Sport Horse Spotlight

calucci_cf_sq

Real Estate Spotlight

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

Barisone Pleads Not Guilty

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

  • Originally posted by FitzE View Post

    One thing stands out: it was reported in the NYT article that when questioned about the call to CPS, her answer was "she did not recall placing the call to child services." So, she is able to remember minute details before, during, and after being shot. Yet this detail - did she dial a phone and make a report to an agency - which would have happened prior to any shooting/trauma is somehow foggy? But other contemporaneous actions (she self-reports calling SS, installing cameras, calling 911, etc.) are not foggy.

    While her statement that she cannot recall calling CPS is not evidence, it is notable that she cannot provide a yes or no answer when she insists on black and white certainty wrt her recall of almost every other aspect of the events leading up to and occurring on the day of the shooting. It strongly suggests she knows she cannot deny making the call (e.g., there is evidence and it will be produced at trial) but admitting it would look bad, so she simply "doesn't remember."
    I believe it is called "convenient recollection". Everything has become rehearsed and more pat now that the trial is looming. I feel certain that is a common practice for parties of trials - to rehearse testimony and play devil's advocate. Heck, we're actually helping LK by asking so many questions the jurors would probably want to be answered, giving her plenty of time to form a response.

    I have no idea who the prosecuting attorney is, but I wonder if Ed Bilinkas would be considered a BNT or SEMI-BNT or even a Quasi-BNT as far as criminal attorneys?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by GreenWithEnvy View Post
      It just occurred to me it will be interesting to see who the witnesses will be at the trial. I imagine RC's testimony will be quite explosive explaining her need to sleep outside her horse's stall with a loaded weapon for protection.
      I mean, I guess if it can be proven that LK and RG were walking around the property armed and threatening everyone, it might maybe in some way make sense that the barn manager was armed and seemingly ready to fire at all times, but outside of that I don't get how the defense is going to use the fact that the barn staff was carrying loaded weapons as a way to make a case that it was even remotely acceptable and appropriate for MB to shoot a person TWICE at point blank range, and also attempt to shoot another person immediately after that.


      Comment


      • Originally posted by FitzE View Post

        One thing stands out: it was reported in the NYT article that when questioned about the call to CPS, her answer was "she did not recall placing the call to child services." So, she is able to remember minute details before, during, and after being shot. Yet this detail - did she dial a phone and make a report to an agency - which would have happened prior to any shooting/trauma is somehow foggy? But other contemporaneous actions (she self-reports calling SS, installing cameras, calling 911, etc.) are not foggy.

        While her statement that she cannot recall calling CPS is not evidence, it is notable that she cannot provide a yes or no answer when she insists on black and white certainty wrt her recall of almost every other aspect of the events leading up to and occurring on the day of the shooting. It strongly suggests she knows she cannot deny making the call (e.g., there is evidence and it will be produced at trial) but admitting it would look bad, so she simply "doesn’t remember."
        If there is evidence that she called CPS which will be produced at the trial, why be worried that “it would look bad” now? Whether she called CPS with a false allegation on MB is an important point to people who think her behavior prior to the shooting provoked MB into shooting her, but why does it matter to a jury in the attempted murder trial whether she called CPS or not?

        People are assuming she called CPS because apparently CPS showed up. My point has been that CPS showing up does not establish for a fact that she called CPS with a false accusation of child abuse. If she called SS for some other reason, for example alleging bullying by MB toward her, I find in plausible that SS after minimal follow up may have made a referral to CPS. I don’t know for a fact that she did not call CPS. I’m just saying that the fact that CPS showed up does not establish that she called in a false report to CPS. Or any report to CPS.

        I thought I saw a post of hers saying she was not aware of calling 911 after the shooting. I did not get the impression that her recollections in the minutes after the shooting were crystal clear.

