True enough. But it does bring her credibility into question…
2 Likes
I do not think we know the answer to this question.
I am not even a GAS fan, but even I hope GAS did not take this on contingency.
3 Likes
There us no question at all regarding her credibility. There is none. Zero. No question about it.
16 Likes
Great question! And there are plenty here she openly threatened out in the open on the Barisone threads. Probably enough of us they’d need a second courtroom to hold us all!
9 Likes
I will rephrase…
It proves that she has no credibility and that her stories constantly change.
12 Likes
This case is not the same as MB’s as the defendant was found guilty of lesser charges and there is no Krol hearing involved, but I thought the ruling about the judge’s decision was interesting.
18 Likes
It’s the first time there has been evidence that Mr. Deininger isn’t lying. That cat is out of the bag now.
So, when can we expect to see your $10 in the GFM account?
24 Likes
Interesting. I didn’t mean to reply to CH but I guess I did. Oh well!
7 Likes
Reframed this post to ask the question generally, not specifically.
This can’t be the first time in this case that defense has referred to other incidents and people that LK has harrassed. Wasn’t that in their original response, and cross claim? So why now? Isn’t that kind of information some that will be produced in the trial?
At what point in this whole mish mash is it that a side presents their argument? At what point is it that a side is obligated to provide their documentation to the other side?
I would think that it would be AFTER depositions, because its the depositions/discovery that enable a side to put together their case. Why should MB or SGF pre-provide Lauren with the questions they are going to ask? Isn’t that what the questions are for? To ask? And why should MB or SGF give GAS anything they have, if they don’t even know if they are going to use it yet? For example, supposed they want to ask her in deposition about GJ - so they do, and in the end decide they aren’t even going to go there with their case against her, either in defense or in the cross claim. Its not pertinent, then, to GAS so they don’t deserve to have that information.
I don’t get the basis on which they get to ask for the entire case file SGF has at this point?
17 Likes
I’ll bet Lk has no earthly idea which incidents are being mentioned, and this is GAS’ way of trying to find out because even if he has all the 50k pages, there’s no telling what will be used.
Plus, the Krol appeal seems like it has less than zero to do with LK’s civil case, but if she wants that, i don’t see the judge limiting MB or SGF in their requests. Turn about is fair play…
21 Likes
It makes one wonder how many more victims are hidden away from public view that we don’t know about. It may be naive to think her behavior has been limited to +/- a dozen people.
22 Likes
I’m confused about that, too. She knows her record/background. SGF/MB will have whatever is in the public record re: arrests, etc. GAS just needs to digest all that info, too, and prepare what he can prepare. I don’t see why SGF/MB should have to spell out exactly which of the many incidents they will focus on.
GAS needs to do his own DD and get a handle on his client’s vulnerabilities and craft a defence to the countersuit. If there are 12 incidents, prep for those 12. If there are more, prep for more. 
30 Likes
I wonder if he’s done adequate DD…
And I wonder if she’s failed to inform him that there are multiple incidents that are part of the public record…
6 Likes
This.
She’s in her early 40’s now. I bet she was a very busy bee in her 20’s.
13 Likes
Apparently, she did enough damage in the Livingston area - after her NC husband Jack threw her out and divorced her, forcing her to move back to NJ with Robert Guy Goodwin - to have the locals saying bad stuff about her after the trial and 48 Hours episode. She has criminal charges from around that time, so she was up to something.
25 Likes
A question for the legal eagles:
It appears that the work-product exemption refers to Rule 26(b)(3). My question is two-fold:
-
Are documents pertaining to the other party’s behavior collected by opposing counsel or their surrogates typically considered work-product?
-
If so, the rule states they are only discoverable if the party requesting cannot without undue hardship obtain their substantial equivalent through other means. Wouldn’t a previous lawsuit or filing that Lauren was a party to be easily obtained by her or her counsel without seeking it from SGF? And wouldn’t any evidence of her alleged harassment of others - particularly online - be easily obtained as well? Or can she say “give me a copy of my own social media posts/emails/legal documents”? Or am I reading this all wrong?
Rule 26(b)(3):
Thanks!
9 Likes
There are probably a lot that he doesn’t know about - esp. the ones that did not result in public records. Given how evasive LK usually is about recounting her own bad behavior, I can imagine that she has admitted to GAS to only a few such instances, and no doubt glossed over them or rationalized them or left out key bits of info to minimize the “wickedness” of her involvement.
That said, I do wonder if Stone has now read enough of the various text messages, SM posts, and/or watched LK’s testimony from the criminal trial, etc. to have a clearer picture of the kind of person she is. So obtaining evidence regarding other incidents of “alleged harassment” would be even more pertinent - esp. if he is starting to have second thoughts about trying to represent her.
12 Likes
Hypothetically, if GAS decided to bail out, resulting in yet another delay while LK finds a new lawyer, is there a point in the legal system when the judge just says, too bad, so sad, no more delays while you keep changing attorneys?
Otherwise it seems like somebody who is trying to drag things out could just keep switching lawyers forever.
5 Likes
Someone (I think one of the actual attorneys following the threads) said that judges sometimes order lawyers to continue representing clients through the discovery phase in situations like this.
2 Likes
I thought a lawyer has to petition the court to quit on a client – and the court decides if the lawyer can quit?
3 Likes
