Rittenhouse Trial

[dewilson58]

How to pis* off a judge and lose your case.

Quite entertaining yesterday.

I've got some popcorn and ready for today.

:popcorn:

[JMintzer]

How to pis* off a judge and lose your case.

Quite entertaining yesterday.

I've got some popcorn and ready for today.

:popcorn:

https://media0.giphy.com/media/12aW6JtfvUdcdO/200w.gif

[tophcfa]

That crying thing works better for a woman.

[Two Bills]

How to pis* off a judge and lose your case.

Quite entertaining yesterday.

I've got some popcorn and ready for today.

:popcorn:

Was reading report on BBC this morning.
Sounds very interesting.
What channel is showing it live please?

[Taltarzac725]

Was reading report on BBC this morning.
Sounds very interesting.
What channel is showing it live please?

Kyle Rittenhouse trial: Defense plans to call several more witnesses after his crucial testimony - CNN (https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/11/us/kyle-rittenhouse-trial-thursday/index.html)

I saw some of it on CNN. It has been on there a great deal.

[Two Bills]

Thanks Tal.

[dewilson58]

Thanks Tal.

fox as well

(probably any "network" with multiple cable channels)

[Two Bills]

fox as well

(probably any "network" with multiple cable channels)

Thanks. Mr. D.

[DeanFL]

That crying thing works better for a woman.

.
.
omg, no idea what your comment means - and quite sexist. The guy is 18 and been through a very emotional trying experience. I didn't follow this case initially, but saw and read a lot about it during the trial. Seems to be very easy for those seeing only one side to make comments as this.

I saw an article that had a headline, Rittenhouse 'should get Actor of The Year award'. Typical by uninformed and biased media...

The more I saw of the trial so far, good chance the case will be dismissed due to the terrible Prosecution actions during this trial.
.
.

[manaboutown]

Great Judge!

Prosecutors instructing their witness to lie, geez!

Self defense, set Kyle free!

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

That crying thing works better for a woman.

It also works better when there are actual tears shed, and not just a Scott Baio Acting 101 Class demonstration.

[dewilson58]

It also works better when there are actual tears shed, and not just a Scott Baio Acting 101 Class demonstration.

There are people who do not have the ability to cry and that can have a huge affect on their mental well-being. Scientists think that people with Sjogren's syndrome, who do not have the ability to shed tears also might experience difficulty in expressing their emotions.

[manaboutown]

...

[Trayderjoe]

So a 17 year old (at the time of the incident) is arrested and labeled a white supremacist and guilty of murder by many, all without the benefit of trial. At trial, the star witness for the prosecution admits that Rittenhouse did not shoot him UNTIL HE POINTED HIS GUN AT RITTENHOUSE. Another PROSECUTION witness testified that the PROSECUTION tried to get him to change his statement, and the judge had to admonish the prosecutor for attempting to violate Rittenhouse’s constitutional rights to remain silent.

And what are some concerned about? Whether Rittenhouse actually cried during his testimony. Really? I mean, really? If anything, people should be questioning the potential prosecutorial misconduct and the rapid rush to judge a person absent facts and a fair trial. How dare a prosecutor attempt to introduce that the defendant chose to remain silent until he took the witness stand, and yet there are people who are not outraged by the prosecutor, but they apparently are ready to mock the defendant over his crying. What I saw and heard was not crying, but an attempt to control his emotions at which point the judge granted a recess so that the defendant could compose himself.

I guess lessons weren’t learned after the Nicholas Sandman debacle, hopefully Kyle Rittenhouse has attorneys lined up to drop lawsuits. Given that some of those proclaiming his guilt also attacked Nicholas Sandman, one would think the judgement/settlement against these people should be significantly higher.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

There are people who do not have the ability to cry and that can have a huge affect on their mental well-being. Scientists think that people with Sjogren's syndrome, who do not have the ability to shed tears also might experience difficulty in expressing their emotions.

I'm sure that is true. However, so far no one has suggested, or announced, or proclaimed that this kid has been diagnosed with any such thing, or claimed that he's incapable of shedding tears.

And he has plenty of talent in "expression emotions." That blubber-fest would have been convincing, had there been tears.

He admitted to lying about his claim that he was an EMT. So we know he's fully capable of lying, and understands what lying means, and that he knows the difference between "misstating" something and flat out lying about something on purpose.

His mother drove him, while he was a minor child, over state lines with a semi-automatic weapon, for the express purpose of attending what he believed would be a riot (since, why else WOULD he bring a semi-automatic weapon with him over state lines)?

He knew he was going to a violent situation. He brought with him the means to kill people. He killed not someone, but two people. He maimed another. He has bragged about his affiliations with white supremacists and the Proud Boys on his own personal social media accounts, and the public has seen the publicized videos and photos of him exactly where he bragged that he was.

Whether he intended to kill the two VICTIMS, he killed them. They're dead, he's the one who pulled the trigger. They are victims of gun violence, whether it's murder or otherwise. He's not being charged with murder, he's being charged with homicide. He absolutely committed homicide.

[dewilson58]

I'm sure that is true. However, so far no one has suggested, or announced, or proclaimed that this kid has been diagnosed with any such thing, or claimed that he's incapable of shedding tears..

:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

I can see it, before the kid takes the stand.............the attorneys say, in case he tries to cry with tears, he can not, jus in case.

:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

Not all people's tear ducts work the same.
Not all crying has apparent liquid coming from eyes.
Not all liquid from eyes is crying.

If someone is sobbing and distraught, I think it's very ignorant and dickish to say it's 'fake' because there are no visible tear drops.

As usual, Wikipedia has more detail and references in tears.
posted by SaltySalticid at 3:27 PM on August 26, 2016 [12 favorites]


That guy is full of it. I have been socialized that men don't cry and it is damned difficult to even shed a tear when I am overcome with emotion, even to the point where I'm totally incapable of anything but voiceless sobbing.

People naturally respond to emotions differently and people are conditioned to respond to emotions in different ways.
posted by Zalzidrax at 3:29 PM on August 26, 2016 [16 favorites]


Between physical, endocrinological, medical, fight-or-flight, and social conditions, there's just no guarantee of tears. Also no guarantee that you'll even get reddening around the nose/lips/eyes.

[tvbound]

Unfortunately, the smarmy, white supremacist little thug (and his mother) are going to get away with it. He went there for ONE reason and one reason only. He wanted to be a hero and shoot someone. He got his wish and will get away with it, due a lot to an inept prosecution and a sympathetic judge. The fact that his mother (who I can't understand why she isn't being charged) willingly drove him to a location where trouble was likely, while illegally armed, says a lot about the entitlement environment he was raised in. What kind of parent even does that?

[MDLNB]

I'm sure that is true. However, so far no one has suggested, or announced, or proclaimed that this kid has been diagnosed with any such thing, or claimed that he's incapable of shedding tears.

And he has plenty of talent in "expression emotions." That blubber-fest would have been convincing, had there been tears.

He admitted to lying about his claim that he was an EMT. So we know he's fully capable of lying, and understands what lying means, and that he knows the difference between "misstating" something and flat out lying about something on purpose.

His mother drove him, while he was a minor child, over state lines with a semi-automatic weapon, for the express purpose of attending what he believed would be a riot (since, why else WOULD he bring a semi-automatic weapon with him over state lines)?

He knew he was going to a violent situation. He brought with him the means to kill people. He killed not someone, but two people. He maimed another. He has bragged about his affiliations with white supremacists and the Proud Boys on his own personal social media accounts, and the public has seen the publicized videos and photos of him exactly where he bragged that he was.

Whether he intended to kill the two VICTIMS, he killed them. They're dead, he's the one who pulled the trigger. They are victims of gun violence, whether it's murder or otherwise. He's not being charged with murder, he's being charged with homicide. He absolutely committed homicide.


Glad he had a weapon to defend himself. "Homicide" by itself is NOT a charge. Manslaughter, as in voluntary or involuntary can be a charge or maybe even an "intentional homicide" or something similar, but homicide itself is just a classification that the person did not die of natural causes. Personally, I believe in CCW and think that anyone brandishing a weapon in a threatening manor toward another individual should expect that someone might just take it seriously and defend themselves. If I was attempting to assist my fellow neighbor and someone started beating me with or without a weapon, I might feel compelled to defend myself expeditiously. So far, I have not seen any testimony that indicated that he was hunting for someone to shoot, rather than someone to assist. But, I have not seen all the testimony. But, from what I have seen from the videos, even those that the prosecutor has shown, my original thought was that he was justified in responding with deadly force. But, that is my "professional" opinion.

[MDLNB]

Unfortunately, the smarmy, white supremacist little thug (and his mother) are going to get away with it. He went there for ONE reason and one reason only. He wanted to be a hero and shoot someone. He got his wish and will get away with it, due a lot to an inept prosecution and a sympathetic judge. The fact that his mother (who I can't understand why she isn't being charged) willingly drove him to a location where trouble was likely, while illegally armed, says a lot about the entitlement environment he was raised in. What kind of parent even does that?


Your opinion, you might add. Was he a "white supremacist?" What group does he represent? Or, are you judging him? Did he not have a first aid kit with him? Was he intending to choke someone with an ace bandage?

[manaboutown]

Kyle Rittenhouse trial: Defense plans to call several more witnesses after his crucial testimony - CNN (https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/11/us/kyle-rittenhouse-trial-thursday/index.html)

I saw some of it on CNN. It has been on there a great deal.

One needs to be careful where one obtains information. CBS News Deletes Post Declaring Rittenhouse a Murderer Before Verdict (https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/11/11/cbs-news-kyle-rittenhouse-murderer/?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR0YOy9-e7VDP-9QUG5gGFrzxul2gFsL_yM7_iJmgmW7xoGhlztwJV_Utns)

[Trayderjoe]

I'm sure that is true. However, so far no one has suggested, or announced, or proclaimed that this kid has been diagnosed with any such thing, or claimed that he's incapable of shedding tears.

And he has plenty of talent in "expression emotions." That blubber-fest would have been convincing, had there been tears.

He admitted to lying about his claim that he was an EMT. So we know he's fully capable of lying, and understands what lying means, and that he knows the difference between "misstating" something and flat out lying about something on purpose.

His mother drove him, while he was a minor child, over state lines with a semi-automatic weapon, for the express purpose of attending what he believed would be a riot (since, why else WOULD he bring a semi-automatic weapon with him over state lines)?

He knew he was going to a violent situation. He brought with him the means to kill people. He killed not someone, but two people. He maimed another. He has bragged about his affiliations with white supremacists and the Proud Boys on his own personal social media accounts, and the public has seen the publicized videos and photos of him exactly where he bragged that he was.

Whether he intended to kill the two VICTIMS, he killed them. They're dead, he's the one who pulled the trigger. They are victims of gun violence, whether it's murder or otherwise. He's not being charged with murder, he's being charged with homicide. He absolutely committed homicide.

Unfortunately, the smarmy, white supremacist little thug (and his mother) are going to get away with it. He went there for ONE reason and one reason only. He wanted to be a hero and shoot someone. He got his wish and will get away with it, due a lot to an inept prosecution and a sympathetic judge. The fact that his mother (who I can't understand why she isn't being charged) willingly drove him to a location where trouble was likely, while illegally armed, says a lot about the entitlement environment he was raised in. What kind of parent even does that?

Ok, so where in the testimony does it come up that his mother transported him to Kenosha and where does it show that the firearm in question was transported across state lines?

Contrary to these claims, here is Rittenhouse's testimony as presented by CNN:

You will need to scroll down since there no markers on the web page to link to specific parts of the testimony, but I have inserted the noted times and the relevant testimony

1) [12:35:09] (https://transcripts.cnn.com/show/ip/date/2021-11-10/segment/02) Note: There is commentary just prior to the trial resuming, it is just after the trial resumes that the following was recorded.

BINGER: You had spent the night at Dominic Black's house, is that right?

RITTENHOUSE: Yes.

BINGER: And you indicated that you had worked at the RecPlex the night before is that right?

RITTENHOUSE: The 24th, correct.

BINGER: OK. And you worked until about 7:00 p.m.

