Rittenhouse trial thread (multi-merged)

[Phazer]

Not sure what type of training he has had, but I do know, he has a great legal team that prepared him for this cross examination.

It would appear, then, that someone on his defense team has an understanding of defensive use of force and that deployment of a firearm is used to stop a threat...not to kill.

As I've told Leftist anti-gunners: If I ever have to draw a firearm for defense, the number of rounds that I hope to use is zero.

The Leftists usually just stare blankly and say, "Zero?" I then tell them that if I have to draw a firearm, aim it at an attacker, shout at the attacker, and the attacker runs away, then we all win.

 

[4WHLDRFTN]

WATCH: Judge Yells At The Prosecution In Rittenhouse Case, Demands Them To "Stop" Committing "Grave Constitutional Violation" (VIDEO) * The Scoop

On Wednesday morning, Judge Bruce Schroeder of the Kenosha County Court accused prosecutors of committing a “grave constitutional violation” in the murder trial of Kyle Rittenhouse after they attempted to comment on his earlier reactions to testimony in the case. Schroeder called the attempt a...

thescoop.us

 

[GOPerfect]

It would appear, then, that someone on his defense team has an understanding of defensive use of force and that deployment of a firearm is used to stop a threat...not to kill.

As I've told Leftist anti-gunners: If I ever have to draw a firearm for defense, the number of rounds that I hope to use is zero.

The Leftists usually just stare blankly and say, "Zero?" I then tell them that if I have to draw a firearm, aim it at an attacker, shout at the attacker, and the attacker runs away, then we all win.

Perfectly said!!

 

[C3D]

The desperate prosecutor is trying his best to get a mistrial, judge rips him a new one:

Rittenhouse judge tears into prosecution with aggressive tongue lashing over questioning

The judge presiding over Kyle Rittenhouse’s trial scolded the prosecutor during a fiery exchange on Wednesday.

www.foxnews.com

 

[ManrisFrack]

The desperate prosecutor is trying his best to get a mistrial, judge rips him a new one:

Rittenhouse judge tears into prosecution with aggressive tongue lashing over questioning

The judge presiding over Kyle Rittenhouse’s trial scolded the prosecutor during a fiery exchange on Wednesday.

www.foxnews.com

Yep, @GOPerfect called the nature of the prosecutor perfectly. He's so belligerently arrogant that I can't even believe he's throwing on purpose. It's just who he is.

 

[BerettaGuy]

Prosecutors that get high-profile cases like this are invited to cocktail parties and fundraisers of the movers and shakers of the local DNC and High Society. The same people that shout Black Lives Matter watch CNN and wouldn't be caught dead in "da hood". They are made celebrities by these elites just like the movie Hunger Games. The prosecutor lays on the charges hoping for a plea deal.

In this case, no charges should have been filed. No charges meant no "celebrity" and no swanky cocktail parties. These same elites convinced someone to make the police stand down. no police no law you get riots. Riots where the police stand around watching. People that act to do what the elites are preventing are considered extremists racist vigilantes or militia.

It is my hope that this case is going to set the terms for the next riot.
Bottom line. Let the police do their jobs and crap like this won't happen.

 

[Phazer]

Yep, @GOPerfect called the nature of the prosecutor perfectly. He's so belligerently arrogant that I can't even believe he's throwing on purpose. It's just who he is.

Defense council responded that if the DA continued violating the pretrial agreements, the defense would seek a mistrial with prejudice.

 

[Robin]

Yeah, I saw that. He should have done it already.
Robin

 

[fresch]

One more example of not finishing, dead men tell no tails.

 

[livingston]

In the formal legal world, a court case that is dismissed with prejudice means that it is dismissed permanently. A case dismissed with prejudice is over and done with, once and for all, and can't be brought back to court.

 

[BerettaGuy]

I want to ring the necks of the Defense Team. They sit there with a deer in the headlights look.

 

[C3D]

View attachment 133944

In the formal legal world, a court case that is dismissed with prejudice means that it is dismissed permanently. A case dismissed with prejudice is over and done with, once and for all, and can't be brought back to court.

That will never be granted (at least not in a NY courtroom). But the defense is likely to motion at the end of the prosecution's case for dismissal or a directed verdict of not guilty on the basis that the prosecutor failed to present a prima facie case, which may very well be granted.

 

[Uninformed and Compliant]

 

[livingston]

Being talked about only to confuse the jury

Full metal jacket sounds scarier

Perhaps he was trying to evoke this ....

Full Metal Jacket (1987) - The Battle of Hué Scene (7/10) | Movieclips​

 

[holdover]

The desperate prosecutor is trying his best to get a mistrial, judge rips him a new one:

Rittenhouse judge tears into prosecution with aggressive tongue lashing over questioning

The judge presiding over Kyle Rittenhouse’s trial scolded the prosecutor during a fiery exchange on Wednesday.

www.foxnews.com

100%!! They fucked this up so bad they have no chance of winning , Only recourse now is to keep breaking the courts orders until a mistrail can be declared and they get another crack at it. Hopefully the judge sees though the ploy

 

[Jchrisls]

100%!! They fucked this up so bad they have no chance of winning , Only recourse now is to keep breaking the courts orders until a mistrail can be declared and they get another crack at it. Hopefully the judge sees though the ploy

I agree, but in the overall view ( 30 thousand foot) this would mean that in any case the prosecution has the upper hand by intentionally pushing for a mistrial as a "do-over". I may believe it to be possibly true in this scenario, but there must be something procedurally to keep the balance on the scale for justice. Im aware that the defense could ask for a mistrial with prejudice or the judge may ask for a directed verdict, but am more keenly aware of a most important part. NO judge wants thier decision to be overturned, ever, and due to this err on ths side of caution. If anyone here knows legally what that is now would be a great time to share what it is.

