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.

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.

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

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

Great judge!!!

The prosecutors need to be disbarred!

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.

Well said

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?

Well put

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!

I wonder how many demonstrators were arrested ?

Why…..because of your bias against the defendant

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:

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

:shrug:

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.

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

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

Please provide a source for this claim

.
.
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.
.
.

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

What felony was he convicted of?

Very Sad
 

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?

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.

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.

And this kid really failed 101 acting!

Thank you for some clarity need by many!

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.

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

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...

Perzactly!

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

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...

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.,

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

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!

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.

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