- 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: Judge rules: in Riteenhouse case. They are RIOTERS... LOOTERS... NOT VICTIMS!
Posted on 10/27/21 at 8:29 am to roadGator
Posted on 10/27/21 at 8:29 am to roadGator
quote:
quote:
If the people he killed aren’t victims — what are they??
=========================================
Dead, Rex.
Dead. That’s what they are.
Along with their memory forever stamped with the "STUPID" "IDIOT"
BRAINWASHED" "SJW" etc labels.
0
Posted on 10/27/21 at 8:58 am to chalmetteowl
quote:
But he was, and two people are dead
yeah but those "people" didn't have to be there either but yet they were; and what were they doing there? Kenosha has still not recovered from the damage and destruction caused by those "people" and their ilk.
Posted on 10/27/21 at 9:11 am to cyarrr
Yes it does. And this Judge already knows that the evidence that has been viewed by hundreds of thousands, if not millions, not only suggests but demonstrates that they engaged in criminal acts. He set the table for the minions to be labeled correctly in the closing arguments.
And he did not prohibit them from using in opening arguments, only cautioned. That is a vaguely communicated suggestion IMO that does not directly prevent the defense from going there early on. He will make a show of instructing the defense not to use those labels but only after they have gone there. I think he is pretty sure that the defense has all of the evidence that they need and will go full bull rush with the correct labels in the closing arguments.
And he did not prohibit them from using in opening arguments, only cautioned. That is a vaguely communicated suggestion IMO that does not directly prevent the defense from going there early on. He will make a show of instructing the defense not to use those labels but only after they have gone there. I think he is pretty sure that the defense has all of the evidence that they need and will go full bull rush with the correct labels in the closing arguments.
Posted on 10/27/21 at 9:12 am to Figgy
quote:
Seems fair to me.
Fair, notwithstanding the fact he’s on trial for something that’s not a crime.
Posted on 10/27/21 at 9:56 am to Jjdoc
The Judge should be the US Attorney General.
Posted on 10/27/21 at 10:08 am to Jjdoc
In essence, the judge ruled "Don't make a bunch of looting and arson accusations against the Rosenbaum, Huber and Grosskreutz UNTIL you have presented the jury with admissible evidence of such actions. After admission of such evidence, use your own judgment as to whether you want to go there in subsequent arguments."
That is a VERY standard ruling on this sort of issue. In fact, it is likely the exact ruling that BOTH sides expected.
Likewise, the "victim" ruling is very standard in a case involving the assertion of "self-defense." Neither set of attorneys was actually surprised by this ruling, despite protestations to the contrary presented to the media.
That is a VERY standard ruling on this sort of issue. In fact, it is likely the exact ruling that BOTH sides expected.
Likewise, the "victim" ruling is very standard in a case involving the assertion of "self-defense." Neither set of attorneys was actually surprised by this ruling, despite protestations to the contrary presented to the media.
This post was edited on 10/27/21 at 10:28 am
Posted on 10/27/21 at 10:31 am to Dirk Dawgler
quote:
Yes it does. And this Judge already knows that the evidence that has been viewed by hundreds of thousands, if not millions, not only suggests but demonstrates that they engaged in criminal acts. He set the table for the minions to be labeled correctly in the closing arguments.
I agree with you here. However, the point I was trying to make is that without context the quote makes it seem as if the judge is allowing the defense cart blanche ability to label them as looters and rioters. He is not.
quote:
And he did not prohibit them from using in opening arguments, only cautioned. That is a vaguely communicated suggestion IMO that does not directly prevent the defense from going there early on.
Disagree with you here. He is instructing the defense to tread carefully when identifying them as such without first laying a foundation.
This post was edited on 10/27/21 at 10:58 am
Posted on 10/27/21 at 10:31 am to Jjdoc
Seems like the Judge trying to toss it to appeals and out of his hands before it even starts.
Posted on 10/27/21 at 10:40 am to cyarrr
quote:The ruling is more subtle than some posters are crediting.quote:I agree with you here. However, the point I was trying to make is that without context the quote makes it seem as if the judge is allowing the defense cart blanche ability to label them as looters and rioters. He did not.
Yes it does. And this Judge already knows that the evidence that has been viewed by hundreds of thousands, if not millions, not only suggests but demonstrates that they engaged in criminal acts. He set the table for the minions to be labeled correctly in the closing arguments.
One could certainly argue that each of the three was engaged in "rioting," when they attacked young Mr. Rittenhouse.
There does appear to be video evidence of Rosenbaum arguably engaging in arson (the dumpster), but I've seen no footage of either Huber or Grosskreutz engaging in those acts. Does the Defense team get itself into trouble, if it applies that term to all three ... after presenting evidence applicable only to Rosenbaum?
While there was definitely "looting" taking place at the time of the protests, I have seen no footage of any of the Trio "looting" anything. Dangerous ground for Defense counsel.
It will be interesting to see how the Defense team utilizes this ruling.
This post was edited on 10/27/21 at 11:06 am
Page 5 of 5
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News