- 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
Rittenhouse prosecutors ask that men shot not be described as 'looters' or 'rioters'
Posted on 10/25/21 at 2:42 pm
Posted on 10/25/21 at 2:42 pm
quote:
Judge also weighing whether to allow self-defense expert to testify at trial
quote:
In an 11th-hour request, prosecutors put forward a motion to bar the defense from describing the men Rittenhouse shot as "rioters, looters, arsonists or any other pejorative terms," instead insisting that the three be referred to by their last names during the trial, the Chicago Tribune reported.
Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger argues there's no proof any of the three were engaged in such activities the night they were shot and Rittenhouse denied Rosenbaum and Huber an opportunity to defend themselves against those accusations by killing them.
Why? Why not be allowed to call them what they were? quote:
Rittenhouse's attorneys are seeking testimony from use-of-force expert John Black to bolster their case that Rittenhouse acted in self-defense. Prosecutors have asked the judge to disqualify Black, arguing that his expertise is in police, not civilian, use of force and is not relevant to Rittenhouse's actions.
What's the difference? Self defense is self defense. quote:
Monday's hearing will include testimony from Robert Willis, a use-of-force expert whom Binger has said he will use if Black is allowed to testify. Prosecutors also want Schroeder to block any reference to Rosenbaum's and Huber's criminal records.
I just don't understand. Their criminal history goes toward their character. it shows they were in fact rioting and not selling girl scout cookies. This just infuriates me. Fox News
31
Posted on 10/25/21 at 2:44 pm to SouthEndzoneTiger
Amazingly tragic how a prosecutor is going to bat for the assailants while trying to imprison the victim.
Posted on 10/25/21 at 2:44 pm to SouthEndzoneTiger
That prosecutor should be imprisoned.
Posted on 10/25/21 at 2:45 pm to SouthEndzoneTiger
But Jan. 6 is perpetually referred to in the MSM as "the Capitol Riot" & "the January 6th insurrection"....
Posted on 10/25/21 at 2:46 pm to Kino74
quote:And walking into a mistrial or reason(s) for appeal given the probably makeup of the jury.
Amazingly tragic how a prosecutor is going to bat for the assailants while trying to imprison the victim.
Posted on 10/25/21 at 2:48 pm to SouthEndzoneTiger
Are they going to argue that Gaige Grosskreutz was a convicted felon in possession of a firearm and pointed the illegally possessed firearm at Kyle Rittenhouse?
Posted on 10/25/21 at 2:48 pm to SouthEndzoneTiger
I agree with the prosecutors. Child rapist and wife beater better align with the holy three.
Posted on 10/25/21 at 2:49 pm to SouthEndzoneTiger
quote:
Rittenhouse denied Rosenbaum and Huber an opportunity to defend themselves against those accusations by killing them.
They made the choice by giving Kyle no choice.
Posted on 10/25/21 at 2:49 pm to SouthEndzoneTiger
They were rioters and looters, they also were looking to take his life or severely injure him at the very least.
Call them for what they are.
Call them for what they are.
Posted on 10/25/21 at 2:50 pm to TrueTiger
quote:
They made the choice by giving Kyle no choice.
Prosecutor is basically saying "please judge, don't let the defense introduce this evidence that is incredibly damaging to my case."
Posted on 10/25/21 at 2:51 pm to SouthEndzoneTiger
I bet they think it's OK to refer to Kyle as a murderer.
Posted on 10/25/21 at 2:52 pm to SouthEndzoneTiger
My prediction is still... the judge will refuse to allow any video footage from that night to be played to the jury.
This trial will make the chauvin trial look extremely neutral and unbiased, imo.
With no footage being allowed, and the terms rioter being forbidden.. they're going to present it as rittenhouse saw a peaceful protest and just started shooting at them, for no reason. All media will support that view..and the jurors will vote guilty to first degree murder..because they're afraid of being targeted by the mob..and they don't want to be lenient to a guy who shot up a peaceful protest.
This trial will make the chauvin trial look extremely neutral and unbiased, imo.
With no footage being allowed, and the terms rioter being forbidden.. they're going to present it as rittenhouse saw a peaceful protest and just started shooting at them, for no reason. All media will support that view..and the jurors will vote guilty to first degree murder..because they're afraid of being targeted by the mob..and they don't want to be lenient to a guy who shot up a peaceful protest.
This post was edited on 10/25/21 at 2:58 pm
Posted on 10/25/21 at 2:53 pm to auggie
Perv’s would be a better way to describe them, too
Posted on 10/25/21 at 2:54 pm to TrueTiger
quote:
Rittenhouse denied Rosenbaum and Huber an opportunity to defend themselves against those accusations by killing them.
Yeah, that's some pretty impressive mental gymnastics.
Posted on 10/25/21 at 2:56 pm to auggie
quote:
I bet they think it's OK to refer to Kyle as a murderer.
There was one positive thing in the article that it doesn't look like the prosecution can mess with:
quote:
As is common when a defendant claims self-defense, Kenosha Circuit Judge Bruce Schroeder already ruled the three men cannot be referred to as "victims."
So, he's got that going for him.
Posted on 10/25/21 at 3:00 pm to Plx1776
Maybe the criminal atty dogs can chime in here, but I don't think that is even remotely feasible. This isn't some side issue like past conduct -- it's the evidence of the actual, alleged crimes. I can't see a judge keeping that out for any reason. And if they did, it would have to be overturned on appeal.
Posted on 10/25/21 at 3:02 pm to SouthEndzoneTiger
Criminal history is arguably admissible. Rittenhouse didn’t know their history at the time but was proven correct for doing what he did.
The individuals who got shot being rioters? Less debatable. That is without question, as they targeted Rittenhouse for putting out a fire they started then continued chasing him as he withdrew from the scene.
The individuals who got shot being rioters? Less debatable. That is without question, as they targeted Rittenhouse for putting out a fire they started then continued chasing him as he withdrew from the scene.
Posted on 10/25/21 at 3:02 pm to SouthEndzoneTiger
All they have to do is show the video and it's a no brainer.
Let's also ask the prosecutors to not bring up anything about what Kyle was doing there at the same time.
Let's also ask the prosecutors to not bring up anything about what Kyle was doing there at the same time.
Posted on 10/25/21 at 3:06 pm to SouthEndzoneTiger
quote:
In an 11th-hour request, prosecutors put forward a motion to bar the defense from describing the men Rittenhouse shot as "rioters, looters, arsonists or any other pejorative terms," instead insisting that the three be referred to by their last names during the trial, the Chicago Tribune reported.
Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger argues there's no proof any of the three were engaged in such activities the night they were shot and Rittenhouse denied Rosenbaum and Huber an opportunity to defend themselves against those accusations by killing them.
Lawyers in this country have ceased to act in the best interest of justice. It’s all about winning and losing now.
Posted on 10/25/21 at 3:08 pm to Godfather1
shite, really?
I’m sure Johnny Cochran is looking up at us and is shocked at this.
I’m sure Johnny Cochran is looking up at us and is shocked at this.
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News