There have been insinuations that the local PD and DA’s office are somehow under the sway of certain parties. If that is true, then is it totally out of the realm of possibilities to think that someone may have planted a bug in Taylor’s office?
And if THAT is true - my God, the level of political corruption in that neck of the woods is just astounding. 
I doubt it. Doesn’t work like that.
In regards to MB’s upcoming hearing - I think there is a possibility that he will be held longer at Ann Klein for further evaluation to see stability in a more long term way. He seems to have a great support system which will work in his favor. But I do wonder if they will err on the side of caution win terms of release.
It goes without saying that more time inpatient is in no way indicative of guilt or poor progress.
It might help this thread if EVERYBODY would refrain from responding to CH. We are staring to go round and round again and nobody needs that.
I would also think that both Taylor and Schellhorn would want to be done with this case as soon as possible. Especially Taylor, as he was so upset by the verdict.
Or is it a veiled threat to the judge? “Your career and reputation may be at risk if you don’t rule a certain way.”
Good point. Except that in this case, certain parties have proven time and again they do not conduct themselves according to the norm.
I think a planted bug is incredibly far reaching.
Judge Taylor may have known JK but I seriously don’t think anyone is willing to jeopardize their own career and livelihood for any member of the K family. I think JK’s power is very limited. My husband is in LE and I can safely say that at no point in his career did a lawyer ever hold power over a department. Not a judge, not anyone practicing law. It just doesn’t work that way.
Except that sometimes clients ignore all the good advice they are given because they are so convinced of their own superiority they think they don’t have to take advice from anyone else.
Part of me agrees with you, especially your last sentence. But the Krol decision in NJ and the subsequent litigation since 1975, has held:
“The object of the (commitment) order is to impose that degree of restraint upon defendant necessary to reduce the risk of danger which he poses to an acceptable level. Doubts must be resolved in favor of protecting the public, but the court should not, by its order, infringe upon defendant’s liberty or autonomy any more than appears reasonably necessary to accomplish this goal”
And
“ Commitment requires that there be a substantial risk of dangerous conduct within the reasonably foreseeable future”
“ The standard is "dangerous to self or society.’ Dangerous conduct is not identical with criminal conduct. Dangerous conduct involves not merely violation of social norms enforced by criminal sanctions, but significant physical or psychological injury to persons or substantial destruction of property. Persons are not to be indefinitely incarcerated because they present a risk of future conduct which is merely socially undesirable. Personal liberty and autonomy are of too great value to be sacrificed to protect society against the possibility of future behavior which some may find odd, disagreeable, or offensive, or even against the possibility of future non-dangerous acts which would be ground for criminal prosecution if actually committed…”
In other words, if they try to commit him to look for stability, Mr B and MB will appeal, and he will likely win, based on the way NJ courts have ruled.
I hope you are right! 
I think people are giving certain people too much power.
I also didn’t read Judge Taylor as very upset with the verdict. Not at all. I think Taylor has seen a lot in his career and while a NGRI verdict is unusual, I think this is just a drop in the bucket for him. Same for Schellhorn and the prosecutions office. I imagine Schellhorn and Taylor have fast moved on with their lives. I don’t think they are still focusing on this case at all.
At this point, this is a civil issue, the criminal trial is over. Anything done at this point will be on behalf of the civil trial by the lawyers involved.
I agree. I think the fact that his home is now in Florida is a bit tricky. If they recommend holding for another three months out of an abundance of caution, it also allows them to work through all the details of what would be involved with a conditional release to a home in a different state. It’s my understanding that Florida would then take on responsibility for following this case, and holding periodic hearings to ensure MB is following any applicable conditions of his release (my guess is attending outpatient treatment with a qualified provider, etc etc).
It’s going to be a bit of a process. And not move quickly.
And that’s partially why I zeroed in on that YouTube comment from she who shall not be named. It’s just so ugly to throw an allegation out there that there is some sort of underlying conspiracy to use the mental health and legal system to delay MBs conditional release as a way to punish him. It’s all hard enough already for MB and those who love him, I’m sure, without someone crowing about that sort of nonsense from the sidelines.
I’m begging everyone, PLEASE ignore posters who are desperate to turn this into a finger-pointing, rehashing of their previous false statements. Please!
