- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: A Message from Kyle Rittenhouse...
Posted on 9/14/20 at 9:57 pm to Chet Donnely
Posted on 9/14/20 at 9:57 pm to Chet Donnely
quote:Mea culpa. I used an imprecise term on a discussion forum. I am guilty of failing to anticipate that the discussion would devolve into a childish semantic squabble.
You clearly don’t understand shite. Otherwise you wouldn’t have said he committed a MURDER.
Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa
2
Posted on 9/14/20 at 9:57 pm to AggieHank86
I’m hung up on the fact that you are a sanctimonious smart arse and taunted someone else about the definition of murder when you don’t know the fricking definition of it yourself.
You lack any semblance of self awareness. It’s kind of amazing to see.
You lack any semblance of self awareness. It’s kind of amazing to see.
Posted on 9/14/20 at 9:58 pm to TrueTiger
quote:
if what Kyle Rittenhouse did is not clearly and unmistakably affirmed as self defense, then we have lost the right of self defense
"Lost"? The Constitution only codifies that Right; the Right to defend one's self/loved ones comes from God...not 'mob rule' or some Judge's 'interpretation'.
The IDEA of Rights coming from God - as defined in the Constitution - either stands or falls. That is what will be determined in the near future. And it won't be with votes, as votes have become the problem.
Posted on 9/14/20 at 10:02 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
Mea culpa. I used an imprecise term on a discussion forum. I am guilty of failing to anticipate that the discussion would devolve into a childish semantic squabble.
Its a pretty big deal.
Especially when you're talking shite like this in the same post:
quote:
It is clear that many if you do not understand the applicable terminology. No crime in that. You are laypersons. The entertaining part is watching you attack someone who DOES understand it.
Posted on 9/14/20 at 10:02 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
Mea culpa. I used an imprecise term on a discussion forum. I am guilty of failing to anticipate that the discussion would devolve into a childish semantic squabble. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa
You intentionally used the term murder, twice, to attempt to portray rittenhouse in a negative manner.
You got thoroughly called out on it, have spent several posts trying to defend it, and have failed miserably.
Once again you prove yourself to be a shitty “lawyer”
Posted on 9/14/20 at 10:09 pm to Turbeauxdog
quote:Putting several rounds center-mass into another hunan being clearly meets the Wisconsin elements of homicide, in my view.
In what legal or casual use of the word does murder includes self defense?
It is ALSO my view that his actions meet the elements of self-defense, which serves as a legal excuse/justification for his actions. As such, it is highly-unlijely that he will be convicted, which I see as the correct result in this case.
We gave been fighting for two pages because multiple posters do not understand the legal PROCESS associated with an affirmative defense. It is silly.
Posted on 9/14/20 at 10:11 pm to Gtmodawg
Read the statute again, Clarence Darrow
Posted on 9/14/20 at 10:12 pm to Chet Donnely
quote:Where?
taunted someone else about the definition of murder
I simply said that it is understandable for laypersons to be unfamiliar with the nuts-and-bolts of an affirmative defense plea and how it is presented to a jury.
That is not “taunting” ... it is quite the opposite.
This post was edited on 9/14/20 at 10:14 pm
Posted on 9/14/20 at 10:19 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
Putting several rounds center-mass into another hunan being clearly meets the Wisconsin elements of homicide, in my view.
Why are using different words to describe rittenhouse’s actions now?
quote:
We gave been fighting for two pages because multiple posters do not understand the legal PROCESS associated with an affirmative defense. It is silly.
No. You’ve been getting your arse handed to you for 2 pages by multiple “lay persons” that understand the law better than you do.
Again.
Posted on 9/14/20 at 10:25 pm to Open Your Eyes
quote:Both are accurate, but I acknowledged that “homicide” was more precise, and that seemed important to some.
Why are using different words to describe rittenhouse’s actions now?
quote:Not at all. I am sitting here shaking my head that y’all are still not grasping a fairly-simple legal concept, even once it has been explained to you.
You’ve been getting your arse handed to you
Two questions will be presented to the jury as to each homicide charge. Their answers will mean (1) that Rittenhouse kilked someone and (2) that his actions are excused (justified) as having been undertaken in self defense. Due to the second response, he will not be convicted.
