Michael/ Lauren civil trial update February 9

[ekat]

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

think SierraMist speculated yesterday (or maybe it was the day before) that there will be more settlement discussions as soon as discovery is complete

I think it’s just as, if not more likely that motions for dismissal happen if discovery is ever complete.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@cutter99

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

@trubandloki

I also look at the animosity towards LO, the same way I look at the things they have said about MHG. Hurting innocent people who get in their way is just fun for them. They want everyone to look at Lauren as a poor innocent female who is being wronged by the evil man, but then it is OK for them to say horrible things about any female on the other side of the aisle.
They have done some really low things during all of this. But their latest attacks on LO are lower than low. It is them showing their true colors.

I think you are touching on something important here. A few additional thoughts though…

As @skydy so simply and eloquently put it last night… these people are out of their depth.

They seem to have settled on the label “gunshot victim” to describe Lauren. She has hash tagged Instagram posts with that, and seems to want to link her shooting to the issue of gun violence in general. It comes across to me as a clumsy attempt at PR, not a sincere concern for the issue of gun violence. After all… Lauren herself has posted about her own weapons, has communicated threats on Facebook with language about ‘weapons hot’, and has an arrest on her record for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, because (according to the counterclaim filed by MB’s attorneys) she actually discharged a firearm in RGs direction and at his motorcycle while she was in a fit of rage.

However, following the shooting on 08/07/19, LK and her family seem to believe that she is entitled to claim the label of “gunshot victim” - and she should be free from all criticisms and scrutiny related to the events that led up to the shooting that day. That’s an interesting tactic, but somewhat clumsy and poorly considered, in my opinion. My first question about all this is… who exactly qualifies as a “gunshot victim?” I pushed on CH about this in an earlier comment. Does an aggressor who was shot during a legitimate self defense situation count as a “gunshot victim?” How about someone who was willfully engaged in violent altercation with another person who was carrying a weapon… and the weapon accidentally discharged, and one person was injured? Is the injured person in that situation a “gunshot victim?”

And then there is the issue of her past conduct that I have noted, her reckless statements, and her previous attitudes towards gun ownership. I question the sincerity and depth of her concern about issues related to gun violence.

I will admit, I am drawing a fine line on this particular term, and challenging her use of it, and the fact is that she did indeed suffer significant injuries from the gunshot. But I think it’s important to draw a fine line sometimes, and not go around wielding a politically and emotionally loaded term like a useful public relations cudgel. It’s irresponsible and tone deaf. She seems to be using the term right now for personal gain in the realm of public sentiment, in order to demand sympathy, while simultaneously avoiding all scrutiny & accountability for her own actions. That’s not ok, and that’s not actually helpful when speaking about the broader societal issue of gun violence. There are real gunshot victims out there… people who were shot in violent and frightening situations that were CLEARLY not their fault. LK’s situation is much more complex. If we accept the verdict from the criminal trial, and the testimony provided by expert witnesses that lead to that verdict… her actions with respect to the mental torture of MB caused his psychological breakdown, and the psychological breakdown was a key causal factor of the shooting. Given that, is LK still a victim in the true sense of the word? I’m not so sure.

What is crystal clear is that LK sees an opportunity when it comes to adopting the LABEL of ‘victim.’ Simultaneously, she and her family and supporters continue to victimize others. There is a clear pattern of online harassment when it comes to those who are close to MB. First it was MHG, and now it’s LO.

So again… I question the sincerity and depth of their commitment to all sorts of victims’ issues and concerns. But… as has been noted… it’s pretty clear the Kanareks are out of their depth now, and stumbling and grasping at straws as this civil suit moves forward.

QFPing because this needs to be seen repeatedly throughout every Barisone thread. Every. Single. Damn. Thread.

Mic drop @Virginia_Horse_Mom! Loud applause!!!

Wow. I hadn’t seen that post of VHM. Thanks for reposting it, @cutter99.

I started referring to LK as a “gunshot victim” simply because the Barisone apologists stated that she wasn’t a crime victim, because there was no crime. They were correct on that point - no crime was committed since Barisone was found NGRI.

She was shot by a gun, and nearly killed, so “gunshot victim” seems pretty darn obvious and technically accurate, and doesn’t run afoul of inaccurately referring to a crime. That’s why I refer to her as a gunshot victim rather than as just “a victim”.

If we want to tie this to the civil trial, I disagree with your argument that LK caused and is responsible for her own shooting because she caused MBs insanity. Your post is by far the most eloquent version of victim blaming I’ve seen. The victim being blamed in this case is a gunshot victim, not a crime victim.

RC is one of the defendants. It seems likely that LK would not have been shot if the gun were not ready to hand (of a mentally unstable person). This tragedy does speak to the dangers snd horrors of the US gun culture. But in your (generally uncompensated) narrative, it’s LK, not the person who shot her or the person who illegally provided the gun who is responsible.

But it’s an impressive post, VHM.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

Correct me if I’m wrong, but it would be entirely up to the judge as to whether or not they grant a motion to dismiss part or all of the claims and counterclaims… correct?

