“68. BARISONE reported to the responding DEFENDANT POLICE OFFICERS that
BARISONE had found discarded boxes of “Suboxone” in the garbage Kanarek and/or Goodwin
from the farm house, a drug used to treat heroin addiction.”
Clear MB said he found it from they were staying and MB tells police is used to treat people addicted to heroin addicts, which elsewhere in his suit he claims he was informed they were or had been.
Have an umbrella drink for me!
Or as diabolical as shooting someone.
Huh? This is hard to follow. Yes, he learned that there were supposedly some past (or maybe current) issues with heroin use. What is your point?
So?
I am confused what your point is.
Yes, he found it in the trash.
I do not remember it saying that MB told the police what it was for, but I will believe you that he said that (though I am sure the police very much know what it was for).
One of my friends was telling me that she ‘found in the trash’ a used condom that her teen son had tossed in there. I can promise you that my friend did not go digging in the trash looking for used condoms (or anything else).
The term ‘found in the trash’ simply means that the item was in the trash when it was seen. It does not mean (necessarily) that someone went digging in the trash.
I found in my driveway a dead mouse last night. I did not go looking for a dead mouse, I did not dig in my driveway for a dead mouse, I just happened to see a dead mouse (that blended in well with the gravel so I almost stepped on it) while I walked on the driveway.
I think the poster is saying MB was untruthful in how he came to think LK was a recovering addict.
On a literal interpretation, it says that “various living spaces” were to be vacated. Not clear whether it refers to both living spaces in the farmhouse or just one.
I don’t know whether the building inspector ordered both living spaces vacated or just the one occupied by MB and company.
On the Aug 6, second visit, why did Barisone request the building inspector to order LK to vacate her living space if the building inspector had already done so in the first visit? Point #149.
If y’all can keep the thread open until tomorrow, I’ll post some pictures do y’all can have a virtual drink.
Do the documents say exactly how MB learned that LK and RB were drug users? I don’t remember reading that detail, just that he later learned they were. (It could be there, that was a lot of reading all at once.)
My question as well. I don’t think it’s clear. I don’t see where it says he was “informed” as dragonfly put it, just that it was unbeknownst to him. 
But also a comment on the use of Suboxone which I know is also being discussed in the other thread(s?). I personally know someone who is addicted to heroin. However this individual also has a full-time, decent job and maintains a home. While I don’t understand the specifics around timing and dosage, my understanding is that this individual uses Suboxone to manage the addiction during the week in order to work, and then returns to heroin use during off times. So to say that LK or RG or whoever is a recovering addict may not necessarily be valid. I would not consider the individual I mentioned to be recovering or treating addiction, but rather maintaining and managing it in order to carry on with a semi-normal life.
Does it matter? They were in a house and a barn on his property. If they tossed boxes in the trash he was within his rights to look in or through said trash. If he did a background check on them after he was arm-twisted into letting them stay, that’s fine too. Maybe someone called him and told him.
Anyway, he didn’t want them in that house at all. The addiction issue underscored it. I wouldn’t want a present heroin addict in my house or on my property either. Someone who had put it in the past would have to prove it to me and deal with me not trusting them much for a long time.
- Unbeknownst to BARISONE, Kanarek had a history of domestic conflict
following which she was banished from residing with her family.- Unbeknownst to BARISONE, Kanarek was a heroin addict with a lengthy criminal
history, including criminal assault.
In the instance that a boarder was using, my concern would be for liability while handling or riding.
If that person also resided on my farm, my concern for liability would expand to other scenarios.
If I saw that box in the trash, and someone had been acting erratically, I might Google it.
Lots of roads to Rome, they all still end up in Rome.
Oh yeah! Since this is a day to drill down on the brief, will someone tell us what caused this banishment? Inquiring minds would like to know. Perhaps one of our more loquacious posters can research this and report back at length!
He had been looking for dirt on her to get her off the property. He had been contacted by people from her past (or he contacted them) that had problems with her, some that have posted here on past topics on the shooting. Some that have expressed that she has/had heroin addiction on this forum. Makes sense he looks in her trash to find more evidence and tells the police. Point is he wanted her gone, she didn’t want to leave. Both were gathering evidence against the other. Very unpleasant. But again only one was shot.
Indeed. Suboxone is often diverted from those who obtain prescriptions (legit or otherwise) or stolen and sold for cash, as an alternative to other Opiods, and it is frequently found in the company of other drugs in drug arrest confiscations. In the case of NJ and other states, the company behind Suboxone was found to have “flooded the streets” with their product through dishonest medical providers who were in-turn billing the state through Medicaid and it was shown that the company had misrepresented their product as a safe and socially responsible alternative to Methadone. In reality, much of the Suboxone was being diverted to the streets of NJ or stockpiled and sold elsewhere, as any profitable and addictive drug would be. The medical providers who wrote the prescriptions weren’t following the care guidelines - knowingly writing the wrongful prescriptions, they didn’t take the time to follow the care and counseling requirements - and were writing prescriptions for (according to record audits) for non-addiction related reasons and for those who didn’t have addiction to Heroin or other opiods.
And only one was staying where they were asked to leave.
To refocus this thread back to the crux of the lawsuit, the fact that the August 3rd incident was not written until August 8th AFTER the incident is such a huge problem for the PD. Had the cop written it when he was supposed to, his supervisor, the prosecutor and others would have seen it and been able to act! It would have changed the course of things, but the cop hid it for some reason. WHY??? Who got to him?
It does make me wonder if that (writing their reports days after things) is something they do at that department. And if so, why?
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
