- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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: Repost from Ot Board: Jump kick man "identified"
Posted on 11/16/21 at 1:18 pm to BobBoucher
Posted on 11/16/21 at 1:18 pm to BobBoucher
quote:The shots fired at Kung Fu Jamal give rise to the least-serious charges against Rittenhouse, and KFJ was willing to testify only in exchange for immunity on other charges. The DA had the video and testimony from other eyewitnesses.
Bringing this witness in allows Binger to introduce race as another motive. There must be a major reason why Binger didn’t do it.
The prosecutor's office obviously decided that they did not "need him" as much as they wanted to jail him for the other offense.
None of which explains the apparent failure to identify KFJ to the defense team.
This post was edited on 11/16/21 at 1:23 pm
0
Posted on 11/16/21 at 1:19 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
Jump Kick Man has a criminal record that dates back more than two decades, with multiple felony convictions for car theft, ID theft, drug possession, and escaping custody
quote:
12 months' probation.
Posted on 11/16/21 at 1:20 pm to Lsut81
quote:Almost certainly.
Honest question, how the hell did it take this long to identify him? I don't believe for one second the feds/prosecutors didn't know who he was a year ago.
So, did the DA disclose KFJ to the defense. If not, Judge Schroeder could conceivably be very, very unhappy with them.
This post was edited on 11/16/21 at 1:22 pm
Posted on 11/16/21 at 1:22 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
Jump Kick Man is a 40-year-old Black male from Kenosha with an extensive criminal record who was at the time of the Rittenhouse shootings on probation following a conviction for domestic violence battery.
Two things.
First, Kyle is LUCKY he did not hit that cat, because that would have been a black "victim" and regardless of the video he'd have HAD TO BE convicted.
Second, it's now 4 for 4 that the people Kyle was forced to shoot at were criminals. What are the odds that Kyle is just THAT GOOD at picking out the worst of the litter, or do you think this is likely to be a solid cross section of the shitheads out there "protesting?"
Posted on 11/16/21 at 1:25 pm to Anne_R_Key
quote:
So, did the DA disclose KFJ to the defense. If not, Judge Schroeder could conceivably be very, very unhappy with them.
I’m almost certain it was stated during the trial by the defense that no one can identify him. If true, the judge is going to ream the prosecutor. You can’t hide evidence like that.
Posted on 11/16/21 at 1:27 pm to C
I recall them claiming he couldn't be identified as well.
The DA didn't want him there just like he didn't want Ziminsky testifying.
The DA didn't want him there just like he didn't want Ziminsky testifying.
Posted on 11/16/21 at 1:29 pm to GeauxTigerTM
quote:
Second, it's now 4 for 4 that the people Kyle was forced to shoot at were criminals. What are the odds that Kyle is just THAT GOOD at picking out the worst of the litter, or do you think this is likely to be a solid cross section of the shitheads out there "protesting?"
I believe a very substantial component of Antifa and the violent elements of BLM are ex-cons or thug types. They are violent people with nothing to lose except for their freedom...if we would put them back in prison.
Posted on 11/16/21 at 1:31 pm to Tigers2010a
Still no identification of the white T-shirt attacker. Bet he is a local. He should be identifiable from those videos.
Posted on 11/16/21 at 1:32 pm to Lonnie Utah
Never believed for one second this guy was “unknown” to the prosecution. They were hiding him.
Posted on 11/16/21 at 1:32 pm to Tchefuncte Tiger
quote:
Sources indicate that he contacted prosecutors and offered to testify, but in exchange requested immunity from an ongoing drunk driving and domestic abuse case with which he was charged in June. Prosecutors declined his offer and chose not to call him as a witness in the Rittenhouse case.
So excuse my lack of trial knowledge… but the prosecution hiding his identity, if known, is a no no isn’t it? Can that be considered exculpatory evidence? And that be a “Brady” violation?
Or are they not required to turn that over?
This post was edited on 11/16/21 at 1:41 pm
Posted on 11/16/21 at 1:33 pm to Tigers2010a
quote:
I believe a very substantial component of Antifa and the violent elements of BLM are ex-cons or thug types. They are violent people with nothing to lose except for their freedom...if we would put them back in prison.
LINK
quote:
The prosecution's star witness in the Kyle Rittenhouse case had a criminal charge dismissed just six days before the trial's start, meaning the jury had no insight into his extensive criminal record nor his history of lying to police, DailyMail.com can reveal.
Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger was well aware of this when he paraded Gaige Grosskreutz, 28, the third man shot on the night of August 25, 2020, as a paragon of selfless virtue. He was a paramedic, the court heard, just there that evening to provide medical aid, as he claimed to have done at countless other protests across the country.
In fact, DailyMail.com has learned, he is a violent career criminal with a laundry list of prior offenses and convictions stretching back more than a decade.
These include domestic abuse, prowling, trespass, two DUIs, felony burglary and two charges of carrying a firearm while intoxicated - one of which took place when he was banned as a felon from carrying a firearm.
He also has a history of showing disdain for the law by lying to, and failing to co-operate with, police.
But the Rittenhouse jury heard none of this.
Because just six days before he took the stand, Grosskreutz was before a judge himself at a hearing at which a pending DUI charge – a second offense that saw him three times over the legal limit – was dismissed on a technicality.
quote:
Had Grosskreutz's latest DUI charge not been dismissed in such a timely manner Rittenhouse's defense would have been allowed to question him under oath about the fact that he was on bond and the nature of his offense.
The information would have severely damaged Grosskreutz's credibility and eroded the wholesome image of a law-abiding citizen offered up by the prosecution.
Posted on 11/16/21 at 1:33 pm to Lonnie Utah
Thank goodness he missed
Posted on 11/16/21 at 1:34 pm to Lonnie Utah
God was really watching over KR that night despite everything. Imagine if his bullets had actually struck a black man even if being jump kicked?
Posted on 11/16/21 at 1:36 pm to Havoc
Theyd be acreaming how kicking people in the face isnt deadly force and no reason to get shot. All the white boys would be forgotten. Hell they may have only charged him with 1 count
Posted on 11/16/21 at 1:37 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
Sources indicate that he contacted prosecutors and offered to testify, but in exchange requested immunity from an ongoing drunk driving and domestic abuse case with which he was charged in June. Prosecutors declined his offer and chose not to call him as a witness in the Rittenhouse case.
If true, that's a fricking bombshell.
Posted on 11/16/21 at 1:39 pm to GeauxTigerTM
quote:law abiding citizens don’t see a riot going and see it as an opportunity to go out and riot or loot businesses. It takes a special kind of piece of shite to do that so yes most there will have some kind of criminal background
Second, it's now 4 for 4 that the people Kyle was forced to shoot at were criminals. What are the odds that Kyle is just THAT GOOD at picking out the worst of the litter, or do you think this is likely to be a solid cross section of the shitheads out there "protesting?"
Posted on 11/16/21 at 1:43 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:
If true, that's a fricking bombshell.
That is putting it lightly. If this is true it’s essentially a guarantee of a dismissal with prejudice due to prosecutorial misconduct. I don’t think there is any way this could be true, it would be really, really brazen
Posted on 11/16/21 at 1:46 pm to CleverUserName
quote:You are correct.
So excuse my lack of trial knowledge… but the prosecution hiding his identity, if known, is a no no isn’t it?
The question is whether the info was withheld or whether the defense had the identity of this person and also chose not to use him. There might be several reasons for such a decision, including (but not limited to) having no control over him, having no way to predict what he might perjure himself and say, and not wanting a Black "victim" on the stand claiming that he was assaulted to Rittenhouse.
At no point does the OP assert that the DA withheld this information, and I would think that the defense would be screaming loudly-enough to be heard in Atlanta if that were the case.
But I would very, very much like to know for certain whether this info was disclosed.
This post was edited on 11/16/21 at 1:49 pm
Posted on 11/16/21 at 1:51 pm to 10MTNTiger
quote:Only if the DA did not disclose the info to the defense. Thus far, no one has reported that to be the case, though a lot of posters are jumping to that conclusion.quote:That is putting it lightly. If this is true it’s essentially a guarantee of a dismissal with prejudice due to prosecutorial misconduct.quote:If true, that's a fricking bombshell.
Sources indicate that he contacted prosecutors and offered to testify, but in exchange requested immunity from an ongoing drunk driving and domestic abuse case with which he was charged in June. Prosecutors declined his offer and chose not to call him as a witness in the Rittenhouse case.
On the other hand, statements (from both sides, as I recall) that no one had identified KFJ do tend to support the conclusions that (i) the defense did not know and (ii) the prosecution lied. I certainly cannot think of a reason that both sides would lie about that issue to the judge and jury.
This post was edited on 11/16/21 at 1:54 pm
Posted on 11/16/21 at 1:53 pm to Anne_R_Key
quote:
Only if the DA did not disclose the info to the defense. Thus far, no one has made that claim, though a lot of posters are jumping to that conclusion.
I recall the ADA claiming, in court, that he could not be identified.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News