I am still very curious about Kirby Kanarek (@Seeker1) and Jonathan Kanarek (@Inigo-montoya) and their involvement in the illegal recordings and how that might come into play with the counter claim.
I keep thinking about how the transcripts practically prove by their existence what the NJ law says not to do, so…how does Lauren Kanarek wiggle out? And does it mean that Mom and Pops might be added?
9 Likes
You know, I wonder about this too. How many times can you say, I lied, and have a jury believe you?
Can Kirby Kanarek say all those posts on here about hearing and transcribing the audios were lies? All of Lauren’s post on so many platforms, about who she’s let hear the tapes or read the transcripts were lies? And…JK/IM was also lying when he talked about the content of the audios on CoTH?
This particular counterclaim seems like quite a problem.
26 Likes
Lying on social media carries zero consequences in a court of law unless a jury comes to believe its a heinous thing. What matters far more is lying in court and during depositions or other sworn events.
If I had to guess there are people who believe only suckers tell the 100% truth on social media and that there should be no expectation of any social media comment ever being truthful.
For the record I don’t believe that way. My word is my word.
17 Likes
The percentages DO add up to 100. You are conflating two different pies - “Liability Pie” and “Money Pie”, if I understand things correctly.
Legal 
folks, correct me if I am wrong, but since my horse threw a shoe and my Internet is down, here is how I understand what has been explained.
For each issue, you’re looking at a liability pie and a money pie, and both add up to 100%:
ETA: I don’t know why I wrote “neglicence” and not “negligence” - I think I forgot the descender on the G!
27 Likes
Right.
But when asked about the recordings/posts in the criminal trial, LK’s answer was, she lied. It’s just social media.
Is that an adequate defense in front of another jury?
12 Likes
Yup.
And that’s why people who are in the middle of a criminal or civil legal kerfluffle shouldn’t be talking about it with people other than their own attorneys or spouses.
Humans being humans though, sometimes people talk to their own friends. I get that.
But should someone write things on the internet about it all?
No. Definitely not.
Should they have participated in a public discussion forum, and talked about all these details of their situation?
DEFINITELY not.
But the Kanareks couldn’t resist the temptation. Which is absolutely wild. People warned them over and over, for years on these threads, that all the talking was a BAD idea. But the Kanareks were/are positive they are smarter than everyone else, and everyone else is wrong.
And here it all is now.
Oh well. If it goes to trial, maybe they will get lucky and a jury will find them sympathetic and think that the wiretapping law really shouldn’t be so punitive with respect to the damages it outlines. You never know.
12 Likes
I’m having flashbacks of studying for the clerks test now.
9 Likes
LOL, but did I get it right?
5 Likes
Oh my your drawing is so much better than mine!
And yes!
Liability pie for each individual defendant, and money pie at the end each add up to 100%.
21 Likes
I have a side gig maintaining a customer database. There isn’t a day that goes by that I’m not amazed by what I can find out about someone with basic Google search skills and publicly available databases.
Someone’s prior bad acts are absolutely out there and can be found by someone with an internet connection and a modest amount of persistence.
17 Likes
This is a brilliant analogy.
And… I’m now hungry. Pie is pretty much my favorite dessert. Dutch apple crumb, to be specific.
8 Likes
Oh I would 100% tell this new jury that. So that they think it’s a heinous thing. A grifter who does what they can get away with. A person whose word is not their honor. And then send that message home with the story of how LK tried to bamboozle someone’s life, property, honor, reputation and freedom to hell all because she couldn’t be teachers pet and was told to get the hell out and sought revenge to FINISH THE BASTARD.
Oh how the jury will LOVE hearing that and imagining themselves in MBs position.
22 Likes
Also should add that from my understanding, MONEY PIE (aka damages) could be free, no? Meaning there are no damages awarded to the prevailing party (the pie is worthless to the recipient and free to the losing party) if there is no basis for them (i.e. no loss of income, enjoyment, etc.). Correct?
And with that, I just learned I have another horse on my schedule so I’m out. I look forward to another few hundred posts to catch up on after I get home from NJ. Lol.
12 Likes
Have a good time riding!
5 Likes
Correct. If the jury decides there are no actual damages, the money pie is essentially free.
Have fun!
6 Likes
Thanks, @Virginia_Horse_Mom and @ekat! Pre-New Years, leaving at this hour for the barn would be normal. Now it’s stressing me out that it’s so late!! Sticking to my resolutions…
6 Likes
Yes, I keep coming back to exactly this. Five random people on a jury of six hearing all of this and imagining themselves in this muck.
7 Likes
Wow! Your skills are crazy good! That is an amazing graphic!
8 Likes
But… You can’t say that was a lie when there is a filed report with what you claim is your transcript in it.
Did the Kanarek family actually send recordings/transcripts to SS? Did they actually send recordings/transcripts to AK?
7 Likes
I don’t reach in. I’m not stupid. I pulled them apart. It was a very large mixed breed and a pitbull. The mixed breed started it and it was him I pulled off. Someone else pulled the pitty out of harm’s way. I’ve never been bitten. Ever. OTOH, I have been kicked in the face, run over, stepped on and bitten by horses, so…
3 Likes
