Michael Barisone/Lauren Kanarek Civil Suit

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Jenerationx

@CurrentlyHorseless

Here’s what I meant.

On the relatively simple question of whether MB was or wasn’t insane when he shot LK, the jury required several hours of psychiatric testimony to be replayed for them, and deliberated for hours before deciding that by a preponderance of the evidence (that is more likely than not) he was insane.

The jury clearly found that MB was insane, to the standard of by a preponderance of the evidence.

When did the standard change for criminal trials? In what state is a preponderance of the evidence the standard in a criminal trial?

Are you asking me or cutter?

[SoCoPony]

[cutter99]

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

I just find it bizarre that I asked KK a clarifying question… and I posed it in a diplomatic way. She could have simply responded, “Lauren had her entire breast implant removed.”

Instead… KK decided to try and double down, and SPECIFICALLY claimed that LKs “whole breast” was removed.

As others have noted… either LK herself nor LK’s surgeon made this claim.

So why did Seeker choose to make that specific claim… in writing… on this thread?

Neither myself, nor anyone else, forced the woman to try and claim this.

Anyway… I’m sorry she feels that this is a mean and unsympathetic crowd. But… when someone goes online and lies about something like this… and people take note… the reaction is often harsh.

What @Seeker1 said is very disrespectful and minimizing to those who have experienced a mastectomy and all it involves, especially since it has always been presented that LK had an implant replaced.

Absolutely disgusting!!!

[ohnoO]

I guess the new filing would allow questions about Rosie, since she was strictly off limits in the criminal trial per Judge Taylor?

I would love to see her bio and the training she endured.

“Did you just jerk her around when she didn’t do as you thought she should because she didn’t understand what you wanted?”

“Did you love and pat on her when she snuggled up to you looking for answers or direction?”

Hmmm….

[Paint_Party]

Indeed. Tonight we’re subjected to a match race between arguing the extent of LK’s breast reconstruction and rehashing the NGRI verdict. At least collateral estoppel is worn out.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@BigMama1

@CurrentlyHorseless

The defense did not prove that LK caused his insanity.

The defence was not permitted to present that line of argument in the criminal trial, which would tie in to self defence and probably would require Michael to have enough memory of events to testify to them. But the defence is 100% going to pursue this argument in the civil trial, as is clearly outlined in the filing.

OK, so you are saying that the defense was “not permitted” to argue that LK caused his insanity, while @Knights_Mom claims that the defense succeeded in proving the claim.

MB only claims memory loss for a period of hours. He could easily have testified about the events leading up to the shooting, and chose not to.

[SillyHorse]

OMG the little pink helmets!

[Knights_Mom]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@BigMama1

@CurrentlyHorseless

The defense did not prove that LK caused his insanity.

The defence was not permitted to present that line of argument in the criminal trial, which would tie in to self defence and probably would require Michael to have enough memory of events to testify to them. But the defence is 100% going to pursue this argument in the civil trial, as is clearly outlined in the filing.

OK, so you are saying that the defense was “not permitted” to argue that LK caused his insanity, while @Knights_Mom claims that the defense succeeded in proving the claim.

MB only claims memory loss for a period of hours. He could easily have testified about the events leading up to the shooting, and chose not to.

Memory loss during a traumatic event and under duress is a verifiable, known thing whether you are willing to acknowledge that or not.

It’s also common with people who have PTSD from their past. It’s also known to happen under psychological pressure. These all happened.

This doesn’t include the fact that MB was pummeled excessively on the head with weapons and fists.

I suppose now you’ll take us down that gloomy road where you earn your PhD in psychiatry from Google U.

[iridedressage]

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@omare

Well, the sentence at issue could be read MB is not liable because he was incompetent at the time (and all the reasons why really do not matter) . There is legal support for not holding an insane person legally responsible in civil court, if intent was needed for the action and he could not form the necessary intent. However, the meaning of intent in the civil vs criminal context (if there is any difference), I find confusing.

I agree with you that Deininger was arguing as a defense that MB was not liable because he was not mentally competent at the time.

I did not see a claim that LK “caused” his insanity.

Perhaps you need to watch the trial again because proving this very thing was the basis of the defense and witness testimony.

Exactly. I tend to believe the witnesses who knew MB before LK entered the picture as well as knowing him after she entered the picture. They were there and they was what was happening not only to MB but, maybe on another level, to them as well.

[DownYonder]

Is it possible that KK did not know that Daughter Dearest had breast implants?

[Knights_Mom]

@DownYonder

Is it possible that KK did not know that Daughter Dearest had breast implants?

Then she knows nothing and should keep her mouth shut from making accusations in outrage.

[DreadPirateRoberts]

The merry go round is indeed spinning … is that CH I see going by just now?

[Omgitsme]

You read it that way.
Some others read the comma as and/or.

[KurPlexed]

Do judges confer with each other? Any chance this judge will reach out to Taylor for his opinion on the latest filing?

[SoCoPony]

[MHM]

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

Soooo… we will all have to wait and see if @Seeker1 chooses to pop back into the discussion and clarify… again… whether she is claiming Lauren actually lost her breast and had a mastectomy… or is the claim actually related to the implant.

Really, what difference would it make? How much is her word worth on the subject?

She’s demonstrated her credibility pretty clearly on this thread and previous ones.

[Knights_Mom]

@KurPlexed

Do judges confer with each other? Any chance this judge will reach out to Taylor for his opinion on the latest filing?

In my experience they don’t seek out a judge they don’t know but if they’re buddies or run into eachother the subject might pop up.

One should pay attention to party affiliations and knowing work histories of the two gives you an idea as to a chance conversation.

[3PonyFarm]

I was reading about continued commitment for patients found ngri that were not state specific but still interesting.

One of the things about determining if someone is dangerous to themselves or others is how they act within the psychiatric facility and if they have posed a danger to themselves or to staff and other patients. Many have to be kept away from the general population if they are dangerous.
It also appears that most states use if someone is dangerous at the current time and can treatment control their behavior.
It doesn’t appear that courts are allowed to use “maybe sometime in the future under these circumstances they might be dangerous” approach that I feel Judge T used in the last hearing.

Another thing I thought interesting is some experts feel that a patient working with therapists could possibly be deprived of their “right to remain silent” to protect them from statements they might make in therapy that may have the potential to be used against them at a future hearing. The experts want to look at ways to insure that a patient’s rights are protected.

[roseymare]

Nah their head is up and not in the sand…

[MHM]

@BatCoach

Its clear that your medical experience is on par with your legal experience.

Hey, it’s taxing to do a double major at Google Med and Google Law.