Sport Horse Spotlight

Real Estate Spotlight

97 Spring Lane (1)

Sale Spotlight

  • 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

  • I wonder, based on LK's statements that other charges may be forthcoming if others will be charged with conspiracy based on the "inadmissible" recordings? Unless names are spoken, how does one 100% identify the speakers?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by MHM View Post

      Not to mention that anyone can delete a previous post at any time, which will throw all succeeding post numbers right out the window.

      Also, did I invent the notation QFP? I started using it on here a few months ago, quite possibly on the original thread on this whole debacle. But maybe it had been used elsewhere before that, and I just never saw it.
      Yes QFP has been along quite a long while.
      Yo/Yousolong April 23rd, 1985- April 15th, 2014

      http://notesfromadogwalker.com/2012/...m-a-sanctuary/

      Comment


      • Originally posted by MHM View Post

        I just deleted my earlier post about this as a test, and the post numbers did reconfigure.
        Good to know. So no trace remains to the normal user. Interesting. Thank you.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by GreenWithEnvy View Post

          I seriously doubt potential jurors are eagerly reading COTH at this point. Not everyone in NJ is interested in this case.

          As far as character assassination on SM, LK's past behavior on SM has written that story all by her own making. The "lies" allegedly told by two passionate posters on the larger thread have considerable truth to her past behavior. Will that information be admissible in court? I have absolutely no idea but I'm sure past behavior (of all 3 parties) will be introduced at some point and will carry considerable weight to some jurors.
          Any past “bad behaviour” doesn’t seem relevant to LK being shot any more than someone’s past sexual history is relevant to being raped.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by GreenWithEnvy View Post

            Good to know. So no trace remains to the normal user. Interesting. Thank you.
            Hahaha. In this case I think I quoted MHM moments before the deletion, so there is a trace.

            But if not quoted, no.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by x-halt-salute View Post

              Post numbers shifted in the very recent "should I pay for a lesson I cancel at the last minute" thread when OP packed up her toys, deleted a few posts, and went home. I wouldn't have noticed, except someone used post # instead of quote, and it made no sense after the deletion.
              It’s always entertaining when that happens. Another reason to quote a crazy original post for posterity before it evaporates.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Gestalt View Post

                Not being facetious but, that's what I thought all during the OJ trial. I was shocked, and sickened, by his acquittal.
                Me too. However in OJ’s case nobody saw him commit the crime, which makes reasonable doubt easier. Here the shooting victims are alive and there is no doubt that MB shot them. I believe the difficult part will be proving intent / pre-meditation beyond a reasonable doubt.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by BigMama1 View Post

                  Any past “bad behaviour” doesn’t seem relevant to LK being shot any more than someone’s past sexual history is relevant to being raped.
                  I certainly don't have the information to argue one way or another, but I would think (hypothetically speaking) any verified past provocation by either party would be fair to admit in a trial to show state of mind of either or all parties. Similar to abused women who take matters into their own hands and do harm to their abuser and end up being found not guilty. Again, perhaps I've watched too much Law & Order and real crime drama shows for my own good. This situation seems different than wearing provocative clothing, being raped and having John Q public say the woman asked for it because of her attire.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by GreenWithEnvy View Post

                    I did not know the post numbers reconfigured. I thought they simply skipped the deleted post number. Good to know.




                    YIKES. I honestly, genuinely did not understand that. No more post #s for me, if neither the contents nor the number is fixed.

                    I genuinely was not trying to be tricky.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post





                      YIKES. I honestly, genuinely did not understand that. No more post #s for me, if neither the contents nor the number is fixed.

                      I genuinely was not trying to be tricky.
                      All good. We all have to learn the ins and outs of any SM platform.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by GreenWithEnvy View Post

                        All good. We all have to learn the ins and outs of any SM platform.
                        Just FYI. There is a brief period when a post here can be edited without a trace for about 10-20 minutes after it goes up. If it is edited after that, you will see the notation at the bottom to indicate it was edited, and at what time. When you edit it, you have the option to include a reason, such as typo, etc.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by BigMama1 View Post

                          Me too. However in OJ’s case nobody saw him commit the crime, which makes reasonable doubt easier. Here the shooting victims are alive and there is no doubt that MB shot them. I believe the difficult part will be proving intent / pre-meditation beyond a reasonable doubt.
                          I always thought that the murderer had to be someone the Akita knew, as I wouldn't expect a dog like that to stand by while his mistress was being murdered by an "unknown" person.
                          "Oh, sure, you may be able to take down one smurf, but mark my words: You bonk one smurf, you better be ready for a blue wave."---Bucky Katt

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by NEEDS A NAP View Post

                            I read them.
                            Thank you.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by GreenWithEnvy View Post

                              I certainly don't have the information to argue one way or another, but I would think (hypothetically speaking) any verified past provocation by either party would be fair to admit in a trial to show state of mind of either or all parties. Similar to abused women who take matters into their own hands and do harm to their abuser and end up being found not guilty. Again, perhaps I've watched too much Law & Order and real crime drama shows for my own good. This situation seems different than wearing provocative clothing, being raped and having John Q public say the woman asked for it because of her attire.
                              Portraying MB in your scenario as equivalent to an abused woman who took matters into her own hands would be laughable if it wasn't such a disgusting insult to women who really are physically abused in such a serious way and get no help that their literal last option is to take matters into their own hands.