Then there is the very weird thing about how the FM/BI let them back into a condemned house with just an email saying they put in smoke detectors…screams bought off/threatened to me…
In my area, inpatient mental health is so backlogged they will release obviously problematic patients with a simple “contract” that they won’t harm themselves/others and a promise to follow up with a doctor……
My comments in bold.
Got it.
I am mentally envisioning cute little squirrels frolicking today. And just letting them play and chatter 
As for @eggbutt - I think it’s fortunate that she has a good sense of humor about being compared to Susan Atkins. We don’t want this whole thread to go all helter skelter again though, so we will just ignore the squirrels and the “You’re just like Susan!” stuff.
Shhh Susan. 
Shhhh.
Well… I think buying off local buildings inspectors IS not all that uncommon in many parts of the country. For sure. Sad but true. But I g off a judge is a whole different ball game.
I wouldn’t be surprised if people who are reasonably wealthy and have lived nearby one another for decades coincidentally belong to the same country club, or have played in the same golf tournament in the past, or belong to the same local community organization, or had kids who graduated the same year from the same high school. Maybe there is some sort of connection like that between the Ks and Judge Taylor, and certain people are taking extra comfort from it, and assuming that means they have a judge on their side.
But… if that’s all it is, I don’t see any reason to doubt Taylor can be impartial. Judges and attorneys have to work on cases involving community members that they do have some sort of passing familiarity with. And most of the time, it’s just irrelevant. Probably a little sad for the legal professionals though, when they see people caught up in messy situations that ended up in the legal system, and inevitably mentally juxtapose that with regular life when that person seemed like a more normal member of society who had their stuff together.
.
MB shot and nearly killed LK. The jury found that he is not criminally responsible for having shot her due to the insanity. If he was insane at the time (I agree with the jury that he probably was), he’s not morally responsible either.
I have no hatred for MB. I have never met him, and know of him primarily from the Colbert clip. He seems (preshooting) charismatic.
I sincerely wish all parties — MB, MHG, LK and the others can get past this senseless tragedy and put their lives back together.
There is huge support for MB to do so. LK has made plenty of bad choices in her life and obviously contributed to the crisis (although I don’t think she “caused” his insanity).
Since MB was not in his right mind when he shot her
(was literally not himself), what is preventing him from expressing remorse to LK and her family that one of the consequences of his mental break was his nearly killing LK? What is stopping him from conveying to Eggbutt to lay off the SM harassment of LK?
LK was victimized when she was shot and nearly died. It appears she has mostly recovered physically.
IMHO, the threads here on CotH have (by no means all posters, in fact just a very small set of posters) have very deliberately attempted to get her blackballed from barns, and, well, harassed and abused her.
Why? What is the purpose? Why can’t you let her get on with her life?
The Krol hearing is about determining whether MB is sufficiently sane to be released, conditionally or unconditionally, from the psychiatric facility. Given that he’s in the psychiatric facility because he shot someone while delusional, I think it’s relevant as to whether he now understands, rationally, that shooting her was wrong.
I think it’s possibly relevant to the hearing as to whether he now understands that shooting someone is not a rational response to provocation, and feels remorse. If LK and her family feel they are under continued attack by his supporters, I think that is possibly relevant in that it indicates neither he nor his lawyers nor his “support system” has done anything to call off the attack. Does he still think, delusionally, that he is at war with her?
The hearing is about MBs mental state. But it’s also about the safety of the public and LK if he is released. I think, IMHO, that whether he can acknowledge to himself and his supporters that shooting LK was wrong (no matter how bad the provocation) is an important issue. If he had expressed remorse for shooting her, and indicated a preference for the “elderly illegal mob” (my understanding is that this is Eggbutt’s preferred term) to let LK get on with her life, I would have donated to the GoFundMe.
I have noted a very marked change in Eggbutt’s posting since a month or two ago. Perhaps there has been a communication from the inner circle.
Here’s my point: If you want to be supportive of MB, it’s not as simple as thinking “The more I tear down LK, the more I’m building up MB.” Perhaps some posters consider tearing down LK as fun. But if posters think tearing her down is somehow supporting MB, I think that’s a dicy proposition.
But I can’t control what anyone posts, so carry on.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
