• We will be taking the server down at approximately 3:30 AM ET on Wednesday, 10/8/25. We have a hard drive that is in the early stages of failure and this is necessary to prevent data loss. We hope to be back up and running quickly, however this process could take some time.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

(W#4255)The trial of Kyle Rittenhouse for the intentional first degree homicide of 2, injuring of 1

Lutherf said:
It's being played for effect. This has nothing to do with whether the shooting was self defense or not.
Click to expand...
I realize that... That seems to be all the prosecution has is to play to the jury's sympathy.
 
Damn... That video seems to prove self defense... What in the hell are the prosecutors doing?
 
Grim17 said:
Damn... That video seems to prove self defense... What in the hell are the prosecutors doing?
Click to expand...

"Beyond a reasonable doubt"

When is he going to prove it wasn't self defense? Who knows, but there's lots of sympathetic witnesses coming up.
 
Grim17 said:
Damn... That video seems to prove self defense... What in the hell are the prosecutors doing?
Click to expand...
The prosecutor does not recognize a legitimate right to self defense. To this guy the ONLY reason to own a gun is to hunt down and kill people.
 
ASHES said:
"Beyond a reasonable doubt"

When is he going to prove it wasn't self defense? Who knows, but there's lots of sympathetic witnesses coming up.
Click to expand...
So far, it seems that sympathetic witnesses are their only play.

.
 
Grim17 said:
So far, it seems that sympathetic witnesses are their only play.

.
Click to expand...
I want to see the cross of this witness already.
 
Mercado Media and CJTV were the live streamers the previous night that saw the beginning of the car source fire. They both ended up behind that car source trying to keep the church just behind car source from catching fire.
 
Grim17 said:
So far, it seems that sympathetic witnesses are their only play.

.
Click to expand...
Well, let's be realistic here: terrible prosecutor or not, a prosecutor is going to play any video of the killing for maximal effect. That's never not going to happen in a murder trial.
 
ASHES said:
I want to see the cross of this witness already.
Click to expand...
The cop testified that there was no evidence Rosenbaum was armed. We heard and saw the guy behind Rittenhouse and Rosenbaum shoot. The prosecutor stated that someone else shot. That shot is evidence that SOMEONE in the immediate area was armed.
 
Cardinal said:
Well, let's be realistic here: terrible prosecutor or not, a prosecutor is going to play any video of the killing for maximal effect. That's never not going to happen in a murder trial.
Click to expand...
Terrible case. I'm sure he wasn't happy getting stuck with it.
 
Cardinal said:
Well, let's be realistic here: terrible prosecutor or not, a prosecutor is going to play any video of the killing for maximal effect. That's never not going to happen in a murder trial.
Click to expand...
Like I said before, it seems all they're doing is trying to play to the jury's sympathy rather than trying to prove it was murder rather than self defense.
 
Was it a "good shoot"?
 
ASHES said:
They (the police) left the first scene (Rosenbaum) open to the public, with evidence sitting around, until some citizen pointed out said evidence, 4 days later.
Click to expand...
We only hire the best.
 
GummyVitamins said:
The prosecution is getting a lesson on hearsay since they're trying to bring in inadmissible evidence. Prosecution is feigning interest. They're being told hearsay is not admissible for "very obvious reasons." With few exceptions, unless the person making the statement is under oath in the courtroom and can be cross examined the prosecution can't bring their statements into the trial. They're now playing a video without the sound they want the jury to hear. Prosecution also got their hand slapped for referencing inadmissible evidence prior to being given a basic law school evidence crash course.

Edit: They're playing with fire now trying to play the video with sound and without sound based on the prosecutor's recollection of hearsay.

View attachment 67359764
Click to expand...
We only hire the best.
 
State's tech guy sucks. Recess so he can enlarge an image.
 
Before the shooting the defendant appeared to be walking the area with his hand on his weapon asking protesters "does anyone need a medic or help", one of the responses was something like "get out of here with that gun".

To me that looked as though he was menacing and confronting people under the guise of helping.

Maybe he was too young and dumb to realize that walking towards a crowd of people (who probably didn't like him) with a gun in hand asking if they needed help was a bad idea.

If I was a juror that might effect my decision.
 
Last edited:
Prosecutors and defense attorneys play to win.

They do it every day in every case.
 
Grim17 said:
Like I said before, it seems all they're doing is trying to play to the jury's sympathy rather than trying to prove it was murder rather than self defense.
Click to expand...
And it's fine for you to say that. All I'm saying is that this is a regular feature of murder trials. If you don't like seeing video of the killing play out over and over and over again, don't watch murder trials.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom