re: Lawyer for Kyle Rittenhouse gives Joe Biden’s campaign two options

quote:

---

Does super lawyer Lin really think it’s a good idea to file a civil suit related to his clients criminal charges during the state’s prosecution of those criminal charges. Best. Lawyer. Ever.

---

Well, there's a SOL and that criminal case may not be over by the time the SOL runs. Filing a lawsuit doesn't mean the kid would be testifying at trial next week. May be tricky as to where jurisdiction would be, but the SOL in Illinois (where KR lives) for defamation is one year from the time of publication or broadcast. The kid also may not need to testify to carry the elements needed for defamation. But the crux of the problem with the democratic party in these incidents that have popped up is slandering normal citizens to attack a sitting US president, two of them lately being minor children. It's disgusting

quote:

---

most people won't see this story about the retraction

---

I think that these kind of retractions need to be required to run during prime time for a week and be very specific as to the offense - and the rationale behind its utterance.

Malevolent intent combined with utter ignorance caused by mental incapacitation is an acceptable response.

quote:

---

His criminal case likely won't be resolved in a year. Filing a civil suit that would expose him to wide ranging discovery and depos about his motives would be malpractice

---

Like I said, he doesn't lose his 5th Amendment right not to testify if he files a civil lawsuit. I literally deal with this all the time in my practice, albeit I deal with domestic law. And you don't need to tell me his criminal case won't be resolved in a year. I, quite literally, said as much in the post you quoted. However, as I also pointed out, his testimony may not be needed to carry his burden. All they have to do is show that the statement was knowingly false that he was in a white supremacist group; that it was broadcast or published to a 3rd party; that it was negligent; and that it caused damages or harm. Biden would find himself backed into a corner when deposed about that, and he has no criminal implications and would have to respond to questions about why he said KR was in a white supremacist group. A big problem for KR would be substantiating monetary damages for what Biden said/tweeted. Regardless, his lawyer would be committing actual malpractice if he failed to file the necessary legal action within the SOL. He can work around a pending criminal case. A judge is not going to force the case forward in a circumstance like that. I get continuances all the damn time for testimonial settings for this exact reason. (my client having pending criminal charges and his criminal case being adversely affected by testifying in a civil matter and his civil matter being adversely affected by invoking his 5th Amendment rights)

Also, as Biden so stupidly pointed out, he "isn't an elected official" so he can be subject to a defamation suit, as he is not carrying out duties of a political office when saying what he said.

quote:

---

Kyle Rittenhouse is about to make bank, ask CNN ...

---

Anyone who files suit about something I support is a Patriot and is "gonna make bank" on meritless lawsuits and confidential settlements

Anyone who files suit about something I oppose is a slimy subhuman, and did not deserve one penny of their ACTUAL DOCUMENTED multi-million dollar recoveries.

quote:

---

So you think you can file a civil defamation suit relative to your motive in a criminal matter and then not offer any testimony or respond to questions that go to the heart of the matter of your lawsuit, just plead the 5th and win?

---

I'm saying they're not going to force him to testify at a civil trial before his criminal matters have been adjudicated. I'm also saying he has to file this civil action to comply with the SOL if he's seeking an award of damages.

Do you really think the Court is going to back KR into a corner and say "welp, you may have a civil cause of action, are presumed innocent in the criminal courts, but you need to decide whether you wish to seek damages or risk incriminating yourself, otherwise we're dismissing the case." You're looking at this in a vacuum. The courts don't work that way. I've been granted continuances for hearings/depos/discovery deadlines/etc out 6+ months due to pending criminal matters needing to be resolved so my client's refusal to testify doesn't result in a negative inference taken by the Court.

As to your other point. There are plenty of ways, without KR's testimony, to prove he wasn't in a white supremacist group. They're honing in on these back the blue groups he was a part of and calling them white supremacists groups. Calling the leader of that group to testify would be a start.

quote:

---

You do know that unlike crim you can draw inferences in civ.

---

I'm very aware. See my first comment regarding extensions on discovery deadlines and testimonial hearings.

You have a very warped view how how the legal system works in an attempt to "mic drop" his lawyer on a message board. I can guarantee you his lawyer knows what he's doing much more so than you think he does.

quote:

---

Biden ad about white supremacists.

---

Did it include this picture?

Joe Manchan right behind him, why are these people already running around with people like Robert Byrd but get away with calling Republican racist.

quote:

---

AggieHank86

---

We’re you complaining about childish language in the abortion thread?

quote:

---

Am I the only one who sees it that way.

---

No, it's obvious, but there are many Lawyers on this board who are natural born liars who will sit for hours and argue otherwise.