Safesport in the wake of the Barisone Verdict: Weaponization and Inconsistent Standards

[BrendaJane]

well, seems we are barking up the wrong tree.
LK might have wanted to get MHG banned. Her big rival.
perhaps she wanted MB just for her personal slave, as she has her boy toy RG hanging around.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@RND

@CurrentlyHorseless

No evidence of a third shot =/= proven not to exist.

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 also agree that NG on the charges wrt to RG was the correct decision by the jury, since it was not proven that RG was shot at. The prosecution even tacitly agreed they were unlikely to get a conviction on those charges, since they dropped those two charges in their plea offer.

I was just making the logical point to KnightsMom that the statement that “the existence of the third shot was not proven” does not necessarily imply that “the third shot was proven not to exist.”

[BrendaJane]

@CurrentlyHorseless

I was just making the logical point to KnightsMom that the statement that “the existence of the third shot was not proven” does not necessarily imply that “the third shot was proven not to exist.”

how do you prove a negative?

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@BrendaJane

@CurrentlyHorseless

I was just making the logical point to KnightsMom that the statement that “the existence of the third shot was not proven” does not necessarily imply that “the third shot was proven not to exist.”

how do you prove a negative?

You don’t. That’s why failing to prove its existence does not automatically imply, logically, that you’ve proven that is does not exist.

Back months ago FitzE (or maybe it was DreadPirateRoberts) had the Latin phrase that lawyers apparently use to describe the logical fallacy (The fallacy is that failure to prove existence logically implies that non-existence has been proven).

IANAL, but I think DreadPirateRoberts may be. Maybe he/she will chime in.

[erinmeri]

@RND

I am not even a tiny bit afraid of anything LK related and anyone here who is deserves what they get.

Let me get this straight. Testimony in court proves that she purposely threatened, harassed and attempted to intimidate others (successfully!), and that people were scared of her. Those of us who find her frightening and don’t wish to have any of those tactics lobbed against us deserve what we get??? Wow. Just wow.

[IdahoRider]

@hut-ho78

So people can dream up false SafeSport reports but it seems like hers was a verified report of danger.

Danger that she created. Well, that LK, JK and RG created in their plan to destroy MB, which LK admitted to on the stand.
Sheilah

[trubandloki]

@IdahoRider

@hut-ho78

So people can dream up false SafeSport reports but it seems like hers was a verified report of danger.

Danger that she created. Well, that LK, JK and RG created in their plan to destroy MB, which LK admitted to on the stand.
Sheilah

Right. I don’t think one can say she was right when she was the one complaining AND the person causing the problems.

[MHM]

@trubandloki

Right. I don’t think one can say she was right when she was the one complaining AND the person causing the problems.

Similar to calling the fire department after you purposely started the fire.

[MorganSercu]

Then complaining when getting charged with arson.

[MHM]

@MorganSercu

Then complaining when getting charged with arson.

And getting your name in the news for it.

[Aurora58]

I seem to recall LK and RG saying on the witness stand, it was “boom boom … boom”. ED was on the phone and only heard two shots, per his testimony, and they only found two shell casings. LK/RG were shown to lie on the witness stand so it may be there were only two shots in reality.

[Einhorn]

On the issue of safe sport, I think the real problem is that law enforcement is painfully behind the times with cyber stalking, harassment and general online misbehavior. I do think, however, that local authorities are better for dealing with this than a national club.

This way, all victims have the same protections, not just those who participate in certain sports in certain ways.

As an aside, if I were MB, I would as soon stay out of the USEF, because they don’t seem to be able to find their, um, hooves with a hoof pick. Plus he can no longer be threatened with a violation.

If MB does return to training others, perhaps he can focus clinics or online training where long term in-person contact can be limited.

Edited for spelling

[RHdobes563]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@RND

@CurrentlyHorseless

No evidence of a third shot =/= proven not to exist.

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 also agree that NG on the charges wrt to RG was the correct decision by the jury, since it was not proven that RG was shot at. The prosecution even tacitly agreed they were unlikely to get a conviction on those charges, since they dropped those two charges in their plea offer.

I was just making the logical point to KnightsMom that the statement that “the existence of the third shot was not proven” does not necessarily imply that “the third shot was proven not to exist.”

Like the two baseball bats that LK and RG used when they jumped MB from behind…

[Scribbler]

@Einhorn

On the issue of safe sport, I think the real problem is that law enforcement is painfully behind the times with cyber stalking, harassment and general online misbehavior. I do think, however, that local authorities are better for dealing with this than a national club.

This way, all victims have the same protections, not just those who participate in certain sports in certain ways.

As an aside, if I were MB, I would as soon stay out of the USEF, because they don’t seem to be able to find their, um, hooves with a hoof pick. Plus he can no longer be threatened with a violation.

If MB does return to training others, perhaps he can focus clinics or online training where long term in-person contact can be limited.

Edited for spelling

If MB continues to be banned from SS then no one who is a USEF member is allowed to aid and abet and train with him. If he gave clinics there could be sanctions against any USEF members who attended. It is a big deal. Being banned is meant to remove you from the sport.

Obviously you can let your membership lapse if you aren’t showing. But if you are banned, thats different.

[Einhorn]

I understand that, and certainly there could be a chilling effect for some; but USEF enforcement seems lackluster at best. See: George Morris.

Also, if a banned person were to create online subscription type trainings, how could USEF even begin to enforce a member’s subscription to that? It’s a pretty empty threat as far as I can see. And look at how many are saying they’d train with him after this while he is banned.

From MBs perspective, especially if he is reinstated, not joining has the added benefit that if someone complains to them about him, USEF will only penalizing the complainer, not MB.

Also you’re not removed from equestrian sport, just from participating competitions that are under USEF and FEI, I think? Again only if USEF decides it’s worth pursuing.

Yes, I am cynical and jaded.

[Scribbler]

He is already banned. He cant give up his membership.

Obviously some people may try to abet a banned person by flouting the rules about equestrian activity and daring SS to enforce them. We may have seen a bit of that around George Morris. But basically it’s career ending.

[trubandloki]

@Scribbler, is he banned or suspended? I thought he was currently suspended.

[Einhorn]

I disagree about it being “career ending” but perhaps we are thinking of different groups? You can’t end the career of an AA rider, they have no riding career. They can lose the ability to perform in USEF sanctioned Events. That’s all.

Yes, that could be the be all end all for that person, but they won’t choose to train with a banned person. Which was my point, not being part of the USEF (either by choice or violation) eliminates a certain clientele from MBs universe, which may be a good thing. The burden is on the client not him. He sounds like someone who needs fewer burdens in his life.

However, you may disagree, and we can agree to do that.

Edited to add: I’ll be interested to see what sanctions USEF brings against those members who gave money to the go find me set up forMB. That’s aiding, I’d think.

[Sdel]

MB is only suspended….

[cutter99]

@Einhorn

I disagree about it being “career ending” but perhaps we are thinking of different groups? You can’t end the career of an AA rider, they have no riding career. They can lose the ability to perform in USEF sanctioned Events. That’s all.

Yes, that could be the be all end all for that person, but they won’t choose to train with a banned person. Which was my point, not being part of the USEF (either by choice or violation) eliminates a certain clientele from MBs universe, which may be a good thing. The burden is on the client not him. He sounds like someone who needs fewer burdens in his life.

However, you may disagree, and we can agree to do that.

Edited to add: I’ll be interested to see what sanctions USEF brings against those members who gave money to the go find me set up forMB. That’s aiding, I’d think.

How could USEF sanction members for donating to a GoFundMe?

If they were to do that, they would need to see a strict accounting from every member of any donation made ever.

That is not what they are in the business to do!