MB update

[LilRanger]

That’s good to know about geese at night. I know the wild geese migrate at night, but wasn’t sure about when they’re not commuting, so to speak.

[MHM]

@Warmblood1

The person that loaned him a gun was a mental health professional. But perhaps that person also believed in MB’s right to self defense.

As I recall, the idea was that she was not loaning him the gun so much as giving it to him so that it could be locked up securely, instead of having it floating around loose on the farm.

[Sdel]

@MHM

@Warmblood1

The person that loaned him a gun was a mental health professional. But perhaps that person also believed in MB’s right to self defense.

As I recall, the idea was that she was not loaning him the gun so much as giving it to him so that it could be locked up securely, instead of having it floating around loose on the farm.

That is right. RC gave MB the gun to keep in the safe to keep it safe. LK was running around full ninja.

[LexInVA]

@Sdel

@MHM

@Warmblood1

The person that loaned him a gun was a mental health professional. But perhaps that person also believed in MB’s right to self defense.

As I recall, the idea was that she was not loaning him the gun so much as giving it to him so that it could be locked up securely, instead of having it floating around loose on the farm.

That is right. RC gave MB the gun to keep in the safe to keep it safe. LK was running around full ninja.

[MorganSercu]

Needs to be less sexy, more full-blown unhinged. And disheveled.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

That only captures the ninja look from the shoulders up.

You need to find an image that reveals bare feet (dirty from wandering around the farm) to really do it justice.

[avjudge]

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

You need to find an image that reveals bare feet (dirty from wandering around the farm) to really do it justice.

Hey, that’s the only part that sounded normal to me!

(I’m weird, I live barefoot at home most of the summer. Yes, even around the horses. And yes, I know better. You’re not kidding about the dirty part, in the shower I spend as much time with brush, pumice, and apricot scrub on my feet as washing the rest of my body minus my hair!)

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@FitzE

Just a quick question: I see lots of references to ‘conditional release’ but just plain release is also an option, correct?

As for the ridiculous ‘remorse’ thing now being pushed: It’s a proven fact from things posted here and elsewhere that the other side at least partially disagrees with the jury’s finding. They are still out there pushing the idea that MB shot at RG and RG is just, literally, faster than a speeding bullet. So they think the jury got that point wrong. Otherwise they’d have to be saying, the jury had to first decide if he did or didn’t shot at RG before they could get to the insanity question, they clearly decided he did not, so that’s dispositive of that question: MB was found to have NOT shot at RG. But, that’s not at all what they are saying. They use that lovely little logical walk through of jury deliberation only for the NGRI part of the verdict. Because of course they do.

I’m not sure who you’re referring to as “they” or “the other side”, but I have explicitly said that I think the jury got the following points correct: 1) beyond a reasonable doubt, MB shot LK in a manner likely to cause death, 2) the evidence was not there to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that MB attempted to murder RG, and 3) MB was legally insane at the time he shot her.

I’ve said several times that I think the verdict was just. I agree with all elements of the verdict. So no, it is not “a proven fact” that “the other side at least partially disagrees with the jury’s finding.”

In short: they say that moving onto considering mental state = the jury found the MB intentionally shot LK = that’s proof it happened. Using their own logic, the opposite would be true for the RG-related charges, ergo, MB shooting at RG didn’t happen. Yet, they are still out there telling that story, over and over and over again.

You’re right that the jury moving on to considering MBs mental state is proof of something. It’s proof that the jury determined as fact finders that, beyond a reasonable doubt MB shot LK. It’s not “proof” that he shot her if by “proof” you mean 100% certainty. All we know is that the jury found that, beyond a reasonable doubt, MB shot her.

It is NOT my logic that “ergo” the RG shooting “didn’t happen”. MB may or may not have aimed at RGs head. All we know from the jury’s verdict of NG wrt the charges regarding RG is that there was not evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that MB was aiming at RG.

Who is out there, “telling that story, over and over and over again”? I haven’t said it and I haven’t seen it argued by others.

I imagine many, including people in MB’s camp, believe the jury got it wrong that he intentionally shot LK. Not that they don’t respect the jury’s process, just that they got that one point wrong, most likely through no fault of their own, since there was almost no forensics to go on. Certainly LK’s civil attorney thinks the jury got it wrong.

The use of the word “intentionally” is problematic. But if you’re saying that people “in MBs camp” “think the jury got it wrong” with respect to finding MB NGRI on the charges wrt LK, then, yes, several people in MBs camp are still pushing self defense or accidental discharge during a scuffle. This does suggest that they think the jury was at fault. If there was not enough forensics to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that he shot MB, the jury should have taken the lack of forensic evidence to find that they were unable to determine beyond a reasonable doubt that he shot her. Taking the forensic evidence presented to them, the jury found that that evidence was sufficient to establish that, beyond a reasonable doubt, he shot LK.

Why would MB express remorse over something he cannot remember and the jury may not have been able to accurately determine due to the shocking lack of forensic evidence gathered?

Let’s assume the amnesia is real. He sat through his own trial and has lawyers to explain to him the fact that the jury’s finding of NGRI wrt LK indicates that the jury, as fact finders, determined that he did (beyond a reasonable doubt) shoot LK, and nearly killed her.

He is not obligated to express remorse to LK or her family. In order to win release or conditional release, he needs to convince the court that he is no longer insane and suffering from delusions. The idea that he shot LK in self-defense? Delusion! The idea that LK lured him to the farmhouse that day so that they could beat him up, and the gun went off in a “scuffle”? Delusion! The idea that, however much the jury is to be respected, they got that one little detail wrong on his shooting of LK, and he is currently in a secure psychiatric facility facing a Krol hearing because the jury goofed when they decided NGRI instead of NG? Delusion!

If he is going to get beyond his delusions, I think he needs to acknowledge, to himself and his closest supporters, at a minimum, that he understands that he shot and nearly killed someone.

By that reasoning, and if it is felt important that apologies and remorse are expressed based upon the verdict, I assume LK and RG have apologised and expressed remorse for accusing MB of shooting at RG, right? I mean, in line with the twaddle being pushed here, that would also be required based on the verdict, no?

Expressing apologies and remorse to the victim are not the crucial issue. The crucial issue is whether MB is sane enough to admit to himself that, (beyond a reasonable doubt), the determination of the jury was that be shot and nearly killed someone.

No one, including RG, is in a position to know with absolute certainty whether MB was aiming for RGs head and firing the gun. RG and the prosecutor thought he was. The jury’s verdict indicates that, whether did or didn’t aim for RGs head, there was not sufficient evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that he did. So, no, RG (and the state of NJ!) accusing MB of the attempted murder of RG would not require an apology or expression of remorse based on the jury’s verdict. Not that I’ve ever said that MB is “required” to apologize or express remorse to LK for having shot her. My point was that to get beyond his delusions, he needs to acknowledge to himself that he shot and nearly killed her. Also that his “supporters” continuing to nurse these delusions is not helpful, IMHO, in promoting the mental healing, or winning the release of, someone who committed a violent act while in a delusional state.

My response in bold.

[Paint_Party]

@Sdel

LK was running around full ninja.

Wait. I thought her “ninja look” was really just standard Lulemon attire. You know, because she’d just gotten out of a nighttime dance class. Or yoga. Each conducted with a sort of harem girl flair, hence the veil. Or am I just misremembering things?

/s

[Knights_Mom]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@FitzE

Just a quick question: I see lots of references to ‘conditional release’ but just plain release is also an option, correct?

As for the ridiculous ‘remorse’ thing now being pushed: It’s a proven fact from things posted here and elsewhere that the other side at least partially disagrees with the jury’s finding. They are still out there pushing the idea that MB shot at RG and RG is just, literally, faster than a speeding bullet. So they think the jury got that point wrong. Otherwise they’d have to be saying, the jury had to first decide if he did or didn’t shot at RG before they could get to the insanity question, they clearly decided he did not, so that’s dispositive of that question: MB was found to have NOT shot at RG. But, that’s not at all what they are saying. They use that lovely little logical walk through of jury deliberation only for the NGRI part of the verdict. Because of course they do.

