Sport Horse Spotlight

received_2752639298077582

Real Estate Spotlight

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

  • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

    What assumptions are you criticizing me for, exactly? The statement that “negligence in not securing a gun” is a serious crime?
    Who has said this gun was not secured correctly? No one knows where the gun came from, how it was secured, where it was obtained on the property, who actually owned it, etc.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

      As I remember it, LKs “claim” was that RC had been charged, not arrested.
      I could have this all entirely wrong, but...it seems that you are charged after the arrest. Or there is an indictment from a grand jury, which leads to an arrest warrant. So if you have been charged with something, there is an arrest in there somewhere.
      The police investigate and an arrest warrant is issued if the investigation provides enough evidence to support the belief that a crime has been committed. The person is arrested and then the district attorney (or whatever the local legal jurisdiction is called) either charges or decides not to charge the person who has been arrested.
      Sheilah

      Comment


      • Originally posted by rothmpp View Post

        Except that absolutely no one posting here has any idea where the gun came from or where/how it was stored. The only thing we know for sure is that at some point the gun ended up in in MB's hand on the day in question.

        I'm finding it very difficult to believe that anyone other than MB has been arrested up to this point, LKs insistence to the contrary aside. We've got people on here whose internet sleuthing skills, frankly, frighten me a little. Some of 'em should be working for Homeland or the CIA. No one has been able to turn up any record at all of an arrest.

        I could come up with a dozen different plausible (wild and otherwise) scenarios for where/how/who owned and/or had control of the gun prior to the shooting.
        The claim, I believe, is that RC was charged, not that she was arrested. Is everyone charged with a crime in NJ listed on a publicly searchable database?

        Again with the word “plausible”. A plausible scenario is one that is sensible and believable. A “wild” scenario is generally not plausible. There are indeed dozens of not hundreds of scenarios about who owned and had control of the gun. Only a few of those are plausible.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

          The claim, I believe, is that RC was charged, not that she was arrested. Is everyone charged with a crime in NJ listed on a publicly searchable database?

          Again with the word “plausible”. A plausible scenario is one that is sensible and believable. A “wild” scenario is generally not plausible. There are indeed dozens of not hundreds of scenarios about who owned and had control of the gun. Only a few of those are plausible.
          Okay.....and? What is "plausible" to you does not mean it is plausible to others. This entire situation is wild to the nth degree.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

            The claim, I believe, is that RC was charged, not that she was arrested. Is everyone charged with a crime in NJ listed on a publicly searchable database?

            Again with the word “plausible”. A plausible scenario is one that is sensible and believable. A “wild” scenario is generally not plausible. There are indeed dozens of not hundreds of scenarios about who owned and had control of the gun. Only a few of those are plausible.
            It is not plausible that there have been any other charges in this case without there being a public record somewhere. it is just not sensible or believable.

            Considering how well versed in the law LK presents herself as, it is also not plausible that she confused being charged with a crime and being served in a civil case.
            Sheilah

            Comment


            • Again, YankeeDuchess, the ONLY information any of us on SM have is what LK has stated as "her" truth. Many have said she is not the most honest person around (I have no idea) and question her recollection. See my post earlier about how she has never seemed to accept responsibility for anything negative in her life.)

              You have chosen to believe her story, hook, line, and sinker. Others have many questions and lots of doubt other than she was shot twice. HOW that happened will be revealed in the trial.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by GreenWithEnvy View Post

                Why? She was stating that in her experience guns were common in a barn area. Are we going to debate gun laws at various states now? Once again, YOU are dictating what is and isn't relevant to this discussion and going off on tangents that make no difference whatsoever.
                Why are gun laws in Southern Utah, in an area so remote that it takes two hours to get to a vet, relevant to the legality or illegality of a barn manager in NJ, which according to a knowledgeable source has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, having a HANDGUN on the premises?

                Comment


                • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

                  Why are gun laws in Southern Utah, in an area so remote that it takes two hours to get to a vet, relevant to the legality or illegality of a barn manager in NJ, which according to a knowledgeable source has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, having a HANDGUN on the premises?
                  But who cares???? You seem to know more than you are stating and want to argue with everyone proving you are right. It just doesn't work that way.

                  Here's the thing.....a handgun was obviously there. Can we leave it at that and wait for the actual trial instead of the spin LK wants to put on everything? Again, who said it wasn't legally secured somewhere on the property?

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

                    Again with the word “plausible”. A plausible scenario is one that is sensible and believable. A “wild” scenario is generally not plausible. There are indeed dozens of not hundreds of scenarios about who owned and had control of the gun. Only a few of those are plausible.
                    Ugh, I miss the eyeroll emoji.

                    My bad - I momentarily forgot that we were being policed by Webster's, rather than the commonly accepted definition.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by IdahoRider View Post
                      I could have this all entirely wrong, but...it seems that you are charged after the arrest. Or there is an indictment from a grand jury, which leads to an arrest warrant. So if you have been charged with something, there is an arrest in there somewhere.
                      The police investigate and an arrest warrant is issued if the investigation provides enough evidence to support the belief that a crime has been committed. The person is arrested and then the district attorney (or whatever the local legal jurisdiction is called) either charges or decides not to charge the person who has been arrested.
                      Sheilah
                      Someone upthread said that being cited or charged was different from being arrested.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by IdahoRider View Post
                        It is not plausible that there have been any other charges in this case without there being a public record somewhere. it is just not sensible or believable.

