Sport Horse Spotlight

8ISF-5732

Real Estate Spotlight

105 DSCN0687

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

Barisone Pleads Not Guilty

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

  • #81
    Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

    Perhaps
    MHM
    could use her copy and paste skills to provide a definition of “plausible”.
    Why? Is there some reason you are unable to do so?

    While we are on the subject of definitions, I will point out that this BB is what is commonly known as a discussion board. That means everyone can discuss things. It is not a dictation board, where someone can dictate the course of the discussion.

    Comment


    • #82
      Originally posted by MHM View Post

      Why? Is there some reason you are unable to do so?

      While we are on the subject of definitions, I will point out that this BB is what is commonly known as a discussion board. That means everyone can discuss things. It is not a dictation board, where someone can dictate the course of the discussion.
      Indeed!!!

      Comment


      • #83
        Originally posted by Angela Freda View Post

        But has anyone seen anything verifying she was arrested? I haven't, but have really looked, either.
        I did look and couldn't find anything.
        Sheilah

        Comment


        • #84
          Originally posted by mswillie View Post
          That dog must be on a diet. It keeps getting smaller. And having been bitten by a 30 lb. dog I can tell you I wish I had had the means to dispatch it at that time. No idea what happened to the dog, I did get all appropriate animal control and law enforcement involved, and I never saw it again.
          Yes! I recall a photo of the mutt, looks to be a medium sized dog.

          Comment


          • #85
            Originally posted by AnotherRound View Post

            Good grief, the rabid sneering and crazy from this woman is numbing. Its like whiplash reading La di da's posts! Talk about meaningless drool - don't like what someone is musing and you just blather on and on using as many nutso words as you can think of. Good grief! Just because you say it doesn't mean its true! In fact, I automatically don't believe anything you say, just because you're the one who said it. Good god. Do you have any idea how you sound?
            I feel this way about 98% of the posts on these threads. Meaningless drool, blathering on, nutso words - if many of the people posting here were able to be honest about their posting habits, they would realize that they are no better than the one person they are continuously picking on.

            Originally posted by MHM View Post

            Why? Is there some reason you are unable to do so?

            While we are on the subject of definitions, I will point out that this BB is what is commonly known as a discussion board. That means everyone can discuss things. It is not a dictation board, where someone can dictate the course of the discussion.
            I can't help but feel that it's a little disingenuous of you to call out this forum as a DISCUSSION board after you have spent much of your time here copying and pasting someone else's post without any DISCUSSION on your part. You are correct that it is not a dictation board; it is also not a copy board.

            Comment


            • #86
              Originally posted by AnotherRound View Post

              I agree. Each theory is as plausible as the next. I tend to think that there was another reason for carrying the gun, such as knowing the dog was a biter, than that he "planned it". I mean, when you think about it, planned what? to murder people at 2 in the afternoon? Its so implausible there almost automatically has to be an other reason this whole thing happened. And the "I was there, so I should know, and you should believe ME" doesn't work when it comes to this entirely non-credible victim. The only thing I believe is that she got shot, which is terrible. How it happened I have no doubt is not as she has sprayed across social media. How it happened is yet unknown and each theory is as plausible as the next.
              I do have to say, shooting two people midday seems highly irrational. If, as LK has alleged, they planned this whole murder(attempt), they are particularly dumb criminals. What on earth would be the plan if he HAD killed them?*

              ETA: *assuming he was planning to get away with a double murder.

              Comment


              • #87
                Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post
                LK - Some of these posters make a point of not believing what you say, and therefore will ignore your statement that RC was arrested on a weapons charge unless you link to an official (government) website saying she was arrested.
                Okay, but if she had been arrested on weapons charges, wouldn't there be an official record of it somewhere? I have looked and can't find anything, either official or unofficial (other than the claim made here. And I would think that if there had been an arrest, it would have been reported (even if it was just locally) since it would have been related to a case that has drawn a lot of media attention.

                Some of the progress has made sense to me. Like MB pleading not guilty. That is pretty much par for the course in these things, as far as I understand them. But someone being arrested and there being no mention of it (other than here on CoTH forums) or record of it is weird, as far as I understand these things.