I’m not sure who you’re referring to as “they” or “the other side”, but I have explicitly said that I think the jury got the following points correct: 1) beyond a reasonable doubt, MB shot LK in a manner likely to cause death, 2) the evidence was not there to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that MB attempted to murder RG, and 3) MB was legally insane at the time he shot her.

I’ve said several times that I think the verdict was just. I agree with all elements of the verdict. So no, it is not “a proven fact” that “the other side at least partially disagrees with the jury’s finding.”

In short: they say that moving onto considering mental state = the jury found the MB intentionally shot LK = that’s proof it happened. Using their own logic, the opposite would be true for the RG-related charges, ergo, MB shooting at RG didn’t happen. Yet, they are still out there telling that story, over and over and over again.

You’re right that the jury moving on to considering MBs mental state is proof of something. It’s proof that the jury determined as fact finders that, beyond a reasonable doubt MB shot LK. It’s not “proof” that he shot her if by “proof” you mean 100% certainty. All we know is that the jury found that, beyond a reasonable doubt, MB shot her.

It is NOT my logic that “ergo” the RG shooting “didn’t happen”. MB may or may not have aimed at RGs head. All we know from the jury’s verdict of NG wrt the charges regarding RG is that there was not evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that MB was aiming at RG.

Who is out there, “telling that story, over and over and over again”? I haven’t said it and I haven’t seen it argued by others.

I imagine many, including people in MB’s camp, believe the jury got it wrong that he intentionally shot LK. Not that they don’t respect the jury’s process, just that they got that one point wrong, most likely through no fault of their own, since there was almost no forensics to go on. Certainly LK’s civil attorney thinks the jury got it wrong.

The use of the word “intentionally” is problematic. But if you’re saying that people “in MBs camp” “think the jury got it wrong” with respect to finding MB NGRI on the charges wrt LK, then, yes, several people in MBs camp are still pushing self defense or accidental discharge during a scuffle. This does suggest that they think the jury was at fault. If there was not enough forensics to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that he shot MB, the jury should have taken the lack of forensic evidence to find that they were unable to determine beyond a reasonable doubt that he shot her. Taking the forensic evidence presented to them, the jury found that that evidence was sufficient to establish that, beyond a reasonable doubt, he shot LK.

Why would MB express remorse over something he cannot remember and the jury may not have been able to accurately determine due to the shocking lack of forensic evidence gathered?

Let’s assume the amnesia is real. He sat through his own trial and has lawyers to explain to him the fact that the jury’s finding of NGRI wrt LK indicates that the jury, as fact finders, determined that he did (beyond a reasonable doubt) shoot LK, and nearly killed her.

He is not obligated to express remorse to LK or her family. In order to win release or conditional release, he needs to convince the court that he is no longer insane and suffering from delusions. The idea that he shot LK in self-defense? Delusion! The idea that LK lured him to the farmhouse that day so that they could beat him up, and the gun went off in a “scuffle”? Delusion! The idea that, however much the jury is to be respected, they got that one little detail wrong on his shooting of LK, and he is currently in a secure psychiatric facility facing a Krol hearing because the jury goofed when they decided NGRI instead of NG? Delusion!

If he is going to get beyond his delusions, I think he needs to acknowledge, to himself and his closest supporters, at a minimum, that he understands that he shot and nearly killed someone.

By that reasoning, and if it is felt important that apologies and remorse are expressed based upon the verdict, I assume LK and RG have apologised and expressed remorse for accusing MB of shooting at RG, right? I mean, in line with the twaddle being pushed here, that would also be required based on the verdict, no?

