Sport Horse Spotlight

Real Estate Spotlight

Hart_Barn 1

Sale Spotlight

COTH_without Subscribe
  • Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You�re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the Forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it�details of personal disputes may be better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts, though are not legally obligated to do so, regardless of content.

Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting. Moderators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts unless they have been alerted and have determined that a post, thread or user has violated the Forums� policies. Moderators do not regularly independently monitor the Forums for such violations.

Profanity, outright vulgarity, blatant personal insults or otherwise inappropriate statements will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

Users may provide their positive or negative experiences with or opinions of companies, products, individuals, etc.; however, accounts involving allegations of criminal behavior against named individuals or companies MUST be first-hand accounts and may NOT be made anonymously.

If a situation has been reported upon by a reputable news source or addressed by law enforcement or the legal system it is open for discussion, but if an individual wants to make their own claims of criminal behavior against a named party in the course of that discussion, they too must identify themselves by first and last name and the account must be first-person.

Criminal allegations that do not satisfy these requirements, when brought to our attention, may be removed pending satisfaction of these criteria, and we reserve the right to err on the side of caution when making these determinations.

Credible threats of suicide will be reported to the police along with identifying user information at our disposal, in addition to referring the user to suicide helpline resources such as 1-800-SUICIDE or 1-800-273-TALK.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it�s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users� profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses � Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it�s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who�s selling it, it doesn�t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions � Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services � Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products � While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements � Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be �bumped� excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues � Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators� discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the �alert� button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your �Ignore� list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you�d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user�s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 5/9/18)
See more
See less

That's a twist

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by AnotherRound View Post
    So wait - what career?

    But what I can't get over, she went back to the now empty property, her horses were gone, everyone was gone, and effing lived there for how many months? The property she wouldn't leave when asked, and when MB started eviction proceedings to get her off of, and wouldn't pay rent on, where she harrassed this guy until she broke his brain and shot her, she goes back and squats there until what last week. The brass balls. And didn't feed the barn cats while she was there, either, apparently, a neighbor put on her personal page a photo of a barn cat that wasn't being fed.

    And what freaking carreer? She's not a professional, wasn't headed in that direction, and claims she was an ammy. Just doesn't stop. [QUOTE]

    Um, no. The picture of the cat was posted by neighbor. Further, I believe we & our lawyers would know exactly when we left, not you, though.

    In addition, there are far too many “professionals,” in the horse world without a day of real training to become such. I could declare myself “pro,” right now if I so wished & I will, when I feel the time is right. That said, I am still an AA & my job has been the same for 20 yrs. Non-horse related. My “career,” is Dressage. By “career,” I mean, “becoming the best rider & horsewoman I can possibly become,” - there’s a regular MB quote for ya!
    ????????????????????

    Comment


    • Originally posted by strangewings View Post

      Did you listen to all of the 911 calls that MB made? Over the multiple 911 calls, MB indicated that he was threatened, harassed, and menaced by LK and RG, driven from his home due to their behavior/actions and felt he and his family were unsafe and fearful. I'm paraphrasing - wording may not be exactly that used in the calls. That's what people are considering evidence of provocation by her in the lead-up to the shooting - they are not simply assuming she "must have" done something based on past behavior.

      Vague, sure, so we have no idea exactly what she was doing to make him say that (trespassing and disturbing the peace were reasons given for other calls), but the documents were only mentioned once briefly at the beginning of one of the latter calls. We don't have any reason to believe "documents" were involved at all prior to that call, and so refusing to sign them seems like a minor element in this situation.

      Standard disclaimer: Not an alter, don't know anyone, not on any side, don't think she should have been shot, not trying to blame the victim or say she should "take responsibility", no question MB shot her. Terrible situation all around and I hope the other clients and employees are doing ok.
      Yes, if you accept MBs statement (the statement of the alleged attempted murderer) that they were being harassed, as clear evidence they were being harassed, that was provocation. LK says she was not harassing. You believe him (the alleged perp in the shooting) and not her, the victim of the shooting.

