re: Rittenhouse day 9-Motions and jury instructions

Honestly, prosecutors who pull this crap should face jail time. Just him being on trial is a travesty of justice. It makes me angry to think about.

quote:

---

Is this prosecutor not tired of getting his fricking arse chewed

he’s been scolded in this trial more than I have in my 15 year military career

---

I'll let a judge chew my arse all day everyday as long as he lets in every piece of shite evidence I have and gives the jury instructions based on said pieces of shite.

That is exactly what happened.

Richards should retire after this. His arrogant and incompetent arse may never get another client.

quote:

---

Just him being on trial is a travesty of justice. It makes me angry to think about.

---

When we get to the root of this, it makes me angry as well.

Why was he even out there?
Because a 17 yr old boy with a reasonably strong sense of right and wrong, was opposed to seeing rioters and looters destroy his country, and when it started occurring 10 minutes away from his house he felt strongly enough about it that he came out in person.
Why did he have an AR with him?
Probably, he had the (somewhat flawed) notion that being visibly armed would serve as a deterrent to violence. But I would also say he had every right to be concerned about his own safety, as the rioters were committing wanton acts of arson and property damage, and the government was doing zero to stop any of it. The criminal element was completely unopposed (except by citizens like him).

The very argument that he agitated anything by being out there is an indictment against society.

His intent was to protect our society and culture, the rioters were destroying it. Prior to the 1960's, this would have been almost universally been hailed as a "good deed", not something you get arrested for.

Hell, go look at all the Westerns where the band of bad guys go shoot up a town- using the logic of this trial, they should have been allowed to do so, and anyone that stood up to them, trying to protect themselves and their property, would be on trial.
Something's wrong with that.

quote:

---

There will be no clear verdict either way.

---

Ever

quote:

---

The young Turks chick changing her mind is a good sign.

---

I've been thinking that as well.

Someone mentioned r/wisconsin on reddit the other day so I checked out the big thread there and it was almost all in support of Kyle. Not that they necessarily liked what he did, but seeing the evidence they couldn't possibly convict him of murder.

And being reddit you know the vast majority of them are leftists and a LOT of them were saying their minds had been changed.

The folks on court tv radio doesn't think the state has much.

I can't help but think if the defense would have pushed back just a little the judge would not have allowed it.

quote:

---

I can't help but think if the defense would have pushed back just a little the judge would not have allowed it.

---

I think the concerns over the provocation instruction are much ado about nothing. I can assure you that defense counsel objected for the record once the judge made his decision on that, so the objection is preserved for appeal. But it's really not shocking that the judge allowed the instruction because it basically goes hand in hand with a self-defense claim.

IMO it would've been more shocking had the judge disallowed it, potentially resulting in speculation as to unfairness toward the prosecution, thus tainting an eventual acquittal. The bottom line question still comes down to whether the evidence supports self-defense or whether it supports provocation or the other conclusions that would be unfavorable to Rittenhouse. It remains clear to me that the evidence (or lack thereof, as it were) supports self-defense, and Rittenhouse will prevail on the most significant of charges involved.