UPDATES! Michael Barisone Released! FREEDOM! Plus Insurance Settlement

[Jenerationx]

@CurrentlyHorseless

He was not sentenced to prison and is not serving a prison sentence.

The way the K crew has acted since trial, you wouldn’t know it.

[CanteringCarrot]

@CurrentlyHorseless

It serves no one’s purpose that MB be confined longer than necessary. Not MB, not LK, and certainly not an anonymous lower level AA like me.

Agree to disagree on the LK point.

[FitzE]

The way Taylor and Schellhorn have acted since the trial, you wouldn’t know it, too.

They’ve had it in for MB and anyone truly neutral would be able to admit that. It could be purely professional ego when a case not only goes against you but with such a rare verdict. Had to hurt Schellhorn but he should have had the sense and professional integrity to accept the outcome and let it go. He was handed an absolute joke of a case due to the gross negligence and incompetence of the investigation. And his two star witnesses could not have been more problematic. He did his best. Bravo. Now move on.

[Jenerationx]

@FitzE

He did his best. Bravo. Now move on.

Exactly. He and Taylor seem overly invested in keeping MB in, despite the reports from the first facility from people working with him that he was not a danger to society.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Virginia_Horse_Mom

Given the crisis in terms of mental health care and lack of public resources and beds at inpatient treatment facilities impacting the entire country, it seems like it would be grossly irresponsible to keep a man who has been designated as not a threat to society by multiple psychiatric professionals involuntarily inpatient for 10 years.

It seems like most unbiased people can and should understand this.

The decision is up to the judge, after taking into account testimony from the psychiatric professionals.

Judge Taylor thought he was a risk to himself or to others as of the previous Krol hearing. I think Judge Taylor is trying to handle the case fairly and impartially. I understand that others, who talk about “judicial vendettas”, think otherwise.

[Jenerationx]

The same Judge Taylor who remarked on MB’s improved appearance and then disregarded reports from the Ann Klein doctors at the first Krol hearing?

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Jenerationx

@CurrentlyHorseless

He was not sentenced to prison and is not serving a prison sentence.

The way the K crew has acted since trial, you wouldn’t know it.

You asked whether I understood that he had not been sentenced to prison.

Yes, I have always understood that he was not sentenced to prison.

[FitzE]

This. It was Taylor rejecting the in-person testimony of doctors who had directly treated MB and said he was good to go and instead using a footnote written by a committee who never treated MB as the sole basis for keeping him confined that was proof positive of bias. All of that was also in direct violation of the clearly articulated Krol criteria.

No one with half a brain cell to their name could have missed that, unless they were hopelessly and rather cluelessly biased themselves.

[Sdel]

@Jenerationx

The same Judge Taylor who remarked on MB’s improved appearance and then disregarded reports from the Ann Klein doctors at the first Krol hearing?

The same judge who also mishandled the plea bargain for Vertetis after he was overturned by the appeals court on her trial? That judge with a public history of having a vendetta against a defendant?

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@FitzE

The way Taylor and Schellhorn have acted since the trial, you wouldn’t know it, too.

They’ve had it in for MB and anyone truly neutral would be able to admit that. It could be purely professional ego when a case not only goes against you but with such a rare verdict. Had to hurt Schellhorn but he should have had the sense and professional integrity to accept the outcome and let it go. He was handed an absolute joke of a case due to the gross negligence and incompetence of the investigation. And his two star witnesses could not have been more problematic. He did his best. Bravo. Now move on.

Schellhorn successfully proved what he needed to prove.

Bilinkas successfully made his case that MB was insane at the moment he shot LK. That’s not a repudiation of Schellhorn’s case.

[Jenerationx]

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@FitzE

This. It was Taylor rejecting the in-person testimony of doctors who had directly treated MB and said he was good to go and instead using a footnote written by a committee who never treated MB as the sole basis for keeping him confined that was proof positive of bias. All of that was also in direct violation of the clearly articulated Krol criteria.

No one with half a brain cell to their name could have missed that, unless they were hopelessly and rather cluelessly biased themselves.

If Taylor’s action was a direct violation of the Krol procedure, then you must be confident that MBs appeal will succeed.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

@FitzE

This. It was Taylor rejecting the in-person testimony of doctors who had directly treated MB and said he was good to go and instead using a footnote written by a committee who never treated MB as the sole basis for keeping him confined that was proof positive of bias. All of that was also in direct violation of the clearly articulated Krol criteria.

I’ve always wondered who was on that committee.

I wonder if the committee has routinely made footnotes like that about patients they didn’t actually evaluate… or was MBs case unique?

I also wonder if Taylor has an history of overruling treatment teams in other Krol cases, or if he has utilized footnotes by committeees like this in other decisions?

The whole process has been interesting to follow and I have a lot of questions as to what is/isn’t typical.

[vxf111]

I actually know that but my fat fingers and autocorrect don’t

[smoofox]

~ peeking in at the thread hoping for good news ~

[FitzE]

Agreed on all points. It was so bizarre b/c the Krol standards are so clearly written.

[vxf111]

Also I don’t fault LO for NOT DISCLOSING every last detail. She’s under no obligation to do so and there are many good reasons not to share everything publicly. I’m just saying not to assume XYZ must not have happened if LO hasn’t said XYZ happened. And to take her interpretation of events as an interpretation of someone who is not (and has never held herself out to be, nor should she be) unbiased. Having attending one of the hearings in this case, my impression of many facts differs from LOs and from the facts some here believe. Just take anything learned secondhand with a grain of salt. I can’t imagine what she’s going through so none of this is to fault her, just to point out that relying on exclusively her public comments is likely to provide an incomplete view of actual events.

[Joanne]

Well, I sure as hell am not going to believe anything the Ks put out there.

[vxf111]

I don’t suggest that either

[Warmblood1]

I consider MB to be a victim. I wouldn’t discount the family member or SO of a victim in such a way to insinuate that because they have a personal relationship with a victim, they can not tell the truth or have a perception in alignment with reality.

And since we are dragging LO into this, LO has been at every hearing, has intimate knowledge of the details, and has done nothing to prove to me that her word can not for some reason be relied upon or trusted. Implying that it can’t be is uncalled for and unnecessary.