RITTENHOUSE: I couldn't give you exact time. But I'd say I got off from between 6:00 and 7:00. I don't recall. It's been a while.

BINGER: And then you drove your car over to Dominic's house.

RITTENHOUSE: Yes.

BINGER: OK. So the rest of the time it seems like you're being driven around in Mr. Black's car. Is that fair to say?

RITTENHOUSE: Yes.


2) [12:50:03] (https://transcripts.cnn.com/show/ip/date/2021-11-10/segment/02)

BINGER: So when the gun was left at Dominic Black's house it had that ammunition with it?

RITTENHOUSE: Yes, the ammo was in a box or a magazine, I don't really know.

BINGER: When you were at Dominic Black's house on August 25th, you found your that AR-15 downstairs in his basement, correct?

RITTENHOUSE: No.

BINGER: Where did you find it at?

RITTENHOUSE: It was downstairs in the basement. But I was told by Dominic Black, hey, go downstairs, grab that rifle -- grab your rifle.

BINGER: So you knew up until that point that that rifle was being stored in a gun safe in the garage, correct?

RITTENHOUSE: Correct.


3) [11:55:02] (https://transcripts.cnn.com/show/ath/date/2021-11-10/segment/02)

RICHARDS: And did you go and turn yourself into the Kenosha Police Department?

RITTENHOUSE: I did not.

RICHARDS: Why not?

RITTENHOUSE: The Kenosha Police Department was barricaded off with a fence, and I don't think they were accepting anybody to come to the police department at that time.

RICHARDS: What did you do then?

RITTENHOUSE: I went to the nearest police department that I knew of, which was Antioch Police Department in Illinois by my house.

RICHARDS: Who took you there?

RITTENHOUSE: My mother.

RICHARDS: Okay. How did you get to Antioch from Downtown Kenosha?

RITTENHOUSE: Dominic Black drove me.

RICHARDS: And then Dominic Black drives you where?

RITTENHOUSE: He drives me to my house in Antioch, Illinois, where I meet with my mother and sisters and I sort of tell them what happened. I was still in shock. My head was still spinning and then we go to the Antioch Police Department, where I turned myself in.

RICHARDS: Who drove you to the Antioch Police Department?

RITTENHOUSE: My mother.

[MDLNB]

Ok, so where in the testimony does it come up that his mother transported him to Kenosha and where does it show that the firearm in question was transported across state lines?

Contrary to these claims, here is Rittenhouse's testimony as presented by CNN:

You will need to scroll down since there no markers on the web page to link to specific parts of the testimony, but I have inserted the noted times and the relevant testimony

1) [12:35:09] (https://transcripts.cnn.com/show/ip/date/2021-11-10/segment/02) Note: There is commentary just prior to the trial resuming, it is just after the trial resumes that the following was recorded.

BINGER: You had spent the night at Dominic Black's house, is that right?

RITTENHOUSE: Yes.

BINGER: And you indicated that you had worked at the RecPlex the night before is that right?

RITTENHOUSE: The 24th, correct.

BINGER: OK. And you worked until about 7:00 p.m.

RITTENHOUSE: I couldn't give you exact time. But I'd say I got off from between 6:00 and 7:00. I don't recall. It's been a while.

BINGER: And then you drove your car over to Dominic's house.

RITTENHOUSE: Yes.

BINGER: OK. So the rest of the time it seems like you're being driven around in Mr. Black's car. Is that fair to say?

RITTENHOUSE: Yes.


2) [12:50:03] (https://transcripts.cnn.com/show/ip/date/2021-11-10/segment/02)

BINGER: So when the gun was left at Dominic Black's house it had that ammunition with it?

RITTENHOUSE: Yes, the ammo was in a box or a magazine, I don't really know.

BINGER: When you were at Dominic Black's house on August 25th, you found your that AR-15 downstairs in his basement, correct?

RITTENHOUSE: No.

BINGER: Where did you find it at?

RITTENHOUSE: It was downstairs in the basement. But I was told by Dominic Black, hey, go downstairs, grab that rifle -- grab your rifle.

BINGER: So you knew up until that point that that rifle was being stored in a gun safe in the garage, correct?

RITTENHOUSE: Correct.


3) [11:55:02] (https://transcripts.cnn.com/show/ath/date/2021-11-10/segment/02)

RICHARDS: And did you go and turn yourself into the Kenosha Police Department?

RITTENHOUSE: I did not.

RICHARDS: Why not?

RITTENHOUSE: The Kenosha Police Department was barricaded off with a fence, and I don't think they were accepting anybody to come to the police department at that time.

RICHARDS: What did you do then?

RITTENHOUSE: I went to the nearest police department that I knew of, which was Antioch Police Department in Illinois by my house.

RICHARDS: Who took you there?

RITTENHOUSE: My mother.

RICHARDS: Okay. How did you get to Antioch from Downtown Kenosha?

RITTENHOUSE: Dominic Black drove me.

RICHARDS: And then Dominic Black drives you where?

RITTENHOUSE: He drives me to my house in Antioch, Illinois, where I meet with my mother and sisters and I sort of tell them what happened. I was still in shock. My head was still spinning and then we go to the Antioch Police Department, where I turned myself in.

RICHARDS: Who drove you to the Antioch Police Department?

RITTENHOUSE: My mother.


I guess when posters get their "information" from the MSM, they should probably make sure it's fact and not just some commentator's opinion. Such as the young man being a "white supremacist." Not sure where that came from. Not sure if that is fact or someone's opinion but no matter what your belief or slant is, if someone is chasing you to kill you and you are running away, what you believe is irrelevant to your own survival. You use what you have handy to protect yourself. And if someone is pointing a gun at you, you don't wait until he shoots you before responding.

The trial is not over yet, but from what I have seen of the prosecution, that young man should be acquitted.
And regarding the matter of a minor in possession of a firearm, if they are going to try him as an adult then they should drop that charge also.

[manaboutown]

Unfortunately, the smarmy, white supremacist little thug (and his mother) are going to get away with it. He went there for ONE reason and one reason only. He wanted to be a hero and shoot someone. He got his wish and will get away with it, due a lot to an inept prosecution and a sympathetic judge. The fact that his mother (who I can't understand why she isn't being charged) willingly drove him to a location where trouble was likely, while illegally armed, says a lot about the entitlement environment he was raised in. What kind of parent even does that?

The prosecutor is the smarmy one. The judge may have to declare a mistrial with prejudice as a result of his outrageous antics. The prosecutor should be disbarred IMHO for denying Kyle his 5th amendment rights and instructing his witness to change his story (lie).

Furthermore Kyle is NOT a "white supremacist". Wherever did you hear or read that libel/slander? His mother did not drive him to the riot with or with out a gun. The gun is legal, not illegal. Kyle is not a thug. He was attacked by thugs and he shot them in self defense. So much misinformation...

BTW, the judge is fair!

[DeanFL]

.
.
Personally, I wish that Celebrities et al would KEEP THEIR MOUTHS SHUT - or at least ask the MEDIA to not widely publish their OPINIONS. Who the hexx cares what know-it-alls like Lebron thinks????

news>

Los Angeles Lakers star LeBron James mocked alleged Kenosha shooter Kyle Rittenhouse over a video showing the 18-year-old crying in court while testifying in his murder trial.

"What tears?????" the 17-time All-Star tweeted Wednesday evening after the conclusion of Rittenhouse’s testimony in his unfolding murder trial, where the teen broke down on the stand recounting the August 2020 shooting he was involved in that left two people dead and one injured.

"I didn’t see one. Man knock it off! That boy ate some lemon heads before walking into court," James added.


...and imagine IF a white guy said "boy" about an African American?
.
.

[MDLNB]

.
.
Personally, I wish that Celebrities et al would KEEP THEIR MOUTHS SHUT - or at least ask the MEDIA to not widely publish their OPINIONS. Who the hexx cares what know-it-alls like Lebron thinks????

news>

Los Angeles Lakers star LeBron James mocked alleged Kenosha shooter Kyle Rittenhouse over a video showing the 18-year-old crying in court while testifying in his murder trial.

"What tears?????" the 17-time All-Star tweeted Wednesday evening after the conclusion of Rittenhouse’s testimony in his unfolding murder trial, where the teen broke down on the stand recounting the August 2020 shooting he was involved in that left two people dead and one injured.

"I didn’t see one. Man knock it off! That boy ate some lemon heads before walking into court," James added.


...and imagine IF a white guy said "boy" about an African American?
.
.


He would be deemed a "white supremacist" for sure.

[Trayderjoe]

I guess when posters get their "information" from the MSM, they should probably make sure it's fact and not just some commentator's opinion. Such as the young man being a "white supremacist." Not sure where that came from. Not sure if that is fact or someone's opinion but no matter what your belief or slant is, if someone is chasing you to kill you and you are running away, what you believe is irrelevant to your own survival. You use what you have handy to protect yourself. And if someone is pointing a gun at you, you don't wait until he shoots you before responding.

The trial is not over yet, but from what I have seen of the prosecution, that young man should be acquitted.
And regarding the matter of a minor in possession of a firearm, if they are going to try him as an adult then they should drop that charge also.

I agree. You would think that after the proven deliberate misrepresentations by MSM, I referenced the Sandman episode earlier as an example, that it would give pause to those "carrying the water" of MSM, but why let facts stand in the way of their "truth"?

I am also curious as to the lack of indignation and condemnation of the prosecutor's star witness, who testified that Rittenhouse did not shoot him until he pointed his gun at Rittenhouse. Let's ask some of the same questions, and a few others, of this "white supremist thug" (the descriptor used by those who point fingers at Rittenhouse) :

1) Why were you there and violating the curfew?
2) Weren't you looking to shoot someone since you brought a gun to a riot?
3) Where did you get the gun?
4) Did you carry a pistol so that it would be easier to hide it after you shot someone?
5) Do you like shooting people?

So given that he admitted to pointing a deadly weapon first, why are some of the MSM "water carriers" still insisting that Rittenhouse has ANY guilt when it comes to shooting that "thug"?

I too will wait for the conclusion of the trial as there may be facts still not in evidence which will need to be evaluated.

[Trayderjoe]

.
.
Personally, I wish that Celebrities et al would KEEP THEIR MOUTHS SHUT - or at least ask the MEDIA to not widely publish their OPINIONS. Who the hexx cares what know-it-alls like Lebron thinks????

news>

Los Angeles Lakers star LeBron James mocked alleged Kenosha shooter Kyle Rittenhouse over a video showing the 18-year-old crying in court while testifying in his murder trial.

"What tears?????" the 17-time All-Star tweeted Wednesday evening after the conclusion of Rittenhouse’s testimony in his unfolding murder trial, where the teen broke down on the stand recounting the August 2020 shooting he was involved in that left two people dead and one injured.

"I didn’t see one. Man knock it off! That boy ate some lemon heads before walking into court," James added.


...and imagine IF a white guy said "boy" about an African American?
.
.

I am ok with someone posting their opinion if they don't make it a statement of fact, which some are prone to do, even on this board. I don't give any weight to James' opinions as I neither read or care about them.

[manaboutown]

.
.
Personally, I wish that Celebrities et al would KEEP THEIR MOUTHS SHUT - or at least ask the MEDIA to not widely publish their OPINIONS. Who the hexx cares what know-it-alls like Lebron thinks????

news>

Los Angeles Lakers star LeBron James mocked alleged Kenosha shooter Kyle Rittenhouse over a video showing the 18-year-old crying in court while testifying in his murder trial.

"What tears?????" the 17-time All-Star tweeted Wednesday evening after the conclusion of Rittenhouse’s testimony in his unfolding murder trial, where the teen broke down on the stand recounting the August 2020 shooting he was involved in that left two people dead and one injured.

"I didn’t see one. Man knock it off! That boy ate some lemon heads before walking into court," James added.


...and imagine IF a white guy said "boy" about an African American?
.
.