Expressing apologies and remorse to the victim are not the crucial issue. The crucial issue is whether MB is sane enough to admit to himself that, (beyond a reasonable doubt), the determination of the jury was that be shot and nearly killed someone.

No one, including RG, is in a position to know with absolute certainty whether MB was aiming for RGs head and firing the gun. RG and the prosecutor thought he was. The jury’s verdict indicates that, whether did or didn’t aim for RGs head, there was not sufficient evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that he did. So, no, RG (and the state of NJ!) accusing MB of the attempted murder of RG would not require an apology or expression of remorse based on the jury’s verdict. Not that I’ve ever said that MB is “required” to apologize or express remorse to LK for having shot her. My point was that to get beyond his delusions, he needs to acknowledge to himself that he shot and nearly killed her. Also that his “supporters” continuing to nurse these delusions is not helpful, IMHO, in promoting the mental healing, or winning the release of, someone who committed a violent act while in a delusional state.

My response in bold.

NGRI means there was no crime as mens rea didn’t exist. There was no finding MB shot her beyond a reasonable doubt.

You keep getting the verdict confused with Guilty but insane. It’s not.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

Hey Everyone! Guess what?

[Sdel]

“My point was that to get beyond his delusions, he needs to acknowledge to himself that he shot and nearly killed her. Also that his “supporters” continuing to nurse these delusions is not helpful, IMHO, in promoting the mental healing, or winning the release of, someone who committed a violent act while in a delusional state.”

From CH’s bolded responses above…

You forget, MB and his closest supporters know a heck of a lot more about what really happened than was actually allowed to be presented at trial because the judge excluded testimony of relevant information and didn’t allow the defense to explore in more detail timelines and events.

The details in the texts/email chains about what LK, JK, and RG actually planned to do to MB. What was actually put into the SS report that triggered CPS to show up. What is actually in those recordings LK brags about. What access to the office and the ability to forge signature and contracts really meant. Everyone’s fear of the dog and all the dog bites that covered MB. The fact that he was beaten to such a state as he was.

Lots to unpack still in the civil trial. I bet it will show that, yes, indeed the jury got it “wrong” because the judge tied their hands by not allowing certain testimony.

And let’s not forget, the state psych’s testimony essentially boiled down to: MB wasn’t delusional because his fear was real. LK was really plotting against him and acting in ways that would cause any rational person to be afraid. And he testified that he read everything.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@FitzE

Just a quick question: I see lots of references to ‘conditional release’ but just plain release is also an option, correct?

As for the ridiculous ‘remorse’ thing now being pushed: It’s a proven fact from things posted here and elsewhere that the other side at least partially disagrees with the jury’s finding. They are still out there pushing the idea that MB shot at RG and RG is just, literally, faster than a speeding bullet. So they think the jury got that point wrong. Otherwise they’d have to be saying, the jury had to first decide if he did or didn’t shot at RG before they could get to the insanity question, they clearly decided he did not, so that’s dispositive of that question: MB was found to have NOT shot at RG. But, that’s not at all what they are saying. They use that lovely little logical walk through of jury deliberation only for the NGRI part of the verdict. Because of course they do.

I’m not sure who you’re referring to as “they” or “the other side”, but I have explicitly said that I think the jury got the following points correct: 1) beyond a reasonable doubt, MB shot LK in a manner likely to cause death, 2) the evidence was not there to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that MB attempted to murder RG, and 3) MB was legally insane at the time he shot her.

I’ve said several times that I think the verdict was just. I agree with all elements of the verdict. So no, it is not “a proven fact” that “the other side at least partially disagrees with the jury’s finding.”

In short: they say that moving onto considering mental state = the jury found the MB intentionally shot LK = that’s proof it happened. Using their own logic, the opposite would be true for the RG-related charges, ergo, MB shooting at RG didn’t happen. Yet, they are still out there telling that story, over and over and over again.

You’re right that the jury moving on to considering MBs mental state is proof of something. It’s proof that the jury determined as fact finders that, beyond a reasonable doubt MB shot LK. It’s not “proof” that he shot her if by “proof” you mean 100% certainty. All we know is that the jury found that, beyond a reasonable doubt, MB shot her.

