Michael Barisone/Lauren Kanarek Civil Suit

[eggbutt]

@Seeker1

and you think you are normal?

Compared to you and your despicable family, I am a Saint.

Keep laughing Kirby. I guess it is all you have left is finding humor where you can. Personally I think this situation is beyond deplorable.

[SoCoPony]

[Ambitious_Kate]

@Seeker1

and you think you are normal?

You sound like a twelve year old.

[Seeker1]

only you can decide if you are behaving yourself. You wouldn’t believe me if I told you… so why bother?

[eggbutt]

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

Honestly… they are both smart enough to be above this sort of stupidity.

Maybe they just really hate all the Lollypop jokes I have made on the forums, and feel like making sarcastic comments about bilateral mastectomy due to breast cancer is an appropriate retort.

VHM, I am so sorry anyone on these forums has sunk to such low depths, particularly defending a Kanarek. Thank you for your bravery in sharing your story to help many understand what mastectomy really involves.

[eggbutt]

@Seeker1

only you can decide if you are behaving yourself. You wouldn’t believe me if I told you… so why bother?

To prove you aren’t lying is reason to “bother”. Otherwise you are simply posting crap about others.

[Ambitious_Kate]

Things must be falling apart in the Kanarek household. Kirby must have just been told they have to sell their house in New Jersey to pay for their attorneys fees and is going to have to move in with Laren in Florida. Aiee!

[CanteringCarrot]

@Seeker1

only you can decide if you are behaving yourself. You wouldn’t believe me if I told you… so why bother?

I am not being facetious, really. You said it, so I’m genuinely curious and will gladly engage in a conversation about this. I will always believe you if you provide proof. There are also times when you may not have proof, but I might still be able to atleast have an understanding re where you’re coming from.

If you make a bold claim or assertment, back it up. This can only help your credibility and create meaningful conversations.

I also wouldn’t leave it to me to decide if I’m behaving myself sounds dangerous

Please take that last sentence as a joke. Please! It’s meant to be humor.

[Ghazzu]

@Seeker1

and you think you are normal?

I find her posts to at least be consistent wrt tone.
Your, OTOH, veer wildly, from expressing compassion for everyone here who is clearly woefully mistaken about what happened at HH one minute, to vague threats and venomous rants to anyone who disagrees with your take on things.
Not to mention repeatedly contradicting yourself.

I find your posts somewhat disturbing and sad.
I’d offer you the advice to maybe stop posting and reading here, except that when I did the same to your daughter, she responded with threats of a lawsuit.

[CanteringCarrot]

@Ambitious_Kate

Things must be falling apart in the Kanarek household. Kirby must have just been told they have to sell their house in New Jersey to pay for their attorneys fees and is going to have to move in with Laren in Florida. Aiee!

Erm, really?

That’s a bit much.

[Knights_Mom]

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

@hut-ho78

@CurrentlyHorseless

Some people can look at their scars and be reminded that that was the surgery that they voluntarily undertook to save their life. Others look at the scar and are reminded that an insane man tried to kill them.

But, definitely, you’re the “brave” one, VHM. (Sarcasm)

You nailed it.

Tell me, oh wise ones…

If a woman has to “choose” to undergo surgery to remove both her breasts in order to have ANY chance of surviving a medical diagnosis…

And she really wants to live, because she has two VERY small children (not even in kindergarten yet) who will be left to grow up without any mother…

Is that surgery really “voluntary” ?

But by all means, continue with the sarcastic comments if you want. You two certainly reveal quite a bit about yourselves in terms of character and intellect with this particular bit of nonsense.

https://media4.giphy.com/media/XoM5mucec1WV7kvJRo/giphy.gif?cid=2154d3d7ppu75prfupti4bopxgd42qnlx851oideur6oeb80&rid=giphy.gif&ct=g

I have a bunch of scars from lung cancer surgery and bilateral oophorectomy.

I do not consider myself mutilated. I consider myself a SURVIVOR.

And I survived so much much more than a couple of surgeries.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

Meanwhile back to the upcoming civil trial, I am very curious as to where the box of 9mm ammunition came from that was found by the safe. RC testified she did not give her box of ammunition to MB and no other weapons used 9mm ammo so who bought this and when and how did it get in the safe?