LeBron James In Pain Screaming OH **** With Cramp - Game 4 - NBA FINALS 2012 - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9P0xCipae8)

[manaboutown]

Witness: Rittenhouse Tried to 'De-escalate' Riot, Not Cause Violence (https://www.breitbart.com/law-and-order/2021/11/11/witness-rittenhouse-tried-to-de-escalate-riot-not-cause-violence/?fbclid=IwAR2HmgNiElZ0eck6OLhIReuPlE5umbeIGv79jDgs zmV7iPOr77rEB1SFy-Q)

[JMintzer]

It also works better when there are actual tears shed, and not just a Scott Baio Acting 101 Class demonstration.

Such compassion...

[JMintzer]

I'm sure that is true. However, so far no one has suggested, or announced, or proclaimed that this kid has been diagnosed with any such thing, or claimed that he's incapable of shedding tears.

And he has plenty of talent in "expression emotions." That blubber-fest would have been convincing, had there been tears.

He admitted to lying about his claim that he was an EMT. So we know he's fully capable of lying, and understands what lying means, and that he knows the difference between "misstating" something and flat out lying about something on purpose.

His mother drove him, while he was a minor child, over state lines with a semi-automatic weapon, for the express purpose of attending what he believed would be a riot (since, why else WOULD he bring a semi-automatic weapon with him over state lines)?

He knew he was going to a violent situation. He brought with him the means to kill people. He killed not someone, but two people. He maimed another. He has bragged about his affiliations with white supremacists and the Proud Boys on his own personal social media accounts, and the public has seen the publicized videos and photos of him exactly where he bragged that he was.

Whether he intended to kill the two VICTIMS, he killed them. They're dead, he's the one who pulled the trigger. They are victims of gun violence, whether it's murder or otherwise. He's not being charged with murder, he's being charged with homicide. He absolutely committed homicide.

Wrong AGAIN!

Did you even watch the trial?

NO ONE drove him across anything with a rifle. He didn't bring ANYTHING across state lines.

[JMintzer]

Unfortunately, the smarmy, white supremacist little thug (and his mother) are going to get away with it. He went there for ONE reason and one reason only. He wanted to be a hero and shoot someone. He got his wish and will get away with it, due a lot to an inept prosecution and a sympathetic judge. The fact that his mother (who I can't understand why she isn't being charged) willingly drove him to a location where trouble was likely, while illegally armed, says a lot about the entitlement environment he was raised in. What kind of parent even does that?

Well, I guess there was no reason for a trial, since you're so sure of what happened...

Are you available for other trials? It could save the justice system a lot of money!

[holger danske]

It also works better when there are actual tears shed, and not just a Scott Baio Acting 101 Class demonstration.

Classic symptom of PTSD- inability to cry. I've you had watched his entire testimony (which I doubt CNN carried) you would have seen other symptoms displayed as wellas well.
Why do you hate Scott Baio? What did he ever do to you?

[JMintzer]

I agree. You would think that after the proven deliberate misrepresentations by MSM, I referenced the Sandman episode earlier as an example, that it would give pause to those "carrying the water" of MSM, but why let facts stand in the way of their "truth"?

I am also curious as to the lack of indignation and condemnation of the prosecutor's star witness, who testified that Rittenhouse did not shoot him until he pointed his gun at Rittenhouse. Let's ask some of the same questions, and a few others, of this "white supremist thug" (the descriptor used by those who point fingers at Rittenhouse) :

1) Why were you there and violating the curfew?
2) Weren't you looking to shoot someone since you brought a gun to a riot?
3) Where did you get the gun?
4) Did you carry a pistol so that it would be easier to hide it after you shot someone?
5) Do you like shooting people?

So given that he admitted to pointing a deadly weapon first, why are some of the MSM "water carriers" still insisting that Rittenhouse has ANY guilt when it comes to shooting that "thug"?

I too will wait for the conclusion of the trial as there may be facts still not in evidence which will need to be evaluated.

You mean the FELON, who was not allowed to possess the gun he pointed at KR?

[JMintzer]

Witness: Rittenhouse Tried to 'De-escalate' Riot, Not Cause Violence (https://www.breitbart.com/law-and-order/2021/11/11/witness-rittenhouse-tried-to-de-escalate-riot-not-cause-violence/?fbclid=IwAR2HmgNiElZ0eck6OLhIReuPlE5umbeIGv79jDgs zmV7iPOr77rEB1SFy-Q)

Stop it with the actual testimony!

We need more "opinions" from news talking heads...

[JMintzer]

Classic symptom of PTSD- inability to cry. I've you had watched his entire testimony (which I doubt CNN carried) you would have seen other symptoms displayed as wellas well.
Why do you hate Scott Baio? What did he ever do to you?

I'd explain it to you, but I don't want another "vacation"...:icon_wink:

[Chi-Town]

Noticed that Rittenhouse looks like Mickey Milkovich. Guilty as charged.

[tvbound]

Some sources say that he drove himself and when he got home, his mom made him turn himself in, so I'll admit that whether she drove him there is unclear.

What is not unclear and was actually what was argued about yesterday, with the judge not allowing the proof, is this;

Kyle Rittenhouse Gave White Supremacist Hand Symbol, Drank With 'Proud Boys' at Bar: Affidavit (https://www.newsweek.com/kyle-rittenhouse-ok-white-supremacist-proud-boys-1561465)


According to an affidavit filed by Kenosha County Assistant District Attorney Thomas C. Binge, Rittenhouse stayed at the pub for around 90 minutes wearing a T-shirt reading "free as f**k."

Immediately upon arriving at the bar, Rittenhouse posed for pictures while flashing the OK hand gesture—a previously innocuous symbol that has been co-opted by some on the far-right as a coded message to show support for white supremacy.

Rittenhouse drank three beers during the 90 minutes he was at Pudgy's Pub and "remained with these 'Proud Boys' for the entire time," the affidavit states.

Police were made aware that Rittenhouse was at the bar and obtained surveillance footage from the business to confirm his presence.


Definitely, a white supremacist thug.

[tophcfa]

LeBron James In Pain Screaming OH **** With Cramp - Game 4 - NBA FINALS 2012 - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9P0xCipae8)

LeBron needs to shut up and dribble.

[manaboutown]

“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 said. “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.”

Even the “fact-checking” grifters at Snopes had to conclude that Rosenbaum was indeed a convicted child molester.

When Rittenhouse took the stand, Carlson argued, what we all saw was “willful prosecutorial misconduct.”

Kenosha County Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger, Carlson noted, “[implied] that Kyle Rittenhouse must be guilty because he had exercised his constitutional right to remain silent after he was arrested.”

According to Fox News, the move prompted defense attorneys to ask for a mistrial, which Judge Bruce Schroeder didn’t immediately rule on.

He did, however, excoriate Binger.

“I was astonished when you began your examination by commenting on the defendant’s post-arrest silence,” a visibly angry Schroeder said after the jury was removed from the courtroom.

“That’s basic law. It’s been basic law in this country for 40 years, 50 years. I have no idea why you would do something like that. … I don’t know what you’re up to.”

From: Tucker: Rittenhouse Has 'Already Won' and We Are Watching 'Willful Prosecutorial Misconduct' (https://www.westernjournal.com/tucker-rittenhouse-already-won-watching-willful-prosecutorial-misconduct/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=teaparty&utm_content=2021-11-11&utm_campaign=manualpost&fbclid=IwAR3oQZl3MdtvHudFHrfMrT5nYh_g4IoJZTU-ly75P9ufybqZDNlbTLUq3ic)

[dwoodley1975]

The judge needs to be taken off the case.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

The judge needs to be taken off the case.

Yeah that judge is having trouble speaking coherently. The "news articles" that quote him aren't quoting him in full. They're heavily editing what he actually was saying, so that their readers can make sense of it.

He forbade anyone calling the victims of the shooting - victims. In medical terms, that's what they were. Victims. They didn't die of old age. They were victims of fatal wounds from gunshots. Just like someone who dies from cancer is a victim of cancer. And someone who falls off a ladder is a victim of a broken neck. Someone who is killed in a car crash is a victim of massive internal injuries.

Victim is a 100%valid word to use for someone who is dead as a result of a gunshot. But the judge wants to minimize the "victimhood" of the victims by forbidding the word.

It was okay to call the victims rioters or looters, if it could be proven that they were. He actually pro-actively stated as such. But he pre-emptively forbade the word "victim." Even if it could be proven they were victims, they aren't allowed to call them that and when one witnessed used the word in his testimony the judge went ballistic.

(I was watching this on Fox News, at the time, in case anyone REALLY and SINCERELY gives a crap)

He is gaslighting a trial he presides over.

[AJ32162]

The person who is dead from a gunshot wound, will be a victim of a gunshot wound, no matter what crimes he's committing the second before he becomes a corpse.

Also I don't know what "liberals" viewing the shooting of criminals has to do with anything at all. I'm not a liberal, and the corpse doesn't become any less dead just because he was a criminal while he was still alive. The dead person is a victim of something that caused him to be dead. If he wasn't, he'd still be alive.

Do you also view Rittenhouse as a victim?

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Do you also view Rittenhouse as a victim?

No. He wasn't injured, he isn't dead, and there is no living person from this event who has committed any crime against him. He is a victim perhaps of white supremacists, the proud boys, and his own mother. But at this particular event, at the riot where he admits he shot and killed two people? No. He's not a victim.

[AJ32162]

No. He wasn't injured, he isn't dead, and there is no living person from this event who has committed any crime against him. He is a victim perhaps of white supremacists, the proud boys, and his own mother. But at this particular event, at the riot where he admits he shot and killed two people? No. He's not a victim.

Well, he was kicked and hit in the head with a skateboard...a victim of assault. So there is that.

[John41]

Well, I guess there was no reason for a trial, since you're so sure of what happened...

Are you available for other trials? It could save the justice system a lot of money!

Under cross examination by defense, the prosecution star witness testified he was chasing Rittenhouse with his Glock. His gun was pointed at Rittenhouse before Rittenhouse fired. Video from the FBI corroborates what Rittenhouse said about the shootings. A clear case of self defense when an angry mob is chasing you. The prosecution saw it was losing the case and tried for a mistrial by breaking constitutional protections so it could retry him.The judge gave a stern rebuke to the prosecutor calling him brazen. But the judge could declare a mistrial with prejudice, issue a directed verdict or nullify a guilty jury verdict because of jury intimidation. It’s all on video or live TV unedited

[manaboutown]

The judge needs to be taken off the case.

Great judge!!!

The prosecutors need to be disbarred!

[Two Bills]

I think the word 'victim' used in any trial is biased against the accused person.
It infers that the defendant is the sole perpetrator before any evidence is offered to the contrary.
I do not think the word should be allowed to be used in any trial, before evidence of proof, or a conviction.
Been watching recordings of trial, and find whole thing riveting.
I also find it quite funny how those who would hang Mr Baldwin from a lamp post before trial, and those who defended him, are now diametrically apposed in this case.

JMTC.

[Eg_cruz]

So a 17 year old (at the time of the incident) is arrested and labeled a white supremacist and guilty of murder by many, all without the benefit of trial. At trial, the star witness for the prosecution admits that Rittenhouse did not shoot him UNTIL HE POINTED HIS GUN AT RITTENHOUSE. Another PROSECUTION witness testified that the PROSECUTION tried to get him to change his statement, and the judge had to admonish the prosecutor for attempting to violate Rittenhouse’s constitutional rights to remain silent.

And what are some concerned about? Whether Rittenhouse actually cried during his testimony. Really? I mean, really? If anything, people should be questioning the potential prosecutorial misconduct and the rapid rush to judge a person absent facts and a fair trial. How dare a prosecutor attempt to introduce that the defendant chose to remain silent until he took the witness stand, and yet there are people who are not outraged by the prosecutor, but they apparently are ready to mock the defendant over his crying. What I saw and heard was not crying, but an attempt to control his emotions at which point the judge granted a recess so that the defendant could compose himself.

