Michael/ Lauren civil trial update February 9

[Ambitious_Kate]

Oh, honey the percentages. Just because you win money based on a percentage of how much you or he is responsible, doesn’t mean you get to lump different people together to add up their percentages. Are you that ignorant? LOL

[Maria]

IMO not a creepy and disgusting as RG googling MHG’s kids to try to find out where there were.

[trubandloki]

@CurrentlyHorseless

Who has ever failed to condemn LKs SM post to GirlJoey?

Your favorite poster!

Who claimed it was just a spat between ladies.

[eggbutt]

There are a handful of CoTH posters who I respect and Uber trust due to their knowledge and facts. @LexInVA is among that handful. Anyone want to argue with me?

[eggbutt]

Thank you!

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@ekat

@CurrentlyHorseless

My example is an example, so please explain how an example can be “wrong”.

If

Your example is wrong because you are starting with a faulty premise. Each defendant is an individual defendant, defending individual claims. There is no collective defendant.

Maybe my really bad artwork will help.

OK. Are you tripling down on your statement that LK will recover zip if in the three separate cases, none of the individual defendants is responsible for over 51%, even if LK was found to be 0% responsible in all three cases?

BTW an example does not have a premise.

[Knights_Mom]

[eggbutt]

@ekat! Please don’t respond anymore! You have gone above and beyond explaining in the finest detail and will continue to be met with meaningless arguments because they enjoy arguing.

[Ambitious_Kate]

@CurrentlyHorseless

I’m not into cyberstalking. I suppose I could be

Nobody would ever accuse you of cyberstalking. It requires critical evaluation skills.

[trubandloki]

@ekat, I love your drawings. And nothing is better than a “random flower”.

You make what seemed like a simple concept the way it was already explained, even more simple with your great drawings.

[cutter99]

@ekat

@CurrentlyHorseless

My example is an example, so please explain how an example can be “wrong”.

If

Your example is wrong because you are starting with a faulty premise. Each defendant is an individual defendant, defending individual claims. There is no collective defendant.

Maybe my really bad artwork will help.

Incredible work @ekat!

I proclaim ekat the winner of the Interwebz today! All hail ekat!

[eggbutt]

Yeah, “someone” went back well over 8+ years of random posts looking for me. It’s all good. Most of us have nothing to hide!

[Ambitious_Kate]

@CurrentlyHorseless

OK. Are you tripling down on your statement that LK will recover zip if in the three separate cases, none of the individual defendants is responsible for over 51%, even if LK was found to be 0% responsible in all three cases?

YES! Collective means nothing! Get it¿???

[eggbutt]

What a total cutie!

[Knights_Mom]

@eggbutt

Yeah, “someone” went back well over 8+ years of random posts looking for me. It’s all good. Most of us have nothing to hide!

Or contacting people because they dated someone

[ZuzusPetals]

I was incorrect. MB had attempted a self-defense argument but the judge ruled there wasn’t enough evidence to support.

[MHM]

@cutter99

Incredible work @ekat!

I proclaim ekat the winner of the Interwebz today! All hail ekat!

Huzzah!!

[trubandloki]

@CurrentlyHorseless, here is your favorite posters thoughts on what Lauren Kanarek did about the drowned baby incident.

He certainly does not condemn his daughter’s actions.

[DownYonder]

@MHM

Plus Spot could have been sitting still. Just because he was told to run doesn’t mean he did it. Maybe he’s a beagle who always does the opposite of what he’s told.

Hound or terrier, for sure.

[MHM]

JK called someone else a known grifter? Interesting.