 

[Uninformed and Compliant]

 

[spat]

Not sure what type of training he has had, but I do know, he has a great legal team that prepared him for this cross examination.

The way that trial was going I think a great legal team wouldn't have put him on the stand.

That's generally a desperation move by a defense team, not a victory lap.

Don't get cocky.

 

[Darth]

I agree, but in the overall view ( 30 thousand foot) this would mean that in any case the prosecution has the upper hand by intentionally pushing for a mistrial as a "do-over". I may believe it to be possibly true in this scenario, but there must be something procedurally to keep the balance on the scale for justice. Im aware that the defense could ask for a mistrial with prejudice or the judge may ask for a directed verdict, but am more keenly aware of a most important part. NO judge wants thier decision to be overturned, ever, and due to this err on ths side of caution. If anyone here knows legally what that is now would be a great time to share what it is.

They did ask for a Mistrial with Prejudice .

 

[spat]

I gotta disagree with this one. I think him taking the stand is the best thing possible. The prosecution is going to screw up the cross examination

Probably, but this is the prosecution's last chance to salvage their case, and the defense doesn't have to give it to them.

 

[holdover]

They did ask for a Mistrial with Prejudice .

The defense did. ""With Prejudice"" means the whole case is dismissed and cant be retried. The DA allegedly wanted a mistrial by breeching court procedures repeatedly. To point of being obvious, In order to get a re-do, because they fucked it up beyond help. I doubt the judge does it at this point in the trial , And I cant see a jury convicting him beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[GOPerfect]

The way that trial was going I think a great legal team wouldn't have put him on the stand.

That's generally a desperation move by a defense team, not a victory lap.

Don't get cocky.

Not at all cocky. I do think this was a good move on the part of the defense.

I have been in the court room more than a few times; they seem to know when to and when not to put the accused on the stand.

 

[spat]

Not at all cocky. I do think this was a good move on the part of the defense.

I have been in the court room more than a few times; they seem to know when to and when not to put the accused on the stand.

Maybe, you have more experience than I do.

And the defense would have a better sense of what kind of witness Kyle would be.

But I still think, no matter how good he was, they already had victory in the bag, why give the prosecutor another chance.

 

[GOYABEAN]

 

[Acer-m14]

View attachment 133944

In the formal legal world, a court case that is dismissed with prejudice means that it is dismissed permanently. A case dismissed with prejudice is over and done with, once and for all, and can't be brought back to court.

said something like that a few pages ago .. post 150 i think ..

i wonder when this judge will just say .. to the prosecution ..... you have no facts ....
hearsay, fake news reports, ect ect .. is all you have .. hell your even helping the defendants case

case dismissed all charges dropped with prejudice

mike drop .

i just left out the judge saying to the Jury .,. i'm sorry for wasting your time here and the PA will pay you triple time

 

[Darth]

said something like that a few pages ago .. post 150 i think ..



i just left out the judge saying to the Jury .,. i'm sorry for wasting your time here and the PA will pay you triple time

You leave Pennsylvania out of this!

 

[holdover]

You guys will love this,

 

[Deplorable Me]

From the loony bin. Interesting how the media accepts the left wing peaceful riots as normal. They equate Columbine with a kid getting clubbed by a skateboard and guy charging him with a drawn handgun.

Gun Country: The NRA's Radical Path From Columbine To Rittenhouse - All In - MSNBC - Democratic Underground Forums

www.democraticunderground.com

 

[livingston]

Tucker: ‘A Rapist Called Joseph Rosenbaum … Died As He Had Lived, Trying To Touch An Unwilling Minor’

Fox News host Tucker Carlson weighed in on the latest developments from the Kyle Rittenhouse trial during his show on Wednesday night where he discussed one of the individuals involved in the incident. “In a move that surprised lawyers everywhere, Rittenhouse took the stand in his own defense...

www.dailywire.com

Tucker: ‘A Rapist Called Joseph Rosenbaum … Died As He Had Lived, Trying To Touch An Unwilling Minor’​

“One wrong answer in a cross examination and you could wind up spending life in prison. But this case was different. By the time he testified today, Kyle Rittenhouse had already won the case,” Carlson claimed.

“At this point, there was no remaining doubt that Kyle Rittenhouse acted in self-defense during the riots last summer in Kenosha; every shot Rittenhouse fired was captured on videotape and from multiple angles,” Carlson opined. “Every single witness who testified this week at the trial confirmed exactly what happened. And here are the facts of it: A convicted child rapist called Joseph Rosenbaum was released from a mental hospital and then went directly to join the mob that was burning downtown Kenosha.”

“Once he got to the riot, Rosenbaum saw Kyle Rittenhouse and immediately threatened to kill him,” Carlson claimed. “Rosenbaum then chased Rittenhouse and tried to pull the gun from his hands. When he did that, Kyle Rittenhouse shot him. So, Joseph Rosenbaum died as he had lived, trying to touch an unwilling minor.”

Left-wing Snopes confirmed Rosenbaum’s criminal history:

…yes, at age 19, Rosenbaum was sentenced to prison for sexually abusing five children — all boys between the ages of 9 and 11 — in Arizona’s Pima County in early 2002, according to his case file obtained via a public records request by Snopes.

 

[livingston]