I guess lessons weren’t learned after the Nicholas Sandman debacle, hopefully Kyle Rittenhouse has attorneys lined up to drop lawsuits. Given that some of those proclaiming his guilt also attacked Nicholas Sandman, one would think the judgement/settlement against these people should be significantly higher.
Well said

[MDLNB]

No. He wasn't injured, he isn't dead, and there is no living person from this event who has committed any crime against him. He is a victim perhaps of white supremacists, the proud boys, and his own mother. But at this particular event, at the riot where he admits he shot and killed two people? No. He's not a victim.
So, when a person is chased down by rioters, things thrown at him and being smacked in the back of the head repeatedly with a skateboard and kicked while on the ground, and then a gun aimed at him, that does not make him a victim? Interesting perspective. So, if a person is a racist, he can't be a victim but if he is a child molester or a rapist, or just a violent thug, he will be a victim? Is this a special theory based on one's ethnicity?

[Eg_cruz]

Well, I guess there was no reason for a trial, since you're so sure of what happened...

Are you available for other trials? It could save the justice system a lot of money!
Well put

[MDLNB]

Apparently, there are some on here that feel that one should not defend themselves from being beaten and possibly even murdered in the street. I certainly hope that no one has a family member that is a victim that has to run for his life because he attempts to do his civic duty, patriotic duty of helping his fellow man. Find this young man guilty and it will discourage brave young people from running into a fire to save a child or even a pet, assist an accident victim or even enlist in the military. Apparently, some folks believe that towns should be burnt down to demonstrate their opposition to a view. When your female family member is being assaulted by some thug, I hope that witnesses do not turn a blind eye away from the incident instead of defending them. Hopefully, if someone attempts to carjack you, a good neighbor will be there to assist and not go about his merry way, thinking it is not his business.
As for any association with a white supremacist group, it wouldn't matter to me if the rescuer is a member of the KKK or the Black Panthers. One shouldn't be picky about those that attempt to assist them when their homes are burning.
I have observed the trial on this young man and think that he should be acquitted. I have little doubt that they will still find him guilty of illegally in possession of a firearm. Funny, but other states(30) only have such age restrictions on handguns. I also feel that if they are trying him as an adult that charge should be dropped.

Case closed!

[J1ceasar]

I wonder how many demonstrators were arrested ?

How to pis* off a judge and lose your case.

Quite entertaining yesterday.

I've got some popcorn and ready for today.

:popcorn:

[Eg_cruz]

The judge needs to be taken off the case.
Why…..because of your bias against the defendant

[spd2918]

2 thugs / rioters died because they tried to kill a man. That man defended his own live. I have no issues with that.

I do have issues with a system that destroys an innocent young man's life for political reasons.

I do have issues with a media that labels a young man a white supremacist and omits information to its viewers for political reasons.

[dewilson58]

2 thugs / rioters died because they tried to kill a man. That man defended his own live. I have no issues with that.

I do have issues with a system that destroys an innocent young man's life for political reasons.

I do have issues with a media that labels a young man a white supremacist and omits information to its viewers for political reasons.

:bigbow:

[dewilson58]

Maybe someone told him there are blanks in the gun, so it's not his responsibility.

:shrug:

[Love2Swim]

I'm sure that is true. However, so far no one has suggested, or announced, or proclaimed that this kid has been diagnosed with any such thing, or claimed that he's incapable of shedding tears.

And he has plenty of talent in "expression emotions." That blubber-fest would have been convincing, had there been tears.

He admitted to lying about his claim that he was an EMT. So we know he's fully capable of lying, and understands what lying means, and that he knows the difference between "misstating" something and flat out lying about something on purpose.

His mother drove him, while he was a minor child, over state lines with a semi-automatic weapon, for the express purpose of attending what he believed would be a riot (since, why else WOULD he bring a semi-automatic weapon with him over state lines)?

He knew he was going to a violent situation. He brought with him the means to kill people. He killed not someone, but two people. He maimed another. He has bragged about his affiliations with white supremacists and the Proud Boys on his own personal social media accounts, and the public has seen the publicized videos and photos of him exactly where he bragged that he was.

Whether he intended to kill the two VICTIMS, he killed them. They're dead, he's the one who pulled the trigger. They are victims of gun violence, whether it's murder or otherwise. He's not being charged with murder, he's being charged with homicide. He absolutely committed homicide.

Agree. There is no way to sugar coat his actions - he was a self described white supremacist and vigilante. I think its important to separate politics from facts. Taking a look at the FACTS - He willingly came to a riot "locked and loaded" with 30 rounds of live ammunition in his semi-automatic rifle. He lied about being an EMT - he was not licensed or even trained as one, and he is not old enough to open carry the weapon in Wisconsin. He deliberately injected himself into a dangerous situation with a conspicuous assault rifle where he KNEW he might have to use it. He not only pulled the trigger four times killing one person (shot in the head?), he then pulled it again killing a second person, and then a third time injuring a a third person IMHO, If he doesn't serve jail time for the shootings there is something wrong with our justice system. And I think his mother, who knew what he was up to and transported him across state lines, should be held accountable as well.

What is additionally sickening is that (according to an affidavit filed by the Kenosha DA) Rittenhouse was at a pub on January 5 with his mother, after the killings, posing for pictures while flashing a white supremacist hand gesture, wearing a T-shirt reading "free as f**k." It doesn't appear he even had an real remorse for what he had done.

[wamley]

You are wrong. " Lake County, Ill. State's Attorney Michael Nerheim's office said in a statement that an investigation conducted by local police "revealed the gun used in the Kenosha shooting was purchased, stored and used in Wisconsin."

"Additionally, there is no evidence the gun was ever physically possessed by Kyle Rittenhouse in Illinois," the state's attorney's office added.
Kyle Rittenhouse Will Face No Gun Charges In Illinois For Wisconsin Shooting : Updates: The Fight Against Racial Injustice : NPR (https://www.npr.org/sections/live-updates-protests-for-racial-justice/2020/10/14/923643265/kyle-rittenhouse-accused-kenosha-killer-wont-face-gun-charges-in-illinois)

[wamley]

You are wrong. " Lake County, Ill. State's Attorney Michael Nerheim's office said in a statement that an investigation conducted by local police "revealed the gun used in the Kenosha shooting was purchased, stored and used in Wisconsin."

"Additionally, there is no evidence the gun was ever physically possessed by Kyle Rittenhouse in Illinois," the state's attorney's office added.
Kyle Rittenhouse Will Face No Gun Charges In Illinois For Wisconsin Shooting : Updates: The Fight Against Racial Injustice : NPR (https://www.npr.org/sections/live-updates-protests-for-racial-justice/2020/10/14/923643265/kyle-rittenhouse-accused-kenosha-killer-wont-face-gun-charges-in-illinois)

[George Page]

He has bragged about his affiliations with white supremacists and the Proud Boys.

Please provide a source for this claim

[DeanFL]

.
.
yet ANOTHER (idiotic) example of how MEDIA spins things in their view>

From USA TODAY. today>


headline:
'How not to be a good judge': Kyle Rittenhouse judge draws new backlash with 'Asian food' joke
Drake Bentley Joel Shannon USA TODAY NETWORK


A day after he made headlines for erupting in anger at the prosecution in Kyle Rittenhouse's murder trial, Kenosha County Circuit Judge Bruce Schroeder continued to draw attention, criticism and accusations of bias.

On Thursday, the judge sparked backlash by making a quip about "Asian food." And his attempt to honor veterans led the courtroom to applaud a man who appeared to be the only veteran in the room: A witness for the defense.
Those comments came as Schroeder's latest controversy gained national attention. On Thursday he attempted a joke in response to an inquiry about a lunch break: “I hope the Asian food isn’t coming ... isn’t on one of those boats along Long Beach Harbor," he said.

The comment seemingly referenced the situation unfolding on the West Coast, where a record-breaking number of cargo ships have waited off the coast of California due to a backup at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.
.
.

[wamley]

They were perpetrators, not victims. Someone that dies of cancer did not perpetrate a crime against cancer. Simple is what simple does.

[wamley]

What felony was he convicted of?

[tjlee500]

People have been shot and killed and you think this is entertaining and popcorn is appropriate? Think about the families. What would your reaction to a fool who would make such callous remarks?

[heenables]

I was watching it on the court tv youtube channel (non-political) They took a poll with over 10,000 responses. Results were 87% Not guilty (self defense) and 13% guilty. This was after it was over but (both rested and rebuttal was finished) before the closing arguments. Makes sense that 13% of people on here see it the way they do with blind disregard and more than that I would equate the 13% to other things as well but that's just my humble opinion.

[christine J Toft]

.
.
omg, no idea what your comment means - and quite sexist. The guy is 18 and been through a very emotional trying experience. I didn't follow this case initially, but saw and read a lot about it during the trial. Seems to be very easy for those seeing only one side to make comments as this.

I saw an article that had a headline, Rittenhouse 'should get Actor of The Year award'. Typical by uninformed and biased media...

The more I saw of the trial so far, good chance the case will be dismissed due to the terrible Prosecution actions during this trial.
.
.
Odd, I watched. Not one drop of water came from his eyes. He's not even a good actor. And I also found it disturbing that the judge would not allow the prosecution to refer to those shot as "victims" yet the defense can call them Thugs, Rioters etc.... This judge was obviously very biased.

[christine J Toft]

It also works better when there are actual tears shed, and not just a Scott Baio Acting 101 Class demonstration.
And this kid really failed 101 acting!

[christine J Toft]

I'm sure that is true. However, so far no one has suggested, or announced, or proclaimed that this kid has been diagnosed with any such thing, or claimed that he's incapable of shedding tears.

And he has plenty of talent in "expression emotions." That blubber-fest would have been convincing, had there been tears.

He admitted to lying about his claim that he was an EMT. So we know he's fully capable of lying, and understands what lying means, and that he knows the difference between "misstating" something and flat out lying about something on purpose.

His mother drove him, while he was a minor child, over state lines with a semi-automatic weapon, for the express purpose of attending what he believed would be a riot (since, why else WOULD he bring a semi-automatic weapon with him over state lines)?

He knew he was going to a violent situation. He brought with him the means to kill people. He killed not someone, but two people. He maimed another. He has bragged about his affiliations with white supremacists and the Proud Boys on his own personal social media accounts, and the public has seen the publicized videos and photos of him exactly where he bragged that he was.

Whether he intended to kill the two VICTIMS, he killed them. They're dead, he's the one who pulled the trigger. They are victims of gun violence, whether it's murder or otherwise. He's not being charged with murder, he's being charged with homicide. He absolutely committed homicide.
Thank you for some clarity need by many!

[airstreamingypsy]

Glad he had a weapon to defend himself. "Homicide" by itself is NOT a charge. Manslaughter, as in voluntary or involuntary can be a charge or maybe even an "intentional homicide" or something similar, but homicide itself is just a classification that the person did not die of natural causes. Personally, I believe in CCW and think that anyone brandishing a weapon in a threatening manor toward another individual should expect that someone might just take it seriously and defend themselves. If I was attempting to assist my fellow neighbor and someone started beating me with or without a weapon, I might feel compelled to defend myself expeditiously. So far, I have not seen any testimony that indicated that he was hunting for someone to shoot, rather than someone to assist. But, I have not seen all the testimony. But, from what I have seen from the videos, even those that the prosecutor has shown, my original thought was that he was justified in responding with deadly force. But, that is my "professional" opinion.

Um, he wouldn't have had to defend himself if he didn't have a weapon. He didn't even have to be there. He chose to show up, across state lines, with an illegal weapon..... he and his mother should spend the rest of their lives in jail. Vermin like that have no place in society.

[JMintzer]

Yeah that judge is having trouble speaking coherently. The "news articles" that quote him aren't quoting him in full. They're heavily editing what he actually was saying, so that their readers can make sense of it.

He forbade anyone calling the victims of the shooting - victims. In medical terms, that's what they were. Victims. They didn't die of old age. They were victims of fatal wounds from gunshots. Just like someone who dies from cancer is a victim of cancer. And someone who falls off a ladder is a victim of a broken neck. Someone who is killed in a car crash is a victim of massive internal injuries.

Victim is a 100%valid word to use for someone who is dead as a result of a gunshot. But the judge wants to minimize the "victimhood" of the victims by forbidding the word.

