NEW Barisone Court Filing - 7/15/21

[eggbutt]

@YankeeDuchess

Is it likely that based on that statement to the police, it was the police who notified CPS? Wouldn’t it be a dereliction of their duty to fail to notify CPS?

Trust me, the attorneys know exactly how and why CPS became involved and it wasn’t due to actions by the PD. Perhaps you should refresh your memory regarding all the references to the report made to USEF/SS in several of the threads. Those documents are in the Civil documents but require a password to view if I am not mistaken.

[trubandloki]

@MHM

Careful what you wish for. Lol.

I know! Silly me! Very silly!

[YankeeDuchess]

@eggbutt

@YankeeDuchess

Oddly, the CPS visit is not mentioned, while the visit by the building inspector as well as the police responses are all described in detail.

Since the police were not involved when CPS arrived, why would it be mentioned in a lawsuit against them? Silly goose!

Again, you’ve received coaching on this post, perhaps from someone you say you don’t even know. I believe what is written in the brief much more than what you are trying to spin (with help).

I came on thinking you were going to tell us your were leaving again and found this diatribe. Oh we’ll, back to ignore.

1. LOL. I have not received “coaching” from anyone. Anyone. Every single bit of information referred to in my post is from the filing you posted, @eggbutt. You could verify that if you read the filing yourself.
2. The civil suit names as defendants not just the individual police officers but Washington township itself, as well as other public officials such as the building inspector.
3. The whole gist of the lawsuit against the individual police officers and the township itself is that in over 6 encounters with the police and other township officials, the police and the township in general failed in their duty to notice that Barisone was obviously on the verge of a “psychological/emotional/mental breakdown, and it was that failure that was responsible for “the incident on August 7”, which has caused economic damage, emotional distress, and loss of reputation to Barisone. Reread his recollection of his speech on the state of affairs on Aug 5 in the police lobby, delivered by someone visibly on the verge of a psychiatric breakdown. How could the police be informed of that situation and not notify CPS? The police had a duty to notify CPS, but why would they be present when CPS went to investigate?
4. Diatribe? I posted a 100% calm and civil statement of my interpretation of the filing you posted, aka the topic of the thread. Thanks for making my point, once again, that anyone posting a minority opinion is posting something inflammatory, in your view.

[endlessclimb]

One can not live somewhere, vacate the property for at least 5 months, then expect they would still have immediate tenancy rights when they return…

Right?

[Knights_Mom]

If they returned and were there 30 days even squatting tenancy rights are established.

Prior to that 30 days police can remove them for trespassing.

[endlessclimb]

Sounds like they were there for longer than the 30 days both times. I was just mentally clarifying whether purported tenancy rights last beyond the physical occupation of the space.

[Knights_Mom]

Tenancy rights are established by the 30 day time. In NJ from what I’ve read a Holdover eviction case deals with other rights such a leases, rent increase etc.

[Jealoushe]

Sounds like the police weren’t going to do anything regardless of the law. They hardly cared at all on those 911 calls…have never heard such an unconcerned officer in my life.

[MorganSercu]

Can is not the same as will, I suspect.

[Knights_Mom]

We learn to accent the difference between MAY and MUST.

[MorganSercu]

A pity.

[YankeeDuchess]

@eggbutt

Nice coaching from someone.

Walk on by.

Name one sentence in my post which would require “coaching”. The entire post is purely based on the filing you posted, and other publicly available information such as the 911 calls.
I have received “coaching” from absolutely no one.

Please delete your post falsely accusing me of posting inside information obtained privately.

[YankeeDuchess]

@Knights_Mom

Had you ever been involved in eviction proceedings you would know that Step 1 of the process is to demand verbally or in writing that the “tenant/occupant” vacate. If within a certain amount of days they have not yet left then a formal eviction proceeding can be initiated.

Once the eviction proceeding is initiated, the occupant is given a court date. If they miss the first court date a 2nd is given. If they miss that one, a warrant of eviction is ordered. At this point the landlord applies to whatever peace officer entity is charged with physical removal of the occupant. In my state it’s a Marshal. The occupant has up to 6 days to ask for an extension. The limit for staying is 6 months from the date the warrant is issued. Once the time is up, the Marshal or whomever takes possession of the property. The door is forced open, belongings seized, and animal control seizes any animal there. The lock is then replaced with a Marshal’s lock.

So what MB did was entirely correct for Step 1.

I reiterate that a vacate order by the building department is immediate and staying cannot be negotiated. It is a final order and the courts DO NOT offer any relief nor extension.

I agree with everything you say here. My point was that the filing shows that when MB made the “entirely correct” step 1, the date that he did so was Aug 5. If at that point they had tenancy rights, he could then go through the eviction process through the courts.

Re bolded: I also agree with you that if the building inspectors found any of the multiple “living spaces” on the farm uninhabitable and ordered one or more of those multiple “living spaces” vacated, that the issue of tenancy doesn’t matter.

I did not notice any statement in the filing to the effect that all living spaces on the entire property had been ordered vacated by the building inspector. Which bullet point was that?

[ASB_Stars]

Down in CE it is very peaceful. Y’all should try it!

[eggbutt]

An AMENDED lawsuit had just been posted under the Dressage Forum. MUCH more information.

[eggbutt]

No where did I accuse you of having “insider information”! Your lengthy post reads like it was put together by committee…that’s my opinion.

Go read the amended brief, okay? It may have some answers for you.

[MHM]

With all the emojis in my phone, I’m surprised there is not one of a person holding their hands over their ears.

I don’t see one in the BB assortment, either, although it would certainly come in useful.

[MHM]

@eggbutt

An AMENDED lawsuit had just been posted under the Dressage Forum. MUCH more information.

Another one?!?

But I’ve been trying to cut back on my screen time! Lol.

[YankeeDuchess]

@eggbutt

@YankeeDuchess

Is it likely that based on that statement to the police, it was the police who notified CPS? Wouldn’t it be a dereliction of their duty to fail to notify CPS?

Trust me, the attorneys know exactly how and why CPS became involved and it wasn’t due to actions by the PD. Perhaps you should refresh your memory regarding all the references to the report made to USEF/SS in several of the threads. Those documents are in the Civil documents but require a password to view if I am not mistaken.

Interesting. I should “trust you” that “the attorneys know exactly how and why CPS became involved and it wasn’t due to the actions of the PD.”

How would you know that, @eggbutt?

I, on the other hand, don’t know who alerted CPS. My position in earlier threads was that regardless of who it was that called CPS, the children, if they had been present that day, probably were in danger. There was a gun on the property (owned by RC, not LK), Barisone had stated that LK had guns (not clear she did), tensions were high on both sides, and at least one adult was visibly on the verge of a mental breakdown.

I’m just speculating based purely on the information in the filing that after hearing Barisone’s speech of Aug 5, possibly it was the police who alerted CPS. But I don’t know, I’m not one with the inside information.

[YankeeDuchess]

@eggbutt

No where did I accuse you of having “insider information”! Your lengthy post reads like it was put together by committee…that’s my opinion.

Go read the amended brief, okay? It may have some answers for you.

I interpreted the accusation of being “coached” by “someone I claimed not to even know” as asserting that my post was based on insider information. Why else would I need coaching?

My post looks like it was put together by committee? Well, now I’ve been well and truly insulted.