Not only did photos reveal no such bench, but testimony denied its existence as well! The conundrum to me is that the person asserting the existence of said bench also testified they lie on social media!
22 Likes
That was an interesting gotcha, wasn’t it?
10 Likes
Can you imagine how many more “gotchas” might arise in the civil suit where more things are admissible?!?
15 Likes
I remember the recordings were said by LK to be from the locker area which seemed to be discussed in court as a “public area” and RG recording conversations from his phone.
Some of the testimony from Tarshis and others showed they believed there were more recording devices in more private areas where LK and RG were not. If so, those would be illegal. That aspect is the one where I suspect more that people were confiding in someone whom they thought was a trusted confidant until what was said reached the obligatory barn pot stirrer. That is mere speculation on my part.
They had the barn swept for bugs and I spent some time specifically trying to find out if anyone testified as to what, if anything, was found and I don’t remember hearing anything one way or the other. I’ve always been curious about that.
Edited for a left out word and to say while I was typing others were typing about the same thing so pardon the repetition.
The issue is whether there was a reasonable expectation of privacy in the locker.
Whether the recordings were or weren’t legally made was not determined at the criminal trial.
Everybody here will nevertheless continue to refer to them as “the illegal recordings”. If you repeat a claim 2,000 times on COTH, it becomes a COTH-fact. Not a fact, but a COTH-fact. That’s the purpose of these threads, right?
My point was that it was unlikely that LK referred to them that way, as Scribbler claimed.
1 Like
I’m not caught up yet, but this is exactly my question.
Couldn’t I make up a KK email and link to my Seeker1 postings?
Maybe the tech team checked the URL? (Is that the right terminology?)
3 Likes
That’s quite a leap of speculation considering Mr Tarshis’s testimony that his private atty/client conversations ended up on social media. We’ll see how that works going forward.
Also - ED, another attorney, certainly was not aware what he thought was a privileged conversation was being recorded.
25 Likes
I thought the testimony was that some of the conversations were private, in private locations, example given was a discussion between Michael and his lawyer. Not conversations with random barn people.
15 Likes
Yes - and working student’s mother.
7 Likes
Yes - her too. She specifically referenced a conversation that took place in the office that got put on blast.
11 Likes
There is an expectation of privacy in a private conversation in Michael’s office, which is the conversation that was discussed at the criminal trial I believe.
14 Likes
Indeed! Office (and even Lounge/Club Room) would have expectations of privacy, I would imagine!!
8 Likes
Not keeping up with your thought process here. I think we are saying the same things, that Tarshis and others testified they believed they were being recorded. I speculate that was barn gossip. You do not and have not ever agreed. Ok.
I thought the recording of ED and that meeting was on RG’s phone which is legal but unwise as it probably destroyed attorney/client privilege.
Except for my suspecting barn gossip which you fairly enough have never agreed with, where are we in disagreement?
Maybe I wasn’t clear because several are puzzled. I think MB leaned on and confided everything in detail (all mental health professionals discussed his powers of recall except for the incident itself) and I agree he may not remember that) to possibly MHG who then leaned on and confided everything to her dad or RC or JH or someone, who then confided everything or confronted LK and RG with every detail. It could be a pot stirrer or someone saying you need to leave and this is why and no one wants you here and this is what they are really saying.
I find it a stretch than LK and RG were capable of successfully placing and retrieving listening devices in private areas without being seen. I could be wrong. Y’all could be right in your belief they could and did. It is a possibility of which we have differing thoughts.
You think that Michael Barisone’s Attorney was gossiping in the barn? And then somehow when he testified that his private conversation with his client was put on SM, that was more gossip? Wow, big, if true.
Not illegal. Just a very, very bad idea, especially since they were discussing all the other potentially illegal recordings.
I will never believe, unless Mr Tarshis testifies to it under oath, that he participated in barn gossip. I will also not believe that Lauren Kanarek was telling the truth about the one recorder in part because RG testified there were at least two, and in part that the one recorder was in her locker because everyone said, and PICTURES proved there was no bench in that area and the locker was an entire floor away from Michael’s office, where conversations happened that ended up blasting people on SM.
Perhaps, if Kirby ever responds to her subpoena, she can provide some clarification as to her knowledge of locations of the conversations she transcribed.
27 Likes
Again, begs a serious question of logic….If RG was present to be recording on his phone, do we seriously believe there were on going discussions of such incriminating things directly to his face/in his presence?
23 Likes
My point was that Nagel’s request for the the virtual deposition was not based on anything specific to LK, but rather on two considerations that affect everyone universally.
- Zoom depositions are more efficient and cost effective.
- Travel involves some additional risk of Covid.
Support for these two considerations is obviously available without requiring exhibits specific to LK.
He threw in that LK was potentially at higher risk of harm from Covid exposure due to the injury to her lungs (a major impetus for the personal injury suit). I think he threw that in more to get in a dig at Barisone— ‘Look the guy shot her and caused permanent damage to her lungs and now you’re insisting that she undertake avoidable travel during a Covid surge’.
There’s lots we still don’t know about Covid - do you imagine there is some expert who can quantify the degree of increased risk of a Covid case depending on the number of bullet wounds and there exact location in the lungs? There’s a reasonable presumption that lung damage isn’t good, but no scientific information on that particular consequence of getting shot, I would think.
Presumably the plaintiff will need to depose Barisone. Can he decline to be deposed as long as he is in AK?
Has Barisone been subpoenaed, but his lawyers have quashed the subpoena on the grounds he is in AK?
LK herself bragged early on about having recorded conversations of MB with his lawyer.
23 Likes
I believe the point made at the trial was not barn gossip, but that Lauren Kanarek was posting things about private conversations on social media.
18 Likes
And,again, you missed my (and Mr Deininger’s And @lazaret, and @LilRanger) point. That’s not how this works.
Presumably they will at some point. And since he has no freedom of movement yet, it would be foolish to ask.
It would be hanging out there in the public record if they had.
18 Likes
