If LK is wrongly accusing people of theft, those people need to press charges against her and those cases will proceed separately from the MB shooting case.
Finding her and then serving her have been frequently mentioned as problems. You can’t force someone to open the door. Not even for a sheriff.
I doubt anyone, including the lawyers, would consider using it that way.
But ALL of those 'If’s you outline just may enlighten the jury about the overall tension on that farm. Not tension from one sides bad behavior either, but both sides behaving badly.
Not that it excuses shooting anyone
But it just might explain why one party would consider arming themselves : LK mentioned being afraid and made posts about her guns on SM, after all
The big bad bear roaring, and the Lil tiny harmless mouse poking the bear in the foot with a thorn.
That scenario.
What could go wrong if they both are unwilling to back down, calm the feud or simply not add fuel to the fire by adding bad behavior or weapons to it?
None of that discussion “might explain why one party would consider arming themselves”. All those annoying behaviors you allege LK engaged in needed to be dealt with through civil or criminal courts, not with guns. That was the whole point of the previous post.
Yours is the best example yet of the very common technique of putting in the standard disclaimer - no one deserves to be shot- then stating a bunch of -usually unproven- claims as to why her alleged behavior poked the bear and made him shoot her.
It’s like saying “Standard disclaimer: no one should be body shamed. A lot of people seem to think Susie Q is hideously obese.” You probably think you are being more subtle that that, but you’re not.
Surely the almost daily calls to 911 and the police, and the complaints to SS are more reliable evidence of “tensions” on the farm than anonymous bulletin board posters posting “criticisms” of the victim 7 months after the fact.
Do I read you correctly that you fancy yourself “enlightening the jury” (on MBs behalf) by posting your “criticisms” of LK?
Playing on a loop in my brain right now is Dionne Warwick’s “Walk on By”…However,
Imagine if Lauren had spent her energy getting well, tending to her horses and dogs and living life instead of producing volumes of vengeful, hateful, bullying, inaccurate SM posts after she was released from the hospital. Yeah, yeah, yeah, she has every right and all that to defend herself against all the hateful people. Gosh, what would those hateful people have to chat about had she stopped all her posts!
By the way, I doubt any of us fancy ourselves influencing the jury (on MB’s behalf) by posting criticisms of LK…she is doing a fabulous job of that all by herself. You hit the nail on the head - it’s been 7 months and LK is still posting vitriol at anyone who doesn’t support her “explanations” of her actions, including calling her on her false allegations about others.
Your time would be better spent chatting with LK on moving on until the trial and backing off her hateful posts I suspect.
Wow, there’s some serious reach on the part of she who may not be named or quoted or responded to, huh?
In a ‘The lady doth protest too much’ kinda way, no?
If one is not willing to consider that all parties on that farm had a part in the building of tensions on that same farm, then lack of bias is seriously, erm, lacking.
As for parties still, as in to this day, posting vitriol…
Well honestly, I can point to only one side of this conflict who hadn’t posted any of it that I have seen.
Not one single post on SM that anyone has mentioned [and I imagine it would have been noted if they existed],… but instead seeking a lawyer, a PI, the local authorities and perhaps more, in order to deal with the civil matter that was ongoing, and the tensions that were clearly accruing.
EDIT
It makes me wonder if he had been posting his concerns online they may have been taken more seriously. Which is a very sad thought.
The whole situation is sad, of course.
I must have failed to understand AF’s post, then. I thought she was saying that the “usefulness” of her contributions was that the jury would be “enlightened”. Perhaps you could let her speak for herself.
You have, however, made one good point. To the extent any of the 19,000 pages of SM drivel is admitted into evidence, I strongly suspect that the pages that are admitted will be just the ones which document that LK has a history of making false accusations of fraud (if indeed she has)
(prior to the shooting). That’s because I think that Bilinkas is preparing to defend against a prosecution theory that the motive for the shooting was to cover up fraud. I strongly doubt that the many thousands of pages of mean girl FB squabbles are remotely relevant.
Apparently you managed to scroll on by the posts in which I said I considered it patronizing to “advise” someone else not to post, even if their motivation is motherly concern for the well being of the poster.
Here you are patronizingly tellingly me my “time would be better spent chatting with LK” “to back off her hateful posts”. “You suspect”.