It was okay to call the victims rioters or looters, if it could be proven that they were. He actually pro-actively stated as such. But he pre-emptively forbade the word "victim." Even if it could be proven they were victims, they aren't allowed to call them that and when one witnessed used the word in his testimony the judge went ballistic.

(I was watching this on Fox News, at the time, in case anyone REALLY and SINCERELY gives a crap)

He is gaslighting a trial he presides over.

He is insisting on "legal" terms, not "medical" terms...

[JMintzer]

No. He wasn't injured, he isn't dead, and there is no living person from this event who has committed any crime against him. He is a victim perhaps of white supremacists, the proud boys, and his own mother. But at this particular event, at the riot where he admits he shot and killed two people? No. He's not a victim.

A kick to the face, two blunt force traumas to the neck and a rock to the back of the head aren't injuries?

Interesting...

[JMintzer]

Under cross examination by defense, the prosecution star witness testified he was chasing Rittenhouse with his Glock. His gun was pointed at Rittenhouse before Rittenhouse fired. Video from the FBI corroborates what Rittenhouse said about the shootings. A clear case of self defense when an angry mob is chasing you. The prosecution saw it was losing the case and tried for a mistrial by breaking constitutional protections so it could retry him.The judge gave a stern rebuke to the prosecutor calling him brazen. But the judge could declare a mistrial with prejudice, issue a directed verdict or nullify a guilty jury verdict because of jury intimidation. It’s all on video or live TV unedited

Perzactly!

[JMintzer]

I think the word 'victim' used in any trial is biased against the accused person.
It infers that the defendant is the sole perpetrator before any evidence is offered to the contrary.
I do not think the word should be allowed to be used in any trial, before evidence of proof, or a conviction.
Been watching recordings of trial, and find whole thing riveting.
I also find it quite funny how those who would hang Mr Baldwin from a lamp post before trial, and those who defended him, are now diametrically apposed in this case.

JMTC.

Completely different scenarios, but sure, why not...

[JMintzer]

Two scumbags dead. Fire setting scumbags. If the authorities /police were allowed to do their jobs then this situation would never have occurred. Say what you want but the kid has some huge stones. And quite the marksman.

Also, excellent shoot/don't shoot judgement...

He lowered his weapon when Grosskuertz put his hands up (even though he was still armed) and didn't shoot until Grosskuertz pointed his handgun at him...

[ThirdOfFive]

Well, I guess there was no reason for a trial, since you're so sure of what happened...

Are you available for other trials? It could save the justice system a lot of money!
Good point.

No one here is on that jury, which means that no one here will know in total what that jury knows or how the deliberations proceed. What we DO know is that juries are charged to decide guilt or innocence based on the LAW, not on prior prejudices one way or the other.

This is our system. Trusting it is essential, no matter what our personal feelings might be.,

[JMintzer]

I understand the label "white supremacist" was spoken by the President of the United States.

Before he had any facts... He learned well as VP...

[JMintzer]

Agree. There is no way to sugar coat his actions - he was a self described white supremacist and vigilante. I think its important to separate politics from facts. Taking a look at the FACTS - He willingly came to a riot "locked and loaded" with 30 rounds of live ammunition in his semi-automatic rifle. He lied about being an EMT - he was not licensed or even trained as one, and he is not old enough to open carry the weapon in Wisconsin. He deliberately injected himself into a dangerous situation with a conspicuous assault rifle where he KNEW he might have to use it. He not only pulled the trigger four times killing one person (shot in the head?), he then pulled it again killing a second person, and then a third time injuring a a third person IMHO, If he doesn't serve jail time for the shootings there is something wrong with our justice system. And I think his mother, who knew what he was up to and transported him across state lines, should be held accountable as well.

What is additionally sickening is that (according to an affidavit filed by the Kenosha DA) Rittenhouse was at a pub on January 5 with his mother, after the killings, posing for pictures while flashing a white supremacist hand gesture, wearing a T-shirt reading "free as f**k." It doesn't appear he even had an real remorse for what he had done.

Funny, you neglected to mention that those shot attacked/assaulted and pointed their (illegally possessed) weapon at Rittenhouse...

And please point me to any link that shows he was a "self proclaimed" anything.

Yes, he puffed up his resume to a reporter... The horror!

[MandoMan]

So a 17 year old (at the time of the incident) is arrested and labeled a white supremacist and guilty of murder by many, all without the benefit of trial. At trial, the star witness for the prosecution admits that Rittenhouse did not shoot him UNTIL HE POINTED HIS GUN AT RITTENHOUSE. Another PROSECUTION witness testified that the PROSECUTION tried to get him to change his statement, and the judge had to admonish the prosecutor for attempting to violate Rittenhouse’s constitutional rights to remain silent.

And what are some concerned about? Whether Rittenhouse actually cried during his testimony. Really? I mean, really? If anything, people should be questioning the potential prosecutorial misconduct and the rapid rush to judge a person absent facts and a fair trial. How dare a prosecutor attempt to introduce that the defendant chose to remain silent until he took the witness stand, and yet there are people who are not outraged by the prosecutor, but they apparently are ready to mock the defendant over his crying. What I saw and heard was not crying, but an attempt to control his emotions at which point the judge granted a recess so that the defendant could compose himself.

I guess lessons weren’t learned after the Nicholas Sandman debacle, hopefully Kyle Rittenhouse has attorneys lined up to drop lawsuits. Given that some of those proclaiming his guilt also attacked Nicholas Sandman, one would think the judgement/settlement against these people should be significantly higher.

He shouldn’t have been there and shouldn’t have been armed, but he must have been utterly terrified, and he makes an excellent case for it being self-defense. Seventeen year olds often make very poor decisions, especially if swayed by emotional and one-sided arguments.

[JMintzer]

People have been shot and killed and you think this is entertaining and popcorn is appropriate? Think about the families. What would your reaction to a fool who would make such callous remarks?

The popcorn is for the reactions on this board. And rightly so...

[JMintzer]

Odd, I watched. Not one drop of water came from his eyes. He's not even a good actor. And I also found it disturbing that the judge would not allow the prosecution to refer to those shot as "victims" yet the defense can call them Thugs, Rioters etc.... This judge was obviously very biased.

Sorry he didn't "cry" well enough for you... If you though he was "acting", you have no place discussing "bias"...

To your other point, already covered...

[Proveone]

How to pis* off a judge and lose your case.

Quite entertaining yesterday.

I've got some popcorn and ready for today.

:popcorn:
The judge is a nut case. He is an elected official and playing to his "audience". Pathetic human being! The prosecution is inept. Rittenhouse should have stuck to video games. He will be a "marked" person if he gets off. By the way, so that's how you entertain yourself with popcorn?

[Roron123]

Fox News had the whole thing on yesterday!!remember this kid is 18 yrs and he killed someone so is allowed to get emotional 😢

[Larchap49]

Kyle Rittenhouse trial: Defense plans to call several more witnesses after his crucial testimony - CNN (https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/11/us/kyle-rittenhouse-trial-thursday/index.html)

I saw some of it on CNN. It has been on there a great deal.

I bet that is real accurate reporting. NOT

[JMintzer]

It is very easy to **** off a biased judge what has Lee Greenwood's "anthem" as his ring tone.

I thought it was "Southern Cross", by CS&N...

But I've since listened to both and neither have those horns in them... So there's that...

[JMintzer]

Um, he wouldn't have had to defend himself if he didn't have a weapon. He didn't even have to be there. He chose to show up, across state lines, with an illegal weapon..... he and his mother should spend the rest of their lives in jail. Vermin like that have no place in society.

Wrong. You need to brush up on your facts and stop getting your talking points from the MSM...

[JMintzer]

The judge is a nut case. He is an elected official and playing to his "audience". Pathetic human being! The prosecution is inept. Rittenhouse should have stuck to video games. He will be a "marked" person if he gets off. By the way, so that's how you entertain yourself with popcorn?

The judge is following the law. He has repeatedly told the prosecution to cut out their shenanigans, yet they continued, so they were (deservedly) admonished).

The recent, most blatant one was their attempt to try to paint Rittenhouse as guilty because he followed his CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to REMAIN SILENT...

[Larchap49]

Unfortunately, the smarmy, white supremacist little thug (and his mother) are going to get away with it. He went there for ONE reason and one reason only. He wanted to be a hero and shoot someone. He got his wish and will get away with it, due a lot to an inept prosecution and a sympathetic judge. The fact that his mother (who I can't understand why she isn't being charged) willingly drove him to a location where trouble was likely, while illegally armed, says a lot about the entitlement environment he was raised in. What kind of parent even does that?

What you leave out in your rant is the video evidence of his running away from a mob trying to catch and kill him and his resorting to using his gun only when on the ground with a gun pointed at him. The only thing you stated accurately was he should not have been there but on the other hand he did have every right to be there as did the protesters. Oops rioters destroying private property with no intervention allowed from from law enforcement being managed by the elected leaders. So far testimony from prosecution witnesses seem to back up the defense.

[Bonnevie]

Your opinion, you might add. Was he a "white supremacist?" What group does he represent? Or, are you judging him? Did he not have a first aid kit with him? Was he intending to choke someone with an ace bandage?

At Pudgy’s Pub, Rittenhouse was seen wearing a T-shirt with the words, “Free as F***,” while flashing the "OK" sign — a gesture that has been co-opted by known white supremacist groups, the motion said. In his 90-minute visit to the bar, which was captured on security footage, the teen was seen consuming alcohol while being serenaded by a group of adult men who sang the Proud Boys’ anthem, according to the motion.

[JMintzer]

At Pudgy’s Pub, Rittenhouse was seen wearing a T-shirt with the words, “Free as F***,” while flashing the "OK" sign — a gesture that has been co-opted by known white supremacist groups, the motion said. In his 90-minute visit to the bar, which was captured on security footage, the teen was seen consuming alcohol while being serenaded by a group of adult men who sang the Proud Boys’ anthem, according to the motion.

The t-shirt proves nothing...

That "gesture" has also been used by countless others, as I showed earlier in this thread. It proves nothing...

Being given a drink by his parent proves nothing...

And what is this "Proud Boys Anthem" you speak of?

[JMintzer]

And do you know that he is suffering from anything that you posted???? No...I didn't think so.

Do you know his "lack of tears" proves anything? No...I didn't think so...

[JMintzer]

Hopefully your 17yo son wouldn't illegally obtain an assault rifle then go to another state to parade around in an area where there is civil unrest with it strapped across his back looking for trouble....hopefully

It' wasn't an "assault rifle". He didn't transport it to another state...

He live right over the border, in Ohio, only 15 minutes away and he worked in Kenosha, daily. His father lived there... So just give up on the "crossing state lines" BS narrative already...

He was actively asking people if they "needed medical assistance". It's on video.

He threatened no one with his rifle. He passed countless others who completely ignored him. It's on video.

It wasn't until the child rapist, Rosenbaum, decided to attack him that things went sideways...

[Vermilion Villager]

Do you know his "lack of tears" proves anything? No...I didn't think so...

I was in law enforcement.....When someone who is not a trained like and actor fakes crying they cannot produce tears. Producing tears based on emotion is an involuntary response. Its one of the first thing we look for. Now you know...:welcome:

[Pamelah]

How to pis* off a judge and lose your case.

Quite entertaining yesterday.

I've got some popcorn and ready for today.

:popcorn:

Yup after 12 surgeries with anesthesia my brain cells are rusting. I can’t see the the importance of all these posts when NO ONE IS AGHAST THAT AN 18 YEAR OLD GOES OUT FOR AN EVENING TOTING AN
AK47? Oh right, gun rights and all that crap.

[JMintzer]

I was in law enforcement.....When someone who is not a trained like and actor fakes crying they cannot produce tears. Producing tears based on emotion is an involuntary response. Its one of the first thing we look for. Now you know...:welcome:

Sure... if you say so... :ohdear:

Funny, the career cops I've talked to all believed him... So there's that...

[JMintzer]

Yup after 12 surgeries with anesthesia my brain cells are rusting. I can’t see the the importance of all these posts when NO ONE IS AGHAST THAT AN 18 YEAR OLD GOES OUT FOR AN EVENING TOTING AN
AK47? Oh right, gun rights and all that crap.

