Exactly, admitting she herself doesn’t recall, and she’s relying on someone who clearly doesn’t either.
15 Likes
Gosh, so many old posts she didn’t get around to editing or deleting! @Sdel thanks for this refresher!
Obviously LK believes her posts on a social forum won’t be admissible in court. Bless her heart. Imagine how much easier this case would go for the state if she’d only kept her narcissistic mouth shut like all the others involved.
A real gem was hidden in the refresher comments - that MB had relinquished instructing her and assigned her to JH. Quite clearly MB wouldn’t have done that if LK was as talented as she fantasizes herself to be! That “demotion” must have caused her head to explode! If her standard reaction occurred, she would have called daddy to threaten and bully.
19 Likes
What LK may have said or says in the future on COTH is totally irrelevant to her testimony at trial. Why would she give accurate information to those who want to blame her for getting shot?
In any event, who cares what she writes here.
So, she’s lying?
But to whom? Which time? With this admission its now muddied the water such that what is truth can’t reliably be determined.
And why? That seems… Imprudent.
23 Likes
Well that’s calling the kettle black! She never posted here until Mean Girls, Inc. started posting lies about what happened. If that has resulted in muddying the water here on COTH…good for her.
Why would she do anything else? Most of you here…and I’m including you…don’t give a damn about the truth.
1 Like
Lol… Sure.
8 Likes
Or maybe she wasn’t putting in the necessary effort or listening to MB when was instructing her. Or MB hoped that what/the way JH explained would lead to an “AHA! Now I get it!” moment and then MB would take over and build on the momentum.
9 Likes
I also find it interesting that the house that RG supposedly did so much work on and was owed money for was condemned.
25 Likes
Exactly.
4 Likes
**[quote=“Inigo-montoya, post:1982, topic:762373, full:true”]
Well that’s calling the kettle black! She never posted here until Mean Girls, Inc. started posting lies about what happened. If that has resulted in muddying the water here on COTH…good for her.
Why would she do anything else? Most of you here…and I’m including you…don’t give a damn about the truth.
[/quote]
I fully dispute and condemn the validity of this statement in its entirety.
It also flies in the face of IM’s assertion that they know EVERYTHING.
Do yourself a favor IM - stop posting.
19 Likes
So IM claims to know “everything” about the incident in question and the circumstances leading up to it, as well as all details of the plans for prosecution and defense. Which makes me think he (she?) is a legal-beagle of sorts - perhaps someone who (like Knights_Mom) is highly involved in the procedural aspects of a legal process and has easy access to all court filings and related documents.
And/or IM is the person Ms Lollipop was on the phone with when the shooting occurred (and the person that called Daddy to let him know dear daughter had been shot).
(I am sure IM will happily and smugly correct me if I am wrong.) 
[Edited for clarification]
6 Likes
Well, we aren’t suppose to speculate who someone is or what they do IRL per the rules of the forum. 
7 Likes
I thought that referred to a positive ID - such as, “Poster XYZ is Gina Giraffe, who is a paralegal for the DA’s office in XXXXX.” 
3 Likes
Now you’ve done it
4 Likes
We wanted to clear up some debate/confusion that the Inigo-montoya account was an alter account for Lauren Kanarek. The account does not share an IP address with the account she has posted under, and it is not registered to a Lauren Kanarek. The email account associated with the account can be linked to a person who is not LK as well. So that line of discussion can be dropped.
Again, the debate of this high-profile event and the court cases stemming from it are fine. We do grant a little more latitude for commentary regarding limited purpose public figures, but please avoid the cursing and name calling directed at other users if you’d like to continue to discuss the matter here. Also, please avoid posting personal information such as addresses, phone numbers, etc. of those being discussed.
Yes, apparently we can discuss in our own professional capacity expertise.
1 Like
To clarify: we don’t have a explicit rule pertaining to users’ IDs (but it may be something that requires one).
It’s commonly accepted netiquette that you don’t “out” an anonymous poster’s ID if they choose to by anonymous. If someone chooses to reveal their own real-life identity, that’s obviously entirely different.
It’s not necessarily verboten to speculate that “gee, xyz poster sounds like abc poster or person” – but if a thread is going sideways because of rampant finger pointing and speculation, we’ll sometimes come in to clear things up…mostly if it’s assumptions regarding someone posting under an alter, so users can get past it and get back to discussing the topic vs. each other.
Clearly, IP and email addresses aren’t guarantees about who is behind any post/keyboard, but it’s generally the best we have, and likely significantly more concrete than other speculation, so accept the information for what it is and move on.
20 Likes
Thank you, again, for all you do to monitor these forums!
Do you think there will be rules for messaging netiquette in the future? The harassment, threats and falsehoods recently were quite upsetting.
5 Likes
We can’t and don’t moderate the site based on accuracy of statements made, so we wouldn’t moderate based on supposed falsehoods. Users are legally responsible for their comments, so if someone threatened a user with legal action based on comments they had made on the site, that’s not likely something we would moderate based on. Harassment is a relative term, so that would depend on the situation.
Fortunately, on our current platform, users have the ability to block other users, so that would be an effective way of ending perceived messaging harassment, as it blocks that user’s ability to direct message you.
We will review messages if alerted to them, but the bar for moderation intervention would be higher, as the content has not been posted publicly. We would intervene in cases of direct threats of physical harm, obscene content, spam solicitations, etc…other content would be subject to review of the overall situation.
18 Likes
Thank you! Understandable response.
2 Likes
How naive to think Joey won’t be called as a witness. A complete stranger harassed for years by LK. She will show the depths of LK’s depraved behavior. Ironically, you call Joey a “lunatic”! She was driven to compete distraction by LK after the loss of her son. And you don’t think something similar wasn’t done to Barisone?
You can’t honestly think Joey is the only one who will be called to testify. There are several other, more recent events that show the same behavior.
11 Likes
