In response to someone else’s comment I said someone from here was inviting non horse people on the YT channel to come to COTH. I thought that was a weird thing do. However, I have no idea if anyone from YT did join here or if they are posting here.
You are the poodle lady! I actually thought I was still in conversation with you about the dog, didn’t realize someone else had entered the conversation(and I certainly did not mean to offend her by asking if she had Standard poodles.)
On to the topic.
SGF has received all the audios and videos and texts from the MCPO and/or from Barisone, even though they were not involved in the criminal trial. That happened months ago.
Then what did you mean when told me I would not make a good lawyer?
It sounds like an insult. Is there a better “spin” you can put on it?

Did you read the filing wherein they identify a specific audio recording that was quoted nearly verbatim by Lauren on social media that was NOT handed over during the criminal trial? Wouldn’t that make you inherently unsatisfied that you had been delivered all of the audio and video recordings as a result?
What do mean there was a recording that was not handed over? The police received the hard drives from the audio devices and all the phones that may have been used to make recordings.

eggbutt:
BTW, it’s hard to find a YT post that doesn’t bash LK so it’s weird to me you think someone here is posting all that negativity.
In response to someone else’s comment I said someone from here was inviting non horse people on the YT channel to come to COTH. I thought that was a weird thing do. However, I have no idea if anyone from YT did join here or if they are posting here.
You are the poodle lady! I actually thought I was still in conversation with you about the dog, didn’t realize someone else had entered the conversation(and I certainly did not mean to offend her by asking if she had Standard poodles.)
On to the topic.
Inviting? That’s an odd word to use. Maybe notifying people there’s active discussion here? That seems more likely than your inference of

Knights_Mom:
Some parties weren’t in the criminal trial. Are you denying SGFs right to Discovery?
SGF has received all the audios and videos and texts from the MCPO and/or from Barisone, even though they were not involved in the criminal trial. That happened months ago.
There are things missing. Read above.
Fugoodness sake, CH! Let-it-go!
This diversion you’re trying to create is just another example of how you use contrariness to try to keep yourself relevant.

Knights_Mom:
CurrentlyHorseless:
Omgitsme:
Because you don’t know the law? I mean…same. I would be a terrible lawyer.
ETA: sorry, sometimes I think I’m funny.
Well, if I intended to become a lawyer, I’d have to go to law school and pass the bar, thereby learning the law.
KnightsMom seemed to be suggesting that I didn’t have the aptitude to become a lawyer.
For someone who unilaterally supports LK and JK who have said all sorts of outrageous things directly and overtly, you sure to seem to have a tendency to overly dramatize statements from everyone else putting the worst spin on them as if you’ve been victimized somehow.
Then what did you mean when told me I would not make a good lawyer?
It sounds like an insult. Is there a better “spin” you can put on it?
Of course you took it in a victimized way.
That’s on you. But by all means dredge your point ad nauseum.

erinmeri:
Did you read the filing wherein they identify a specific audio recording that was quoted nearly verbatim by Lauren on social media that was NOT handed over during the criminal trial? Wouldn’t that make you inherently unsatisfied that you had been delivered all of the audio and video recordings as a result?
What do mean there was a recording that was not handed over? The police received the hard drives from the audio devices and all the phones that may have been used to make recordings.
If you reread @erinmeri’s post you responded to, the answer is her post! Read the filing!

If you reread @erinmeri’s post you responded to, the answer is her post! Read the filing!
Yes. Good lawyers actually read the filings.

From what I can tell, MOST of us here have precisely zero idea what happened on August 7th.
You must be gutted that the jury did not return a verdict of NG on all four counts, then.
Apparently LK was preparing to leave. It’s unfortunate that MB was not able to hold it together mentally long enough to let her leave without shooting her.
Double dose.

erinmeri:
From what I can tell, MOST of us here have precisely zero idea what happened on August 7th.
You must be gutted that the jury did not return a verdict of NG on all four counts, then.
Apparently LK was preparing to leave. It’s unfortunate that MB was not able to hold it together mentally long enough to let her leave without shooting her.
What is unfortunate is Lauren and her father continued to play games, called building inspectors “that they knew”, discussed sabotaging the generator, etc rather than leaving!
Wasn’t it you who said there was no proof she was told to leave? Again, read the filings and exhibits. Read them several times since you really, really do seem to have comprehension issues with the written word.

Fugoodness sake, CH! Let-it-go!
This diversion you’re trying to create is just another example of how you use contrariness to try to keep yourself relevant.
So @Knights_Mom has a post saying nothing other than a statement that I would not be a good lawyer, and I’m the one who’s contrary?
How did I create “this diversion”?

Of course you took it in a victimized way.
That’s on you. But by all means dredge your point ad nauseum.
What is the favorable spin on your gratuitous statement that I would not make a good lawyer, @Knights_Mom?

Pocket_Rocket:
Fugoodness sake, CH! Let-it-go!
This diversion you’re trying to create is just another example of how you use contrariness to try to keep yourself relevant.
So @KnightsMom has a post saying nothing other than a statement that I would not be a good lawyer, and I’m the one who’s contrary?
How did I create “this diversion”?
You don’t read the filings!
You truly are pedantic, aren’t you? Let it go.

Wasn’t it you who said there was no proof she was told to leave? Again, read the filings and exhibits. Read them several times since you really, really do seem to have comprehension issues with the written word.
Yes, there is no proof she was told she was being evicted prior to Aug 5, 2019.
Tarshis testified that even then Barisone did not want to evict her, but wanted to “scare her out” instead.
Barisone did not handle the issue in a rational, sane manner.
Then why was she discussing moving during texts with her father a week before? read the exhibits

Then why was she discussing moving during texts with her father a week before? read the exhibits
Because she wanted to move.