’s information. They can always request it. Maybe the judge will agree.

The man that shot their daughter twice causing her to flatline twice, the man that they trusted, that Seeker1 said she fixed breakfast for him and his clients and staff may be released this month and they are being subpoenaed. That has to be incredibly hard

Drama much? It will be revealed the actual chain chain of events. And as LKs [edit] were so convinced MB would be found guilty and were wrong, the civil case promises a similar outcome with the plaintiff impeached and the win justly going to MB.

And I can’t wait to see the hysterical spin on that!!

It will be justice for MB who was rendered repeatedly unconscious and suffered permanent and protracted injury when RG tried to kill him so viciously even LK knew she had to call him off.

[hut-ho78]

@smoofox

@hut-ho78

@Sdel

@ekat

@Sdel

Well, in order to do that (have a deposition without documents), does that mean they have some sort of record from another source that they can ask about?

Maybe? I mean, we know they have stuff because we saw Lauren read from one text between her and her dad. And we know 70 (I think) audios were turned over after the criminal trial concluded. We know someone posting under the name Seeker claimed to be Kirby and claimed to have transcribed the tapes. So, odds are good they have more stuff we don’t know about they can question about.

I guess the point I’m trying to make, it seems pretty silly to be refusing to sit for a deposition, turn over documents, and throwing a temper tantrum on SM about lying/their existence or not because there is another part of the record out there….

Are you saying that LK is throwing a temper tantrum on SM? Elsewhere than here?

???
LK has thrown tantrums here, there and everywhere… most recently in the YouTube discussions…complete with snobbery and insults. Long before August 7, 2019… to the present.

Many of us have had traumatic events and PTSD. We do not need total strangers holding us up as a paragon of awesomeness for our suffering and making excuses for us… and excusing any and all bad behavior as being due to PTSD. We move on… we are not obsessed with revenge and plots and conspiracies… we move on. We try not to let these things consume our lives. We do not repeatedly brag about comas or flat-lining or anything else that may have happened as a way to show we have suffered more than anyone else and are thus justified in engaging in inappropriate behavior. We make no excuses. We do the best we can and move on…

Move on. Hmm. Right. Got it. That explains the civility of these threads. Thank you.

[ekat]

@hut-ho78

What happened to option 2? Option 1 is declined. Option 2 was ED’s option. How did we get to Option 3?

For that matter, how many FB friends offered to come get her and her horses?

She should have left

Option 2, as I just stated, was the agreement that Mr Tarshis came to with Jonathon Kanarek on Friday, August 2nd 2019, to move to a barn with a Pan Am gold medalist trainer 15 minutes up the road. Lauren did not take Option 2. So on Monday, August 5th, 2019, Mr Tarshis emailed her an eviction notice and Jonathan Kanarek hired ED.

Should I link Mr Tarshis’ testimony?

Yes, she should have left.

@hut-ho78

he should not have shot her.

It will be interesting indeed, to see if the next jury supports your statement that he did, in fact, shoot her.

I can’t address FB posts. I have no idea.

Edit to add for clarity: Option 1 was just to GO when it was clear she was no longer welcome. Michael had exactly Zero obligation to try to find a new barn (Option 2)

[hut-ho78]

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

Good to know the civil trial is not saying JK is responsible. I guess that is just forum speculation. I don’t think it’s clear the defense teams are entitled to JK’s and KK’s information. They can always request it. Maybe the judge will agree.

The man that shot their daughter twice causing her to flatline twice, the man that they trusted, that Seeker1 said she fixed breakfast for him and his clients and staff may be released this month and they are being subpoenaed. That has to be incredibly hard

Drama much? It will be revealed the actual chain chain of events. And as LKs sycophants were so convinced MB would be found guilty and were wrong, the civil case promises a similar outcome with the plaintiff impeached and the win justly going to MB.

And I can’t wait to see the hysterical spin on that!!

It will be justice for MB who was rendered repeatedly unconscious and suffered permanent and protracted injury when RG tried to kill him so viciously even LK knew she had to call him off.

Well. I guess a MB should not have shot her twice causing her to flat line twice. Remember “self defense”? Once he started shooting, RG was in the clear. That only helps LK and RG as force used was force required to subdue, not kill.

[hut-ho78]

@ekat

@hut-ho78

What happened to option 2? Option 1 is declined. Option 2 was ED’s option. How did we get to Option 3?

For that matter, how many FB friends offered to come get her and her horses?

She should have left

Option 2, as I just stated, was the agreement that Mr Tarshis came to with Jonathon Kanarek on Friday, August 2nd 2019, to move to a barn with a Pan Am gold medalist trainer 15 minutes up the road. Lauren did not take Option 2. So on Monday, August 5th, 2019, Mr Tarshis emailed her an eviction notice and Jonathan Kanarek hired ED.