Well, he didn't have an AK-47, so there's that...

[Marine1974]

It’s amazing how many people are
experts on court proceedings and
know when someone is crying or not . Thankfully he has a jury to decide his fate .

[spd2918]

I wonder how many posters know the proud boys are an inclusive group, not racists, with black and Asian members. I wonder what the boy's POSSIBLE personal opinions have to do with the facts of the case.

I wonder what most posters would do if someone pointed a gun at them and they feared for their lives....

[MDLNB]

Um, he wouldn't have had to defend himself if he didn't have a weapon. He didn't even have to be there. He chose to show up, across state lines, with an illegal weapon..... he and his mother should spend the rest of their lives in jail. Vermin like that have no place in society.


Obviously, you have no clue, but that is understandable. Many of us in The Villages are CCW. Many of us would become involved in a crisis. Not ALL of us, of course. That is proof by some of the very few comments on here that have no clue. Whether or not he had any business in the area, is no one's business. He said he was there, and there was video evidence and witnesses, that concluded that he was offering assistance. He put at least one fire out and he offered first aid assistance to the wounded. So, building are being burnt down by arsonists and folks are being assaulted, and he had a weapon for self defense. If he did not, I would think that he was a foolish nut, even though a decent guy for trying to help the community. He had a gun, wow! Most of the residents in The Villages have at least one gun. How wrong some folks are that jump to the conclusion that three scumbags are shot and the guy that did it was a bad guy. Sometimes bad guys get what they deserve. In this case, only two of them really got what they deserved. The third one got a second chance to right his own actions.

Pretty bad when a person is running for his life is prosecuted for defending himself.

[MDLNB]

He shouldn’t have been there and shouldn’t have been armed, but he must have been utterly terrified, and he makes an excellent case for it being self-defense. Seventeen year olds often make very poor decisions, especially if swayed by emotional and one-sided arguments.


"Poor decisions?" Hmmm, I wonder what some on here would do if confronted with the same situation. I probably would have approached the situation a bit more cautiously, but I would probably be on trial for THREE deaths instead of just two. I've had more experience over the years with firearms, I'm sure. I doubt I would have been able to attempt to outrun the crowd, so I would have had to make a fast decision as to what I would have to do to protect myself. "Poor decision?"

[MDLNB]

At Pudgy’s Pub, Rittenhouse was seen wearing a T-shirt with the words, “Free as F***,” while flashing the "OK" sign — a gesture that has been co-opted by known white supremacist groups, the motion said. In his 90-minute visit to the bar, which was captured on security footage, the teen was seen consuming alcohol while being serenaded by a group of adult men who sang the Proud Boys’ anthem, according to the motion.


And that makes him a "white supremacist?" SO, shooting three white guys is proof that he is a racist? I know of several racists in The Villages, but that does not make me a racist. Some folks just jump to conclusions based on what someone tells them, and others reason things out and do not condemn based on gossip and rumor.

[Hifred]

How to pis* off a judge and lose your case.

Quite entertaining yesterday.

I've got some popcorn and ready for today.

:popcorn:

You are forgetting those whose lives were lost. To you it is entertainment.....to the families and those that loved the people who died it is life altering. Have compassion.

[JMintzer]

You are forgetting those whose lives were lost. To you it is entertainment.....to the families and those that loved the people who died it is life altering. Have compassion.

Read up on them... Their families had nothing to do with them for years...

The two who died had a long violent past.

Sad, but true...

[MDLNB]

I was in law enforcement.....When someone who is not a trained like and actor fakes crying they cannot produce tears. Producing tears based on emotion is an involuntary response. Its one of the first thing we look for. Now you know...:welcome:
I was in law enforcement and the lack of tears means absolutely NOTHING. I have never seen ANYONE convicted in court because they were unable to cry. Maybe in your vast experience, you have? If so, perhaps you can share the specifics? I have seen folks cry when they were in court and still found guilty. And then they really cried. So, the moral of the story is that crying won't get you anywhere....:a040:

[JMintzer]

I was in law enforcement and the lack of tears means absolutely NOTHING. I have never seen ANYONE convicted in court because they were unable to cry. Maybe in your vast experience, you have? If so, perhaps you can share the specifics? I have seen folks cry when they were in court and still found guilty. And then they really cried. So, the moral of the story is that crying won't get you anywhere....:a040:

You mean it won't get me out of a ticket? Damn!

[Westie Man]

Yeah that judge is having trouble speaking coherently. The "news articles" that quote him aren't quoting him in full. They're heavily editing what he actually was saying, so that their readers can make sense of it.

He forbade anyone calling the victims of the shooting - victims. In medical terms, that's what they were. Victims. They didn't die of old age. They were victims of fatal wounds from gunshots. Just like someone who dies from cancer is a victim of cancer. And someone who falls off a ladder is a victim of a broken neck. Someone who is killed in a car crash is a victim of massive internal injuries.

Victim is a 100%valid word to use for someone who is dead as a result of a gunshot. But the judge wants to minimize the "victimhood" of the victims by forbidding the word.

It was okay to call the victims rioters or looters, if it could be proven that they were. He actually pro-actively stated as such. But he pre-emptively forbade the word "victim." Even if it could be proven they were victims, they aren't allowed to call them that and when one witnessed used the word in his testimony the judge went ballistic.

(I was watching this on Fox News, at the time, in case anyone REALLY and SINCERELY gives a crap)

He is gaslighting a trial he presides over.


While being deposed by the defense attorney I called myself the victim. The attorney replied that the State of Florida is the victim

[MDLNB]

Hopefully your 17yo son wouldn't illegally obtain an assault rifle then go to another state to parade around in an area where there is civil unrest with it strapped across his back looking for trouble....hopefully


My grandson has a mounted buck head that he shot when he was 11yo.

Not to seem biased, but it does seem that city folk have an innate fear of big bad guns. Wonder why the survivor of the shooting is not ostracized for pointing a pistol at the DEFENDANT, the way this young man is criminalized for defending himself.

Hey, maybe that guy would not have been shot if he had not been where he should not have been, and brandishing an illegally possessed pistol while chasing a person down the street. I am presupposing that he illegally possessed the pistol, based on the statement by him that his CCW permit was expired at the time of the shooting.

[MDLNB]

You mean it won't get me out of a ticket? Damn!


I stand corrected..:) There are always exceptions...:clap2:

[MDLNB]

You are forgetting those whose lives were lost. To you it is entertainment.....to the families and those that loved the people who died it is life altering. Have compassion.


To me, it's just street justice. Sometimes you just have to accept the good with the bad. I am sure that the families are thinking of how much money they may be able to get out of the system and that those two finally may have been productive for something in their lives. :coolsmiley:

[Bonnevie]

And that makes him a "white supremacist?" SO, shooting three white guys is proof that he is a racist? I know of several racists in The Villages, but that does not make me a racist. Some folks just jump to conclusions based on what someone tells them, and others reason things out and do not condemn based on gossip and rumor.

there are pictures of him making the white power ok sign....no one forced him to do that.

so you know several people that are racists...do you hang out with them in bars letting them serenade you with Proud Boys anthem????

idk, if I was awaiting trial for killing people at a Black Lives Matter protest, it's not something I would do. I would use my "reasoning" to think that's not a good look.

[Bonnevie]

The t-shirt proves nothing...

That "gesture" has also been used by countless others, as I showed earlier in this thread. It proves nothing...

Being given a drink by his parent proves nothing...

And what is this "Proud Boys Anthem" you speak of?

well....he was awaiting trial for killing people at a Black Lives Matter protest....he was there illegally carrying a weapon now he was again breaking the law by drinking in a bar (if his mother wants to give him a drink in the privacy of their home, that's different) to do so in public seems like a flaunting display of entitlement.

“Proud of Your Boy” a song written for the 1992 Disney film “Aladdin,” but not used until a 2011 stage adaptation, and is the source of the name of the far-right group self-described “western chauvinist” group the Proud Boys. Prosecutors said the song sung by members of the Proud Boys “as an anthem and for self-identification.”

[Trayderjoe]

Please provide a source for this claim

Good luck with your request. There are posters who have a history of inaccuracy in their posts, but they never provide proof of their assertions. It is easier to misrepresent than it is to actually do a little research. Even when presented with proof that they were incorrect, they will stick to "their truth".

[MDLNB]

there are pictures of him making the white power ok sign....no one forced him to do that.

so you know several people that are racists...do you hang out with them in bars letting them serenade you with Proud Boys anthem????

idk, if I was awaiting trial for killing people at a Black Lives Matter protest, it's not something I would do. I would use my "reasoning" to think that's not a good look.


I don't know what a "white power sign" is, but last I heard there was no law regarding the gesture. Was that instrumental in his shooting three WHITE guys?
I don't hang around in any bars, and I do not know what the "Proud Boys Anthem" is. Does that make me want to go out and shoot three WHITE guys?
Why don't you contact the young man and give him suggestions on how your "reasoning" and what a "good look" to be so he can emulate it?


So, you believe the guy to be guilty of being a racist, therefore he is sure to go out and shoot three white guys for no other reason than they were following him down the street?

[Bonnevie]

Well, he didn't have an AK-47, so there's that...

yes, that's so much better. it was only an AK-15 style rifle
so what's the big deal some teenager was roaming the streets with it? oh,yeah there's this:

AR-15 rifles are lighter and have a higher rate of accuracy than the AK-47, but the AK-47 is considerably cheaper and more dependable in comparison.

and this:The AR-15 is sometimes called "America's Rifle" because it is the most popular long gun in the country. There are around 10 million AR-15 units currently in the United States. In fact, the AR-15 has also been popular with perpetrators of mass shootings — the gun was used in the San Bernardino, Aurora and Sandy Hook shootings.

whew, I feel so much better now that you said it wasn't an AK-47

[Trayderjoe]

Thank you for some clarity need by many!

Actually the poster did not provide clarity as their post was proven not factual with the trial transcripts. It would be more accurate to say that the post "muddied the waters".

NO ONE has yet to provide proof of the inaccurate allegations the poster made, as well as those who have posted similar comments. Do you have proof that those statements are actually fact? And be careful citing a MSM source since the there is a proven history of misinformation (remember Nicholas Sandman?).

[MDLNB]

well....he was awaiting trial for killing people at a Black Lives Matter protest....he was there illegally carrying a weapon now he was again breaking the law by drinking in a bar (if his mother wants to give him a drink in the privacy of their home, that's different) to do so in public seems like a flaunting display of entitlement.

“Proud of Your Boy” a song written for the 1992 Disney film “Aladdin,” but not used until a 2011 stage adaptation, and is the source of the name of the far-right group self-described “western chauvinist” group the Proud Boys. Prosecutors said the song sung by members of the Proud Boys “as an anthem and for self-identification.”


Wow, no one ever drank an alcoholic beverage before they were adults before. I guess I am guilty of murder because I had a draft beer given to me by a relative in bar. Sounds real ominous.

And now, a Disney theme song makes the young man a racist? Still trying to figure out why it matters if a racist shoots someone in self defense is any different than someone that is a Methodist or a Catholic shoots someone. And what is really interesting is that the supposed "racist" shot three white guys. I have not heard of any minorities shot by this supposed mass murderer.

So, the consensus by CERTAIN folks on here is that if you are around anyone that might be racist, you are deemed a racist and therefore must be a mass murderer. And if you are a racist and shoot a white guy in self defense, you are guilty of murder regardless of whether or not you feared for your life.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

"Poor decisions?" Hmmm, I wonder what some on here would do if confronted with the same situation. I probably would have approached the situation a bit more cautiously, but I would probably be on trial for THREE deaths instead of just two. I've had more experience over the years with firearms, I'm sure. I doubt I would have been able to attempt to outrun the crowd, so I would have had to make a fast decision as to what I would have to do to protect myself. "Poor decision?"

Well - you can ask MOST people in this country. Since every single person in this country had the same options:

a) Show up in a town you don't know anything about, in a state you don't even live in, at while you are still a minor who isn't even eligible to join the armed forces, armed with a semi-automatic weapon that had previously been classified as an actual assault weapon, to an event where you know you will be expecting violence, which is why you are bringing your firearm, to "protect" or "defend" people who never asked you to show up at all.