        When did the NYT interview her? In the hospital?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by GreenWithEnvy View Post
          If I had the time I would organize all these threads and sort the comments to write a quasi-fiction book of everything that has been posted. It would be fascinating to get it all organized in one place, wouldn't it?

          It just occurred to me it will be interesting to see who the witnesses will be at the trial. I imagine RC's testimony will be quite explosive explaining her need to sleep outside her horse's stall with a loaded weapon for protection.
          So you know for a fact that RC was sleeping outside her horse’s stall with a loaded weapon? The pink handgun?

          That does sound explosive.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by ynl063w View Post

            I mean, I guess if it can be proven that LK and RG were walking around the property armed and threatening everyone, it might maybe in some way make sense that the barn manager was armed and seemingly ready to fire at all times, but outside of that I don't get how the defense is going to use the fact that the barn staff was carrying loaded weapons as a way to make a case that it was even remotely acceptable and appropriate for MB to shoot a person TWICE at point blank range, and also attempt to shoot another person immediately after that.

            I suspect everything and anything will be introduced to show the state of mind in the days leading up to the shooting. I still maintain the arrival of CPS was the straw that broke the camel's back so to speak emotionally.....seriously, how low was she willing to go to harass and intimidate? Nothing will surprise me in this trial.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

              So you know for a fact that RC was sleeping outside her horse’s stall with a loaded weapon? The pink handgun?

              That does sound explosive.
              It was well documented in the big thread. I don't know that the "pink" handgun was referenced but a gun was referenced in the big thread.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post


                When did the NYT interview her? In the hospital?
                Sarah Nir interviewed her and several others in September I believe. The article had several errors in it that many people pointed out and some were corrected in the online version.

                https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/15/n...ial-media.html

                Comment


                • Originally posted by GreenWithEnvy View Post

                  It was well documented in the big thread. I don't know that the "pink" handgun was referenced but a gun was referenced in the big thread.
                  I’m asking whether you personally know she was sleeping with a loaded gun, or whether the statement is an internet rumor.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by GreenWithEnvy View Post

                    I suspect everything and anything will be introduced to show the state of mind in the days leading up to the shooting. I still maintain the arrival of CPS was the straw that broke the camel's back so to speak emotionally.....seriously, how low was she willing to go to harass and intimidate? Nothing will surprise me in this trial.
                    Can you help me understand how your reply here relates to my post that you quoted, which was in reference to your assertion that the fact that RC was apparently sleeping outside of a horse's stall with a loaded gun within reach could potentially help MB's defense?

                    Unless there is evidence that LK and RG were roaming the property with loaded weapons, threatening anyone on the property, the fact that the barn manager was carrying a weapon makes the defense of MB MORE, not less, complicated. Especially if the gun that MB used is the same gun that RC was sleeping with.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

                      I’m asking whether you personally know she was sleeping with a loaded gun, or whether the statement is an internet rumor.
                      I wasn't there and I'm not going to play that game with you. Now, you want personal eye witness knowledge. It is amazing for someone so interested in this as you seem to have become, that you have not read the several hundred pages in the big thread. There is a wealth of information there that was not disputed by anyone.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by GreenWithEnvy View Post

                        Sarah Nir interviewed her and several others in September I believe. The article had several errors in it that many people pointed out and some were corrected in the online version.

                        https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/15/n...ial-media.html
                        The article was dated Oct 15,10 weeks after the shooting.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post
                          People are assuming she called CPS because apparently CPS showed up. My point has been that CPS showing up does not establish for a fact that she called CPS with a false accusation of child abuse. If she called SS for some other reason, for example alleging bullying by MB toward her, I find in plausible that SS after minimal follow up may have made a referral to CPS. I don’t know for a fact that she did not call CPS. I’m just saying that the fact that CPS showed up does not establish that she called in a false report to CPS. Or any report to CPS.
                          So in other words, you still don’t know.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by ynl063w View Post

                            Can you help me understand how your reply here relates to my post that you quoted, which was in reference to your assertion that the fact that RC was apparently sleeping outside of a horse's stall with a loaded gun within reach could potentially help MB's defense?