      Disbelieving the victim of the shooting and taking the word of the shooter, when you have no evidence beyond the claim of the shooter, I consider victim blaming.

      Does she get a presumption of innocence? Presumption that possibly she did not provoke the bear?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

        If she had left, she would not have been shot. True.

        My point was you said she aggravated him, poking the bear, I do not see evidence that she “did” anything to aggravate him
        beyond refusing to sign documents. Not signing documents aggravated him to the point he called 911, but I think she has the right to decline to sign documents, regardless of the nature of the documents.
        Yes..... exactly. Exactly.
        And, evidence is everything. At least in every court system I know of, in civilization. Personally, if I need to call the police, I have evidence to show them. For people claiming in their 911 calls, they’re being “serially harassed,” one might surmise they would record any & all incidents, as well as installing cameras. They had cameras to plug in. They had WiFi to run them. I’d be asking everyone “why didn’t they simply place the cameras up?” Except we know already to this answer, unfortunately. And to the point of whoever first said “had she left, she wouldn’t have been shot,” I have 2 retorts.
        1.) Don’t be so sure.
        2.) Not leaving somewhere one had a right to be - does not warrant being killed. Or..... “attempted KILLED.” Good god. (Smh)
        ????????????????????

        Comment


        • Originally posted by FatDinah View Post

          LK has been sued by the property owners. (The start of this thread ☺). Should we assume she's liable for damages just because there is a legal filing? Yet, you assume just because Barisone is charged that he's guilty of premeditated murder.
          I mean, isn't Michael Barisone also a defendant in the suit by the property owner (per the first post)?
          Let me apologize in advance.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by ladyj79 View Post

            I mean, isn't Michael Barisone also a defendant in the suit by the property owner (per the first post)?
            Yes, he is. Or at least his business entity. I suspect that is an avenue to sue where there are actual assets since he, as an indivi dual in jail, likely can say he doesn't have any.
            Godwin is also named as a defendant.
            One interpretation is that the plaintiff thinks they all contributed to the damages suffered. Another is that the plaintiff is firing a scatter shot case so they can get money from someone.
            Which goes to my point, civil filings and criminal filings are not proof of anyone's innocence/guilt or responsibility.
            Neither are unsubstantiated claims of incriminating videos and audio tapes and vague accusations of conspiracies for murder, bronze medals, and trainer overcharges.
            And, as an aside, if I had someone on my property putting up surveillance cameras, bugging the barn, and videoing me with a phone, I would feel harassed.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

              Yes, if you accept MBs statement (the statement of the alleged attempted murder) that they were being harassed, as clear evidence they were being harassed, that was provocation. LK says she was not harassing. You believe him (the alleged perp in the shooting) and not her, the victim of the shooting.

              Disbelieving the victim of the shooting and taking the word of the shooter, when you have no evidence beyond the claim of the shooter, I consider victim blaming.

              Does she get a presumption of innocence? Presumption that possibly she did not provoke the bear?
              Agreed that this is only evidence of her doing the things he says if you take him at his word on the calls. Lauren correctly points out that anyone can say anything on a 911 call and we only have his statements on those calls and not her version. So I am not saying what I or anyone should believe about what he says is happening on those calls.

              I am just pointing out that there are calls that predate any mention of documents that indicate there were apparently escalating problems/tensions unrelated to her refusal to sign documents, which has been your singular focus. My point is mainly about the role of the documents, not about what she did or didn't do in the escalation.

              She says important information will come out at the trial and that there is more to this than any of us know. I believe that and am frankly not going to believe much else from either party until more details are public.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by x-halt-salute View Post
                smoofox wishing your guy a full and speedy recovery from the pneumonia.
                Me, too, many many times over!

                I must admit that I don’t ever remembering hearing of a horse getting pneumonia! Where have I been? In Lucky-Land I suppose! 😱

                Comment


                • Originally posted by ohnoO View Post

                  Me, too, many many times over!

