(A) All that kind of info and much more is available online from public sources.
(B) Is anybody contacting Guy Goodwin, his employees, his family, his business contacts or his friends? Talking about him is not harassing him. And this seems like as a time as any for our regular scheduled reminder: discussing someone’s actual words and actions is not “bashing” them
No. I consider it speculation. ETA: also, nobody tried to pin it on you.
Well, we know that as of September 6th, 2022, SGF had received 38,000+ pages of “public bulletin board material” via subpoena.
I imagine it’s ongoing.
Honestly, Lauren Kanarek has posted enough under her own name on YT to seriously damage her case. I’m not sure I’d pay to subpoena the BobAbooey stuff with what she’s thrown out there about audios, transcripts, etc under her own name. But it would be pretty funny - in an absurd kind of way. Like, it’s just almost unbelievable.
Hiieee, Inigo!
I would like to take this time to say that LK used this same flawed logic with the ear witness and 911. She tried to claim that one corroborated the other….but in fact, no, the conversations happened separately over the phone. No corroboration.
I find it fascinating to note specific patterns related to the timing of certain posts.
Seriously damage her case? Some of those YT posts were more like she blithely poured gasoline all over it - and all that is needed now is one small spark…
I’m picturing Mr Bilinkas with a lighter right now…. 
Out of curiosity, did anyone ever follow the comments on that psychologist’s YouTube video - the guy who profiled her and talked about narcissism? I can’t remember his name.
Anyway, I thought that video got a lot of traffic. It wouldn’t surprise me if ‘Bob’ or ‘Jumping Queen’ or some other similar sock puppet appeared in the comments and started arguing with people in defense of Lollypop.
In rewatching these cross exams of Lauren, I have questions. Do you think her bizarre behavior is a result of being on drugs (many people on YouTube thing so), being not very bright, or just trying to avoid the questions?
Also, I missed her taunting RC about a missing gun. When and where was that? That seems like something pretty significant with regards to the trial and who actually had possession of the gun.
Hi VHM, that was “Dr. Grande” and now I’m going to have another look at the comments!
For anyone, being on the stand under oath is nerve-wracking, for sure.
Having to explain things like the Manifesto would add a great deal to that stress. Not remembering the versions of the story you have put out in the world would also increase that stress. Also, trying to think on the spot about which version is the best to pull out of your hat would be pretty tough. Add that stress to the arrogance that screams through her posts, and you’re going to get bizarre.
Many, many YT viewers said drugs. That certainly wouldn’t help anyone be clearheaded.
The bizarre thing about “I don’t recall” if used by LK in a deposition for this case, is that she is the plaintiff. “I don’t recall” won’t be helping her move forward in her quest for monetary damages.
If the case does make it to trial (I have no idea how judges feel about uncooperative plaintiffs), for each one of her “I don’t recall” answers, LK will have her memory “refreshed” by the defense.
That was not a good look in the criminal trial and it will probably look a whole lot worse in the civil one, where the defense can really let loose with what they’ve got.
Look at what she has in front of her during her time on the stand. Sugary drinks, specifically Ginger Ale. In studies, Opiate use has been linked to the desire to consume sugary food and drink, because the sugar consumption triggers the same receptors as Opiates and produces dopamine, albeit not as intensely.
It will be years before the civil trials begin. Hell, it took three years for the criminal trial, which he won, BTW. Hopefully Michael will have been released to resume his life long before that. Musings and circular discussions on these threads are meaningless except for entertainment purposes. Nothing argued here will be resolved will it? Ironic, eh?
Just watched the next day when she claimed that JH had “stolen” her phone to pass the buck. Yeah, he did that twice. 
It was a post LK put in the comments of something on RC’s FB page. It was posted after she woke up in the hospital.
The contents included:
Claims of a recording of RC and Barisone’s conversation of when the gun was exchanged and placed in the safe and that there are transcripts (I think it implied one she had made in addition to an official forensic ones to be made in conjunction with the case).
Rants about RC’s part in the conspiracy to commit murder by knowingly giving her gun the MB so he can do the deed.
Argues in the alternative that it is negligent to allow the gun to go missing and endanger two 12 year olds.
Number 3 is what I think is incredibly interesting considering:
CPS was there to investigate negligence claims that were generated by whatever it was that LK said to SS. And the attempt to place that blame on JH in the trial…
The searches for MHG’s kids locations.
The claims that there was a plot to harm Barisone and others on the farm.
The K pushed false narrative that RG was a hero that stopped Barisone before he could go harm the rest of the people on the farm.
My vote is all of the above.
If the civil suit ever makes it to trial (I think that’s unlikely), she’s likely to do worse on the stand. Different rules, and more latitude allowed during questioning.
She would have been better off just answering the question and not going off on the “stolen phone” excuse.
It really is painful to watch her dig such holes for herself.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