                Maybe there is some confusion and there is a sealed indictment for the as yet publically un-named owner? Rather than an actual arrest? Or perhaps the person who LK has named as the owner of the gun has been served in LK's civil case? Although usually civil lawyers advise that they wait until criminal charges have been fully adjudicated.
                Sheilah

                Comment


                • #88
                  Originally posted by ynl063w View Post
                  I can't help but feel that it's a little disingenuous of you to call out this forum as a DISCUSSION board after you have spent much of your time here copying and pasting someone else's post without any DISCUSSION on your part. You are correct that it is not a dictation board; it is also not a copy board.
                  Perhaps you missed the discussion on the previous thread about the value of posts being quoted for posterity, in case the stories were later edited and changed. Some posters do that quite a bit.

                  Anyone is more than welcome to quote my posts for posterity, although I rarely go back and change them, other than to fix the occasional typo.

                  Comment


                  • #89
                    Originally posted by MHM View Post

                    Perhaps you missed the discussion on the previous thread about the value of posts being quoted for posterity, in case the stories were later edited and changed. Some posters do that quite a bit.

                    Anyone is more than welcome to quote my posts for posterity, although I rarely go back and change them, other than to fix the occasional typo.
                    I haven't missed anything; I have a thorough understanding of the whole "quote for posterity" idea. I'm just wondering if you do based on the posts that you have been quoting, since they are really not noteworthy in any way as far as preserving them for the sake of continued discussion. Quoting for posterity certainly has it's place in this forum, but not in the completely unconstrained and discriminating way you are displaying here.

                    Comment


                    • #90
                      Originally posted by ynl063w View Post

                      I haven't missed anything; I have a thorough understanding of the whole "quote for posterity" idea. I'm just wondering if you do based on the posts that you have been quoting, since they are really not noteworthy in any way as far as preserving them for the sake of continued discussion. Quoting for posterity certainly has it's place in this forum, but not in the completely unconstrained and discriminating way you are displaying here.
                      Thanks for your input.

                      Again, I will repeat that it is not a dictation board.

                      Comment


                      • #91
                        Originally posted by MHM View Post

                        Thanks for your input.

                        Again, I will repeat that it is not a dictation board.
                        And I will repeat that it is also not a copy board.

                        I do understand that sometimes people can somehow get so emotionally consumed in something that is so far removed from themselves that they end up feeling like it has become personal, and it is equally impossible for others to understand how that level of involvement could possibly happen. This thread has definitely shown who is in which category.

                        Comment


                        • #92
                          Originally posted by IdahoRider View Post
                          Okay, but if she had been arrested on weapons charges, wouldn't there be an official record of it somewhere? I have looked and can't find anything, either official or unofficial (other than the claim made here. And I would think that if there had been an arrest, it would have been reported (even if it was just locally) since it would have been related to a case that has drawn a lot of media attention.

                          Some of the progress has made sense to me. Like MB pleading not guilty. That is pretty much par for the course in these things, as far as I understand them. But someone being arrested and there being no mention of it (other than here on CoTH forums) or record of it is weird, as far as I understand these things.

                          Maybe there is some confusion and there is a sealed indictment for the as yet publically un-named owner? Rather than an actual arrest? Or perhaps the person who LK has named as the owner of the gun has been served in LK's civil case? Although usually civil lawyers advise that they wait until criminal charges have been fully adjudicated.
                          Sheilah
                          100% up to you whether you believe her or not.

                          I frankly don’t see what’s in it for her to say that RC was arrested on gun charges, if it’s not true, so I do believe her.

                          MB was indicted on two gun charges as well as two charges first degree attempted murder, so it makes sense that the owner of the gun would also face serious gun charges.

                          Comment


                          • #93
                            Originally posted by MHM View Post

                            Thanks for your input.

                            Again, I will repeat that it is not a dictation board.

                            If I may express an opinion:
                            I see the whole QFP strategy as essentially hostile, basically saying “I’ve made a record of what you’ve said and will throw it back in your face at some point if it suits my purpose”!

                            If someone writes something in the heat of the moment, and later regrets it, possibly because they have been enlightened by a subsequent post, why not let them retreat?


                            Comment


                            • #94
                              Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post


                              If I may express an opinion:
                              I see the whole QFP strategy as essentially hostile, basically saying “I’ve made a record of what you’ve said and will throw it back in your face at some point if it suits my purpose”!

                              If someone writes something in the heat of the moment, and later regrets it, possibly because they have been enlightened by a subsequent post, why not let them retreat?

                              If that’s your opinion, you’re certainly not obliged to quote for posterity. Others may take a different view.

                              Comment


                              • #95
                                Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post


                                If I may express an opinion:
                                I see the whole QFP strategy as essentially hostile, basically saying “I’ve made a record of what you’ve said and will throw it back in your face at some point if it suits my purpose”!

