Well, she certainly isn’t going to achieve recognition and a place on a national team if she doesn’t put in the time to practice and bother to show.
shrugs
Surely she has the free time to sit for the depositions for the lawsuit SHE BROUGHT.
10 Likes
Umm… I think I’ll just leave that one alone.
3 Likes
From Nancy Jaffer’s most recent report:
“At issue this morning were remarks by Taylor about the change in Barisone’s appearance from his trial to his last Krol hearing. Attorney Chris Deininger, who appeared for Barisone with attorney Edward Bilinkas, contended those comments reflected what Kanarek had written in a letter to the court. Deininger maintained that document “contained inflammatory falsehoods.”
He believes it “puts a taint on the proceedings,” explaining, “a letter like that cannot be unread.”
Deininger told Taylor, “Even a conscientious jurist like yourself, your honor, can’t eliminate from the consciousness what that letter presented.”
Taylor responded, “I have no idea what was said in that letter…the court did not reference that letter at all in my decision on the Krol hearing.”
The defense is appealing the outcome of that September hearing.
The judge suggested the attorney had “jumped to the conclusion” that “because there is one line in there (the letter) that is somewhat similar to the court decision, the court must have been influenced.”
The judge asked how it tainted the proceedings.
Deininger said “the taint in my view is the public’s perception and it arises from the Krol hearing,” pointing out the judge had noted at that time Barisone “could have had his hair cut, he could have shaved for trial.”
13 Likes
As someone very wisely pointed out upthread, if he did not know what was in the letter, how did he know there was a similar phrase in his decision??? 
31 Likes
Every time I hear this I get angry because the Judge seems to have forgotten (oh so quickly) the problems with getting hair cuts in the jail at that time, because of the covid protocols and lock downs.
33 Likes
Exactly. He didn’t read the letter, he did read the letter. Since only one of those statements can be true, the other is a falsehood.
How does a judge get away with that kind of nonsense? 
34 Likes
It makes me wonder what was in the letter that LK sent to the court. Per Deininger, “contained inflammatory falsehoods.”
17 Likes
Clearly Judge Taylor uses the same type of honesty that the Kanarek family uses.
#jonathankanarek
#kirbykanarek
#laurenkanarek
#lalapoprider
#liars
#prooftheyareliars
#contempt
#finishthebastard
17 Likes
Yes. And keep MB incarcerated in hopes he will break down in despair and therefore have to stay locked up for a very long time. 
13 Likes
Yes and drain his financial resources.
7 Likes
Which seems very counter productive to the Kanarek goal of getting lots of money out of him.
16 Likes
Apparently Taylor believes that the Krol guidelines are exactly that - guidelines. And it is his prerogative as Judge to follow them or not. He is applying those guidelines as he sees fit, which means we will see more flip-flopping in coming hearings.
And since he obviously has no concerns about straying outside the guidelines, it makes me wonder if that is SOP in that state regarding Krol. “Yeah, it’s on the books, but judges don’t get slapped down for not adhering to it, so we can drive outside the lanes if we want to as long we stay on the roadway.”
16 Likes
Nancy Jaffers noted the dramatic change in MB’s appearance in both articles, before she gets to the judge addressing it. SInce the issue at his trial was whether he was insane at the time of the event, and not whether he was mentally competent to stand at trial, I dont see how his appearance at trial would be relevant except to show: 1) he was depressed and/or lacked grooming tools; and /or 2) it was a strategy by his lawyers (*edited to add-*or a combination of the two)–but his appearance at trial would not be evidence of his mental state at the time of the event.
If the shoe was on the other foot- and MB’s appearance was used against him at trial and his appearance was not trial strategy -would not having proper grooming tools be a due process violation?(That has probably been litigated and why defendants do not have to appear in prison jumpsuits before the jury.)
14 Likes
Maybe it has started to dawn on the Ks that they would be better off getting a little money out of him instead of owing him a gigantic fortune, depending on how things play out.
4 Likes
Since Taylor thinks the public should see and hear everything, I want “the letter” made public! You know it is filled with steaming BS.
31 Likes
Nancy’s article also seemed to reference comments from Dr. Simring about MBs change in appearance from the trial to the last Krol hearing. I assume that the September hearing is the source of these Simring comments, given that Simring testified at that hearing…
The judge said Simring did comment that the issue was, “did the actions of the defendant and his appearance result from the mental illness or from something else?” Taylor asked whether the change in appearance was “the result of improvement in Mr. Barisone’s mental state or is it something else?”
Taylor wondered whether Barisone’s appearance during the trial was “a mannerism simply unconnected to the underlying mental illness that resulted in the acquittal. Dr. Simring seems to suggest that it did not relate to the delusional disorder but to the other diagnosis of depression.”
Anyway… if I am reading this correctly, it seems like Dr. Simring raised the possibility at the last Krol hearing that the dramatic change in MB’s appearance was in part due to an alleviation of depression symptoms. One can imagine he was very depressed during the trial in 2022, when he was facing possible decades in prison . But… he may have been considerably less depressed by last September.
20 Likes
I totally hear you.
If MBs private mental health issues should be made public… the same argument can apply to any letters that LK chooses to send to Judge Taylor. MB is no longer a “defendant.” He was acquitted. He is now a private citizen who has been committed by the state of NJ following a series of events. His right to personal privacy should be on par with LKs at this point.
Here’s the relevant passage from Nancy Jaffer’s report:
The judge pointed out so much about Barisone already has been aired through live streaming and the media that “I feel the horse has already left the barn.” Citing the fact that it is “a very unique case” in regard to the extent of the international attention it has received, he believes the courtroom should be open for future hearings.
“To close it would lead to a great deal of suspicion,” he said, in denying the motion.
9 Likes
Isn’t the purpose if the Krol hearings to show the mental health of the person currently since a requirement is made that the expert’s evaluations need to be made within a set timeframe of the hearings?
12 Likes
Yes. 100%.
It has nothing to do with what their mental health was six months, nine months, 2 years before.
Judge Taylor is making up his own rules.
26 Likes
Maybe Deininger will quote the letter in a future filing. Maybe letters should be sent to Taylor by Lauren’s previous victims, you know, attesting to her great character. I believe that would fall into the same lane, don’t you?
12 Likes
