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.
