Oh, yeah! 
4 Likes
They haven’t proven anything on either side, as the trial isn’t done. The criminal trial wasn’t about who caused MB’s mental state, just what was evidence of his mental state at the time of the event.
16 Likes
I read both filings - Nagel and Deininger.
Nagel’s motion for the virtual deposition was not based on saying that LK was in a weakened state and too weak to travel.
His primary argument was that conducting the deposition by zoom was more efficient and cost effective. Secondarily, travel would expose her to the generic risk of Covid.
Even Deininger’s reference to case law said that evidence needed to be attached if the argument was based on considerations not publicly known.
What about those arguments — zoom is more efficient and cost effective; traveling increases the risk of Covid — are requiring of evidence not already in the public record?
I don’t remember if Nagel argued that LK might be at higher risk of Covid complications due to the damage to her lungs from Barisone shooting her, but if he did make that argument, what evidence would need to be attached? It’s public record she was shot and has had surgery on her lungs. Other than the public knowledge that Covid is a potential deadly respiratory disease, I doubt there are experts who know precisely the increased risk due to the guns shot wounds.
As I remember Nagel’s motion, he relied not at all on assertions not already in the public record, and therefore did not need any exhibits. Do you imagine the judge wants to be bored silly with a condescending explanation about why zoom is more cost effective than in person after having most depositions conducted by zoom for several years?
The caption to the middle finger pic explained that the sisters were flipping off anyone who didn’t understand the difference between “vindication” and being transferred from county jail to a secure psychiatric facility. I’m pretty sure the judge understands the difference. But it does make a lot of sense to have it posted here.
One finger salutes aside, at least the pics of her sitting on a horse and partying in NYC make more sense to show she is not a recluse than the picture of a horse.
@ekat I answered your question on the evidentiary hearings for the criminal trial. What is your response? Do you agree that if any evidence of self defense had been offered by Bilinkas in those evidentiary hearings, it would have been admitted by Judge Taylor?
No, I do not agree, as I stated when I asked you about those evidentiary hearings. I was not there. I have no idea what Mr Bilinkas may have argued, what Judge Taylor may have excluded or why. I further have zero knowledge about any evidence that may have been discovered subsequent to April 14, 2022.
21 Likes
I know you weren’t there. Neither was I.
Did you even read my response to your question?
Given that Barisone entered a plea of Not Guilty Reason Insanity, don’t you agree that, had Taylor rejected legitimate evidence of self defense, Bilinkas would have (justifiably) moved for a mistrial?
Please respond to my second point as well — since Barisone’s own psychiatric expert testified that Barisone told him he remembered getting the gun out of the safe and going to the farmhouse with it, even if RG or LK somehow got the upper hand momentarily in an altercation MB provoked, and MB at that moment felt his life was in danger, doesn’t the evidence that he was the aggressor and that he brought the lethal weapon make it virtually impossible to prevail with a self defense claim?
If I understand the question correctly, his claim would be for damages incurred in litigating the civil case that she brought against him, in which case that situation is current.
These are tricky claims to make, though I suppose intentional infliction of emotional distress would be a solid case. However, his amnesia on that point would make it a bit tricky. However, the statute of limitations on that in NJ is two years, but it’s from the “accrual” of the action so arguably it could still be ongoing. Interesting law.
However it would be expensive to litigate so if his attorneys manage to get her suit tossed out, that might just be the win and move on sort of situation.
9 Likes
Nagle is required by the rules of civil procedure and stare decisis to show evidence from his client that those issues affect her. Travelling by car or airplane is also generally known to have a risk of injury, but without evidence of the risk to LK, those are non issues.
The cost argument absolutely has to be backed up by evidence, because everyone’s financial situation is different. Also, she has family in the area and access to a vehicle, so travel costs I would assume, are pretty minimal. And let’s be honest, off peak flights between NJ and FLA should be numerous and competitively priced.
13 Likes
Thank you for your well thought out and complete answer @lazaret! I do appreciate you sharing your professional experience and knowledge with us.
10 Likes
No. Just because evidence is “legitimate” does not mean it is admissible. Further, it is grounds for appeal so unless the harm to the client is so egregious that without that evidence believed to be admissible there is no possibility of a fair trial, you take your toys home and you bring them to the appeal table. Pretty much every case has some grounds for appeal somewhere in it.
21 Likes
Hmm, there was a verdict, when did the plea happen? I think I missed that.
15 Likes
I particularly like that Deininger added by “boat” to the options for Lauren to get to NJ. Nice touch.
33 Likes
Bilinkas filed that early on. Not guilty by self defense and not guilty by reason of insanity.
I do not suffer from lack of reading comprehension. (EDIT: I DO SUFFER FROM TECHNOLOGY ISSUES SORRY) Your previous response said this, including my responses:
Now you’re talking about a mistrial, which a) wasn’t mentioned previously and b) it wouldn’t have been appropriate or justifiable to ask the judge for a mistrial because the judge ruled against you in an evidentiary hearing.
13 Likes
I wonder if the judge is already girding his loins in preparation for the expected debacle when this whole thing finally comes to court. If it does.
7 Likes
I wonder this too. Though it is clear that there are some people who think that Bruce did a great job, so who knows, maybe the rest of us are all wrong and Bruce’s response filled with errors is a special technique he has that gets him the win in the end.
7 Likes
Thank you for your response.
It still strikes me as odd that one would have to provide evidence that increased cost and standard risk of Covid would need to be argued with exhibits as applying to LK specifically when those are two considerations that are so obviously valid and equally obviously apply universally to anyone needing to be deposed. Also, he did not argue that LK in particular could not afford to be deposed in person, just that the virtual deposition would be more efficient and less costly for anyone.
I also do not recall Nagel basing his filing on an assertion that LK was in a weakened state, as Chris asserted.
Honestly, I feel like if the judge tossed LK’s suit over the delays and games, that it would be a further victimization on MB. This case isn’t about two people fighting over money or property, about physical and and mental injury and so, it seems to me that allowing the person who brought the suit and caused the incident to walk away consequences free would be a big slap in the face. I would hope the judge would question why the plaintiff would be playing such games and issue sanctions instead of a dismissal of the entire suit.
14 Likes
I found this the other day about virtual depositions. I also read New Jersey has opened up a lot of Covid restrictions and is well into a return to “normalcy.” It doesn’t seem likely she will be allowed a virtual deposition but it is still possible and certainly reasonable to still ask. Of course, the article is March so by now, all depositions may be back to in person.
We have a very high positivity rate where I am but hardly any hospitalizations. I don’t know how her lung injuries would play into this.
Thank you @lazaret for your explanation.
Yes, that was the defenses, it was not a plea. A plea negates having a trial on that issue. It is probably an honest mistake, but it’s a rather huge difference between the two.
21 Likes
And neither eliminate a good old fashioned Not Guilty. See the verdicts re: RG.
16 Likes