                  I must admit that I don’t ever remembering hearing of a horse getting pneumonia! Where have I been? In Lucky-Land I suppose! 😱
                  My horse as a yearlin g inhaled some feed (long story how) and my vet put him on antibiotics as a precaution against infection/pneumonia.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by ladyj79 View Post

                    I mean, isn't Michael Barisone also a defendant in the suit by the property owner (per the first post)?
                    Yes, and my understanding is that the property owner is an LLC partly owned by MB! I think that was the original “twist”.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post
                      I have not read the previous three threads and don’t intend to.
                      I am dubious that you have not read the other threads - but if in fact you haven't, that is even worse. That would mean that you just stormed in here on your white charger with guns blazing and proceeded to go on the attack without any idea of what had gone on before. You just merrily painted everyone with a broad brush of condemnation and contempt, took on the role of martyred hero and started trying to light as many fires as possible in any way possible - and then cried foul when you were called out for it.

                      If you indeed have not read the other threads and yet continue to "know" everything about other posters' motives etc., then maybe you should get off your high horse and actually read them.

                      ***

                      Vet just left. We did ultrasounds and thankfully, there are no fluid pockets in his lungs. Heavy course of meds over the next few days, quiet (?!?!) and stall rest. Something this guy does not particularly like...

                      We have no idea how he got it - aspirated something at some point? Who knows. He was fine one day, galloping and playing in his pasture - and then WHAM!! bad the next. This guy is truly a bubble-wrap horse... if there is some ailment to be had or injury to be subjected to, he will do it/find it.


                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Angela Freda View Post

                        THERE
                        WAS
                        NO
                        "BAIL"
                        HEARING.
                        Weird. My father, sister & RG were all there. It was referred to by the court as “bail hearing.” If there is a technical “new name,” no one at the courthouse has used it in my presence. And anyway, who cares what the “name,” is. It’s the purpose which matters. He was denied release- period.
                        ????????????????????

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

                          Yes, and my understanding is that the property owner is an LLC partly owned by MB! I think that was the original “twist”.
                          If he has partners in the LLC, that would explain why he would be sued and why it would be his other business entity. Their aim as far as Barisone could be to obtain his share of the property/LLC as a settlement. And to shield the LLC from lawsuits.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Angela Freda View Post

                            So the facts of the matter mean not even enough to you to investigate, even when the sources to investigate are handed to you... noted.
                            Ughh. Leave YD alone about the “term.” Shes right about the purpose & you know it. He was, in fact, denied bail/release. That is the only “FACT,” which is relevant to your blathering.
                            ????????????????????

                            Comment


                            • MB's attorney, Edward Bilinkas, is considered one of the very best in his field. The charge currently is first degree attempted murder. All it takes is one juror with reasonable doubt. I have no doubt Mr. Bilinkas will earn his fee for this case, and like most high profile attorneys, he wouldn't have taken it without a reasonable expectation of a good verdict. Personally, I have no earthly idea what MB's prison term might end up being and couldn't begin to speculate. For sure, I suspect Mr. Bilinikas will use everything at his discretion to help his case.

                              That's not a threat, harassment, victim shaming, nothing.....simple fact. Screw the forum debate about a piece of paper or a signature, 911 calls, bronze medal or anything else that has been debated for days now. As soon as the arraignment is held, Mr. Bilinkas will begin his work. I sure hope the trial is televised!!

                              Okay, YankeeDuchess, time for your response. It really would help your arguments to read the other large thread for background on both parties since you've recently drifted on to this campaign to defend LK.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by strangewings View Post

                                Agreed that this is only evidence of her doing the things he says if you take him at his word on the calls. Lauren correctly points out that anyone can say anything on a 911 call and we only have his statements on those calls and not her version. So I am not saying what I or anyone should believe about what he says is happening on those calls.

                                I am just pointing out that there are calls that predate any mention of documents that indicate there were apparently escalating problems/tensions unrelated to her refusal to sign documents, which has been your singular focus. My point is mainly about the role of the documents, not about what she did or didn't do in the escalation.

                                She says important information will come out at the trial and that there is more to this than any of us know. I believe that and am frankly not going to believe much else from either party until more details are public.
                                We do have her version. she says they were not doing the harassing.
                                He said (on 911 calls): She is harassing us, we feel threatened.
                                She said in posts: We were not harassing, we felt threatened.
                                Turns out 3 days later HE does the shooting (is alleged attempted murderer); SHE is clearly the victim of the shooting.