Is there an appeal process that could play out with respect to a judge’s ruling on motions to dismiss? Or… would appeals wait until the entire case had gone through an actual trial, subsequent to any and all rulings on motions to dismiss some or all of the claims and counterclaims?

I hope my questions make sense.

[ohnoO]

@ekat

Only if Mom and Dad are subpoena’d as witnesses.

Oooh, there is that “s” word again!

Thanks for all your replies.

[ekat]

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

Correct me if I’m wrong, but it would be entirely up to the judge as to whether or not they grant a motion to dismiss part or all of the claims and counterclaims… correct?

Is there an appeal process that could play out with respect to a judge’s ruling on motions to dismiss? Or… would appeals wait until the entire case had gone through an actual trial, subsequent to any and all rulings on motions to dismiss some or all of the claims and counterclaims?

I hope my questions make sense.

I think it makes sense, yes.

And yes, it’s up to the judge to rule on any motions to dismiss.

Any Court order can be appealed during the appropriate time frame For That Order.

For example:

SGF files motion for summary judgment and dismissal for their part.

Judge Grants said motions.

LK can then appeal those rulings.

And the judge could maybe issue a stay on the remaining suit during that appeal.

Does that answer your questions?

[ekat]

You’re welcome!

[Knights_Mom]

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

That depends entirely on whether or not there even is a trial. I think SierraMist speculated yesterday (or maybe it was the day before) that there will be more settlement discussions as soon as discovery is complete. Apparently SM is a practicing attorney.

Yes I saw that. So it made me curious in multiple ways.

[StB.YM]

If say, only one party gets a summary judgement in their favor, say SGF in this case, and then the entire case is later dismissed without prejudice, if the plaintiff chooses to refile the case at a later date, does that then open SGF up again to another suit? Or does the original judgment absolve them from being included again?

Also, if say this case gets dismissed without prejudice, can it even get relitigated again at a later date or is there a statute of limitations that would restrict the timeframe this could happen in?

[MHM]

@Knights_Mom

I must admit I’m married to Amazon. Just the way it is.

I’m not married to it, but I have flings more often than I care to admit. Lol.

[ekat]

@StB.YM

If say, only one party gets a summary judgement in their favor, say SGF in this case, and then the entire case is later dismissed without prejudice, if the plaintiff chooses to refile the case at a later date, does that then open SGF up again to another suit? Or does the original judgment absolve them from being included again?

If one defendant wins on summary judgment, the plaintiff can’t sue them again for the same cause of action.

[ekat]

@StB.YM

Also, if say this case gets dismissed without prejudice, can it even get relitigated again at a later date or is there a statute of limitations that would restrict the timeframe this could happen in?

That would depend on how the judge writes the order for dismissal.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

Yes, that helps fill in a lot of blanks!

Thanks Ekat!

[ekat]

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

Yes, that helps fill in a lot of blanks!

Thanks Ekat!

You’re welcome!

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@ekat

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

Correct me if I’m wrong, but it would be entirely up to the judge as to whether or not they grant a motion to dismiss part or all of the claims and counterclaims… correct?

Is there an appeal process that could play out with respect to a judge’s ruling on motions to dismiss? Or… would appeals wait until the entire case had gone through an actual trial, subsequent to any and all rulings on motions to dismiss some or all of the claims and counterclaims?

I hope my questions make sense.

I think it makes sense, yes.

And yes, it’s up to the judge to rule on any motions to dismiss.

Any Court order can be appealed during the appropriate time frame For That Order.

For example:

SGF files motion for summary judgment and dismissal for their part.

Judge Grants said motions.

LK can then appeal those rulings.

And the judge could maybe issue a stay on the remaining suit during that appeal.

Does that answer your questions?

I thought @Virginia_Horse_Mom was asking whether a judge’s ruling denying a motion to dismiss could be appealed after the whole trial had been completed.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

@CurrentlyHorseless

I thought @Virginia_Horse_Mom was asking whether a judge’s ruling denying a motion to dismiss could be appealed after the whole trial had been completed.

Nope. But that’s ok. I probably was imprecise in how I phrased my original question.

[HoolieB]

The summary could begin: “The good news is we have completed the review of the documents. The bad news is we have completed the review of the documents.”

[ekat]

@HoolieB

The summary could begin: “The good news is we have completed the review of the documents. The bad news is we have completed the review of the documents.”

Oh, yes! That would be perfect!

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

Just kidding (in case that wasn’t abundantly clear, given your tendency for being a humorless scold). I don’t actually get compensated in movie passes, or in any other form for any of my comments on the COTH forums.

OK, VHM. The only reason it occurred to me you might be paid is that you asserted that I was either a relative of the Kanareks or being paid, and I’ve said many times I’m not related.

I see projection so darn much on COTH.

The compliment was sincere, however much I disagree with you.

[StB.YM]

@ekat

That would depend on how the judge writes the order for dismissal.

Thank you!

[ekat]

@StB.YM

Thank you!

You’re welcome!