Michael Barisone/Lauren Kanarek Civil Suit

[MorganSercu]

Right to be there - absolutely (if they had a ticket or if it was open to anyone to stroll around). But for a retired attorney, his wife and daughter to approach a witness or even someone who might be associated with the defendant in this case is so far beyond the pale as to be sailing alongside Voyager 1.

[ohnoO]

@SillyHorse

It’s likely they purchased a table, thinking it would give them access to Mr. T. or other people they might try to influence. I don’t think you can get into the tent without a ticket.

Well, a year ago they they didn’t know that they needed that money for lawyers.

[trubandloki]

I agree with you on that. Jonathan Kanarek (@Inigo-montoya), then Kirby Kanarek (@Seeker1), then Lauren Kanarek all approaching (one at a time, in that order) Mr. Tarshis at this social event and then trying to discuss the case with him is minimally them being morally lacking and in a normal world that is not NJ could have caused them to receive a legal slap.

#jonathankanarek
#kirbykanarek
#laurenkanarek
#lalapoprider
#liars
#prooftheyareliars
#contempt

[SillyHorse]

@ohnoO

@SillyHorse

It’s likely they purchased a table, thinking it would give them access to Mr. T. or other people they might try to influence. I don’t think you can get into the tent without a ticket.

Well, a year ago they they didn’t know that they needed that money for lawyers.

Yep, they probably thought they were locking in the slam dunk they believed they had. Whoops.

[ohnoO]

I can’t decide if it’s worse than sending a secret email to the judge!

[trubandloki]

@ohnoO

I can’t decide if it’s worse than sending a secret email to the judge!

Different.
It is just different.
And they are both examples of how Jonathan Kanarek @Inigo-montoya seems to think the world is all his to do as he pleases, heck with the rules, heck with anyone else.

#jonathankanarek
#kirbykanarek
#laurenkanarek
#lalapoprider
#liars
#prooftheyareliars
#contempt

[SillyHorse]

@ohnoO

I can’t decide if it’s worse than sending a secret email to the judge!

They could claim they were just making social small talk with Mr. T. at Friday Night Lights, but I don’t think there’s anyway to make themselves look all innocent with justifications for contacting the judge. This is especially heinous because JK, being even a non-practicing attorney, knows without question it was unethical.

[Knights_Mom]

Remember that there are those who live under a different standard than say I might. And while to me walking up and speaking to a witness in an upcoming trial is beyond the pale there are many people who live by what I’ll call Jungle Law.

In Jungle Law you do anything you can get away with that will work to your advantage and those that won’t do so are suckers.

Fortune favors the bold and all that. Sheep and wolves.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Pocket_Rocket

I feel that by answering this I’m keeping you from reading the filings.

IMO, contrariness and argument are what keeps you here. Perhaps I’m being harsh… I was never quite the same after your “JK is my favorite” not too long after his anti MB verbal vomit in a previous thread.

There’s been a lot of verbal vomit on these threads. Only one episode from JK.

It’s a discussion board. I have the minority opinion. Others with the minority opinion have been bullied off with insults, snark, and mockery.

[Knights_Mom]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Pocket_Rocket

I feel that by answering this I’m keeping you from reading the filings.

IMO, contrariness and argument are what keeps you here. Perhaps I’m being harsh… I was never quite the same after your “JK is my favorite” not too long after his anti MB verbal vomit in a previous thread.

There’s been a lot of verbal vomit on these threads. Only one episode from JK.

It’s a discussion board. I have the minority opinion. Others with the minority opinion have been bullied off with insults, snark, and mockery.

Welcome to the internet. Have you met it?

[trubandloki]

@CurrentlyHorseless

It’s a discussion board. I have the minority opinion. Others with the minority opinion have been bullied off with insults, snark, and mockery.

Same level of the threats that Lauren Kanarek sent people?

I would guess more people have left from the boredom of certain posters asking the same things for years, than any other reason.

I am still very curious about your thoughts on Line 1 of Exhibit J.
I am also curious about your thoughts on the Kanarek family and their individual visits with Mr. Tarshis at that riding thing he talks about.

#jonathankanarek
#kirbykanarek
#laurenkanarek
#lalapoprider
#liars
#prooftheyareliars
#contempt

[Sdel]

@LiberalSnowflake

but they set up multiple accounts (often having to keep spreadsheets or lists to keep up with what they’ve said and where they’ve said it) and enter discussions purely to argue against the popular opinion and be “superior”.

LK did mention her multiple devices filled with screenshots once……for a purpose that none of us needed to know about……

[eggbutt]

I doubt anyone knew who they were. They aren’t exactly recognizable regardless of their “notoriety”.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@erinmeri

have stated before that I think the jury’s verdict was reasonable, and that given the dearth of evidence and the impeachment issues, I would not personally have been able to find him guilty. But I do think the trial painted a pretty clear picture of a tormented man who was driven to a mental break, so I understand the verdict reached.

