Thanks for that info. It sort of seems to me though that if she was serious about putting forth the message that her riding “career” was negatively affected by her injuries, she would be competing in Para-Dressage. And not attaining USDF Medals in traditional classes (medals that had eluded her prior to the shooting).
Replying to my own reply because I realized my previous response was facetious, esp. since I had already mentioned that I didn’t think Ulf would be a good candidate since he is German and resides in Germany.
In reality, MB would no doubt have to get a well-known U.S. based rider to testify on his behalf. Someone like Stefan Peters would probably impress the jury, assuming he could explain dressage training and levels well enough. Do those kind of experts have to be “approved” by the other side? I believe SP has contributed to the GFM though - would that be reason enough for LK to reject him as a witness for MB?
They really don’t get to approve or reject each other’s witnesses. The best they can do is try to poke holes in credibility, bias, etc.
Let’s take Dr Simring as an example for an expert witness. He went in to meeting MB as a neutral uninterested party, and formed his opinions based on time spent with MB.
So, take that and apply it to the Dressage world. While I think Ali Brock could do a fine job of explaining Dressage in an engaging way, you can bet LK’s side is going to question her ability to look at LK’s riding career in a relatively unbiased way.
I have no idea how or what will happen. All I know is, somehow LK needs to explain what her riding loss is (and again, not just her say so) and MB gets to rebut whatever she brings in. So, I like to think about how that will happen.
There are many upper level dressage professionals who would be qualified as experts IMO, among them would be Robert Dover, Lars Peterson, Scott Hassler, etc. The issue might be admitted bias.
I really wonder if the civil case will reach the need to justify her loss of income unless Barisone rejects her settlement offer.
When you prove you’re not a robot, you want to click on Civil Part on this screen. And this website is not nice. It will kick you out often, and you have to go all the way back to the start.
You know, I wonder too if this case will make it that far. I just got lost in my head over the language about that Oct 4th management conference re: scheduling of expert discovery.
Civil suits are full of experts, so it can get pretty interesting.