What the Rittenhouse trial resembles

Back to the subject, with an example. The fat dude hopes that no one knows this, but he states that there are no left handed guns. That's a flat out lie. Why it was even relevant is beyond me.

But crooked prosecutors have been playing little tricks like this for a long dayum time. Hoping and praying the jurors are too stupid to realize what's fact or fiction.


37:30 mark comes the stupid comment.

There is nothing in closing arguments that must be based on fact. It is the lawyers' chance to lie their asses off to make their cases. They could have said it was a BB gun. There are no objections allowed in closings.
 
There is nothing in closing arguments that must be based on fact. It is the lawyers' chance to lie their asses off to make their cases. They could have said it was a BB gun. There are no objections allowed in closings.
That’s not quite correct. In some jurisdictions, to preserve an argument for appeal, an objection not only must be made, it must be made in a timely fashion.

No lawyer is supposed to lie his or her ass off. Sure it happens from time to time. But that doesn’t mean it ever is allowed to. One of my only negative comments about the defense, in fact, is that I think I should have heard more objections even on summation.
 
That’s not quite correct. In some jurisdictions, to preserve an argument for appeal, an objection not only must be made, it must be made in a timely fashion.

No lawyer is supposed to lie his or her ass off. Sure it happens from time to time. But that doesn’t mean it ever is allowed to. One of my only negative comments about the defense, in fact, is that I think I should have heard more objections even on summation.
I sat on a jury MANY years ago and that point was made during the trial. A lawyer can say the sky is fuscia and Hawaii sunk under the waves in closing arguments if they so desire. The testimony has been closed when the two sides rest.
 
There is nothing in closing arguments that must be based on fact. It is the lawyers' chance to lie their asses off to make their cases. They could have said it was a BB gun. There are no objections allowed in closings.

Oh yes there are objections. Richards objected twice, and for good reason. The prosecution was bringing up someone the defense never had the opportunity to question. Therefore, there was no way to make it clear to the jurors.

They will allow little stuff, like when the fat prosecutor said there was no left handed guns. But bigger issues, objections are allowed.

P.S. Richards shaking his head with fat dude said that, was enough for the jurors to know fat dude was lying.
 
In Canada and other democracies the killer wouldn't have even attempted to go hunting people with his military style weapon on public streets.

But Kyle did and it can be said to be pre-meditated.

At least the judge disallowed the self defense claim on one of the charges. Now the judge is only left with finding an excuse to reduce the penalty to a slap on the wrist.
Premeditation in this case would mean Rittenhouse intended to put himself in the position of being by himself and chased by a mob of anarchists determined to beat him senseless. Do you really think that's the case, Donald?

Before he was chased, Rittenhouse had a fire extinguisher and was attempting to put out fires that the anarchists had set...which was of course why they wanted to beat him senseless! Now why would someone intent on simply "hunting people" waste time with a fire extinguisher? Gee...do you think perhaps his real motive WAS to protect private property from the anarchists and he only brought the AR-15 for self defense? I'm curious...does anyone out there think it would have gone well for that young man if all he'd had with him that night WAS a fire extinguisher? How badly do you think he would have been beaten? Just within an inch of his life? Or beaten to death?
 
I can't help but think back on several of the innocent people who have spent decades in prison, on bogus charges brought on crooked DA and prosecutors.

DNA has changed the world. It's helped good prosecutors send actual guilty people to prison. It's helped free innocent ones. It's brought families together.

But in cases like this, where there's only video evidence, crooked prosecutors have the ability to sway jurors about what they're seeing in the video's.
Seriously, you never know how or what the jurors took in and what they missed. The prosecution made a point that bringing a gun forfeits your right to self defense. As stupid as that might be, you never know how many stupid jurors their are that would believe that.
 
DNA has changed the world. It's helped good prosecutors send actual guilty people to prison. It's helped free innocent ones. It's brought families together.
A double edged sword, in my opinion.

I have wondered how many people have had a DNA test for whatever reason and discovered that son, daughter, dad is not who they believed all those years.

There has to have been a lot of bombshells.
 
In Canada and other democracies the killer wouldn't have even attempted to go hunting people with his military style weapon on public streets.

But Kyle did and it can be said to be pre-meditated.

At least the judge disallowed the self defense claim on one of the charges. Now the judge is only left with finding an excuse to reduce the penalty to a slap on the wrist.
The judge didn’t disallow anything. He just allowed the prosecution to attempt to argue it in their closing argument.
 
A double edged sword, in my opinion.

I have wondered how many people have had a DNA test for whatever reason and discovered that son, daughter, dad is not who they believed all those years.

There has to have been a lot of bombshells.
I know what you mean. I don't let anyone take my picture if I can help it, I might find out that I'm liable for child support going back a long way all over the country. LOL
 
Our gun thing here is based on fear. And partially for good reason. We have a LOT of violent thugs in our country. But then again, our population is EXTREMELY higher than yours. I think y'alls population is about the same our one state of California. We have a lot more good people here. But a lot more bad too.
California has a larger population than all of Canada.
 
Why did that judge dismiss the gun charge?

Was it worth it to blow the cover of trying to claim it was an unbiased court?

If there is no guilt found by the jury on the existing charges then the effort will be proven to be worthwhile. The severity of the gun charge in Kyle's case would have demanded the maximum 9 months in jail.

I'm still betting on a 5 year suspended sentence.

Why is everybody else so afraid of making a guess?
He dismissed the gun charge because there is a loophole in it that Kyle fell into. Something the Prosecution should have known.
 
Use a little logic for a ch
You will already know of standards adhered to by Canada and most of the world's other democracies on disallowing killers to go hunting for people.

Is it a matter of pride that American permits the sort of behaviour demonstrated by Rittenhouse? Or is there shame attached?
Use a little logic for a change. If Rittenhouse had been “hunting” there would have been a much higher body count and he would have been carrying more than the single magazine that was in the rifle. When I was in the Army and it was “hunting” Vietnam Cong and North Vietnamese Regulars, the standard load was five twenty round magazines. If Rittenhouse intended to “hunt” rioters he would have carried multiple magazines.
 
Actually the Mayor is in all kinds of hot water politically for encouraging and allowing the riots because he is a democrat and wanted the rioting just like Seattle and Portland.

So he has been breathing down the DA and assistant DA to get a prosecution in this case regardless of how it's accomplished.

That's why Grosskreutz hasn't been charged with anything and protected.
That's why everyone shot by Kyle is a hero to the DA.

And it's absolutely disgusting as to why this is happening...they actually know the truth but they just don't care. They would rather flush a poor but good kid than face the consequences of their own actions.

That's a literal David vs Goliath.
So it is possible that a poor but good kid will be sacrificed so the city will not be burned down again and the mayor will save his job.

What next? Will the democrats start sacrificing virgins to stay in power?
 

Forum List

Back
Top