Posted on 10/27/2021 1:17:16 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd
The men shot by Kyle Rittenhouse in August 2020 can potentially be referred to at his trial as "rioters" or "looters," a Wisconsin judge said Monday while reiterating his long-held view that attorneys should not use the word "victim."
Defense lawyers maintain the young man acted in self defense when he fatally shot two protesters in Kenosha, Wisconsin. The protesters were shot during a demonstration against the police shooting of a Black man. Rittenhouse was among armed civilians who said they were there to protect businesses after nights of arson and looting.
"Let the evidence show what the evidence shows, that any or one of these people were engaged in arson, rioting or looting, then I'm not going to tell the defense they can't call them that," Kenosha County Circuit Judge Bruce Schroeder said during the pre-trial hearing.
Schroeder has had a longstanding rule of not allowing prosecutors to refer to people as "victims" at trial.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
I love this!!!
the community of blm is getting angry- demanding hte judge step down- will they threaten jurors like they did in chauvin trial? Will governors and mayors etc incite blm like before?
So, the libs are ticked that a mere judge can tell them to stop crapping over a formerly great language?
Kenosha kid song might become a folk heros song yet.
I prefer the term “domestic terrorists.”
Lefties are up in arms about this. See how they fight though? Republican RINOS do nothing while this country is being torn down.
That was my thought as well.
That is just almost stupid that we feel relief that they call them what they are.
Rioters, arsonists, and looters. Because that is what they were doing.
Yup. They called the January 6 rally people “rioters’ but antifa and blm who clearly burn down buildings are “peaceful protesters” (PUKE)
Leave it to CNN to bury the lede: “Schroeder has had a longstanding rule of not allowing prosecutors to refer to people as “victims” at trial.”
Sounds like the judge scrupulously follows the law - the accused is given the presumption of innocence and referring to the deceased as a “victim” might undermine that.
What the “victims” were up to, particularly in this case, is highly probative and relevant. If they were looting and rioting, well . . . .
I’m liking this judge more and more.
I agree- the first thing Kyle’s lawyer should ask them ‘victim’ rioters is what they planned on doing, when they were chasing Kyle’, if they caught him?
They had guns too. They had fired their guns.
This case should have been thrown out WITH PREJUDICE so that Kyle could sue them back.
Referring to a terrorist as “victim” implies that Kyle attacked them without provocation, when in fact Kyle was the victim of an imminent-threat-of-death attack against him and was exercising his right of self defense.
LOL
But because he killed white peeps he should be called a hero?
Let’s go Brandon and this alleged attorney!
I love the term the Kenosha Hat Trick!
Well “Victim” is yet to be proven. But rioters and looters is a known fact. The judge is right.
Actually if they are victims then the trial is over. Kyle would be guilty. Talk about tainting the jury. The judge is not putting up with that crap.
Pray for Kyle and the judge.
Pray for the salvation of the prosecutor.
I think the attackers should be called “attackers”, and their intended victim should be called “the intended victim”.
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.