The kid should run for mayor of Kenosha, then guvner, then president.
Posted on 11/03/2021 1:25:22 PM PDT by Enterprise
I am seeing prosecutorial misconduct, as well as a violation of Title 18 Section 242 (Denial of rights under color of law)
Self defense is an affirmative defense, meaning defendant has to advance the self defense theory and present evidence. Prosecutor can run the case as though hthere is no justification for self defense, just put on one side. It's unethical, but that's the way it is.
Angela Corey was hand picked by Pam Bondi to “hit” Zimmerman with a murder charge.
I agree. I was amazed how well he reacted while he was being chased and attacked.
Judge needs to award Kyle 1 of the 5 houses of the Black Lives Matter Leader (what’s her name) and 2 years of her earnings as repayment for suffering and time in jail!
The kid should run for mayor of Kenosha, then guvner, then president.
“That “self-defense” angle may have backing/”
There are a lot of problems with the situation. Rittenhouse’s home is a little over 20 miles from the incident, so he had to make a concerted effort to go there. In Wisconsin, no one under 18 is allowed to purchase or bear a non concealed gun. Rittenhouse was seventeen and the person that bought the weapon for him should be arrested also as an accessory.
The video the defense is producing Joseph Rosenbaum seen chasing Rittenhouse across the pavement as a shot rings out in the background. Rittenhouse then turns, and as Rosenbaum moves quickly toward him, fires four times. There is nothing to indicate Rosenbaum was armed so the shots “in the background” did not come from him.
So, if you add this up, you have an illegally carrying kid, saying earlier he was a medic, which he isn’t, traveling over 20 miles to enter an area that is having criminal action, to be a self acting vigilante, shot two to death, at least one unarmed, and wounding a third. He shouldn’t have been there, he shouldn’t have been packing, and he shouldn’t have shot an unarmed man. This is why they don’t let underaged kids own or bear arms.
wy69
That’s exactly why he’s on trial.....
Really pisses me off that the prosecution marked vids as “militia” for the jury to see. Seems like the judge thought so, too.
Since the State is playing games, here’s a Jeopardy! explanation:
A. FBI informants and operatives.
Q. Who fires a gun amid a rioting crowd, yet the police make no effort to id or charge them?
you’re on the wrong site, Kyle is innocent.
I’ve always thought that bottom pic was a little creepy. Antifa guy in the background just watched Kyle shoot 2 of his team members. He didn’t run or take cover. One of his guys lays dying, the other is screaming for a medic. He isn’t paying attention to either of them. He is watching Kyle, waiting to see if there is an opportunity to attack him. Good thing Kyle was quick, focused and alert.
Proceedings just ended.
When I dropped into the livestream, defense was analyzing video from Kyle arriving at car lot, to when he ran out of lot.
- 3 perps (deceased, first shooter, and shooter’s wife) seemed positioned and awaiting Kyle’s arrival. Rosenbaum circles around cars to come up behind Kyle. Defense construes this as an “ambush”, prosecutor objects, objection sustained.
- Rosenbaum chases and assaults Kyle (throws stuff, shouts threats).
- First shooter fires; discussion does not note him doing so “at” Kyle.
- Video shown, evidence someone shouted “get the F out of here” at Kyle, and he proceeded to (crowd obviously becoming hostile to him for obvious reasons).
- Kyle leaves, defense tries to articulate that Kyle did not threaten anyone, [expert] witness (cop?) notes video of Kyle “slightly raised the firearm when something caught his attention to the left” - seemingly trying to impute a hint of malice on Kyle where it should show his restraint and control (preparing for a threat but still not being threatening).
Very clear this started as a matter of self-defense: Kyle exhibited no intent nor interaction regarding 3 initial perps at car lot, just wanted to pass them, and did not fire until pursued, threatened, attacked, cornered, and shot at; once that threat had ceased, he extracted himself from an obviously developing threat from the mob.
After jury & defendant leave, lawyers are arguing about objections. Prosecutor opened a door (regarding some statement made) and is now trying to slam it shut again (arguing that the exact wording means it is not admissible evidence), defense is prying it open (obviously is evidence introduced by the prosecution).
That extends to the entire mob: they are pursuing him PRECISELY because he just killed someone, with a weapon he still has - a poor choice for those un- or under-armed. Most have no apparent weapons, one guy has a skateboard (vs an “assault weapon”? really?), one guy has a compact Glock (and approaches an “assault weapon” to CQB range? really?). Seems an interesting commentary on mob psychology: the swarm forgets individuality, while converging on the threat.
Negative. Jeopardy attaches as soon as the jury is seated and the first witness is sworn in.
How long have you been related to the Soros paid prosecutor?
Just think about this on constitutional grounds …
On the one hand, Wisconsin law prohibits the carrying of firearms by “minors” — which are defined to include anyone under the age of 18. And yet another statute treats a 17 year-old as an ADULT for prosecution in the circumstances of this incident.
If I was on this jury I would find the defendant not guilty simply on the basis of this blatant inconsistency of the law — regardless of the facts of the case.
I am amazed the Judge hasn’t dismissed the case and Jailed the Prosecutor
Shot dead or beaten senseless by a skate board slamming ANTIFA puke.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.