I don’t think the tactic of trying to show LK provokes people is going to work. If they say she caused MB to shoot her that sounds too much like abusive spouses telling the abused spouse “you made me do it.” It brings in a whole new aspect that doesn’t help redeem MB. Also, if people come forward to say she harassed them, they didn’t shoot her. Only MB shot her.

I think with the way MB ignored the law such as Building Code, Habitability, Repair and Deduct, Landlord/Tenant Law, Stable Lien law (or is it called Livery Lien law in New Jersey, occupancy for the barn, environmental/health laws for the barn septic system, the farm house basement egress (don’t forget @SierraMist’s excellent summation on those requirements, much more than just the old coal chute door), etc. I think the jury will be sitting there not finding anyone making good decisions but also no one deserving to be shot.

Logic dictates that since there were 2 other guns in the safe that there might be bullets too. As bullets don’t age they may have been there for a long time. Who knows? Maybe someone who owns guns put them there. Someone who discovered they had access to the office. Maybe they were planted. Who knows?

It surprises no one that you think that the fact (not a tactic, it’s a FACT) that the torts and criminal acts performed by LK and RG wouldn’t drive someone insane. Clearly the rest of the world disagrees.

MB was actively making repairs and it wasn’t just the shoddy work RG doing it. We have no idea what credentials RG pretended to have, if any.

As for the tenancy paragraph you wrote it seems to be a bunch of legal terms tossed about to seem authoritative. But it’s not. Its more like a rowdy party spaghetti thrown onto the ceiling. For instance, mentioning a stableman’s lien in this situation is like talking about the different pattern of spots among giraffe. The rest is just gurgling babble.

People who jump and attack other people bashing them in the head and punching them in the face while their dog Kujo mauls them deserve to be shot.

Your issue is that you believe the narrative that the good guy suddenly turned bad, and the people with known histories of being bad suddenly morphed into victim. I believe LK jumped MB in a raging fit and then RG jumped in and somewhere in there the gun discharged accidentally or in self defense.

No one else believes that.

We believe in likely scenarios where the good guy was forced into a situation due to the bad guys and due to the bad guys even worse stuff happened.

There it is again “deserves to be shot.” The jury, who sat there and listened to and watched everyone every day on trial found differently. Once he pulled the gun out and pointed it at her and fired, anything they did to save their own lives was self defense. RG was quite the hero. Stopped a larger man and refrained from killing him even with LK going down from her injuries.

Also, how do you know what kind of work RG did. You were not there. His work may have been excellent.

Yes if someone is trying to kill somebody and has them down on the ground beating them to the point of unconsciousness they deserve to be shot. It’s called self defense and the victim is on the ground and unable to retreat. And that’s in a scenario where MB was in possession of the gun which we do not know if that was the case.

Since Taylor didn’t allow self defense the jury found what they found even despite the evidence and major relevant facts unable to be heard.

RG is a zero and not a hero. There is nothing heroic in his history. He does nothing heroic. He couldn’t even present himself to have respect for the Court, sitting in the witness stand like Slouchy McPunkface.

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

I completely see why you are not employed in any way in the field of law.

You said yourself in your reply that self defense was not allowed as an option. I bolded it for you. Then I hilighted it in a screen shot to further assist. You seem to need the help understanding your own words.

So my statement stands and is correct. Again.

1. Barisone was allowed to plead not guilty by reason of self defense.

2. If Bilinkas had any evidence that Barisone shot her in self defense, Taylor would have had to allow it.

3. No evidence of self defense was offered by Bilinkas.

4. Given 3, Taylor did not permit Bilinkas to argue a theory of self defense to the jury in his summation.

Barisone didn’t remember anything so logic dictates he could not prove or testify to self defense.

My words stand.

No, your words that “Taylor did not allow self defense” do not stand.

You are now saying that due to the memory loss, Barisone was unable to present evidence of self defense, as in my point 3.

Barisone pled self defense and it didn’t fly because no evidence of self defense was provided, perhaps because of Barisone’s memory loss. While Taylor did not permit Bilinkas to argue a theory of self defense without having provided any evidence that is was self defense, he did not prevent Barisone from pleading, or submitting evidence, that it was self defense.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

@SoCoPony

No kidding!