Or

b) Stay home, or go to work, or go to school if it was on a school day, or go outside and toss a football with your pals, or go shopping, or "anything OTHER than the above paragraph."

Most people chose option b.

In fact, even most people who chose to attend the event weren't armed at all, let alone with a semi-automatic weapon. MOST people chose not to be armed with a firearm at all.

MOST people were not shot at, and MOST people were not killed. And MOST people - including the people who WERE armed - chose not to shoot anyone.

[MDLNB]

Well - you can ask MOST people in this country. Since every single person in this country had the same options:

a) Show up in a town you don't know anything about, in a state you don't even live in, at while you are still a minor who isn't even eligible to join the armed forces, armed with a semi-automatic weapon that had previously been classified as an actual assault weapon, to an event where you know you will be expecting violence, which is why you are bringing your firearm, to "protect" or "defend" people who never asked you to show up at all.

Or

b) Stay home, or go to work, or go to school if it was on a school day, or go outside and toss a football with your pals, or go shopping, or "anything OTHER than the above paragraph."

Most people chose option b.

In fact, even most people who chose to attend the event weren't armed at all, let alone with a semi-automatic weapon. MOST people chose not to be armed with a firearm at all.

MOST people were not shot at, and MOST people were not killed. And MOST people - including the people who WERE armed - chose not to shoot anyone.


Wow, now that is not only totally erroneous, but also a very desperate response. You attempt to make suppositions where they really do not exist. Sorry, but my best response is that your post is just wrong.....:clap2:

[JMintzer]

My grandson has a mounted buck head that he shot when he was 11yo.

Not to seem biased, but it does seem that city folk have an innate fear of big bad guns. Wonder why the survivor of the shooting is not ostracized for pointing a pistol at the DEFENDANT, the way this young man is criminalized for defending himself.

Hey, maybe that guy would not have been shot if he had not been where he should not have been, and brandishing an illegally possessed pistol while chasing a person down the street. I am presupposing that he illegally possessed the pistol, based on the statement by him that his CCW permit was expired at the time of the shooting.

Ooopsie! That's a big no-no...

My guess is that he should have continued to treat injured people, like Rittenhouse was attempting to do... If he had simply "kept it in his pants"...

Now that I think about it, that's sage advice for many! :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[Trayderjoe]

The judge is a nut case. He is an elected official and playing to his "audience". Pathetic human being! The prosecution is inept. Rittenhouse should have stuck to video games. He will be a "marked" person if he gets off. By the way, so that's how you entertain yourself with popcorn?

So if Rittenhouse is found not guilty by reason of self defense, you find it perfectly acceptable to post a threat?

You do realize that the judge is trying to work around the deliberate prosecutorial misconduct in this trial? I believe that the prosecutor (based upon his star witness admitting he pointed his gun at Rittenhouse BEFORE he was shot, and the other prosecution witness saying under oath that the prosecutor's office tried to get him to change his statement) is trying to "tank" this trial as he knows his case is most likely a lost cause. The prosecutor doesn't want "the loss", so he is hoping to force the judge to render a mistrial. I don't believe that the judge wants to take the case away from the jury, as he stopped himself from openly, on the record, indicating that the prosecutor has crossed the line and provided grounds for mistrial or appeal.

Again, why aren't people concerned that a prosecutor would DELIBERATELY violate Rittenhouse's constitutional rights to remain silent? It doesn't matter if he is found guilty or not guilty, the prosecutor should be sanctioned for misconduct at the least.

[JMintzer]

there are pictures of him making the white power ok sign....no one forced him to do that.

so you know several people that are racists...do you hang out with them in bars letting them serenade you with Proud Boys anthem????

idk, if I was awaiting trial for killing people at a Black Lives Matter protest, it's not something I would do. I would use my "reasoning" to think that's not a good look.

You mean this sign?

https://www.chicagotribune.com/resizer/inL8epteq092pAnhVKzzHWuNtfA=/800x450/top/www.trbimg.com/img-5cefebc5/turbine/ct-1559227328-fkycqw5wh9-snap-image

Who knew they were all "white supremacists"?

[Trayderjoe]

And do you know that he is suffering from anything that you posted???? No...I didn't think so.

Please present your proof that he is NOT suffering from the conditions cited. No....I didn't think so.

[JMintzer]

there are pictures of him making the white power ok sign....no one forced him to do that.

so you know several people that are racists...do you hang out with them in bars letting them serenade you with Proud Boys anthem????

idk, if I was awaiting trial for killing people at a Black Lives Matter protest, it's not something I would do. I would use my "reasoning" to think that's not a good look.

And once again, what is this "Proud Boys Anthem" you keep speaking of?

Does it have a name?

[Trayderjoe]

It' wasn't an "assault rifle". He didn't transport it to another state...

He live right over the border, in Ohio, only 15 minutes away and he worked in Kenosha, daily. His father lived there... So just give up on the "crossing state lines" BS narrative already...

He was actively asking people if they "needed medical assistance". It's on video.

He threatened no one with his rifle. He passed countless others who completely ignored him. It's on video.

It wasn't until the child rapist, Rosenbaum, decided to attack him that things went sideways...

There you go, letting facts get in the way of "their truth".

[JMintzer]

well....he was awaiting trial for killing people at a Black Lives Matter protest....he was there illegally carrying a weapon now he was again breaking the law by drinking in a bar (if his mother wants to give him a drink in the privacy of their home, that's different) to do so in public seems like a flaunting display of entitlement.

Per the Google machine:

"Under Ohio law, children under the age of 21 may drink alcoholic beverages while under the supervision of their parents. This means one parent (or legal guardian) must give consent and be physically present while the child consumes alcohol. ... Yes, you can let your kids have a beer under your supervision."

“Proud of Your Boy” a song written for the 1992 Disney film “Aladdin,” but not used until a 2011 stage adaptation, and is the source of the name of the far-right group self-described “western chauvinist” group the Proud Boys. Prosecutors said the song sung by members of the Proud Boys “as an anthem and for self-identification.”

"Prosecutors said"... Well, that must mean it's true! Bwahahaha! :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[JMintzer]

yes, that's so much better. it was only an AK-15 style rifle
so what's the big deal some teenager was roaming the streets with it? oh,yeah there's this:

AR-15 rifles are lighter and have a higher rate of accuracy than the AK-47, but the AK-47 is considerably cheaper and more dependable in comparison.

and this:The AR-15 is sometimes called "America's Rifle" because it is the most popular long gun in the country. There are around 10 million AR-15 units currently in the United States. In fact, the AR-15 has also been popular with perpetrators of mass shootings — the gun was used in the San Bernardino, Aurora and Sandy Hook shootings.

whew, I feel so much better now that you said it wasn't an AK-47

No, it wasn't an "AK-15 style" rifle either...

AR actually stands for "Armalite Rifle". Armalite is the company that developed the rifle...

And yes, it is THE most popular rifle sold in the US. Maybe THAT's why he bought it...

And Glocks are the most popular handgun. And surprisingly, they are the handgun most often used in a crime.

Hmmm, I'm sensing a trend, something to do with statistics...

[Trayderjoe]

Yup after 12 surgeries with anesthesia my brain cells are rusting. I can’t see the the importance of all these posts when NO ONE IS AGHAST THAT AN 18 YEAR OLD GOES OUT FOR AN EVENING TOTING AN
AK47? Oh right, gun rights and all that crap.

Well, he didn't have an AK-47, so there's that...

And of course the video evidence of him cleaning off graffiti, rendering aid to others, etc.

Yet no one is AGHAST that one of the people shot was actually illegally carrying a handgun AND POINTED IT at Rittenhouse, by HIS OWN ADMISSION, before he was shot. No one is AGHAST that an "adult" hit Rittenhouse in the head with his skateboard and continued to advance on Rittenhouse when he was shot.

This is what happens when facts don't matter, taking MSM as the arbiters of truth, and being too lazy to actually try and find out the facts.

[manaboutown]

Well - you can ask MOST people in this country. Since every single person in this country had the same options:

a) Show up in a town you don't know anything about, in a state you don't even live in, at while you are still a minor who isn't even eligible to join the armed forces, armed with a semi-automatic weapon that had previously been classified as an actual assault weapon, to an event where you know you will be expecting violence, which is why you are bringing your firearm, to "protect" or "defend" people who never asked you to show up at all.

Or

b) Stay home, or go to work, or go to school if it was on a school day, or go outside and toss a football with your pals, or go shopping, or "anything OTHER than the above paragraph."

Most people chose option b.

In fact, even most people who chose to attend the event weren't armed at all, let alone with a semi-automatic weapon. MOST people chose not to be armed with a firearm at all.

MOST people were not shot at, and MOST people were not killed. And MOST people - including the people who WERE armed - chose not to shoot anyone.

"This kid went on the stand, and he defended himself. He defended his freedom, and he was superb. If you’re guilty as hell, trust me, you’re not going to go on that stand, and he withstood the lies and the attacks by the prosecutor, trying to trick him. He’s 18 years old.

He was absolutely outstanding. He defended himself. If this kid hadn’t shot Rosenbaum, he’d be dead. If this kid hadn’t shot Huber, he’d be dead. If this kid hadn’t shot Grosskreutz, he’d be dead.

Now, we keep hearing about this kid oh he had rounds in his rifle, what should he have? Ten? Oh, he crossed state lines to go to Kenosha. First of all, he didn’t and so what if he did, his father lived there.

Why is he the one that’s on defense? Why is he the one that has to explain himself to the media? They don’t tell us about Rosenbaum.

Rosenbaum grabbed the barrel of the rifle. Now, who is this guy? He’s prohibited from possessing or was firearms. He had sex with a minor, gruesome grotesque sex with a minor. He’s a bail jumper, two domestic abuse charges. That’s Rosenbaum. You haven’t heard about Rosenbaum.

How about Huber, hits him in the head, chases him with a skateboard. That’s like a bat, then hits him in the neck with a skateboard. Who was he? Well, among other things, he had he was a domestic abuse repeater. Well, shouldn’t people know that?

Who’s Grosskreutz? Just this poor guy who was walking around carrying a pistol? Why did he carry a pistol? Why did he aim it at this kid’s head?

He wasn’t provoked. He chose to do that himself, and as he said on the stand, that’s when he got shot. So my view is this is disgusting."

From: Levin Hammers Rittenhouse Prosecution -- 'This Prosecutor's Ass Should Be in Front of an Ethics Committee' (https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2021/11/12/levin-hammers-rittenhouse-prosecution-this-prosecutors-ass-should-be-in-front-of-an-ethics-committee/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR2dRADUCBZH5gDa-_XvHr4V-F0NSpGs7d5l7QJrR5ZmG8KJvYQIUMoHDPA)

[JMintzer]

Well - you can ask MOST people in this country. Since every single person in this country had the same options:

a) Show up in a town you don't know anything about, in a state you don't even live in, at while you are still a minor who isn't even eligible to join the armed forces, armed with a semi-automatic weapon that had previously been classified as an actual assault weapon, to an event where you know you will be expecting violence, which is why you are bringing your firearm, to "protect" or "defend" people who never asked you to show up at all.

He live only a few miles away and worked in Kenosha. His father lived there. Strike One...

Or

b) Stay home, or go to work, or go to school if it was on a school day, or go outside and toss a football with your pals, or go shopping, or "anything OTHER than the above paragraph."

Most people chose option b.

Completely irrelevant... Strike Two...

In fact, even most people who chose to attend the event weren't armed at all, let alone with a semi-automatic weapon. MOST people chose not to be armed with a firearm at all.

MOST people were not shot at, and MOST people were not killed. And MOST people - including the people who WERE armed - chose not to shoot anyone.

You haven't a clue who was and who wasn't armed.

But we DO know that one of the people shot (Grosskreutz sp?) WAS armed with a "semi-automatic weapon... One he was carrying illegally...

He pointed the gun at Rittenhouse, but like Han Solo, Rittenhouse shot first... Strike Three...

