Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive (Post 2031677)

This was a State case, tried in Wisconsin.

Wisconsin does not have the death penalty.

Originally Posted by DAVES (Post 2031429)

As I've said before, there is right, there is wrong and then there is our legal system.

Coincidence? It took the jury almost a week to find Rittenhouse not guilty. The verdict on friday. All three shot have records as being criminals. The police were close by, they didn't hear the shots? Or did they chose not to hear the shots?

It had to go to trial. Trial by riot. I hope I will be surprised by our people, by our news people and our leaders.

Originally Posted by noslices1 (Post 2031531)

MSNBC & CNN should also be “sanctioned” for their coverage of the trial. Even after the verdict they only interviewed people who disagreed with the verdict and agreed with them that he was guilty. MSNBC was actually kicked out of the courtroom because of the actions of one of their producers. Both channels are not real NEWS channels, just liberal opinion channels.

Originally Posted by sparky4840 (Post 2031697)

I'm sure Fox was unbiased, correct?

Originally Posted by Johnsocat (Post 2031692)

I would argue that they are not our "leaders", they are our "representatives" and our "public servants".

Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive (Post 2031401)

Whether we agree with the verdict or not, it is important to remember that no one here was on that jury. We weren't privy to the deliberations. And it is a given that none of felt anything even close to the pressure they must have felt.

It is important to remember as well that none of this was spur-of-the-moment. This jury deliberated for the better part of four days before delivering their verdict. I think we can assume with confidence that justice was done.

Whether or not we agree with the verdict is, in the end, superfluous. What I hope we all CAN agree on though is that, even with it's flaws, America still has the best justice system on the planet.

Originally Posted by DeanFL (Post 2031623)

.
.
Did you watch the trial? Where do you get your information re the facts from the trial?
.
.

Originally Posted by Bonnevie (Post 2031604)

Really???

KENOSHA, Wis., Nov 8 (Reuters) - The only protester shot by Kyle Rittenhouse to survive testified on Monday that he believed the U.S. teenager was an "active shooter" and was trying to disarm Rittenhouse when a bullet from the teen's semi-automatic rifle severed part of his arm.

Originally Posted by manaboutown (Post 2031731)

He is of course a lying thug. He has even hit his grandmother in the face. Sole survivor of Rittenhouse shootings has criminal past: report

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725 (Post 2031652)

He did go there dressed to kill. The prosecutor did not prove his case beyond a reasonable doubt about whether this was in fact not self-defense but murder.

The burden was not met.

Originally Posted by Speedie (Post 2031738)

Sad for everyone involved. No winners

Originally Posted by manaboutown (Post 2031736)

He was asked to go and protect property, and was armed to protect the property and himself from violent rioters, looters and arsonists. Turns out he needed that rifle or he would now be dead at the hands of violent thugs with lengthy criminal records.

Originally Posted by Speedie (Post 2031738)

Sad for everyone involved. No winners