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

[US&THEM]

Rittenhouse has opened a lot of doors by testifying and the defense is worried and now wants a mistrial. They now realize they should have not put the kid on the stand.

 

[Chomsky]

No, it seems you want some sort of punishment dispite what the law says. Your basing his punishment based on the shootings, two deaths and an injury. That is independent to his other charges and should not be based on that.

No at all, and that was a disingenuous comment.

There's six charges, which I've included below for your edification. Of the six, outside of the 'self-defense' defense, there are several 'non-self-defense' charges that may be applicable and to which the jury will decide culpability.

 

[TurtleDude]

That is not what I posted so make your bs argument with someone else

so what was the point of you raising it?

 

[TurtleDude]

Rittenhouse has opened a lot of doors by testifying and the defense is worried and now wants a mistrial. They now realize they should have not put the kid on the stand.

the DA is getting his ass reamed by the judge

 

[SkyFox76]

I agree, putting Rosenbaum out of his misery was good thing. As for Gaige, the biggest asshole of them all ..he deserved to get his arm blown to bits. He goes at Rittenhouse gun in hand and waits for Rittenhouse to shoot first ..I mean what was this idiot thinking ..listening to him testify was excruciatingly difficult for me.

And he had just attempted to put himself out of misery just days before this. Rosenbaum was a victim of his own abused childhood which he obviously passed on like many do. Add in his being bipolar, he was severely damaged goods. So Rittenhouse got a quick lesson that he'd put himself in a stupid situation by heading there, so now he's up for the fight of his young life, and Rosenbaum is at peace.

 

[Chomsky]

I picked up on it right away, probably got a cue from one of his lawyers to shut your ****ing mouth.

And if you & I did, the jurors did. But I suspect not all.

 

[Lutherf]

So how bad for the prosecution is it when the judge says "I don't believe you're operating in good faith"?

 

[Napoleon]

So how bad for the prosecution is it when the judge says "I don't believe you're operating in good faith"?

It’s like someone else said. Their case went so far down the tubes that they’re trying to be as outrageous as they can in the hope of triggering the judge to declare a mistrial.

 

[US&THEM]

the DA is getting his ass reamed by the judge

The Judge is nervous as hell because he knows he was not straightforward with all of his motions.

 

[TurtleDude]

The Judge is nervous as hell because he knows he was straightforward with all of his motions.

he said the DA did not act in good faith. Ouch

 

[maxparrish]

The bolded is nonsense. Intent & premeditation is a defining characteristic of some of the charges.

But premeditation or intent without action is not a crime. A crime can happen without either of those characteristics, because some actions are illegal. However non-action, non-conduct, because you dream of killing your boss is not a crime.

Hence the first and foremost requirement in this trial is what Rittenhouse did and then what we can infer from his state of mind.

 

[ASHES]

Jury coming in

 

[Chomsky]

At first I almost posted he seems to have some ptsd, but held off because I wanted to see his demeanor when he returned. He seems to be just fine now, so I am in fact questioning if that wasn't a planned (but pretty dramatic) display for the jury. When it was happening I kept wondering why the judge just kept waiting before finally saying okay, let's break. But regardless he's allowed to play the jury like anyone else.

Who, 'is allowed to play the jury'? The judge?

 

[GummyVitamins]

Rittenhouse has opened a lot of doors by testifying and the defense is worried and now wants a mistrial. They now realize they should have not put the kid on the stand.

Binger is breaking the rules and either giving an excellent cause for appeal or tainting the case to the point where the violations would taint the jury perception that the only thing to do going forward is retry the case with a new jury. Binger needs to be careful, he's skating on very thin ice. If this wasn't such a high profile case he'd probably have less leeway. The judge knows what it would look like if he ended this whole thing and forced it to start over.

 

[US&THEM]

he said the DA did not act in good faith. Ouch

The Judge is emotional and he should not be, but he’s a judge they all have to deal with him.

 

[US&THEM]

Binger is breaking the rules and either giving an excellent cause for appeal or tainting the case to the point where the violations would taint the jury perception that the only thing to do going forward is retry the case with a new jury. Binger needs to be careful, he's skating on very thin ice. If there weren't such a high profile case he'd probably have less leeway. The judge knows what it would look like if he ended this whole thing and forced it to start over.

It has become abundantly clear you do not understand what happens in a courtroom. No and no

 

[Chomsky]

But premeditation or intent without action is not a crime. A crime can happen without either of those characteristics, because some actions are illegal. However non-action, non-conduct, because you dream of killing your boss is not a crime.

Hence the first and foremost requirement in this trial is what Rittenhouse did and then what we can infer from his state of mind.

Irrelevant, because it is a component of several of the charges.

You may want to take a look at the specific charges:

EXPLAINER: What charges did Kyle Rittenhouse face?

Kyle Rittenhouse has been acquitted on all charges in the fatal shooting of two men and wounding of a third during a night of protests in Kenosha, Wisconsin, in August 2020.

apnews.com

 

[US&THEM]

I missed the end of the cross, but it looks like KR survived totally unscathed.

I don't really understand what the Defense is doing now, quibbling over the damage to the car dealership. Seem to be making some of the same dumb mistakes the prosecution made.

Tried to show the owner is a liar and therefore they are lying about not asking Rittenhouse and the others to be security.

 

[Napoleon]

Tried to show the owner is a liar and therefore they are lying about not asking Rittenhouse and the others to be security.

Of course “Sam” is a liar.

 

[Linuxcooldude]

No at all, and that was a disingenuous comment.

There's six charges, which I've included below for your edification. Of the six, outside of the 'self-defense' defense, there are several 'non-self-defense' charges that may be applicable and to which the jury will decide culpability.

Of the two "reckless" charges ( not homicide ) were done in self defence. One when firing on Rosenbaulm close to McGinnus, the second when on his back fighting multiple attackers...the unidentified kick man for what the shots missed. When faced with multiple attackers, compromised on his back, even unarmed... is still self defence. Even against Mr. Kick man.

 

[US&THEM]

Of course “Sam” is a liar.

So he committed perjury why? If he lied why didn’t the defense line up all the others who were asked to be security.

 

[GummyVitamins]

It has become abundantly clear you do not understand what happens in a courtroom. No and no

Your posts show a lack of ability to comprehend the applicable law. So I think this is a compliment...

 

[Lutherf]

Rittenhouse has opened a lot of doors by testifying and the defense is worried and now wants a mistrial. They now realize they should have not put the kid on the stand.

I don't get the impression that the defense is at all concerned about their case. If they are concerned about anything it's the emotional stress Rittenhouse is being put through. The scenario d=for the defense, as I see it, is that this case is done but that the prosecution is pushing hairball conspiracies out of pure malevolence.

 

[Napoleon]

So he committed perjury why? If he lied why didn’t the defense line up all the others who were asked to be security.

He committed perjury because, as the defense pointed out, if he were to admit that he asked or authorized those people to be there then he could be held civilly liable for what followed. And besides, we already know he committed perjury. His testimony when he was first on the stand was one thing when being questioned by the prosecutor and a total 180 on several lines of questioning by the time the defense was done with him.

 

[US&THEM]

He committed perjury because, as the defense pointed out, if he were to admit that he asked or authorized those people to be there then he could be held civilly liable for what followed.

It goes to why Rittenhouse and Black were there, that matters too right?