Finally clicked on this wondering why on earth a saddle thread was getting so many posts…whoops hahaha
6 Likes
As long as one is following the laws of the state. Recordings of conversations in which you are a party is admissible. But video of an area presumed to be private, with conversations between other people, is likely not admissible.
I don’t know what kind of footage we are talking about here, but NJ being a one-party consent state, I expect any such evidence gathered in the barn, in which you are not one of the participants, will likely get argued out of court proceedings, if they exist.
10 Likes
In her posts #112 and 148, to name a couple of them.
2 Likes
Ah yes…Saskatchewan.
Remember David Millgaard who spent 20 years in prison for a crime he did not commit. The Hip wrote a song about it.
Worth noting that as a result of the above cited case and other similar cases involving Indigenous people, the federal government of Canada has announced plans to review its policies covering how the legal system treats Indigenous people. With all due respect to Indigenous peoples, I would say there is no commonality between this case and the one under discussion. Not.in.the.least.
1 Like
I provided verbatim quotes of a couple of AR posts from the beginning of the thread for Angela. I’m pretty sure that there are many more, but have limited time.
If there was unpaid rent (no evidence of it that I’ve seen), a defense strategy saying a top BNT, with his own $2,000,000 53 acre training facility and multiple dressage horses, shot his own amateur client, with premeditation, because he was enraged over unpaid rent does not look like a great strategy to me. In fact if he had right on his side with respect to unpaid rent, he had the eviction process available to him. Good thing AR is not his defense attorney.
LK is monied and privileged. But a jury will see a man who earns a living riding prancing horses as pretty darn privileged too. Even poor people barely scraping by are not allowed to shoot people over unpaid rent.
I share ladyj’s befuddlement that AR seems to think that making the case as a shooting that was precipitated by unpaid rent, if there was any, is a non laughable strategy for the defense.
4 Likes
A valid point, but not always the case.
In the Jian Ghomeshi trial that occurred recently in Canada, the ruling in Mr. Ghomeshi’s favor pivoted on 1) Weak legal representation by the prosecution (the Crown); lack of credible evidence from the prosecution and its witnesses; and strong legal representation by the defendant. Yes…Mr Ghomeshi hired the best legal team that money could buy, and they ran circles around the prosecution.
It was not the popular outcome, but it was legally sound.
While a Canadian case, I would suspect that the above principles are equally relevant in the US.
5 Likes
I honestly have come to believe, through learning history, following court cases, etc, that there’s no such thing as any one type of person “capable of murder.” I think every person has the capability, under the right circumstances and mental pressure, of committing incredibly awful actions. Part of my fascination about this whole matter is simply trying to understand what those circumstances are - what blend of pressures (both internal and external, from both MB and you and the other people around this swirling vortex) led to MB pulling that trigger. I don’t think every person would necessarily be incitable to murder, but I do think the vast majority of us have the ability for violence or acts we’d normally find reprehensible with the right combination of circumstance and mental state.
18 Likes
At this point I’ll wait for the trial. There’s nothing new here and hasn’t been for pages and pages and pages.
Give it a rest.
12 Likes
Read my post #1424 again. I wrote “persuade potential jurors”. Meaning the pool of pre-trial potential jurors.
The DA and defense attorneys try to persuade sworn jurors DURING the trial.
Let’s review your words: “From what I hear, (people who have visited him in jail)…”
As you described it, people have visited MB in jail, and then told you what he said to them. Now you repeat it to us, and it becomes hearsay. You, as our only source, weren’t in the jail visiting him when he supposedly made those comments, and you’re passing along second or third hand information that may, or may not be true.
Until the texts and emails sent by MB with his own comments are made public, we have no way of knowing what he actually said. For now it’s rumor, and hearsay.
13 Likes
The scenario about the aliens is not only implausible, it is inconceivable. Your story about MB packing heat because he knew there was a 25 pound dog known to be a biter, then fired 3 shots, none of which hit the dog but two of which hit Lauren in the chest, is conceivable. It is not plausible.
3 Likes
When the jury is selected, any potential jurors who have had previous exposure to the case will be disqualified. How do you not know this?
In the defamation lawsuit against Elon Musk, they had trouble getting a full set of presumed-to-be-unbiased jurors because so many potential jurors owned Tesla cars or Tesla stock.
Is this what all the anti-LK venom is about on this thread? Some people (mistakenly) believe that by using character assassination on SM, that LK will be a sufficiently unlikable victim, that MB will be acquitted?
4 Likes
Michael barisone is 100% going to spend time in prison. He found a gun that wasn’t his to go…do something, and because he had gone to find a gun, actively got a gun he didn’t own, he was able to shoot a woman twice in the chest.
There isn’t a world where he isn’t spending some time in prison.
9 Likes
I seriously doubt potential jurors are eagerly reading COTH at this point. Not everyone in NJ is interested in this case.
As far as character assassination on SM, LK’s past behavior on SM has written that story all by her own making. The “lies” allegedly told by two passionate posters on the larger thread have considerable truth to her past behavior. Will that information be admissible in court? I have absolutely no idea but I’m sure past behavior (of all 3 parties) will be introduced at some point and will carry considerable weight to some jurors.
9 Likes
So, let’s just not have a trial and go ahead and throw that key to his jail cell away right now, shall we? Is there a post here suggesting MB will be completely exonerated of all charges?
10 Likes
So that’s what’s called a slippery slope logical fallacy. With a little reductio ad absurdum thrown in.
8 Likes
A lot of the posters on this thread are not familiar with the criminal justice system whatsoever. Some of us are very familiar with it, for different reasons.
The delusions are real.
MB is 100% going to remain in jail for some time.
11 Likes
I totally agree…almost as absurd as your post. I was shocked to consider MB actually might serve some time in prison. I had never considered that possibility. There must be others like me who appreciate your insight. Or, to reintroduce one of @YankeeDuchess words, No **** Sherlock! (Total sarcasm.)
12 Likes
cool.
3 Likes
For the record, it was Mardi who brought up the concept of posting on COTH to “persuade” “potential pre-trial jurors”. She brought it up in the context of insinuating that LK was poisoning the pool of potential jurors about MB.
This is preposterous, not only because, as you say, of the large set of potential jurors in the NJ court district, only a vanishingly small percentage of them would be reading here. Further, in jury selection, pretrial exposure to the case would get a potential juror disqualified in a heartbeat.
In the movie about Alan Dershowitz defending Klaus von Bulow, in an early meeting Dershowitz tells von Bulow, “Well, everyone pretty much hates you, so you have that going for you.” I think he meant that he expected the judge and jury to work so hard to NOT let the likability/nonlikability of the defendant affect the verdict, that they might even overcompensate and be slightly less likely to convict.
IMHO, the verdict will be based almost wholly on evidence or rules of evidence, and very, very minimally on the likability of the defendant or the victim.
2 Likes
I served on a murder trial last year. There were 2 defendants, and we found them both guilty. One was clear & easy. One was murky. We had no doubt of his involvement, but it wasn’t clear cut as to legally if the charges could stand. We found out much more after the trial about both defendants (and two others charged but tried separately), and we absolutely made the right call. Both will rot in prison for 50+ years. One other got 37 yrs, another is on trial in CA for 2 other murders, and can still be tried on “our” case.
there is a difference between “innocent “ and “not guilty”. How the jurors will decide the case will be dependent on the judges rules on this specific case. All the defense has to do is prove “reasonable doubt” for him to be declared “not guilty”. There is no doubt at all that he is not innocent.
as far as no exposure to the case, that will be up to the attorneys. On a high profile case, it is hard to find jurors that aren’t at least peripherally aware of it. Doesn’t mean they’ll all be thrown off, if they can be open minded & objective. Obviously, anyone close to any one involved, would likely be excused.
13 Likes