                            Unless there is evidence that LK and RG were roaming the property with loaded weapons, threatening anyone on the property, the fact that the barn manager was carrying a weapon makes the defense of MB MORE, not less, complicated. Especially if the gun that MB used is the same gun that RC was sleeping with.
                            As I clearly stated, it will show state of mind of others there. If someone was fearful enough to be sleeping outside their horse's stall to protect it from harm, what does that say? Were they afraid of MB/MH/JH or what? I suspect all of the surveillance videos will show if anyone was roaming the property at night. All of this is sheer speculation isn't it because we have not heard first hand from anyone other than LK?

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

                              The article was dated Oct 15,10 weeks after the shooting.
                              She interviewed people in September. It took several weeks for her to publish it.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by GreenWithEnvy View Post

                                I wasn't there and I'm not going to play that game with you. Now, you want personal eye witness knowledge. It is amazing for someone so interested in this as you seem to have become, that you have not read the several hundred pages in the big thread. There is a wealth of information there that was not disputed by anyone.
                                No problem. Just asking whether it was a fact or an “internet fact”. Turns out it is an “internet fact”.

                                Comment


                                • Originally posted by MHM View Post
                                  So in other words, you still don’t know.


                                  Correct. I do not know whether she called CPS or not.

                                  Comment


                                  • Originally posted by MHM View Post
                                    So in other words, you still don’t know.
                                    No, CPS was simply driving by that day and decided to pop down that driveway and chat with MB & MH. This dead horse is close to bones at this point, isn't it? I can't imagine who else would have been responsible for CPS being on the property, can you?

                                    Comment


                                    • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

                                      No problem. Just asking whether it was a fact or an “internet fact”. Turns out it is an “internet fact”.
                                      WHAT????? What is a fact versus internet fact????? Oh, nevermind, I see who I am responding to.

                                      Comment


                                      • Originally posted by GreenWithEnvy View Post

                                        As I clearly stated, it will show state of mind of others there. If someone was fearful enough to be sleeping outside their horse's stall to protect it from harm, what does that say? Were they afraid of MB/MH/JH or what? I suspect all of the surveillance videos will show if anyone was roaming the property at night. All of this is sheer speculation isn't it because we have not heard first hand from anyone other than LK?
                                        Who on earth is dumb enough to hold on to a job where she is so scared for her life that she is sleeping on the ground in front of a horse's stall with a weapon (that anyone could take away while she sleeps)?

                                        Why didn't she just leave? (Do you see what I just did there?)

                                        And what does the state of others (who seem pretty crazy themselves) have to do with defending why it was not so bad that MB shot LK?

                                        Comment


                                        • Originally posted by IdahoRider View Post
                                          I think this should really stand out. I don't care how obnoxious someone is (or isn't), or how accustomed they are (or aren't) to conflict with other people. I don't think anyone in their right mind would stick around thinking that grave bodily harm or death is a possibility.

                                          So what if she posted that she was afraid? I think that even in the moment when someone might post something like that, regardless of how accurate that statement might be (i.e. are they really afraid or just being overly dramatic), actually being shot is kind of an academic thought. You know as an intellectual exercise that you could be in danger, but as an actual possibility? Not so much.

                                          I get that. I didn't at first. But the more I have thought about it, the more I have gotten a handle on how someone could be in that situation and think that even amid the drama and emotion of it all, that they weren't in danger in a way that might kill them. Especially if you think you have a bone to pick with the other people involved.
                                          Sheilah


                                          I agree with you Idaho. For example, there are abusive domestic situations women and kids are stuck living in. While they are likely scared, they probably don't always actually think they will really be killed even though they've already been beaten.

                                          It's pretty inconceivable that your horse trainer would kill you. Kick you out and tell people bad things about you? Yes! Kill you? Seems crazy!

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X