This is a question for our brillant legal minds. On the above form that the court fills out, no. 8 has the maximum amount of time that could have been served if convicted.
In MB’s case since intent wasn’t proven with the insanity verdict, what basis does the court use for these dates? Do they use the lesser offenses? TIA!
IMO, because COTH, the Dressage forum, Dressage is what LK craves. It is her dream, desire, want, need to be a respected participant in the Dressage world. The need to be recognized. The need to be held in reverence. To wear the crown. Hence the reason she moved to just outside WellyWorld.
COTH is a possible means to an end. Convince us that MB bad, LK good and this will elevate her standing in the Dressage Community. And possibly put her back on track to the Olympics or whatever else she aspires to.
It does not seem to be working by approaching people in WellyWorld, so go on COTH.
I imagine there are some here who have a good standing or an in, in the Dressage Community who are probably big wigs. I also imagine that most of us here are your rank and file ammies, who have a love for horses and dressage, who are ardent readers and want to improve our knowledge of equines and dressage.
If LK wants to improve her standing in the Dressage Community, she needs to make some changes in herself. She needs to look in the mirror with an objective eye. Look inward. Then be willing to see what is real and not imaginary and really desire to make changes. It will be difficult to undue many years of bad behavior.
Hey - so it’s Lent and Seeker1 is all about religion. Did you know the Vatican has classified capybara, beaver, muskrat and maybe others as fish so the faithful can eat them during Lent?
Deininger circled a particular text proposing playing one of the recordings to staff and said that it was part of a conversation between LK and JK. At first I assumed it was from JK and indicated he was proposing the move. But it turns out it was an outgoing text from LK. I believe Deininger that the recipient was JK, since I doubt Deininger would lie about that.
If someone texts to me suggesting whatever, does my phone having received such a text prove my involvement? Why didn’t Deininger submit JKs response to the suggestion? Isn’t it JKs response to that text that would indicate his participation?
It sounds to me that Deininger is reaching to paint JK as being more involved than he was. Is that something lawyers do?
Yeah, it’s amazing what you are willing to eat when you are poor, or hosted by someone who is very poor. I wasn’t going to look that elderly client in the eye and turn down food that was offered my employer and myself in lieu of payment. Nope. Not me.
‘Clara’ has apparently deleted all the comments she made on the latest YT true crime analysis video about the shooting.
I agree with others - the rest of the comments indicate a very poor perception by the general public when it comes to LKs role in this situation. This does not bode well for LKs civil case.
I’m speculating that the judge delayed the ruling on the subpoenas for another two months so that the depositions allow the Kanareks to state under oath what items exist. If all the recordings that exist have already been turned over, and JKs pertinent text records have been turned over, I’d expect the judge to quash the subpoenas.
If they have the materials submitted to SS (including any transcripts) and the related recordings, there is no reason they need more transcripts.
But… why do they need to wait for a deposition to state under oath whether they do or don’t have items that are responsive to the respective subpoenas?
They could just… respond to the actual subpoena ms to clarify what they do or don’t have. That’s literally what a normal discovery process involves.
The Kanareks would be wise to be careful with the length of rope the judge has just handed them on this issue.