You said before that you think “most here” have “precisely zero” information on what happened on Aug 7, 2019.

How can you think that the jury’s verdict was reasonable, then. given that they found there was enough evidence to prove he shot her? Obviously the jury as fact finders thought there was enough evidence that he committed the act to deny him a straight NG verdict.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Knights_Mom

@DownYonder

@Angela_Freda

@CurrentlyHorseless

Because she wanted to move.

She didn’t WANT to move. But she knew she was going to HAVE to move, whether of her own volition or because of a formal eviction.

And she was determined to RUIN MB as much as possible before she left because he had rejected her.

Remember that old saying - “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned”? She is the living embodiment of that phrase.

Also she knew that once she was gone from the premises her ability to continue her campaign would be greatly diminished.

I agree. She thought she and RG were owed money and that she had more leverage over MB when present on the farm.

If it had not been tor the multiple, sloppy, unwritten agreements which led to the financial dispute, I think she would have been gone earlier and with less drama.

[eggbutt]

OH. MY. GOD.

Contrary to there being absolutely no evidence in this universe that Michael Barisone shot anyone, anywhere, anytime, there will be an incredibly abundant amount of evidence of everything Lauren Shay Kanarek and her family did to destroy Michael Barisone. Fortunately, the majority of that evidence is corroborated by them! The family includes her parents and her whatever she calls him today.

Shall we list all the known evidence against the Kanareks again?

[Sdel]

So, considering the tip of the iceberg of texts that reveal plotting, and the claims that physical harm was plotted against Barisone and the others, is anyone else getting the feeling that the civil trial will highlight that the criminal trial will show that it was a travesty of justice.

I mean, one can not fault the jury, they can only work with the information given to them, but the travesty will be just how much was kept from them….

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@omare

As I noted, I think this is a very complex issue. There is a lot of case law/discussion on “privity” (how broad is “privity” applied?) and collateral estoppel and nonparty and NJ case law. As to authority specifically applicable to “this type of case”-- I don’t think there is any case on point out for this type of case (we can agree this case is complex and unique?) .

That is why I think there will be more briefing. Is SGF in privity with MB? I don’t know. It is a hurdle to argue the connections for sure or maybe not! I don’t know if that is even the starting point. (How often does that happen-where one is not even starting at the right place… I now realize nonmutual CE is not the starting place-privity seems to be?) We don’t even know what the many aspects of the relationship is between MB and SGF and if any of it is relevant to collateral estoppel. The other principle, offensive non-mutual collateral estoppel again will depend on the jurisdiction (does NJ even apply it?) and facts unique to that case.(Admittedly it is a harder concept for me to get my head around…and when it applies, what jurisdictions apply it, and how it differs from nonparty privity?)

And often it seems it is how broadly the court wants to apply or restrict the use of collateral estoppel as it is an equitable principle.(Hence very fact dependent.) The court might end up wherever with a clear cut decision that makes one say-oh of course I see now, that is obvious-how stupid of me (and i mean me.) But I just think it will require more briefing.

The facts matter. An example of where one might not expect to end up on a CE issue and not on point here. One can find much case law/articles where an insurance company of a party found guilty of an offense apply CE against victim based on criminal trial outcome, so victim can not relitigate “intent” and company need not pay out.(Cruel irony, victim stands in shoes of party/perpetrator I think due to contract but don’t test me on that). Who would have thought that outcome? Sure does not seem fair to the victim, but it is a successful strategy depending on the facts unique to that case.

Anyway, these I think are interesting legal principles that will be applied to the unique facts of this case (and not to trivialize the whole extremely tragic events.) So in advance, you are right I maybe clearly wrong about the application of CE, but I do think it will require more briefing. It is a complex issue and I don’t think it is addressed and slam dunk settled in a one /two line footnote.

Thanks for your patience.

Thank you, omare.

[clipper]

@Knights_Mom

Without intending to be political I just wanted to point out that a certain party to a court matter was just fined $110,000 for failure to comply with providing documents for Discovery. Again, this post is NOT about who the person is BUT RATHER THE RESULT OF DEFIANCE OF A COURT ORDER.

The $110,000 was a $10,000 a day fine for not complying with the subpoena.
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if both Parties, who did not comply, were hit with a daily fine like this? Even a thousand a day would be wonderful.
Nothing grifters hate more than paying for something with their own money LOL

[Maria]

Deep Breath girlfriend.

It is all going to be revealed. And what has already been reveled is pretty amazing.

I think there have been some folks whose orbit has been thrown a little out of balance.