@mott-the-hoople saidEverybody Kyle shot had long violent criminal records and were sorry unemployed drug addled pieces of chit.
sorry pos
@Contenchess. I haven't followed this, saw y'all writing about it, all I see is giving this guy hell while low lifes are burning down stores, neighborhoods, etc in Portland, et al, and no one is giving those people hell. A new age is upon us? Like one of those futuristic movies that y'all watch? Uh oh, survival of the fittest ,,,,,I KNOW the libs do not like that concept!!!!
@kmax87 saidOh Kev give it up, you are jus like Suzianne, always going the wrong way. Maybe guns scare you, I don't know. I know Suzianne 'fears' them. He will be acquitted, he wanted to protect the area,.... guys, including one who said he would kill him, made him have to protect himself. Prosecutors cannot counter his self defense without reasonable doubt, it is over. You and Suzianne sometimes get on threads without the background required with which to make your points. I hate it, I really do. Did you see above where Suzy says he was just acting? What a great judge of character, she should start a character thread!!
And he needed to defend himself from other people because......why?
- Joined
- 28 Feb 16
- Moves
- 5090
@contenchess saidI've watched a little bit. For entertainment, I've watched CNN essentially find the defendant guilty. I've heard little about it from other sources. Haven't bothered to look into it, while working two jobs.
@AverageJoe1
Neither of them are watching the trial.
But I did see some of the video. I think he will get off with "self-defense." The prosecution is pretty bad, from what little I've seen.
@averagejoe1 saidIts all great for Kyle when he gets support from Trump and Tucker and the alt right huddle around him to raise money to bail him out because he's such a patriotic hero, singing along with the Proud Boys and wearing T shirts emblazoned with "Free as ....." but when he is on the stand and he has to face the gravity of what he has done and the time he could possibly serve, and this wannabe Paul Revere breaks down like a sobbing whiny little bitch.
Oh Kev give it up, you are jus like Suzianne, always going the wrong way. Maybe guns scare you, I don't know. I know Suzianne 'fears' them. He will be acquitted, he wanted to protect the area,.... You and Suzianne sometimes get on threads without the background required with which to make your points. I hate it, I really do. Did you see above where Suzy says he was just acting? What a great judge of character, she should start a character thread!!
@kmax87 saidAnd the judge says you can't refer to those killed as victims because that would prejudice the jury against the defendant and the audio boasting Kyle's solution to the very action he took 2 weeks later is inadmissible.
Its all great for Kyle when he gets support from Trump and Tucker and the alt right huddle around him to raise money to bail him out because he's such a patriotic hero, singing along with the Proud Boys and wearing T shirts emblazoned with "Free as ....." but when he is on the stand and he has to face the gravity of what he has done and the time he could possibly serve, and this wannabe Paul Revere breaks down like a sobbing whiny little bitch.
As we like to say, your monkeys, your circus...
@zahlanzi saidRittenhouse didn't "come from out of state." He was staying and working in Kenosha for weeks before the riots.
All i know is that Rittenhouse wasn't walking home minding his own business. He came from out of state, with an illegal gun, with the notion he is going to defend americans from rioters. The judge at his trial says you can't call victims "victims, only "looters", "rioters".
This is sufficient to mark this as depressing, not my problem and another example of "thank god i don't live in the US"
@kmax87 saidHis bravado after the incident is irrelevant to his guilt or innocence, as the judge correctly ruled.
And the judge says you can't refer to those killed as victims because that would prejudice the jury against the defendant and the audio boasting Kyle's solution to the very action he took 2 weeks later is inadmissible.
As we like to say, your monkeys, your circus...
The judge seems to be favoring the defense (possibly because it's obvious that the prosecution has not proven its case), but every ruling he's made that I've seen has been correct, IMO (except not allowing pinch-zooming on the iPad, which I disagree with).
@liljo saidI think there's a 75+% chance he walks (well, maybe except for the gun charge) and, if convicted, I think there's a decent chance that the judge grants an acquittal notwithstanding the verdict.
I've watched a little bit. For entertainment, I've watched CNN essentially find the defendant guilty. I've heard little about it from other sources. Haven't bothered to look into it, while working two jobs.
But I did see some of the video. I think he will get off with "self-defense." The prosecution is pretty bad, from what little I've seen.
You can argue from today until tomorrow about whether he's stupid or evil or was looking for trouble. But it seems obvious to me that the prosecution has not proven its case.
@sh76 saidLooks that way to me.
I think there's a 75+% chance he walks (well, maybe except for the gun charge) and, if convicted, I think there's a decent chance that the judge grants an acquittal notwithstanding the verdict.
You can argue from today until tomorrow about whether he's stupid or evil or was looking for trouble. But it seems obvious to me that the prosecution has not proven its case.
The problem is not the self-defence. That looks quite solid.
It’s what the hell was a 17 year old with an illegal gun doing so far from home in an area of voilence?
And why were the police thanking vigilantes?
That’s what needs addressing.
And the answers are complicated. He was there protecting businesses he’d never heard of before???
BS.
17 year olds tend to sit at home and spank their monkeys infront of porn.
Or go out and have a beer, dance, get rejected and go home to sit in front of porn and spank their monkeys.
They don’t drive over borders with guns to enter semi-warzones. There are other motivations at play there. And that’s what needs to be addressed.
3 edits
@sh76 saidIF his "bravado after the incident is irrelevant to his guilt or innocence" why were two defense witnesses allowed to testify he seemed shaken and regretful in the aftermath of it? Shouldn't that have "opened the door" to testimony about how he acted after the killings?
His bravado after the incident is irrelevant to his guilt or innocence, as the judge correctly ruled.
The judge seems to be favoring the defense (possibly because it's obvious that the prosecution has not proven its case), but every ruling he's made that I've seen has been correct, IMO (except not allowing pinch-zooming on the iPad, which I disagree with).
And the video from two weeks before where Rittenhouse stated he would have shot people leaving a CVS because he thought they were looters seems like clearly relevant impeachment material. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-10/defense-witnesses-rittenhouse-badly-shaken-by-shootings