I think @CurrentlyHorseless has become the self appointed water carrier for the Kanareks. She’s gaining their attention by fighting their battles for them. Cute and, again, sad.
17 Likes
Not necessarily. Without forensic evidence, verdicts come from story telling. Every lawyer who has ever argued a case tells a story.
14 Likes
It may be a clerical thing, after 10 years or so, stuff gets moved in the system or the DA issues orders that stuff gets delisted or tossed out at 10 years, with minimal records left in the system. There’s a girl in my neighborhood - very much like LK - with a bunch of criminal and misdemeanor charges from the early 2000’s and early 2010’s that have been removed from the state public records, but are still listed in the local court records.
8 Likes
I believe what I have is in NC. Send me a PM so I can PM you back when I find it later if you would be so kind
5 Likes
No doubt. As will the manufacturers of the vehicle the gunman drove to the scene, the dealership he bought or leased it from, the manufacturers of the firearms and ammo, the gun stores or dealers where he acquired them, etc.
As to whether a judge or jury will assign liability to those entities - that is a far stretch and a very slippery slope to go down. I mean, why not also sue the mayor and the city council and the governor? Heck, sue the President while you are at it.
But then, nothing would surprise me in CA. That state has more nutcases running the legal system than NJ - and that is saying something.
1 Like
Wow the Crims system sure is updated from when I used to run them in the 80s
7 Likes
Is Mr. Bilinkas involved in the civil trial?
1 Like
From my experience, it’s totally normal to name anyone and their dog in a suit. As the suit moves forward through the system, names are dropped off as liability is assigned to each party.
Property owners can carry some liability, which is why they should carry insurance.
As for this case - yet to be determined as we await the facts.
2 Likes
Well, that was certainly an interesting read.
Couple points.
Long before the jury ever gets to apportioning liability or whatever phrase we are using, Lauren Kanarek, the Plaintiff, has the burden to prove the elements of the case against each individual defendant. Specifically, she has to prove each of them, individually, owed her a duty, and breached the duty, which caused her damages and losses (if any). She has made very specific claims in her suit, and none of them include the bolded below(bolding mine) possibly because Michael Barisone, as part of SGF, had the right to lease property to himself.
At any rate, proving her claims starts with discovery. If she and her family/witnesses, Jonathan and Kirby Kanarek, don’t start participating in the suit she brought, we are never going to get to a trial.
Assuming they do start providing discovery, personally, I can see SGF moving for dismissal or summary judgment, as Mr Silver has pled that they just might do after LK’s deposition.
But, assuming something makes it to trial on LK’s claims. She has the burden of proof. None of the defendants have to assert a single thing until she’s finished presenting her case.
Conversely, if she doesn’t participate in discovery, and her claims are dismissed, MB still has his claims out there and the penalty for LK not participating in discovery there could be a judgment in MB’s favor.
If her case survives this part of discovery, it sure is going to be interesting to see if her mental health experts are available and ready for depositions to testify to her mental state pre- and post- incident, as is required by the Negligent and Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress claims she has alleged against each defendant.
43 Likes
Along those lines - my brother lost his driver’s license for three years because he was pulled over in our hometown for a broken taillight after leaving a bar at 1:30 AM on a Saturday morning. He had met some friends there after work, where he ate a cheeseburger and some fries and drank three beers over the course of four hours. Trooper says he smelled alcohol on him so did a sobriety test, which my brother failed as he is very knock-kneed due to a congenital leg malformation and has trouble walking a straight line no matter if he has been drinking or not. His record as pulled from STATE databases was spotless - but he had had a DUI some 30 years previous (when he was in his early 20s), and it was STILL in the CITY’S database. So he got clobbered by the judge. It cost him over $9000 in legal fees, and my mother had to drive him to work every day and he had to either go to church every Sunday or do weekly community service - for three years.
4 Likes
Yes he is.
1 Like
That’s wonderful. Love him.
2 Likes
So in the Krol hearing, Simring said that Greystone was not a good option for MB but Judge T disagreed and said Greystone was a good option. At the next hearing, if it was revealed that MB did not receive the treatment recommended and the judge would still want to keep him there, how would he justify that since he thought it was a good option.
If he doesn’t release him saying he is still a danger then clearly it was not a good option and isnt likely to be one for the future.
I just hope that this time MB gets released so he can receive proper treatment.
30 Likes
I was going to point out the absurdity of this statement, but @trubandloki beat me to it. MB did not need an ‘invitation’ to go to his own home, esp. one that was supposed to be empty by order of the fire inspector. Utterly ridiculous.
36 Likes
I think the Judge feels he has no obligation or need to justify his rulings to anyone. That’s the impression I get.
I’m curious if it is possible to FOIA emails to the Judge. Has JK emailed Taylor, similar to how he emailed Sceusi? One wonders.
14 Likes
It is hard to believe that Jonathan Kanarek @Inigo-montoya just randomly started emailing judges with that email to the judge in the civil case. I would guess he has a long history of doing it.
24 Likes
It’s every bit as plausible as the one you keep presenting as fact.
9 Likes
Your idol? Perhaps not, but all I had after the linked post was “Eeew”. And you’re still on that hill.
MB Civil Trial: JK/KK Contempt of Court? - Dressage - Chronicle Forums (chronofhorse.com)
16 Likes
Thank you @Pocket_Rocket! I ran out of time and could not find that post. I knew there was something out there like that.
Here, I took a screen shot of the amazing post that Pocket_Rocket linked to in case you don’t want to go wandering into that older thread.
23 Likes
For someone who claims not to have any inside knowledge about the Kanareks you sure seem confident in your knowledge of LKs background. How odd…
34 Likes
