Michael/ Lauren civil trial update February 9

[FitzE]

@BigMama1

Speaking for myself, I don’t believe Michael didn’t shoot Lauren. I also don’t believe he did shoot her. I believe there was not enough physical evidence produced to make a conclusion either way. (Yes CH, I know the criminal trial jury reached a conclusion. We all understand that.) I believe there are a couple of plausible scenarios in which Michael shot her, either accidentally or intentionally. I believe there are several equally plausible scenarios in which Michael did not pull the trigger and may not even have held the gun.

I believe many more details will come to the light in the civil trial, perhaps enough to point conclusively towards one scenario above all others.

This is 100% my stance as well. I don’t know if MB was the shooter. I don’t know this due to the dearth of hard evidence. I can imagine several scenarios including MB being the shooter and not being the shooter. I would not be at peace if my family member had been found even NGRI based on the evidence presented in this case. It is simply too little and too much standard evidence (GSR, DNA, search of all vehicles at the scene, etc.) was not gathered at all. That is my personal position.

In fact, had I been hiding in the bed of the truck (ready to jump out with the shovel?) and knew for a fact that MB came in aggressively threatening and then shot the weapon unprovoked, I would still accept a full acquittal based on the shockingly inadequate lack of evidence gathering (videos on the clould retrieved THAT DAY, all recording devices, JK and RG not allowed to roam the crime scene, apartment, and barn unescorted the next day, etc.).

And I would be pissed as hell. It shocks me to this day that the Kanareks are not upset that the police failed to gather the customary evidence typically gather in order to convict MB on all charges. I would be livid.

[3PonyFarm]

As a non lawyer/legal person I found some of statements in the most recent motions by GAS shocking that he would state that it was burdensome or harassing for his side to provide info to the other side’s client who had been illegally recorded as well as all the other stuff MB went through.

How would a lot of judges react to that kind of comment?

If an attorney said something like that in a trial and I was a juror, that would be a big old strike against their side.

[Knights_Mom]

@3PonyFarm

As a non lawyer/legal person I found some of statements in the most recent motions by GAS shocking that he would state that it was burdensome or harassing for his side to provide info to the other side’s client who had been illegally recorded as well as all the other stuff MB went through.

How would a lot of judges react to that kind of comment?

If an attorney said something like that in a trial and I was a juror, that would be a big old strike against their side.

Saying terms like “overly burdensome” is something many, many court papers say. It’s commonly said, along with terms like “overreaching” etc. It’s common mumbo jumbo excuse talk.

[hut-ho78]

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

Remember, New Jersey has a “repair and deduct” method for renters to make repairs that affect habitability, a landlord responsibility. If either the landlord or the tenant hire a contractor, the contractor has to be registered but the owner and tenant do not. The owner and tenant can perform certain kinds of maintenance so long as they don’t require a licensed professional such as an electrician or plumber. Repairs for Sheetrock, tile, bathroom and kitchen appliance and fixture replacement do not require a license or a registration so long as it is done by the owner or tenant, walls are not moved, wiring and plumbing is not changed, etc.

Show me a rental agreement with RGs signature otherwise your otherwise invalid point is further made moot.

Agreements can be verbal. Also, there is a written eviction notice for all tenants posted above.

[Knights_Mom]

@hut-ho78

@Knights_Mom

@hut-ho78

Remember, New Jersey has a “repair and deduct” method for renters to make repairs that affect habitability, a landlord responsibility. If either the landlord or the tenant hire a contractor, the contractor has to be registered but the owner and tenant do not. The owner and tenant can perform certain kinds of maintenance so long as they don’t require a licensed professional such as an electrician or plumber. Repairs for Sheetrock, tile, bathroom and kitchen appliance and fixture replacement do not require a license or a registration so long as it is done by the owner or tenant, walls are not moved, wiring and plumbing is not changed, etc.

Show me a rental agreement with RGs signature otherwise your otherwise invalid point is further made moot.

Agreements can be verbal. Also, there is a written eviction notice for all tenants posted above.

I used to write eviction notices as part of my job… A name on the notice in no way is a statement of legal tenant status. Indeed many of these notices have included John & Jane Doe, and those are often numbered to boot!

So there’s that.

Also, the formal eviction had to be done for property sales and mortgaging info. I’ve also written a ton of evictions where the plaintiff/petitioner is a mortgage bank and banks hate having to do that so they aim for preempting that.