                                If someone writes something in the heat of the moment, and later regrets it, possibly because they have been enlightened by a subsequent post, why not let them retreat?

                                If that were to happen, they could simply apologize. I've never QFP'd myself, but I assume it's done as a way to hold someone accountable?

                                Comment


                                • #96
                                  One thing I've noticed in all these threads about this situation and LK's past, both here and elsewhere, is she never is responsible for anything negative that happens in her life. I've never read about a more innocent victim in my life, not even in a Jane Austin novel! Somehow she has reached whatever age she is with the only apparent wrongdoing in her entire life is chronic speeding. Simply amazing. No bullying, no harassing, no intimidation, no responsibility for her actions, nothing.....simply an almost flawless woman. It's always someone else to blame for everything.

                                  Supposedly LK said the older couple who also own the farm were eager for her to stay. I wonder how that eagerness turned into a lawsuit?

                                  We've all heard, or at least have heard hints, of the prosecution's evidence thanks to LK's posts. I can't wait to hear the evidence MB's attorney presents. It's going to be fascinating for sure.

                                  Comment


                                  • #97
                                    Originally posted by GiveEmEl View Post

                                    If that were to happen, they could simply apologize. I've never QFP'd myself, but I assume it's done as a way to hold someone accountable?
                                    Someone can always apologize, or say they’ve changed their opinion, or whatever.

                                    What they can’t do is claim to have never made the statement in the first place, once it is quoted for posterity. That’s all.

                                    Comment


                                    • #98
                                      I personally hate that there is open ended editing/deleting allowed on this board.

                                      Comment


                                      • #99
                                        Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post
                                        I frankly don’t see what’s in it for her to say that RC was arrested on gun charges, if it’s not true, so I do believe her.

                                        MB was indicted on two gun charges as well as two charges first degree attempted murder, so it makes sense that the owner of the gun would also face serious gun charges.
                                        Why would it make sense that the gun owner face serious gun charges? Unless the gun was illegal, or the owner was not legally entitled to own it, there would be no law to charge someone for simply owning a gun. You couldn't charge the lawful owner of the gun over something someone else decided to do with it. That is on MB.

                                        If the owner of the gun had conspired to murder LK and her boyfriend, that would be a different story. If I understand the law correctly, that would be an accessory charge, not a gun charge.

                                        What I find hard to understand is how someone other than MB is charged in this case and not have it reported somewhere. Anywhere. The information shared here was that the owner of the gun had been charged. I can't find that information anywhere, except here, which is weird if someone had actually been charged.

                                        Perhaps LK just confused her civil case with the criminal case, and what she meant was that the possible gun owners had been served in her civil case and not actually charged in a criminal case?

                                        Whatever. It just struck me as weird. I had the time and was interested enough to go looking for the details and there were none.
                                        Sheilah

                                        Comment


                                        • Originally posted by IdahoRider View Post
                                          Why would it make sense that the gun owner face serious gun charges? Unless the gun was illegal, or the owner was not legally entitled to own it, there would be no law to charge someone for simply owning a gun. You couldn't charge the lawful owner of the gun over something someone else decided to do with it. That is on MB.

                                          If the owner of the gun had conspired to murder LK and her boyfriend, that would be a different story. If I understand the law correctly, that would be an accessory charge, not a gun charge.

                                          What I find hard to understand is how someone other than MB is charged in this case and not have it reported somewhere. Anywhere. The information shared here was that the owner of the gun had been charged. I can't find that information anywhere, except here, which is weird if someone had actually been charged.

                                          Perhaps LK just confused her civil case with the criminal case, and what she meant was that the possible gun owners had been served in her civil case and not actually charged in a criminal case?

                                          Whatever. It just struck me as weird. I had the time and was interested enough to go looking for the details and there were none.
                                          Sheilah
                                          I think it is a serious crime if, as a gun owner, you leave a gun lying around such that someone can use it to kill someone else.

                                          There was a case in California in which a parent left a loaded gun in their garage, and a couple of kids got hold of it and one kid fatally shot the other, not knowing it was loaded. The adult who owned the gun went to prison; not sure exactly what the charge was. It sounds like NJ has strict laws on hand guns.

                                          If the gun owner colluded with MB in a premeditated attempted murder, that is really bad. Even if the gun owner did not collude or intentionally provide the gun, negligence in not securing the gun is also a serious crime.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X