For those of you who choose to simultaneously post on 2 different forums your thoughts about LK, using as a pretext the news in the March 3 article, it’s not that hard to arbitrage between the two. The more you “chat” with her on FB, the more you compromise your anonymity here. But your call.This looks to me like a response to a YD post.Isn’t there still an ignore button in these forums? If so, why doesn’t everyone use it to ignore Yankee Duchess?
One wonders.
If you choose to do things the right way, quietly… and here is where you end up.
Would you have ended up here anyway, regardless of how you handled it?
So much time, energy, money,… wasted and there will, ultimately, be no winners in this.
In that the clock can not be turned back. The harm, all of it in every direction, is done and can’t be undone.
At least it appears the girlfriends kids didn’t end up pulled into it with the faked concern phoned in to CPS.
Talk about a tragedy that could have been.
And again, one party had a lawyer, a PI, and local authorities involved in order to loop those agencies and the proper channels in towards resolving whatever the conflict was.
The other seems to not have done that, but instead tried to perhaps do their own evidence collecting, and attempts at… who knows what with the charges levied through CPS, SS et al.?
If they had both just gotten a lawyer, and followed their respective lawyers direction to resolve whatever their issues were, would we be reading about this on here, would the disaster have happened at all?
There is not.
Bummer. Guess I’ll have to break out the Boxed Wine and Guac
I do try to focus on the fact that the kids weren’t directly sucked into the CPS vortex.
I certainly want to believe that the disaster wouldn’t have happened. It pains me to entertain the idea that it was inevitable - for whatever reason.
As has been mentioned in this thread (and other such threads), the ignore function on this forum does not work and has not worked since we started with this platform.
I normally scroll on by, and this is likely my last look at this thread until there is new information.
LK recording conversations (illegally) so that she could prove that MB was defrauding her (or more correctly her father since she has no apparent means of her own) is ludicrous the nth degree!!!
Many of us have been in less than honest training/boarding situations with our horses. We quickly minimize the damage, and move on. Any other reaction would not serve the health and well being of our horses. They are the most vulnerable in such situations. If anyone thinks otherwise, they are in need of a harsh reality check.
Heads up, I’m not engaging in any further discussion with you YD. Am I being rude and dismissive, damn sure I am !!
Without being rude or dismissive (not sarcasm), Wilbury disagrees with my answer to Eggbutt regarding LKs intent in staying on, and considers it ludicrous. I have zero problem with statements by others that they disagree with what I post.
Disagreeing is fine. Ignoring is fine. Declining to engage is fine.
ETA Like you, I have been the victim of very low level fraud, and attempted middling fraud at the hands of pros. I absolutely walked away rather than document and sue or threaten to sue. I even tried to leave on superficially good terms with the fraudster, rather than vent at them. But LK seems to have a different approach, and her confrontational style is STILL not a legitimate reason for shooting her.
See you April 7!
For everyone saying “at least the kids weren’t involved in the CPS investigation”. CPS does not just take the parent’s word, the children are interviewed and asked questions about what may or may not have happened. Imagine how scary that has to be for younger kids. Kids are not stupid, they know the repercussions of having CPS come and talk to them. Making false accusations is one of the most disgusting things that someone could do!
I don’t think the kids were on site that day. No one has said they were there that day that I can recall at any rate.
Yes, I agree that making false accusations to CPS is a low thing to do. I suspect CPS employees don’t like being yanked around that way either.
The kids were not on site, but they were still interviewed.
I did not say they were not involved in the CPS investigation.
By ‘pulled into it’ [see quote below] I was referring to the greater hullabaloo wrt the strife between MB and LK and that the CPS issue went no further than that investigation, ie the kids being removed from their home which is what I was thinking wrt the ‘a tragedy that could have been’ comment.
I wonder what the intent was with that call to CPS. A false claim that resulted in the kids being removed could have been devastating to the kids and their family. Who does that? Who risks that, by falsely claiming they are in danger? SMH
So re the bold I added in your quote, I concur!
And wrt the character of the caller, I think that just about says it all about them.
'At least it appears the girlfriends kids didn’t end up pulled into it with the faked concern phoned in to CPS.
Talk about a tragedy that could have been.’
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