[Ambitious_Kate]

It would have been correct “made further moot” but further made moot is not incorrect. I’m not exactly sure why. Mostly because “moot” is often used as an adjective “moot point” but can also stand alone, as in “made moot”. As in “was made soft, by the sun”. I don’t know much about that.

[hut-ho78]

@IPEsq

@hut-ho78

@FitzE

@IPEsq

It’s soooo strange that the plaintiff and parties related to the plaintiff are trying to delay so much.

So much this! I’ve never heard of such nonsense particularly from the family of the plaintiff. It’s so rare that it strongly suggests something is seriously wrong plaintiff side. No other reasonable explanation.

I don’t know what y’all think these are delaying tactics. The ones I had to represent my employer on were between 15 and 20 years of back and forth and retrials. It hasn’t yet even been a year since the close of the criminal trial and somewhere in google I read that New Jersey just streamlined it’s civil trials to speed them up to an average of two years time.

I don’t see the parents as 3rd parties delaying the trial by their efforts to avoid being harassed by the defense attorneys.

Typically, the plaintiff wants to move forward with discovery. Sure, some requests can be burdensome or overbroad, in which case usually the receiving party still responds to the requesting party but includes some objections about those interrogatories, requests for production, etc.

I have never personally been involved in anything where a cross motion to quash is filed from the plaintiff for a third party. And often plaintiffs are the ones requesting information and things from potentially related parties. Especially in a case like this where these people supposedly have things to support plaintiff’s case. And motions to quash were denied already?

As plaintiff’s counsel, I’ve filed and won several motions to compel and motions for sanctions (including requests for judgment) against non-compliant defendants. I’ve also had one side flood the other side with documents with a, oh you think this is all irrelevant, well too bad because your request was broad and we are complying. Also all designated attorney’s eyes only to drive up costs for the other side.

There are a lot of discovery games that can be played. And I dislike litigation for this reason. Retrial is a totally separate thing, so not sure why you used that as an example? But I stand by my statement that it is very strange for a plaintiff to object to participating in discovery. I also note that the parents are not the plaintiff so I’m not sure why so called harassment of the plaintiffs is relevant to my statement.

Thank you for your thoughtful response.

[Sdel]

@Knights_Mom

I used to write for a living, eviction notices. A name on the notice in no way is a statement of legal tenant status. Indeed many of these notices have included John & Jane Doe, and those are often numbered to boot!

In fact, people that tenants with a lease let stay for too long do not have an agreement with the landlord and still have to be named and formally evicted despite their lack of lease or other agreement, even a verbal one.

[Knights_Mom]

@Sdel

@Knights_Mom

I used to write for a living, eviction notices. A name on the notice in no way is a statement of legal tenant status. Indeed many of these notices have included John & Jane Doe, and those are often numbered to boot!

In fact, people that tenants with a lease let stay for too long do not have an agreement with the landlord and still have to be named and formally evicted despite their lack of lease or other agreement, even a verbal one.

Exactly.

[hut-ho78]

Yes and even real squatters who just drop a little house on land not their own must be formally evicted if one wants them gone. If the land owner is ok about them staying for a while to say keep an eye on things, it is recommended that they sign an Acknowledgement of Tenancy.

In this instance LK and RG staying at the house and paying board/rent, there is no dispute they were tenants. It may be there was dispute as to the value of the “repair and deduct” agreement and it may not have been strictly according to the letter of the law but that would still be ok so long as the owner and tenant agreed. Changing the barn from strictly animal to mixed people and animal and adding wiring and plumbing would be very problematic. Repairing the house from flood damage, no. The majority of that is removing ruined Sheetrock and insulation, flooring, furniture and appliances, drying out and treating for mold, replacing Sheetrock and insulation, flooring, and appliances. Furthermore, a tenant in New Jersey, if the room, apartment, house, etc. is not habitable and the landlord will not repair it or enter into “repair and deduct agreement, has a legal right to report any condition rendering that space inhabitable to the local building inspector and housing authority. Any retaliation against that tenant by the landlord is illegal.

I also found it interesting that a landlord cannot enter a tenant’s area without permission in a residential lease. RC should not have entered their apartment.

habitablity.pdf

[erinmeri]

@BigMama1

Speaking for myself, I don’t believe Michael didn’t shoot Lauren. I also don’t believe he did shoot her. I believe there was not enough physical evidence produced to make a conclusion either way. (Yes CH, I know the criminal trial jury reached a conclusion. We all understand that.) I believe there are a couple of plausible scenarios in which Michael shot her, either accidentally or intentionally. I believe there are several equally plausible scenarios in which Michael did not pull the trigger and may not even have held the gun.