It is NOT my logic that “ergo” the RG shooting “didn’t happen”. MB may or may not have aimed at RGs head. All we know from the jury’s verdict of NG wrt the charges regarding RG is that there was not evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that MB was aiming at RG.

Who is out there, “telling that story, over and over and over again”? I haven’t said it and I haven’t seen it argued by others.

I imagine many, including people in MB’s camp, believe the jury got it wrong that he intentionally shot LK. Not that they don’t respect the jury’s process, just that they got that one point wrong, most likely through no fault of their own, since there was almost no forensics to go on. Certainly LK’s civil attorney thinks the jury got it wrong.

The use of the word “intentionally” is problematic. But if you’re saying that people “in MBs camp” “think the jury got it wrong” with respect to finding MB NGRI on the charges wrt LK, then, yes, several people in MBs camp are still pushing self defense or accidental discharge during a scuffle. This does suggest that they think the jury was at fault. If there was not enough forensics to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that he shot MB, the jury should have taken the lack of forensic evidence to find that they were unable to determine beyond a reasonable doubt that he shot her. Taking the forensic evidence presented to them, the jury found that that evidence was sufficient to establish that, beyond a reasonable doubt, he shot LK.

Why would MB express remorse over something he cannot remember and the jury may not have been able to accurately determine due to the shocking lack of forensic evidence gathered?

Let’s assume the amnesia is real. He sat through his own trial and has lawyers to explain to him the fact that the jury’s finding of NGRI wrt LK indicates that the jury, as fact finders, determined that he did (beyond a reasonable doubt) shoot LK, and nearly killed her.

He is not obligated to express remorse to LK or her family. In order to win release or conditional release, he needs to convince the court that he is no longer insane and suffering from delusions. The idea that he shot LK in self-defense? Delusion! The idea that LK lured him to the farmhouse that day so that they could beat him up, and the gun went off in a “scuffle”? Delusion! The idea that, however much the jury is to be respected, they got that one little detail wrong on his shooting of LK, and he is currently in a secure psychiatric facility facing a Krol hearing because the jury goofed when they decided NGRI instead of NG? Delusion!

If he is going to get beyond his delusions, I think he needs to acknowledge, to himself and his closest supporters, at a minimum, that he understands that he shot and nearly killed someone.

By that reasoning, and if it is felt important that apologies and remorse are expressed based upon the verdict, I assume LK and RG have apologised and expressed remorse for accusing MB of shooting at RG, right? I mean, in line with the twaddle being pushed here, that would also be required based on the verdict, no?

Expressing apologies and remorse to the victim are not the crucial issue. The crucial issue is whether MB is sane enough to admit to himself that, (beyond a reasonable doubt), the determination of the jury was that be shot and nearly killed someone.

No one, including RG, is in a position to know with absolute certainty whether MB was aiming for RGs head and firing the gun. RG and the prosecutor thought he was. The jury’s verdict indicates that, whether did or didn’t aim for RGs head, there was not sufficient evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that he did. So, no, RG (and the state of NJ!) accusing MB of the attempted murder of RG would not require an apology or expression of remorse based on the jury’s verdict. Not that I’ve ever said that MB is “required” to apologize or express remorse to LK for having shot her. My point was that to get beyond his delusions, he needs to acknowledge to himself that he shot and nearly killed her. Also that his “supporters” continuing to nurse these delusions is not helpful, IMHO, in promoting the mental healing, or winning the release of, someone who committed a violent act while in a delusional state.

My response in bold.

NGRI means there was no crime as mens rea didn’t exist. There was no finding MB shot her beyond a reasonable doubt.

You keep getting the verdict confused with Guilty but insane. It’s not.

I agree with you that NGRI is a type of acquittal in which the defendant is found not criminally responsible. I am not confusing the verdict with guilty but insane.