                        Considering how well versed in the law LK presents herself as, it is also not plausible that she confused being charged with a crime and being served in a civil case.
                        Sheilah
                        So you know for a fact that there is a record in a publicly searchable database of everyone charged with a crime in NJ?

                        Comment


                        • Is it time for recipes?

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by rothmpp View Post

                            Ugh, I miss the eyeroll emoji.
                            Here you go.



                            : rolleyes : without the spaces.

                            Comment


                            • I am not sure cited and charged are synonyms. Cited and ticketed usually are but I suppose charged could mean cited.


                              I usually think of citations as mild law breaking such as speeding or jay walking.

                              Maybe if one is a legal owner of a gun there are just citations for certain law breakage in there regards. I would think if said weapon was part of a criminal investigation their would be more than a ticket or citation but I truly do not know if that is the case.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by GreenWithEnvy View Post

                                Who has said this gun was not secured correctly? No one knows where the gun came from, how it was secured, where it was obtained on the property, who actually owned it, etc.

                                I THOUGHT we knew that MB had a pink gun in his hand and shot LK. It is just INFERENCE on my part, but that suggests to me that either
                                ​​​​​​ a) the owner handed it to him, or
                                b) the owner handled it in such a way that MB had the opportunity to pick it up without her knowledge.
                                Given the strict laws regarding handguns in NJ, it is my BELIEF that either of these possibilities would leave the owner of the gun liable for criminal charges.

                                Based on the above, I find it PLAUSIBLE that the owner of the gun was charged with gun violations.

                                I understand that you may not find it plausible.



                                Comment


                                • Originally posted by rothmpp View Post

                                  Ugh, I miss the eyeroll emoji.

                                  My bad - I momentarily forgot that we were being policed by Webster's, rather than the commonly accepted definition.

                                  I’m not the one who copies and pastes from Webster’s. That is MHM.

                                  Serious question: how are you using the word plausible if not to mean sensible and believable? Commonly accepted definition is fine by me.

                                  I’m generally reacting to several posters who have opined that there are lots of possible scenarios out there, and stated that of the hundreds of scenarios all are “equally plausible”.

                                  Some of the scenarios are barely conceivable, but not plausible.

                                  Comment


                                  • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

                                    What assumptions are you criticizing me for, exactly? The statement that “negligence in not securing a gun” is a serious crime?

                                    What would constitute negligence would vary state to state, but it still seems like a solid proposition to me.

                                    With respect to charges against RC, I have consistently stated that LK has asserted that there were charges filed against RC, and that if people choose not to believe her that is 100% their call.

                                    For myself, in my own little mind, I believe LKs assertion that RC was charged with gun violations. That is not speculation.
                                    Every assumption you make I am criticizing you for, just like you do to anyone else who dares to theorize, hypothesize, wild a$$ guess, or whatever you want to call it, other than you! You are VERY quick to shoot down anyone who dare to suggest anything other than what you agree with, and yet have no issue throwing out very presumptive guesses that you even try to pass off as factual.

                                    If the shoe fits...
                                    "You can't fix stupid"- Ron White

                                    Comment


                                    • Originally posted by GreenWithEnvy View Post
                                      Again, YankeeDuchess, the ONLY information any of us on SM have is what LK has stated as "her" truth. Many have said she is not the most honest person around (I have no idea) and question her recollection. See my post earlier about how she has never seemed to accept responsibility for anything negative in her life.)

                                      You have chosen to believe her story, hook, line, and sinker. Others have many questions and lots of doubt other than she was shot twice. HOW that happened will be revealed in the trial.
                                      Who is SM?

                                      Comment


                                      • SM= Social Media

                                        Or should I get out the Urban Dictionary for you???
                                        "You can't fix stupid"- Ron White

                                        Comment


                                        • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post


                                          I THOUGHT we knew that MB had a pink gun in his hand and shot LK. It is just INFERENCE on my part, but that suggests to me that either
                                          ​​​​​​ a) the owner handed it to him, or
                                          b) the owner handled it in such a way that MB had the opportunity to pick it up without her knowledge.
                                          Given the strict laws regarding handguns in NJ, it is my BELIEF that either of these possibilities would leave the owner of the gun liable for criminal charges.

                                          Based on the above, I find it PLAUSIBLE that the owner of the gun was charged with gun violations.

                                          I understand that you may not find it plausible.


                                          YOU thought YOU knew MB had a pink gun in his hand and shot LK. That has not been made public as a hard, cold fact anywhere, especially in a court of law.

                                          Stop promoting what you think you know as fact, when in reality you know nothing more than the rest of us as fact.
                                          Last edited by cutter99; Jan. 12, 2020, 04:02 PM.
                                          "You can't fix stupid"- Ron White

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X