                              A nuisance tenant/boarder is no more responsible for being shot by her landlord/trainer than a provocatively dressed woman who dances closely all night with a man at a club is responsible for being raped at the end of the night by said man.


                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by ynl063w View Post

                                Portraying MB in your scenario as equivalent to an abused woman who took matters into her own hands would be laughable if it wasn't such a disgusting insult to women who really are physically abused in such a serious way and get no help that their literal last option is to take matters into their own hands.

                                A nuisance tenant/boarder is no more responsible for being shot by her landlord/trainer than a provocatively dressed woman who dances closely all night with a man at a club is responsible for being raped at the end of the night by said man.

                                You might want to read my comment again. In NO WAY did I compare MB to the scenario I mentioned. I was indicating that all sorts of previous behavior can and will be admissible I would think by both parties.

                                Comment


                                • Originally posted by ynl063w View Post

                                  Portraying MB in your scenario as equivalent to an abused woman who took matters into her own hands would be laughable if it wasn't such a disgusting insult to women who really are physically abused in such a serious way and get no help that their literal last option is to take matters into their own hands.

                                  A nuisance tenant/boarder is no more responsible for being shot by her landlord/trainer than a provocatively dressed woman who dances closely all night with a man at a club is responsible for being raped at the end of the night by said man.

                                  And as this thread has mentioned so many times, NO ONE KNOWS THE ACTUAL FACTS on this forum (other than one person). I have no idea what the reason for the shooting was. I know we've been told by one person, but I will wait for collaboration before taking that as actual fact.

                                  Comment


                                  • Originally posted by GreenWithEnvy View Post

                                    You might want to read my comment again. In NO WAY did I compare MB to the scenario I mentioned. I was indicating that all sorts of previous behavior can and will be admissible I would think by both parties.
                                    You compared this case to cases where abused women take matters into their own hands and are found not guilty. In those cases, there is a victim (the abused woman), and a perpetrator (the abuser). You stated that the MB/LK case is similar to this, indicating that either MB or LK is similar to the victim in your scenario. MB certainly did take matters into his own hands, but you say that you did not mean that? Are you saying that LK is similar to the victim in your example who took matters into her own hands? How did she do that? How can she be found not guilty if she is not the one going to trial? Is there someone else involved in this case who is the equivalent of the victim in your example of a comparable case?

                                    Comment


                                    • Originally posted by ynl063w View Post

                                      You compared this case to cases where abused women take matters into their own hands and are found not guilty. In those cases, there is a victim (the abused woman), and a perpetrator (the abuser). You stated that the MB/LK case is similar to this, indicating that either MB or LK is similar to the victim in your scenario. MB certainly did take matters into his own hands, but you say that you did not mean that? Are you saying that LK is similar to the victim in your example who took matters into her own hands? How did she do that? How can she be found not guilty if she is not the one going to trial? Is there someone else involved in this case who is the equivalent of the victim in your example of a comparable case?
                                      I AM SAYING PREVIOUS BEHAVIOR CAN BE ENTERED BY EITHER PARTY TO SUBSTANTIATE THEIR CASE TO SHOW MENTAL STATE ON THE DAY OF AUGUST 7 OR EVEN THE WEEK PRECEEDING. FOR EXAMPLE: the previous behavior of an abuser toward his victim showing a pattern of behavior!!!!!!!

                                      Comment


                                      • Just to be clear, YD never quoted me verbatim. She paraphrased me, and that, poorly, changing the meaning of what I said to suit her general shaming of anyone with a different opinion than her. Tra la.
                                        Airborne? Oh. Yes, he can take a joke. Once. After that, the joke's on you.

                                        Comment


                                        • Originally posted by GreenWithEnvy View Post

                                          I AM SAYING PREVIOUS BEHAVIOR CAN BE ENTERED BY EITHER PARTY TO SUBSTANTIATE THEIR CASE TO SHOW MENTAL STATE ON THE DAY OF AUGUST 7 OR EVEN THE WEEK PRECEEDING. FOR EXAMPLE: the previous behavior of an abuser toward his victim showing a pattern of behavior!!!!!!!
                                          Quoted (verbatim) in case anyone didn't get the point, which the seem to keep not getting. Golly, what's with these people turning other people's words around!

                                          Good job, GWE

                                          Airborne? Oh. Yes, he can take a joke. Once. After that, the joke's on you.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X