It is my understanding that NGRI, in distinction from NG, indicates that the jury as fact finders determined that, beyond a reasonable doubt, in this case, he shot her. I understand that your interpretation is different.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

Hey Everyone! Guess what?

I was not tagged or quoted, but the post mentioned the idea of “remorse” that I brought up yesterday, so I assumed by “the other side” the post was referring to me.

There were a number of statements, inferences and “logic” that were incorrectly attributed to me in the post that I wished to clarify.

[ekat]

@FitzE

In order to win release or conditional release, he needs to convince the court that he is no longer insane and suffering from delusions

Responding to @CurrentlyHorseless for clarity. Again,NO he does not. The only determination to be made at a Krol Hearing is if MB PRESENTLY (not three years ago) is a danger to himself or others. The exact language includes, “ Commitment requires that there be a substantial risk of dangerous conduct within the reasonably foreseeable future” (State v Krol, 1975)

Since at least 1965, the state of NJ has held that mental illness alone is not sufficient to commit someone.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

Hey @CurrentlyHorseless -

Just out of curiosity… are you still horseless? Or are you riding these days? What’s your preferred discipline? Dressage? Jumping? Trail riding?

Also, you have any good dog photos to contribute to the thread?

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Sdel

“My point was that to get beyond his delusions, he needs to acknowledge to himself that he shot and nearly killed her. Also that his “supporters” continuing to nurse these delusions is not helpful, IMHO, in promoting the mental healing, or winning the release of, someone who committed a violent act while in a delusional state.”

From CH’s bolded responses above…

You forget, MB and his closest supporters know a heck of a lot more about what really happened than was actually allowed to be presented at trial because the judge excluded testimony of relevant information and didn’t allow the defense to explore in more detail timelines and events.

The details in the texts/email chains about what LK, JK, and RG actually planned to do to MB. What was actually put into the SS report that triggered CPS to show up. What is actually in those recordings LK brags about. What access to the office and the ability to forge signature and contracts really meant. Everyone’s fear of the dog and all the dog bites that covered MB. The fact that he was beaten to such a state as he was.

Lots to unpack still in the civil trial. I bet it will show that, yes, indeed the jury got it “wrong” because the judge tied their hands by not allowing certain testimony.

And let’s not forget, the state psych’s testimony essentially boiled down to: MB wasn’t delusional because his fear was real. LK was really plotting against him and acting in ways that would cause any rational person to be afraid. And he testified that he read everything.

Yes, and if the jury had been convinced by the prosecution’s psych experts that he shot LK while NOT in a delusional state, he’d be in prison instead of a psychiatrist institution right now.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

@CurrentlyHorseless

There were a number of statements, inferences and “logic” that were incorrectly attributed to me in the post that I wished to clarify.

That’s fair enough. Clarify away.

But… what about horses and dogs? Care to share? It’s more pleasant than constant arguing.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@ekat

@FitzE

In order to win release or conditional release, he needs to convince the court that he is no longer insane and suffering from delusions

Responding to @CurrentlyHorseless for clarity. Again,NO he does not. The only determination to be made at a Krol Hearing is if MB PRESENTLY (not three years ago) is a danger to himself or others. The exact language includes, “ Commitment requires that there be a substantial risk of dangerous conduct within the reasonably foreseeable future” (State v Krol, 1975)

Since at least 1965, the state of NJ has held that mental illness alone is not sufficient to commit someone.

I accept your clarification.

The dangerous conduct that occurred in August 2019 occurred because he was in a delusional state and had access to a gun. While the continuing presence of delusional thinking, is not, in itself, a reason to keep him institutionalized, I think evidence that he is still delusional would indicate that he is likely to be a danger to others, including the person be shot while in a delusional state, compared to a situation in which he no longer harbors delusions.

[MHM]

I think I’ve said it before, but my two all time favorite Star Trek episodes were the tribbles episode and the one with Joan Collins on earth in the 1930s. They really worked the comedy/tragedy drama masks with that combination.