Well, last time he stopped by, he mentioned that his daughter couldn’t move because MHG was calling around warning other barn owners. Then people reminded him of Mr Tarshis’s testimony re: the deal and barn that was worked out between those two gentlemen.
So…
He is PO’d at him for telling Deininger (or was it Silver) that the K’s approached him at the show in Wellington. ???
In some circles, that might be construed as witness tampering.
When? Where?
What’s the old saying? Put up or shut up?
Please. No. Please.
That would just continue the cycle of reality show wannabes who all think they are the Kardashians.
Side note. I have never watched one second of any Kardashian show in my life. But unfortunately they are inescapable to some degree.
For real. That has to be the best joke yet.
I am I the only one that hears the Man in Black, Johnny Cash singing in their head
I hear the train a comin
It’s rolling around the bend…
I am just a horse of course.
Which is still ridiculous, because what difference does it make at this point? The civil suits are over.
I know. I laughed way too hard at that.
There is not a single prosecutor in the world who would not use a legally obtained recording that shows the defense side plotting a murder and proclaim - we don’t need that, we have enough other evidence.
It would be so much better if the movie in the heads of some people would at least be believable.
Oh yes. Thank you for the reminder of why the sudden defamation of Mr. Tarshis.
I wondered why the whole Kanarek family was so wanting to hang out with Mr. Tarshis at that dressage event if he was horrible.
The Kanareks apparently are still interested in waging some sort of PR campaign.
Sigh.
Let’s make this clear once and for all, the subpoena was quashed long after you ignored it. In fact, you never responded at all. You never hired an attorney, nor did you make representation that you were representing yourself. Who was it, oh I believe BN, LK’s attorney got the subpoena quashed. Again well after the deadline that you were supposed to respond to said subpoena. Need a refresher, go look at the court doc ents and their timeframe. You also never responded to the second subpoena timely. Wash rinse repeat.
If the recordings/tapes have so little importance, why has such a big deal been made of what they supposedly reveal, you know, the murder plot against LK an RG. If I had that kind of proof, I would be using that proof for my case. Along with the transcript that your wife said she transcribed from the recordings/tapes.
Let’s hear the recording/tapes. It may shut us all up if they have the information you say they have. LK’s case is done. Can never be filed again. Doesn’t need to be kept for evidence for a trial any longer.
While the money might be a huge motivator for the KKlan in this sordid affair, what do you bet a HUGE source of concern is now Princess Lollypop’s reputation, her involvement in the now infamous “FINISH THE BASTARD” plot, and the participation of Rob the Ultimate Equine Groom and Human Laundry Boy.
Their actions are now in the forefront. Sucks to be them, but what comes around, goes around!
Which you would think would be motivation enough to produce them……but nope.
Thank you 3Pony Farm. I found the first Record very interesting in regards to MB’s appeal of his Krol hearing. A long read for the not very legal people but very interesting.
From the first google https://www.njcourts.gov/sites/default/files/court-opinions/2023/a3603-20.pdf
From the Record
D.G. appeals from a July 15, 2021 order continuing his commitment on
Krol status notwithstanding the testimony of the State’s treating psychiatrist
that D.G. was no longer a danger to himself or others, and hospital staff should
begin planning for his discharge to a supervised group home.
We reverse. As our Supreme Court recently reaffirmed in In re Civil Commitment of W.W.,
245 N.J. 438, 451-54 (2021), the State fails to carry its burden of establishing
the need for continued commitment under the general civil commitment
statute, N.J.S.A. 30:4-27.13(b), when its treating psychiatrist testifies against
involuntary commitment. We see no principled reason to conclude the result
should be different because D.G. is on Krol status.
…
As the Court emphasized in R.F., New Jersey law on civil commitment
“has emphasized the importance of ‘provid[ing] the needed level of care’” to
committees “'in the least restrictive manner,’" 217 N.J. at 180 (quoting S.L., 94
N.J. at 141), "and not infringing on an individual’s 'liberty or autonomy any
more than appears reasonably necessary to accomplish’ the State’s goals of
public safety and effective treatment,” ibid. (quoting Krol, 68 N.J. at 261-62).
That is as true of NGI committees as any others. Krol, 68 N.J. at 257-58.
Thank you for summarizing it for us!
Wow, it took almost a year for that decision to be considered/made. I know appeals take a long time, but wow…
What? What does RG have to do with a civil suit brought by Barisone against three insurance companies?
The other one seemed to have a quick turnaround time though.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
I found that one interesting and the Court’s comments that a treating psychiatrist should have testified at the hearing that he should remain confined but the state did not do that.
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