In your mind, he did not commit the offense. That is fine. But LEGALLY he DID commit the offense, but was justified. The net effect is the same ... no conviction.
This post was edited on 9/14/20 at 10:34 pm
Posted on 9/14/20 at 10:26 pm to Open Your Eyes
quote:
Why are using different words to describe rittenhouse’s actions now?
Liberal Hank
Posted on 9/14/20 at 10:26 pm to SidewalkTiger
quote:
Its a pretty big deal.
Watching Hank dig himself ever deeper into a hole is becoming a weekly occurrence. He must be approaching the depth of the Kola Borehole.
Posted on 9/14/20 at 10:27 pm to AggieHank86
Wrong again scumbag. Why don’t you go pop in your favorite movie “Cuties” and relax, you’re embarrassing yourself.
Posted on 9/14/20 at 10:34 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
Both are accurate,
No, they aren’t.
What god-forsaken state was shitty enough to pass you on their bar exam?
quote:
but I acknowledged that “homicide” was more precise
No you didn’t.
What you did you was specifically state that rittenhouse committed “a murder”. Twice.
quote:
that seemed important to some.
Cries about people expecting accurate terminology to be used, cries about people not understanding distinctions in terminology.
Understand this: you’re a fricking imbecile.
quote:
Not at all.
It’s about to go into page 3. And it happens in damn near every thread you post your shitty takes in.
What kind of “lawyer” is incapable of defending his own positions against a bunch of “laypersons”? The same kind that can only offer hypotheticals as proof of accusations.
quote:
I am sitting here shaking my head that y’all are still not grasping a fairly-simple legal concept,
You mean like the definition of murder that you still don’t understand?
quote:
even once it has been explained to you.
Explained where and by whom?
Posted on 9/14/20 at 10:39 pm to Open Your Eyes
I assure you that every lawyer reading this thread understands that I am correctly explaining the law as to submission of self-defense to a jury.
I am just the only one trying to help YOU understand it.
I am just the only one trying to help YOU understand it.
Posted on 9/14/20 at 10:44 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
I assure you that every lawyer reading this thread understands that I am correctly explaining the law as to submission of self-defense to a jury.
You also assured us that rittenhouse committed “a murder”
Your assurances amount to the same as your legal knowledge, which is absolutely nothing.
quote:
I am just the only one trying to help YOU understand it.
I’m still waiting for you to help me understand the definition of murder moron.
Posted on 9/14/20 at 11:31 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
Putting several rounds center-mass into another hunan being clearly meets the Wisconsin elements of homicide, in my view.
It’s definitely a homicide , but you used murder (incorrectly)
Take the L
Posted on 9/14/20 at 11:31 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
I assure you that every lawyer reading this thread understands that I am correctly explaining the law as to submission of self-defense to a jury. I am just the only one trying to help YOU understand it.
There’s that lack of self awareness we all love.
No educated person would understand because you’re not correctly explaining anything. You clearly don’t know what murder actually means, so you’re now trying to change the focus to justifiable homicide. What’s funny is that you clearly don’t know shite about how that works either.
Posted on 9/14/20 at 11:39 pm to SidewalkTiger
quote:
It is clear that many if you do not understand the applicable terminology. No crime in that. You are laypersons. The entertaining part is watching you attack someone who DOES understand it.
Did he really actually type this?
come down off your ivory tower bro
Posted on 9/15/20 at 2:52 am to Gtmodawg
You are just a dumass, dude got attacked. He was retreating. If someone hits you in the head with a bat, skateboard, or whatever, it’s considered deadly force. You can kill someone with a hit to the head. Other dude had a gun pointed right at him. You can just chase someone down and pull a gun on them. Dude that threw his hands up and backed away did not get shot. See how that works???
And yes he shot someone earlier, but they don’t know if it was a good shoot or a bad shoot. What gives them the right to chase someone down, be the judge and jury and give out vigilante justice? They got what they deserved......
And yes he shot someone earlier, but they don’t know if it was a good shoot or a bad shoot. What gives them the right to chase someone down, be the judge and jury and give out vigilante justice? They got what they deserved......
This post was edited on 9/15/20 at 2:54 am
Page 7 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News