I wonder if @CurrentlyHorseless and @Seeker1 will actually talk to each other on the thread this time? Or will the pattern continue where CH just pops in to say things that are supportive of Seeker1… but doesn’t actually have direct dialogue with her…

[Ambitious_Kate]

Interesting.

[CanteringCarrot]

@Ghazzu

@Seeker1

and you think you are normal?

I find her posts to at least be consistent wrt tone.
Your, OTOH, veer wildly, from expressing compassion for everyone here who is clearly woefully mistaken about what happened at HH one minute, to vague threats and venomous rants to anyone who disagrees with your take on things.
Not to mention repeatedly contradicting yourself.

I find your posts somewhat disturbing and sad.
I’d offer you the advice to maybe stop posting and reading here, except that when I did the same to your daughter, she responded with threats of a lawsuit.

This one time, at band camp…

Well, I mean, this one time on COTH, on a thread in the past I said something in favor of LK and it was actually kind and a decent gesture…and I got wild PMs and threats about it. I know she’s defensive due to all of the flak she (somewhat rightfully) receives, but yea, turned me right the f off. Ya can’t kindly advise these folk.

But if one isn’t capable of kindness maybe one doesn’t know how to receive kindness in any form?

[SoCoPony]

[Sdel]

@Knights_Mom

Logic dictates that since there were 2 other guns in the safe that there might be bullets too. As bullets don’t age they may have been there for a long time. Who knows? Maybe someone who owns guns put them there. Someone who discovered they had access to the office. Maybe they were planted. Who knows?

Well, I would put forth the idea that someone does know. MB didn’t lose his memory of what happened surrounding what was said/done around the conversation and decision to put the gun in the safe and what was actually put in that safe.

Someone does know, and so far one of the participants has remained silent on the matter. I wonder if his story will match RC’s? Keep in mind, RC was testifying under duress, she had to push the prosecution’s narrative or face jail time as punishment.

[Maria]

[Knights_Mom]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

Meanwhile back to the upcoming civil trial, I am very curious as to where the box of 9mm ammunition came from that was found by the safe. RC testified she did not give her box of ammunition to MB and no other weapons used 9mm ammo so who bought this and when and how did it get in the safe?

I don’t think the tactic of trying to show LK provokes people is going to work. If they say she caused MB to shoot her that sounds too much like abusive spouses telling the abused spouse “you made me do it.” It brings in a whole new aspect that doesn’t help redeem MB. Also, if people come forward to say she harassed them, they didn’t shoot her. Only MB shot her.

I think with the way MB ignored the law such as Building Code, Habitability, Repair and Deduct, Landlord/Tenant Law, Stable Lien law (or is it called Livery Lien law in New Jersey, occupancy for the barn, environmental/health laws for the barn septic system, the farm house basement egress (don’t forget @SierraMist’s excellent summation on those requirements, much more than just the old coal chute door), etc. I think the jury will be sitting there not finding anyone making good decisions but also no one deserving to be shot.

Logic dictates that since there were 2 other guns in the safe that there might be bullets too. As bullets don’t age they may have been there for a long time. Who knows? Maybe someone who owns guns put them there. Someone who discovered they had access to the office. Maybe they were planted. Who knows?

It surprises no one that you think that the fact (not a tactic, it’s a FACT) that the torts and criminal acts performed by LK and RG wouldn’t drive someone insane. Clearly the rest of the world disagrees.

MB was actively making repairs and it wasn’t just the shoddy work RG doing it. We have no idea what credentials RG pretended to have, if any.

As for the tenancy paragraph you wrote it seems to be a bunch of legal terms tossed about to seem authoritative. But it’s not. Its more like a rowdy party spaghetti thrown onto the ceiling. For instance, mentioning a stableman’s lien in this situation is like talking about the different pattern of spots among giraffe. The rest is just gurgling babble.

People who jump and attack other people bashing them in the head and punching them in the face while their dog Kujo mauls them deserve to be shot.

Your issue is that you believe the narrative that the good guy suddenly turned bad, and the people with known histories of being bad suddenly morphed into victim. I believe LK jumped MB in a raging fit and then RG jumped in and somewhere in there the gun discharged accidentally or in self defense.