                                Until there is evidence from police reports, etc, it is the classic HE said/SHE said. I see it as victim blaming to the extent people believe the shooter and disbelieve the victim, when there is no actual evidence beyond “He said”.

                                My point about the documents is that it strikes me as really bizarre, and not an appropriate use of police resources to call 911 over someone refusing to sign documents. If he was attempting to intimidate her by calling 911 over documents, it does not seem a stretch to imagine him trying to intimidate her by calling 911 alleging harassment.
                                Last edited by YankeeDuchess; Jan. 1, 2020, 08:31 PM.

                                Comment


                                • Originally posted by La-LaPopRider View Post

                                  Ughh. Leave YD alone about the “term.” Shes right about the purpose & you know it. He was, in fact, denied bail/release. That is the only “FACT,” which is relevant to your blathering.
                                  There are only two posters on this thread one should accuse of "blathering" and Angela Freda isn't one of them.

                                  Comment


                                  • Originally posted by CanteringCarrot View Post
                                    I think that the competitor and/or customer in the case of a rider-trainer relationship needs to be their own advocate. A GOOD trainer will support you if you say that you want to ride second level again to earn your patch or whatever. At the end of the day it is your (general) horse(s) and your money. If you want to ride 1 or 6 more second level tests, then do it. Be your own advocate. Do your research. Manage/record your scores.

                                    I've not been in such a relationship with a trainer where I've depended on them heavily, so I admit I have little experience with that dynamic. Yes, I lesson weekly, and go to clinics, but ultimately manage my own competing. And I understand that some people live in a completely different word when it comes to their style of training and/or their relationship with their trainer. I'm not bashing anyone for this, but offering the idea to be somewhat independent so you're not taken advantage of, fooled, or whatever. I do get that hindsight is always 20/20.



                                    And I don't think anyone should talk down to riders at the "lower levels", we want the sport to grow, we want to encourage other riders. Not be a DQ that makes others shy away from entering the sandbox. I don't care what level you (g) ride at, at least you're out there doing it! So what if you ride at a lower level than I do? Again, at least you're out there doing it.
                                    If horses go to a show, (at this show barn) they are trailered by the barn, documents are brought to organizers by the trainers, ride times, rings & judges are given to us by staff. Barn staff. This way, when several students are showing, a trainer can be assigned to each student in each of their warm ups.

                                    We do our own online entries. (Which can 2 hrs sometimes - especially for multi day, separate shows with numerous horses needing stalls, paddocks & a multitude of classes.) I’ve had to email show managers on MANY occasions bc of mistakes in class entries, amount of total tack stalls vs horse stalls, etc...... Every time I apologize. And, every time, they always reply something to the affect of “it’s no problem, this is minor compared to some other competitors requests. We’ll fix it, no worries.” Just as a trainer of a show barn show barn should do, if they make a mistake- or need to fix a mistake made a client. (I.E - student forgetting to get signatures from a horse’s owner who is NOT the rider, when the owner will not be present to sign at the entry desk to receive bridle numbers.)
                                    ????????????????????

                                    Comment


                                    • Originally posted by smoofox View Post

                                      I am dubious that you have not read the other threads - but if in fact you haven't, that is even worse. That would mean that you just stormed in here on your white charger with guns blazing and proceeded to go on the attack without any idea of what had gone on before. You just merrily painted everyone with a broad brush of condemnation and contempt, took on the role of martyred hero and started trying to light as many fires as possible in any way possible - and then cried foul when you were called out for it.

                                      If you indeed have not read the other threads and yet continue to "know" everything about other posters' motives etc., then maybe you should get off your high horse and actually read them.

                                      ***

                                      Vet just left. We did ultrasounds and thankfully, there are no fluid pockets in his lungs. Heavy course of meds over the next few days, quiet (?!?!) and stall rest. Something this guy does not particularly like...