Should I link Mr Tarshis’ testimony?

Yes, she should have left.

@hut-ho78

he should not have shot her.

It will be interesting indeed, to see if the next jury supports your statement that he did, in fact, shoot her.

I can’t address FB posts. I have no idea.

Then what was option 1?

[lazaret]

@hut-ho78

I’m good to agree driving from his office and calling to present the 2nd barn that she had to approve. ED testified he was told by JK that LK had to approve.

Again, that is not what the individual testified to.

Here is, verbatim, his testimony on examination.

Schellhorn: “Did you have involvement with them [Lauren Kanarek and Robert Goodwin] arising from a tenancy dispute in August of 2019?”
David: “I did.”
Schellhorn: “I want to direct your attention specifically to the afternoon of August 7, 2019. Do you recall if you had a phone call with one or both of them that afternoon?”
David: “I do.”
Schellhorn: “Do you recall or can you describe to the jury what you recall about how that phone call began?”
David: [Makes a parenthetical statement that is objected to] “I had been representing Lauren for a little over 24-48 hours in connection with a tenancy issue that she had, and I had called I guess Robert’s cell phone around 2:15, 2:10, something like that, to speak to Lauren. I think I tried her cell phone just to talk to her, she was my client, but I couldn’t get her so I called Robert’s cell phone, to just give her an update on where we were in negotiations with Mr. Barisone’s attorney.”

In re: his location:

“Probably the courthouse in Newark, that’s my guess, going back to my office, at that time at [street name] in Roseland”

[smoofox]

@hut-ho78

Move on. Hmm. Right. Got it. That explains the civility of these threads. Thank you.

Move on… was referring to PERSONAL things in real life that others have gone through… not about these threads or making excuses for LK or what have you. But that must be sneered at and cast aside.

Civility works both ways. Hmm.

ETA: Thanks for inserting facts as needed, @lazaret.

[Knights_Mom]

@hut-ho78

Well. I guess a MB should not have shot her twice causing her to flat line twice. Remember “self defense”? Once he started shooting, RG was in the clear. That only helps LK and RG as force used was force required to subdue, not kill.

I’m quite sure the civil jury will have an entirely different take on the the FINISH THE BASTARDS and their attempted murder causing MB to black out twice and lose his memory after driving him insane and then initiating an assault him on him using a cell phone as a weapon by a person with a lengthy arrest record then adding the continuing assault of a convicted felon male drug addict reportedly skilled in deadly and potentially fatal fighting skills against the Olympic coach horsey guy.

But by all means practice writing “flatlined twice” repeatedly if it gives you comfort since you’ve apparently convinced yourself it means something.

[eggbutt]

@hut-ho78

The man that shot their daughter twice causing her to flatline twice, the man that they trusted, that Seeker1 said she fixed breakfast for him and his clients and staff may be released this month and they are being subpoenaed. That has to be incredibly hard.

What drama! You can’t let go of your pet phrases can you? Oh my, poor Kirby fixed Michael (and others) brunch. So what? They “trusted him”? For what?

What about Michael’s trust that LK was a normal human being who would work hard to fit in, be a team member, show up for training, not stalk and destroy his home, business and family. What about his trust that she wasn’t going to Finish the Bastard?

Just stop @hut-ho78. You actually are becoming more rude and obnoxious as the hours pass - Uvalde yesterday and snotty remarks to @Ambitious_Kate today. Disgusting in every single way. Are you trying to compete with Lauren to be the most outrageous person on the forum?

[hut-ho78]

@lazaret

@hut-ho78

I’m good to agree driving from his office and calling to present the 2nd barn that she had to approve. ED testified he was told by JK that LK had to approve.

Again, that is not what the individual testified to.

Here is, verbatim, his testimony on examination.

Schellhorn: “Did you have involvement with them [Lauren Kanarek and Robert Goodwin] arising from a tenancy dispute in August of 2019?”
David: “I did.”
Schellhorn: “I want to direct your attention specifically to the afternoon of August 7, 2019. Do you recall if you had a phone call with one or both of them that afternoon?”
David: “I do.”
Schellhorn: “Do you recall or can you describe to the jury what you recall about how that phone call began?”
David: [Makes a parenthetical statement that is objected to] “I had been representing Lauren for a little over 24-48 hours in connection with a tenancy issue that she had, and I had called I guess Robert’s cell phone around 2:15, 2:10, something like that, to speak to Lauren. I think I tried her cell phone just to talk to her, she was my client, but I couldn’t get her so I called Robert’s cell phone, to just give her an update on where we were in negotiations with Mr. Barisone’s attorney.”

In re: his location:

“Probably the courthouse in Newark, that’s my guess, going back to my office, at that time at [street name] in Roseland”

Thank you.