Kyle Rittenhouse: Vigilante White Men

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dismiss all charges with prejudice.

Sanction the prosecution.

Notify the Bar Association of the conduct and have them disbarred.

+1. They're beyond dirty.

The defense is incompetent if they didn't realize until yesterday that their copy of the drone video was not clear. They should've asked for it in a different form instead accepting a transfer from one phone to another.

The defense is already backing down. They’ve reportedly renewed their motion to dismiss but this time without prejudice, even though the judge has not ruled on the original motion. They know there’s basically no chance the judge dismisses with prejudice over this.

[Anonymous]

Viewing the video evidence surely means they are going to convict!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Viewing the video evidence surely means they are going to convict!

You have not followed this very closely, have you?

[Anonymous]

Sounds to me like the defense could've raised this issue before the case was given to the jury. They probably waited to see whether the jury deliberated long enough to suggest their client was in trouble before filing a b.s. motion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sounds to me like the defense could've raised this issue before the case was given to the jury. They probably waited to see whether the jury deliberated long enough to suggest their client was in trouble before filing a b.s. motion.

Their client isn't in trouble. Pizzagate Guy says he's not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So much of the discussion in this thread seems to be stuck on the fact that Rittenhouse is a dumbass who made bad choices. That’s probably true, but doesn’t have much to do with his self defense claim.

Anyway, I’m not shedding any tears for the rioters he shot. No big loss.

yep. Every single person who went to a protest and then started to riot and destroy things is a dumbass. You turn an area into what looks like a war zone, things are going to happen. IMO, the blood is on the mayors hands. Should have shut that sht down the second people started to riot.

Why do we want to encourage teenaged yahoos who don't even understand the guns they are carrying to go throw themselves into the middle of a riot, though.

Even if he walks, no one is going to be encouraged to follow his example. A murder trial is no fun.

But, let’s all agree that it would have been a much better idea for him to stay home and play video games. And it would have been even better if the National Guard had been on the streets beating and shooting rioters and looters. But, none of that is relevant to the question of whether Rittenhouse’s use of lethal self defense was justified.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sounds to me like the defense could've raised this issue before the case was given to the jury. They probably waited to see whether the jury deliberated long enough to suggest their client was in trouble before filing a b.s. motion.

I’m no Rittenhouse fanboy, but it sounds like the defense filed their original motion on Monday before closing arguments. But that’s still 6 days after the prosecution showed the video in court, putting the defense on notice that the copy they had was not of the same quality.

It is not clear to me, though, how the defense is claiming they were prejudiced by this given the timing of how it all went down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So much of the discussion in this thread seems to be stuck on the fact that Rittenhouse is a dumbass who made bad choices. That’s probably true, but doesn’t have much to do with his self defense claim.

Anyway, I’m not shedding any tears for the rioters he shot. No big loss.

yep. Every single person who went to a protest and then started to riot and destroy things is a dumbass. You turn an area into what looks like a war zone, things are going to happen. IMO, the blood is on the mayors hands. Should have shut that sht down the second people started to riot.

Why do we want to encourage teenaged yahoos who don't even understand the guns they are carrying to go throw themselves into the middle of a riot, though.

Even if he walks, no one is going to be encouraged to follow his example. A murder trial is no fun.

But, let’s all agree that it would have been a much better idea for him to stay home and play video games. And it would have been even better if the National Guard had been on the streets beating and shooting rioters and looters. But, none of that is relevant to the question of whether Rittenhouse’s use of lethal self defense was justified.

How many people were killed that night and by whom?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dismiss all charges with prejudice.

Sanction the prosecution.

Notify the Bar Association of the conduct and have them disbarred.

+1. They're beyond dirty.

The defense is incompetent if they didn't realize until yesterday that their copy of the drone video was not clear. They should've asked for it in a different form instead accepting a transfer from one phone to another.

Are you kidding? How are they supposed to know there was a more clear version available? They only got clued in when on Friday the large attorney mentioned "our copy is much clearer".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sounds to me like the defense could've raised this issue before the case was given to the jury. They probably waited to see whether the jury deliberated long enough to suggest their client was in trouble before filing a b.s. motion.

The motion was filed on Monday.

[Anonymous]

If convicted isn’t the sentence up to the judge? Either way, I don’t think justice will be served. The judge is clearly sympathetic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sounds to me like the defense could've raised this issue before the case was given to the jury. They probably waited to see whether the jury deliberated long enough to suggest their client was in trouble before filing a b.s. motion.

Um, they didn’t know there was a higher res version until yesterday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So much of the discussion in this thread seems to be stuck on the fact that Rittenhouse is a dumbass who made bad choices. That’s probably true, but doesn’t have much to do with his self defense claim.

Anyway, I’m not shedding any tears for the rioters he shot. No big loss.

yep. Every single person who went to a protest and then started to riot and destroy things is a dumbass. You turn an area into what looks like a war zone, things are going to happen. IMO, the blood is on the mayors hands. Should have shut that sht down the second people started to riot.

Why do we want to encourage teenaged yahoos who don't even understand the guns they are carrying to go throw themselves into the middle of a riot, though.

Even if he walks, no one is going to be encouraged to follow his example. A murder trial is no fun.

But, let’s all agree that it would have been a much better idea for him to stay home and play video games. And it would have been even better if the National Guard had been on the streets beating and shooting rioters and looters. But, none of that is relevant to the question of whether Rittenhouse’s use of lethal self defense was justified.

How many people were killed that night and by whom?

2 by Kyle, as they attacked him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds to me like the defense could've raised this issue before the case was given to the jury. They probably waited to see whether the jury deliberated long enough to suggest their client was in trouble before filing a b.s. motion.

Um, they didn’t know there was a higher res version until yesterday.

Dude, they filed the motion so Monday, so clearly they knew earlier than yesterday.

[Anonymous]

As I understand it, the drone video was made public when it was aired on Tucker Carlson’s show during an appearance with Rittenhouse’s original counsel. That means Rittenhouse’s current counsel surely knew the video existed and could have sought out their own copy directly from the drone operator. The prosecution obtained a copy from the drone operator during the trial and then transferred it to defense counsel. Once the prosecution realized that the defense had a lower quality version, they noticed defense counsel and gave them the opportunity to come collect the original via USB.

And in the end, how did this actually affect the trial? Did the lower resolution somehow conceal or misrepresent what the uncompressed video showed? How would it have affected the defense if they had received the uncompressed version originally? And if it was such key evidence to them, why did they not seek it out from the drone operator pre-trial?