I for one do not believe he shot them people out of self defence and never meant to kill them. I think he intended to kill them and thought he would get away with it. The Judge as well is a joke. What a very strange trial. Only in America.
Binger's(prosecution) questioning of Rittenhouse tried to make him look bad for exercising his right to silence after his arrest. A prosecutor should never do this and he knew it. He was excoriated by the judge for doing this in front of the jury. "Now you're telling your side of the story". That question made the court excuse the Jury and remind the prosecutor of the defendants right to to post-arrest silence.
He was also admonished for trying to bring in 'evidence'(other acts motion) already deemed inadmissable by the judge - twice, in front of the Jury.
The judge said he didn't believe Binger was acting in good faith and this can be used for grounds for a bad-faith argument.
The prosecution agree with Rittenhouse's lawyers that they had a higher-quality drone video that their case rests on than the defence, which had a compressed 3.6mb copy while the prosecution had a 11.2mb copy.
Was just doing some research there it seems the grounds for mistrial with bias require prosecutor overreach that was intentional, whereas a mistake such as the drone video being compressed accidentally might be grounds for mistrial without bias because it can be argued it was accidental.
Not particularly. The legal errors are a matter of record, the only difference really is between if it's seen as 'that damned biased judge' reversing a conviction or an appeals court.
I believe he would remain in custody pending the appeal.
Seems like a shut case. Only people who attacked him got shot. He didn’t fire the first round.
lessons to be learned.
An appeal is much harder because the original conviction removes the presumption of innocence from the accused, and the onus moves to the appellant's legal team to prove innocence, instead of being on the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Doesn't the bar become much higher though?
As MT said his presumption of innocence is gone and he will end up spend at least a couple of years in jail until his appeal is heard.
If it was just the video evidence that they withheld "accidentally" then without prejudice may have been the best approach. However, looking at the other incidents combined it's very hard to say there was not prosecutorial overreach when the judge himself said he didn't believe them when they said they were acting in good faith.
That's not normally how appeals of jury trials work.
An appeals court will normally not overturn a jury conviction unless dramatic new evidence is provided. Juries are finders of fact, judges are finders of law and appeals courts don't have juries. For a typical appeal on a conviction to be successful, the appellant will normally have to show that there was some error of law in the original trial. The judge allowed (or disallowed) something which he should not have, there was an error in the interpretation of the law as applied to the case, there was prejudice to be found in the conduct of counsel, jury instructions were incorrect, that sort of thing. For the sake of an application for mistrial due to misconduct of the prosecution, the 'bar' is the conduct, not the trial result itself.
I suppose you shouldn't be too surprised by obvious things they're clueless about.
You have their current "boss" (puppet) in the oval office, coming out with nonsense like this:
"Poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids".
It's probably true of all politicians to some extent, but the dems seem particularly afflicted by such clueless zombies who live in their privileged little bubbles.
In to the 3rd day so maybe a clear split among jurors so you'd have to assume the chance of a compromise verdict involving "lesser" charges is increasing?
IIRC that may mean serious jail time as well but not sure where I heard that.
I don't really expect a verdict today either.
Doesn't really help with the jury being retired at 4:30 pm.
Thats surpising indeed. From the evidence, I thought surely this one was a slam dunk for the defence.
I'm sure I'd read that there are 2 jurors holding out due to concerns regarding their safety rather than anything else.
Any reliable source on that though. It sounds believable but place I saw it your man wasn't a good source. What happens in a hung jury?
I heard that too but I think it's been widely reported that it was a false rumour.
You would assume with the degree of polarisation there is in the US that theres a juror or two in there who made their mind up long before the trial began
I'm starting to get worried for Rittenhouse at this stage. I think if he was going to be acquitted of all charges, the acquittal would have happened by now.
Well that sounds like bullshit though right.
Any source for where you read this?
I can't remember where I saw/heard it. Annoying the hell out of me.
It's possible. But bear in mind most of the counts have 'lesser included', so if they decide they can't convict of the most serious, the jury has to start all over again the next level down with slightly different criteria and elements. The plus side, it's less likely the more serious charges will stick. The downside, they're still working on the less serious ones.
The fact this whole thing wasn't immediately found in favour of Kyle is astonishing. I do think this will be a landmark ruling and will have major future implications which will be seen for many years, regardless of the outcome.
The media have shown their true colours on this.
Jack Posobiec 😂😂
Pizzagate promoter Jack Posobiec.
🤣🤣🤣
Here's the difference between the left and the right in America.
If he gets acquitted all hell will break loose, there will be rioting and looting for a couple of days (depending on how involved the National Guard get in calming the situation down).
If he is found guilty there will be a lot of grumbling but no violence. It will be like the OJ verdict. People will seethe quietly.
What happened in Washington on the 6th of January when trump lost?
Trump was on trial?
This trial isn't really about the facts of what happened with Rittenhouse and the people he killed, it's about picking a side. The facts are irrelevant.
Seems an "activist" was arrested in Kenosha for photographing members of the Jury.
The Judge, Jury and Rittenhouse will all need protection if he is acquitted.
As will little working class businesses in inner city America, especially the black owned ones.
The rich white kids will be coming to burn it all in a progressive and empathic manner.
No I said Trump was on trial? I didn't mention Rittenhouse
A mainstream media news organisation has been kicked out of the courthouse. One of their staff got caught following the jury bus, ie got caught trying to find out where jury members live. I think jury members will be in fear for themselves amd their families if they acquit
Have we forgot about the capital riots so quickly?
It's the certain groups that want their perceived political 'enemies' punished with the full force of the state at whatever cost. The seething hatred that exists in these groups that are celebrating this juvenile and cynical mindset while pretending that they're principled advocates for a less punitive criminal justice system that benefits them and their political ideologue.
Judge & jury must make the correct decision or else ........
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/v2/86b2bf519a78c14958c9040117dc4dc1.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w2.vanillicon.com/v2/20f4606d019ca0b240328ff30d91e82b.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c9236bc67b608c3603b1ed089c896282.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/efd3dd9d0bb9a4718dd25ad32419f424.svg)
