Yes, that’s why BigMama gets under my skin. The condescension. I can easily imagine other posters developing animosity toward her as a poster. I’m not defending the emails, but I can see it happening.
2 Likes
No. You just attempted to explain away and minimize the issue of adult drug addicts with arrest records for multiple violent assaults when it comes to cyberstalking minors.
25 Likes
Funniest post award.
18 Likes
Stop being condescending Trubs. She gets sensitive about that. It hurts her feelings.
But… it’s ok for her to call breast cancer survivors cowards. We don’t have feelings.
These are the rules. If we don’t accept these rules… ‘someone’ will flag our posts and try to get the mods to lock the thread.
25 Likes
But…
I gave her a trophy.
Everyone wants a trophy.
Is a trophy not good enough?
I do not get why they will not discuss known things with us. I gave them a list to choose from.
13 Likes
Thank you for posting that.
How did you manage to find that?
The “profile” for Jonthan Kanarek does not come up when you search under JKs actual name, Jonathan Kanarek.
Aside from the name being misspelled, did it seem suspicious to you that what you’ve posted there is the entire profile— there is no education or work history, or connections, or skills?
It’s obviously a fake profile.
I wonder who posted it.
3 Likes
She doesn’t want a trophy. She wants respect.
3 Likes
Funny, because I have never found @BigMama1 to be condescending. Must be some sort of projection on your part @CurrentlyHorseless!
BigMama1 has been a wonderful contributor on this forum for many years. She has a tendency to see things very clearly, and her writing style is concise and accurate. Not condescending.
And yes, you are defending the emails by calling her condescending and saying that you can see how other posters would have an issue with her.
It is a shame you let your own insecurities cloud your judgement.
Nice try but no win! But, I am sure you are used to that by now!
32 Likes
I would love to think so, being the optimistic sort that I am.
But based on LO’s updates, how could they even assess if he’s not getting any treatment? So then would they just deny his release and say stay longer? For what purpose if he’s not getting treatment.
That whole situation just boggles my mind.
24 Likes
At some point you have to think the judge will have to acknowledge that he can’t require treatment that isn’t offered?
16 Likes
But…
It is a very shiny trophy.
And her post made me laugh very hard.
8 Likes
I would think so but this whole process has defied logic, to me. So who knows what will happen?
8 Likes
I have no idea if it’s a fake profile or not, and no reason to assume someone else posted it.
Why do you think someone would create a fake profile for JK on Linked In?
I think that’s a bit of a leap.
12 Likes
I think this is more logical than Judge Taylor has shown himself to be.
13 Likes
I think the most likely release situation involves the staff at Greystone writing reports that indicate MB seems stable, and a low risk to himself or others.
If there is a report that says something like this at this hearing, and Judge Taylor ignores it… that will be very unfair. But… if there is another hearing in another 3-6 months, and yet another report from the actual psychiatric staff at the facility noting yet again that MB is a low risk…
I would imagine Taylor will release MB from Greystone to a less restrictive setting at that time. How can he not? I’m not sure what the options might be when it comes to a less restrictive setting though… 
5 Likes
See, that’s what bothers me about this whole thing. At the last Krol hearing, the expert witnesses that were there said he should be released. And the judge chose to send him off to this place that has more than one pending lawsuit against it for some of the same reasons a class action suit was settled in 2020 - overcrowding, lack of staffing, lack of treatment. And said hospital, based on public records and more lawsuits, still isn’t following that 2020 settlement.
The fact that Judge T had two psychiatrists saying Michael was no danger to himself or others and should be released, and chose to send him there anyway hurts my head.
48 Likes
As ekat just wrote, that’s what happened in the first Krol hearing where staff at Anne Klein recommended he was low risk. Yet the judge decided otherwise.
17 Likes
No. I have never condoned cyberstalking minors, or cyberstalking anyone.
On the specific issue of Deininger saying that RG had “friended” MHGs children, I said that if it had occurred in 2018 when the whole group was living in the farmhouse in apparent peace it could be benign, but if it occurred in July or August 2019 when tensions were high it was inexcusable.
I trust Deininger to present a benign act as nefarious if he possibly can.
MB and MHG agreed to a situation in which LK and RG lived in the farmhouse, where the children would have been in contact with them IRL when they visited. Obviously they regretted that decision. But given that real life living situation which appeared to work well in the summer of 2018, I would not find a “friending” on SM creepy if it occurred in that context.
I’m assuming someone from Greystone will provide the court with a report regarding an assessment of MB, regardless of whether or not they are providing MB actual treatment. I would imagine this is somewhat a matter of CYA on Greystone’s part, since they have already been sued for not providing patients adequate treatment…
11 Likes
In 2018, MHGs kids were 12 years old, and younger, I think.
In 2018, RG was apparently still struggling with drug addiction, and still had an arrest record as a violent individual who was involved in multiple assaults.
Nothing about an adult male with a background like that, friending s 12 year old child on social media, a child to whom they are unrelated, is “benign” or appropriate. NOTHING.
44 Likes