I believe many more details will come to the light in the civil trial, perhaps enough to point conclusively towards one scenario above all others.

Me too. So many possibilities, so little evidence. And I hope you’re right!! I’m not so positive on us ever learning what really happened.

[hut-ho78]

This is some of the testimony that made it clear to me MB shot LK. Also, the jury finding he shot her, that it was undisputed, RC’s response as she described finding her gun was the weapon, the 911 call, and the demeanor of the character witnesses. I don’t think anyone testifying or participating in the court procedures doubted he shot her.

NJ v. Michael Barisone Trial Day 2 - Mary Gray - Defendant's Girlfriend

43:16 interrupted 3X by MB

NJ v. Michael Barisone Trial Day 3 - Direct/Cross Exam Continues with Ruth Cox -...

RC and CPS

NJ v. Michael Barisone Trial Day 2 - Justin Harden - Dressage Competitor...

RC starts towards the end.

NJ v. Michael Barisone Trial Day 2 - Bryan Bailey - Crime Scene Investigator

LE searched the barn office

Add to these the prosecution and defense mental health experts’ testimony.

[trubandloki]

@hut-ho78

Remember, New Jersey has a “repair and deduct” method for renters to make repairs that affect habitability, a landlord responsibility. If either the landlord or the tenant hire a contractor, the contractor has to be registered but the owner and tenant do not. The owner and tenant can perform certain kinds of maintenance so long as they don’t require a licensed professional such as an electrician or plumber. Repairs for Sheetrock, tile, bathroom and kitchen appliance and fixture replacement do not require a license or a registration so long as it is done by the owner or tenant, walls are not moved, wiring and plumbing is not changed, etc.

Oh Hut… you are doing it again.
But we get it. You take great pride in your inability to be correct.
You like to provide us all with laughs.

This theory is almost as funny as your other theory, not quite. You will have to work harder to top that one.

Do you realize that this new concept of yours is not even close to what Robert Guy Goodwin/Jim E Stark/Superman/Michael Goodwin testified to at the criminal trial.
If that is not enough for you, neither side, not Lauren’s lawyers or the lawyers for anyone else have said this in any of the pleadings.

Clearly none of those lawyers have the Google Legal skills you do.

#jonathanKanarek
#kirbykanarek
#laurenkanarek
#lalapoprider
#liars
#contempt

[Ambitious_Kate]

They put together a story in their head, and then they say it as though “it could happen!”

[hut-ho78]

I’m posting a link to my former post that contains links on building permits, contractor registration, etc.

Michael/ Lauren civil trial update February 9

A couple of threads back, I found where a homeowner does not need to be licensed to perform home repairs and a person such as a handyman did not need to be registered as a home improvement contractor in New Jersey. That seems to clearly apply in some situations but it seemed a bit fuzzy to me in others. I found New Jersey has a Repair and Deduct course of action established under Marini vs Ireland 1970 where a landlord is required to keep rental property habitable and if unable to do so, the ten…

[Omgitsme]

Augustino Gusto has amazing cronuts. Plus they’re a small, family run business. They are only open Wednesday and Saturday, they spend the rest of the week resting and preparing ingredients. Everything there is beyond amazing.

[omare]

The collateral estoppel issue will likely be robustly briefed so that will be answered on whether MB shot LK can be relitigated. Again I don’t see a court wanting to relitigate who shot LK if they can avoid it as it will use a lot of court resources.

Weighing on having it applied, is that there is non-mutual collateral estoppel (where all the parties need not be the same); the criminal trial had a heavier burden of proof than the civil matter; and MB had his day in a court (it was not an administrative hearing, or a third world country, etc.) Granted, there are many nuances in each of these factors that either side can hammer on and no doubt case law to go with it.

Along with having to meet the elements to have it applied, collateral estoppel I understand is an equitable principle, which will also allow the judge to apply or not even if on the surface the basic elements are met. It is an issue any LK attorney would have to raise whether you think it is valid or not.

[ohnoO]

@MHM

Wait. There’s an equestrian grammar thread?!?

Please don’t tell me about it! Lunging is one thing, but inevitably someone will bring up flatting and my head will explode !

[Ambitious_Kate]

Or sale a horse. People are going want to sale a horse.

[eggbutt]

It looks like multiple votes are allowed. Regardless, the results will be interesting!