No one else believes that.

We believe in likely scenarios where the good guy was forced into a situation due to the bad guys and due to the bad guys even worse stuff happened.

There it is again “deserves to be shot.” The jury, who sat there and listened to and watched everyone every day on trial found differently. Once he pulled the gun out and pointed it at her and fired, anything they did to save their own lives was self defense. RG was quite the hero. Stopped a larger man and refrained from killing him even with LK going down from her injuries.

Also, how do you know what kind of work RG did. You were not there. His work may have been excellent.

Yes if someone is trying to kill somebody and has them down on the ground beating them to the point of unconsciousness they deserve to be shot. It’s called self defense and the victim is on the ground and unable to retreat. And that’s in a scenario where MB was in possession of the gun which we do not know if that was the case.

Since Taylor didn’t allow self defense the jury found what they found even despite the evidence and major relevant facts unable to be heard.

RG is a zero and not a hero. There is nothing heroic in his history. He does nothing heroic. He couldn’t even present himself to have respect for the Court, sitting in the witness stand like Slouchy McPunkface.

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

I completely see why you are not employed in any way in the field of law.

You said yourself in your reply that self defense was not allowed as an option. I bolded it for you. Then I hilighted it in a screen shot to further assist. You seem to need the help understanding your own words.

So my statement stands and is correct. Again.

1. Barisone was allowed to plead not guilty by reason of self defense.

2. If Bilinkas had any evidence that Barisone shot her in self defense, Taylor would have had to allow it.

3. No evidence of self defense was offered by Bilinkas.

4. Given 3, Taylor did not permit Bilinkas to argue a theory of self defense to the jury in his summation.

Barisone didn’t remember anything so logic dictates he could not prove or testify to self defense.

My words stand.

No, your words that “Taylor did not allow self defense” do not stand.

You are now saying that due to the memory loss, Barisone was unable to present evidence of self defense, as in my point 3.

Barisone pled self defense and it didn’t fly because no evidence of self defense was provided, perhaps because of Barisone’s memory loss. While Taylor did not permit Bilinkas to argue a theory of self defense without having provided any evidence that is was self defense, he did not prevent Barisone from pleading, or submitting evidence, that it was self defense.

Sure Jan. Go on the hamster wheel yourself. While you work out your body on the wheel maybe you can do a stint at Google U and further convince yourself you’re right. You seem to need that so very bad.

I can see how LK got the ethics she has. It’s familial. These same ethics draw in people likewise endowed. So you are with the group in which you belong. Kudos.

Oh and BTW you’re still wrong. Spin, hamster, spin!!

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

@hut-ho78

@CurrentlyHorseless

Some people can look at their scars and be reminded that that was the surgery that they voluntarily undertook to save their life. Others look at the scar and are reminded that an insane man tried to kill them.

But, definitely, you’re the “brave” one, VHM. (Sarcasm)

You nailed it.

Tell me, oh wise ones…

If a woman has to “choose” to undergo surgery to remove both her breasts in order to have ANY chance of surviving a medical diagnosis…

And she really wants to live, because she has two VERY small children (not even in kindergarten yet) who will be left to grow up without any mother…

Is that surgery really “voluntary” ?

But by all means, continue with the sarcastic comments if you want. You two certainly reveal quite a bit about yourselves in terms of character and intellect with this particular bit of nonsense.

https://media4.giphy.com/media/XoM5mucec1WV7kvJRo/giphy.gif?cid=2154d3d7ppu75prfupti4bopxgd42qnlx851oideur6oeb80&rid=giphy.gif&ct=g

I have not had breast cancer.

If I did have breast cancer, I would definitely choose to have the recommended treatment, surgery, chemotherapy, radiation, the works, and I would be grateful that such lifesaving treatment was available, despite the nausea, the hair loss, and the scars. Breast cancer sucks. Lifesaving treatment is something one should be grateful for.

I don’t think choosing to undergo a lifesaving treatment, or posting about it while taunting and insulting the mother of a woman whose mastectomy/ partial mastectomy / surgical repair was caused by gunshot wounds, is “brave”. [That’s the version without the sarcasm, if you prefer.]

Yes, voluntary surgery is voluntary even if virtually all rational people would choose to undergo it to save their life.