                                      We have no idea how he got it - aspirated something at some point? Who knows. He was fine one day, galloping and playing in his pasture - and then WHAM!! bad the next. This guy is truly a bubble-wrap horse... if there is some ailment to be had or injury to be subjected to, he will do it/find it.

                                      I am basing my posts mostly on what I have read on this particular thread. I have dipped into several of the previous threads but have not read them in their entirety.

                                      ETA. If, in reading the previous, closed threads, I could assume everything written was factual, or even 90% factual, I would read them. The problem with almost all information sourced from the internet, especially FB, is that a high percentage of the stuff posted is not true. If you swap it around 50 to 100 times, it then becomes accepted as fact, even if it is not true.
                                      A. If I don’t read the previous threads, I have ignorance on issue X discussed there.
                                      B. If I do read through all of the previous threads, I come to this thread with a bunch of unsubstantiated statements that were presented to me as fact, which may not be facts.

                                      It is by no means clear to me that the ignorance in option A is worse than thinking I “know” X, Y, Z are facts, when some or all of them may not be facts in option B.
                                      In fact I think B is worse. It is difficult to understand the overall picture if you are relying on several premises which you take as true, but are not true. Sort of an application of the computer GIGO idea. Same reason jurors are rejected if they come to the case with lots of advance knowledge of the case.

                                      Here are statements that I have seen repeated on this thread as if they are known to be true, which after careful reading of all the information on this thread, I, in my own mind, think are untrue or unsubstantiated.
                                      1. They were squatters.
                                      2. MB was in the process of evicting them.
                                      3. There was an eviction notice posted on their door.
                                      4. The reason for her call to SS was to allege child abuse.

                                      I don’t treat any of those statements as known facts, but they were swapped around as facts. I’m guessing that some or all of these unsubstantiated assertions originated on the previous threads.

                                      In the trial it is likely that the truth/untruth of these statements will come out.
                                      Last edited by YankeeDuchess; Jan. 1, 2020, 08:48 PM.

                                      Comment


                                      • Originally posted by Angela Freda View Post

                                        If you have time to spend all day, on the porch, reading a book... you have time to make a spreadsheet of your horses, tests, and scores to know where you are wrt any achievements as outlined by the body that issues the prize for said achievement... then sit and read on the porch for the rest of the day.

                                        Honestly, if I'd missed my Bronze due to one score, I certainly would be too embarrassed to admit it, and be doing my level best to get myself ready to get it done, and move on... rather than basically sue my way to that award. But then i enjoy the process of Dressage more than the ribbons, medals and other accolades.
                                        Uh... yeah. The issue isn’t the score. The scores are there. The apparent issue is the judge. (An issue no one seemed to contest when MB & MH posted it on their walls in June.) No matter the outcome, they will need to explain that.... not me. And, for the last time- ..... nah. There already was “last time,” for what I’ve already said in previous posts.

                                        You have no information. That must bother you. But, you will not be getting any info from me! The info, rather “content, of your posts speaks volumes of your character & seeming obsession to perpetuate misinformation. You &
                                        @tryingtogettthere seem to have a very special interest in all of this. Don’t you have horses to ride? Friends to chat with? Anything? (Rhetorical.)
                                        ????????????????????

                                        Comment


                                        • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

                                          We do have her version. she says they were not doing the harassing.
                                          He said (on 911 calls): She is harassing us, we feel threatened.
                                          She said in posts: We were not harassing, we felt threatened.
                                          Turns out 3 days later HE does the shooting (is alleged attempted murderer); SHE is clearly the victim of the shooting.

                                          Until there is evidence from police reports, etc, it is the classic HE said/SHE said. I see it as victim blaming to the extent people believe the shooter and disbelieve the victim, when there is no actual evidence beyond “He said”.

                                          My point about the documents is that it strikes me as really bizarre, and not an at appropriate use of police resources to call 911 over someone refusing to sign documents. If he was attempting to intimidate her by calling 911 over documents, it does not seem a stretch to imagine him trying to intimidate her by calling 911 alleging harassment.
                                          MIC DROP! (Standing O !!!)
                                          ????????????????????

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X