Oh for Pete’s sake, she should have left. Hindsight. Shoulda woulda coulda. How many times do I have to say that? You get in a huff because y’all decided they were squatters and you don’t like anyone correcting you? Is that what this is about?
And Ms DiFranco who testified that she was trying to get her horses out to any safe and clean place also didn’t get hers out before MB had his breakdown even though she testified there were several suitable barns nearby.
I don’t know. None of the entire situation sounds plausible.
Maybe it was well known she always had it?
But then, how did they know it was “missing”
Big difference is Ms DiFranco didn’t have two lawyers, and her dad making arrangements for another barn/trainer and transportation that didn’t meet her needs (or words to that effect).
You can’t prove something didn’t happen, so in this case I really think the jury got the verdict right for RG. The fact that only two casings were found makes it pretty much impossible to believe that a third shot was ever fired, because there is no good explanation for the third casing just magically disappearing when the other two did not, especially since it was claimed that all three shots were fired in almost complete succession. If the shooting happened the way it was claimed, the three casings should have been found pretty near each other.
It’s the same as those arguing that since there is no proof that the gun wasn’t shot accidentally during a struggle, it is likely that it was accidentally fired during a struggle. The judge made it clear, and rightly so, early in the trial that making up stories without even a shred of evidence was not allowed. The third shot ended up being one of those stories with no evidence to back it up.
I didn’t edit anything since I couldn’t find the part that was so offensive. I called someone’s post stupid. Is that really all that triggering?
Dunno, since I didn’t flag it. I guess that’s a question for the person who did. And that’s not all you did, if we’re being honest. You had a fair go at several folks yesterday. It was all a bit 
Just to clarify, do I understand correctly that the mods asked you to edit your post and instead you chose to attack the person who flagged it and did not edit your post at all?
Where did I mention the word “concern” in my post? She could have called SafeSport about guns on the property, and SafeSport could have called CPS based on LK’s call. She could have done it out of concern or she could have done it maliciously; I didn’t mention her motive because I don’t know her motive, and her motive didn’t matter for the purpose of my post. Why do you people read things into posts that simply aren’t there?
I’m not Denali or YD but you people love to do this to those who disagree with you and I’m sure you won’t stop even if the moderator tells you I’m not either of those people, so carry on.
That post is just explaining the styles of two former posters. Your posts often remind some people here of those two posters. Sort of a combination of the two, I suppose (Idk, personally, I didn’t pay so much attention). That post doesn’t say that you’re Denali or YD. Why do you read things into posts that simply aren’t there?
You’re right, this post is not accusing me of being YD or Denali; I should have gone back further and found one of the ones that did do that but in the end it really doesn’t matter. We all know that’s what’s being accused here.
To be honest, NO… “we” all do not know that’s what’s being accused here. That is not “common knowledge” or factual.
Why not just move forward/let it go/whatever… or, as CC noted, not read things into posts that are not there? Or address the post you have issues with instead of using a vast sweeping brush of generalization and condemnation and accusing everyone of doing everything? “
Everyone here (“You people” as you have said 
) does not think the same way or have the same opinions - that much is very obvious! 
- and thus there is no need to assign blanket motives and agendas to other posters that they do not have…
I agree with you that the jury got it right when it came to the charges about RG.
You’re right - not everyone here has accused me of being YD and/or Denali, but there is clearly a hive mind mentality that is dominant in these threads that no one who is being honest can deny. So when I say “you all” or something similar, I am referring to those people, and that should really be obvious. Of course those who are part of that hive mind mentality aren’t going to admit it exists. If you want to deny it that’s fine, but I’m not dumb enough to believe you.
Regarding your advice that I just move on, why shouldn’t that advice apply to everyone here? Why do you feel that I am the one who should stop voicing my opinion here, rather than those who continue to post the same conspiracy theories about what they want to have happened on the day of the shooting, continue to bash the shooting victim and her family, and continue to attack those who disagree with them? Have you told them to move forward/let it go/whatever? If not, why not?
I am not sure why you keep at it with dismissive “hive mentality” comments and seem determined to continue along those lines… even saying you are not dumb enough to believe me - therefore implying that I am dumb… see how that works?
And where did I even suggest that you are the only one who should stop voicing their opinion??!! Seriously??! Everything and everyone is not out to get you. No matter how much you seem to think that is the case - and that makes me sad for you, to be honest. You immediately rush to accuse and find fault - all while complaining about “everyone” else doing the same thing.
Many of us have tried to move conversations along at many points throughout these threads… but there seems to be no point in trying to have this conversation with you at this time when you are obviously annoyed and upset. I am going to take my own advice for now and 
…
My perspective is that I’m fine with people voicing their opinions re the case. Trust me, many of the opinions expressed throughout these threads do not align with my own. It’s just the rudeness, insults, backhanded nonsense that I disagree with and don’t care for. It’s not that I am against RND’s opinion on the matter, because I actually agree with a few things said by RND throughout these threads, it’s just the tone of the posts. It’s just so defensive and always looking to slide in an insult. Granted, recently on the other thread, her/his posts have not been that way. Maybe it’s a defense mechanism, I don’t know, nor am I really entitled to know. RND doesn’t have to change anything, I’m just saying how I feel about it and perhaps how others perceive their posts as well. This could be why they get the reception that they do, not solely because their opinion differs.
I don’t like the blanket statements because it’s not always obvious who you are referring to, and if you’re going to make accusations do so directly. If you’re that passionate about the matter, quote what you’re referring to, otherwise it can weaken your argument/point, but on the other hand, if the shoe doesn’t fit, then don’t wear it. So if you don’t fit under the blanket, then it doesn’t pertain to you.
It is a fine tuned mental list not provided by the BB.[quote=“MHM, post:328, topic:771664, full:true”]
Wait, can you actually fine tune your ignore list to specific threads? If so, I did not know that.
There are definitely a few posters who sound a bit like Charlie Brown’s teacher to me.
[/quote]
I thought you were a fan of reading for comprehension? Nobody has said you were YD or Denali, just that your posting “style” is like a blend of the two.
I thought it was just me!
this
Agreed - and well said.
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