[Trayderjoe]

well....he was awaiting trial for killing people at a Black Lives Matter protest....he was there illegally carrying a weapon now he was again breaking the law by drinking in a bar (if his mother wants to give him a drink in the privacy of their home, that's different) to do so in public seems like a flaunting display of entitlement.

“Proud of Your Boy” a song written for the 1992 Disney film “Aladdin,” but not used until a 2011 stage adaptation, and is the source of the name of the far-right group self-described “western chauvinist” group the Proud Boys. Prosecutors said the song sung by members of the Proud Boys “as an anthem and for self-identification.”

You do mean at the riot? Or is throwing rocks, shooting fireworks and other incendiary devices at the police, spraying graffiti, lighting fires and chasing people still considered "peaceful protests"?

[Eg_cruz]

Maybe someone told him there are blanks in the gun, so it's not his responsibility.

:shrug:
Good one

[Trayderjoe]

Well - you can ask MOST people in this country. Since every single person in this country had the same options:

a) Show up in a town you don't know anything about, in a state you don't even live in, at while you are still a minor who isn't even eligible to join the armed forces, armed with a semi-automatic weapon that had previously been classified as an actual assault weapon, to an event where you know you will be expecting violence, which is why you are bringing your firearm, to "protect" or "defend" people who never asked you to show up at all.

Or

b) Stay home, or go to work, or go to school if it was on a school day, or go outside and toss a football with your pals, or go shopping, or "anything OTHER than the above paragraph."

Most people chose option b.

In fact, even most people who chose to attend the event weren't armed at all, let alone with a semi-automatic weapon. MOST people chose not to be armed with a firearm at all.

MOST people were not shot at, and MOST people were not killed. And MOST people - including the people who WERE armed - chose not to shoot anyone.

Oh boy, facts be dammed yet again.

Rittenhouse's father lives in the town. His friend lives there and he is frequently there.

There is no definition of an "assault weapon" because it doesn't actually exist, but is a term coined by the anti-gun lobby

Actually there is evidence presented at trial that he was there cleaning up graffiti, helped put out a fire and provided some first aid. Yes he admitted to lying about being an EMT, but he is also not charged with practicing medicine without a license or crossing the line in the type of first aid he provided.

I know this won't happen (yet again), where is your PROOF that no one asked him to come?

You mean the people who broke concrete blocks to toss rocks at the police? You mean like the people who shot fireworks and incendiary devices at the police? You mean like the prosecutor's witness who admitted he illegally carried a semi-automatic handgun and POINTED it at Rittenhouse BEFORE he was shot? You mean like the "adult" who used a skateboard as a weapon to attack Rittenhouse before he was shot?

About the ONLY thing I can find true was the very last statement: "MOST people were not shot at, and MOST people were not killed. And MOST people - including the people who WERE armed - chose not to shoot anyone". You do realize that a reporter with video tape showed that Rittenhouse passed by several groups of people and neither he or they interacted with each other? Could it be that they were not in the process of attacking him, so he saw no need to defend himself? Could it be that they were not threatened by him because he did not raise his weapon at them, merely walked past them?

No, we can't consider there facts because they don't fit the clearly inaccurate narrative that some insist on continuing.

[Eg_cruz]

Well - you can ask MOST people in this country. Since every single person in this country had the same options:

a) Show up in a town you don't know anything about, in a state you don't even live in, at while you are still a minor who isn't even eligible to join the armed forces, armed with a semi-automatic weapon that had previously been classified as an actual assault weapon, to an event where you know you will be expecting violence, which is why you are bringing your firearm, to "protect" or "defend" people who never asked you to show up at all.

Or

b) Stay home, or go to work, or go to school if it was on a school day, or go outside and toss a football with your pals, or go shopping, or "anything OTHER than the above paragraph."

Most people chose option b.

In fact, even most people who chose to attend the event weren't armed at all, let alone with a semi-automatic weapon. MOST people chose not to be armed with a firearm at all.

MOST people were not shot at, and MOST people were not killed. And MOST people - including the people who WERE armed - chose not to shoot anyone.
You really need to go back and watch the trail, missing so much facts

[manaboutown]

Some sources say that he drove himself and when he got home, his mom made him turn himself in, so I'll admit that whether she drove him there is unclear.

What is not unclear and was actually what was argued about yesterday, with the judge not allowing the proof, is this;

Kyle Rittenhouse Gave White Supremacist Hand Symbol, Drank With 'Proud Boys' at Bar: Affidavit (https://www.newsweek.com/kyle-rittenhouse-ok-white-supremacist-proud-boys-1561465)


According to an affidavit filed by Kenosha County Assistant District Attorney Thomas C. Binge, Rittenhouse stayed at the pub for around 90 minutes wearing a T-shirt reading "free as f**k."

Immediately upon arriving at the bar, Rittenhouse posed for pictures while flashing the OK hand gesture—a previously innocuous symbol that has been co-opted by some on the far-right as a coded message to show support for white supremacy.

Rittenhouse drank three beers during the 90 minutes he was at Pudgy's Pub and "remained with these 'Proud Boys' for the entire time," the affidavit states.

Police were made aware that Rittenhouse was at the bar and obtained surveillance footage from the business to confirm his presence.


Definitely, a white supremacist thug.

Nonsense!

"The defense rested its case in the murder trial of Kyle Rittenhouse in Kenosha, Wisconsin, on Thursday, after neither side presented any evidence of his “white supremacist” opinions or views, as the media and Democrats had initially claimed.

The prosecution in the case attempted to show that Rittenhouse had deliberately provoked the confrontations that led him to shoot several Black Lives Matter rioters, killing two and wounding one. But it never cited any racial bias by Rittenhouse — not even when Rittenhouse took the stand in his own defense, an extremely rare thing for a defendant to do in a murder case."

From: No Evidence of 'White Supremacist' Leanings Presented in Kyle Rittenhouse Trial (https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/11/12/no-evidence-of-white-supremacist-leanings-presented-in-kyle-rittenhouse-trial/?fbclid=IwAR1vYk0Y_h6JkqmrjdrrPQ0WC5g4VMbR_YWxy1MD GlZHFH7324yKoec0GtI)

[rmd2]

Yeah that judge is having trouble speaking coherently. The "news articles" that quote him aren't quoting him in full. They're heavily editing what he actually was saying, so that their readers can make sense of it.

He forbade anyone calling the victims of the shooting - victims. In medical terms, that's what they were. Victims. They didn't die of old age. They were victims of fatal wounds from gunshots. Just like someone who dies from cancer is a victim of cancer. And someone who falls off a ladder is a victim of a broken neck. Someone who is killed in a car crash is a victim of massive internal injuries.

Victim is a 100%valid word to use for someone who is dead as a result of a gunshot. But the judge wants to minimize the "victimhood" of the victims by forbidding the word.

It was okay to call the victims rioters or looters, if it could be proven that they were. He actually pro-actively stated as such. But he pre-emptively forbade the word "victim." Even if it could be proven they were victims, they aren't allowed to call them that and when one witnessed used the word in his testimony the judge went ballistic.

(I was watching this on Fox News, at the time, in case anyone REALLY and SINCERELY gives a crap)

He is gaslighting a trial he presides over.

Sorry, if someone points a gun at me and I kill him, he is NOT a "victim".

[Love2Swim]

Wrong. You need to brush up on your facts and stop getting your talking points from the MSM...\
At least he has some talking points, instead of the same old Faux News drivel. yawn.

[Love2Swim]

Sorry, if someone points a gun at me and I kill him, he is NOT a "victim".

Do you realize that Gaige only pointed his gun at Rittenhouse after Rittenhouse shot the first two individuals? You don't get a self defense to murder if you're the first to use deadly force.

[Trayderjoe]

17 year olds make poor decisions like robbery and murders, but doesn't mean they didn't break the law. He knowingly put himself in a situation with a loaded rifle, and then gunned down 3 people. And then showed no remorse about it afterwards in a bar wearing a t-shirt that said "Free as F**k". Sorry, throw the book at the jerk.

Wow-clearly no concept of the law, and clearly no attempt to actually read THE FACTS from the trial transcripts. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but given the actual facts of the case, I could not disagree more.

[Trayderjoe]

\
At least he has some talking points, instead of the same old Faux News drivel. yawn.

Yeah, I do see a LOT of MSM drivel. No facts to support the drivel, but hey, it is "their truth". Remember, "Facts don't matter, "truth" matters".......

[manaboutown]

17 year olds make poor decisions like robbery and murders, but doesn't mean they didn't break the law. He knowingly put himself in a situation with a loaded rifle, and then gunned down 3 people. And then showed no remorse about it afterwards in a bar wearing a t-shirt that said "Free as F**k". Sorry, throw the book at the jerk.

He defended himself from being attacked by three thugs, duh! Good thing he had the weapon with him and knew how to use it or he would be dead.

[Trayderjoe]

Do you realize that Gaige only pointed his gun at Rittenhouse after Rittenhouse shot the first two individuals? You don't get a self defense to murder if you're the first to use deadly force.

Clearly the laws of self defense are not understood.

You are in effect saying that a person has to have deadly force applied to them first, BEFORE they can protect themselves. Really? Ummm...that is so, politely, illogical that just the statement alone is damming in and of itself.

[Love2Swim]

Wow-clearly no concept of the law, and clearly no attempt to actually read THE FACTS from the trial transcripts. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but given the actual facts of the case, I could not disagree more.

Because you argue about the 'facts' doesn't mean you actually know them or read them. Rittenhouse shot un-armed people, Gaige heard other people saying Rittenhouse was an active shooter and pointed his gun at him to thwart him and Rittenhouse shot him as well. Those are facts from the trial.

[Trayderjoe]

Because you argue about the 'facts' doesn't mean you actually know them or read them. Rittenhouse shot un-armed people, Gaige heard other people saying Rittenhouse was an active shooter and pointed his gun at him to thwart him and Rittenhouse shot him as well. Those are facts from the trial.

Actually, I have watched the trial and read transcripts from the trial. I even posted a link to the transcripts in an earlier post to support my posts. Pray tell, where are the links that support your statements? Again, one also needs to understand the self defense laws.

[JMintzer]

17 year olds make poor decisions like robbery and murders, but doesn't mean they didn't break the law. He knowingly put himself in a situation with a loaded rifle, and then gunned down 3 people. And then showed no remorse about it afterwards in a bar wearing a t-shirt that said "Free as F**k". Sorry, throw the book at the jerk.

"Gunned down"...

You spelled "defended himself from" wrong...

What he wore at a bar after being released from jail is irrelevant...

[JMintzer]

Do you realize that Gaige only pointed his gun at Rittenhouse after Rittenhouse shot the first two individuals? You don't get a self defense to murder if you're the first to use deadly force.

Those first two attacked Rittenhouse BEFORE he shot them. Grosskruetz used deadly force by pointing his gun at Rittenhouse. It was only AFTER that threat did Rittenhouse shoot.

In other words, you're wrong...

[dewilson58]

Pray tell, where are the links that support your statements?

Praying won't even help her stick to the facts. :a040:

[JMintzer]

Because you argue about the 'facts' doesn't mean you actually know them or read them. Rittenhouse shot un-armed people, Gaige heard other people saying Rittenhouse was an active shooter and pointed his gun at him to thwart him and Rittenhouse shot him as well. Those are facts from the trial.

Complete and utter BS...

You don't need a gun to be armed. Grossbaum made verbal threats and then physically attacked Rittenhouse, trying to get his gun. THAT is not being "unarmed"...

The 2nd guy (forgot his name) used his skateboard as a weapon, stomped Rittenhouse in the face and went to grab his rifle. Again, not being "unarmed"...

Here is another example of a skateboard being used as a deadly weapon...

Skateboard used as weapon in alleged San Francisco hate crime (https://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Skateboard-used-as-weapon-in-alleged-San-13060169.php)

There was ZERO testimony from Grosskreutz that he was trying to "thwart" Rittenhouse...

He did testify that when he put his hands up (while still holding his gun), that Rittenhouse lowered his weapon and that he was not shot until he then advanced on Rittenhouse and pointed his own gun at him... So there's that...