Good one! 
3 Likes
Rowdy party spaghetti 
8 Likes
Her breasts look pretty darn even here and she looks to be very proud to show them off. It seems like the only person who is having a meltdown about the size/shape of Lauren’s breasts is you, Kirby Kanarek @Seeker1 . Such a strange stance for a mother, insulting her daughter’s body.
33 Likes
Narcissists don’t care what the rest of the world thinks. They only care about what they want. As far as they are concerned, the rest of the world is comprised of suckers and patsies - i.e., potential victims. And in its more malignant manifestations, narcissists will do whatever is necessary to get what they want. They will push the boundaries of acceptable social mores, ethics, morals, legalities, etc., to achieve their prize, because they don’t believe those boundaries apply to THEM.
13 Likes
That plus Kirby trying to paint Lauren as being younger than she is - she is not a “girl” (the word emphasizes childhood and childishness), she is an adult woman. She was 38 when she was shot. That is far too old to play the role of ingenue.
36 Likes
Interesting observation - I just searched for a text string I saw referenced in another post, because I wanted to read the original post in its entirety. The search results said it was post #5008, but when I clicked the link to those results, I was on post #4904. So it seems there were some 100-odd posts deleted overnight. 
11 Likes
I do have a daughter and there is no way in heaven she would ever act as your daughter has. We raised our daughter to be a contributing, law abiding woman with respect and honor. Under no circumstances would I be posting the ridiculous tantrums you and your husband have posted here if, God forbid, my daughter was in the trouble your daughter is in.
You need some heavy counseling to move past your anger and denial of events that happened in the past 4 years. I hope you find peace somewhere. You won’t find it here.
33 Likes
Yes, I think she came here to tout the new angle GAS said he’d use, that Lauren was “mutilated”. Sounds like his strategy is going to be that, plus get any reference to Lauren’s destroy the bastard plan barred from the case. I wonder how that’s going to work for them.
17 Likes
I have a legal question. What if for some reason the judge barred MB from questioning Lauren about what she did to MB. Cant MB still bring it all up in his cross claim to her, as the basis of his suit against her? He has every right to sue her for what she did to him. How much of this filing is likely to receive notice from the judge? And GAS wants oral arguments about it all? What will happen? Is it unusual or common for a plaintiff to require constraints against how a defendent will argue? Is GAS just trying to get this judge to act like Taylor? What is going on here?
4 Likes
It seems like GAS is saying that since MB didn’t claim justification for shooting LK in the last trial he can’t do that here, and he’s arguing for the defense that the defense is going to use that argument now, and, no fair? That doesn’t sound very correct, he can’t argue against the defence if they haven’t provided one yet, and who is he to say how the defense is going to use this information? or am I getting ahead of myself and missing things?
3 Likes
So I did a search on the term “mutilated” in this thread, to see how many times KK used it thus far. It sure does seem like someone used that term to describe LK’s condition, and KK pounced on it.
Since MB wasn’t the one that cut off LK’s breast, I wonder if he might have cause for legal action against KK for repeatedly libeling him on SM?
4264
4308
4968
4972
4975
4977
4980
4 Likes
So, apparently @Seeker1 is trying to convince anyone that her daughter was mutilated? Huh.
What is mental abuse of others for years and years called? What is the serious beating Michael Barisone received, after he had been subdued, called? Heroism? No intelligent human believes that RG is a hero.
I have zero sympathy for any Kanarek. None whatsoever. Too bad none of them had the grace and intelligence to move on and get appropriate help for their obviously troubled daughter rather than posting on SM, dissing others, harassing others at events, lying, evading legal summons’, delaying, denying, deflecting, and antagonizing others along with each other. Too bad Jonathan Kanarek chose to participate in a conspiracy to destroy someone rather than demanding his daughter get the hell out immediately and handle any issues he thought they had through legal channels. I can’t wait for the civil trials. If they are open and L&O decides to cover them, the K’s aren’t prepared for the backlash they will receive around the world.
25 Likes
IANAL… but…
As I understand it, this motion by GAS only applies to the lines of questioning MBs and SGFs attorneys can pursue during LKs deposition.
This does not mean it would necessarily constrain anyone from pursuing certain lines of questioning and arguments in the event the case ever makes it to trial. That has yet to be decided.
The problem, however, is that discovery and depositions are the evidence gathering phase… everyone on both sides is building their cases with respect to claims and counterclaims. They are all collecting points of evidence that may be used to both positively assert a claim or counterclaim… and also… they all collecting points of evidence that may be used to definitively refute a claim or counterclaim.
The depositions will involve statements made UNDER OATH by various people. There is no guarantee that any questions asked and answered during depositions will be able to be used during the civil trial… but in general… attorneys are allowed to ‘cast a wide net’ when questioning someone during a deposition. So they gather as much evidence as they possibly can during discovery, and then get selective about what is actually used to make persuasive arguments during a civil trial.
This motion would be in conflict with that whole notion of a casting a wide net. It would limit the deposition questions that LK has to face regarding provocation to only that which were posed to her during the criminal trial. But she was a WITNESS during that trial. She was not actually a party to that case. The state of NJ and MB were the parties. So Barisone’s attorneys were understandably constrained by Judge Taylor with respect to the questions they were allow you pose to LK during the criminal trial, because the witness in that matter was NOT the person on trial, nor was the witness the person lodging the criminal complaint against Barisone. Different rules apply to depositions. And MBs attorneys should be allowed to thoroughly confront sbd question the party who is making the complaint!
21 Likes
To expand on this- no woman has perfectly same sized breasts. The breast on the side of the dominant arm is usually bigger.
24 Likes
It appears they are referring to a NJ rule that echoes Federal Rules of Civil Procedure’s 30(d)(3);
I think the key word here is “unreasonably”. It would seem that if you question in good faith and your questions are reasonably germane to the issue, then the annoyance, embarrassment or oppression is allowable. League eagles, is that the case?
I also found this interesting, that as it pertains to discovery, when in doubt the court tends to err on the side of discoverability:
13 Likes
Serious question - is addiction and substance abuse considered self mutilation?
21 Likes
Taylor allowed self defense as a defense. The defense did not offer any evidence that it was self defense, so that Taylor ruled that Bilinkas could not argue self defense in his summation.
2 Likes
44 Likes
Projection.
1 Like
Anticipation.
16 Likes
