Posted on 10/29/2021 3:52:06 AM PDT by marktwain
U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- On October 25, 2021, there was a hearing on evidence to be presented at trial in the Kyle Rittenhouse case in Kenosha, Wisconsin. The most important issue covered appeared to be the prosecution arguing who the aggressor was in the incident, is irrelevant.
The video is two hours and 29 minutes long. This article covers the highlights of the action, as judged by this correspondent.
There was trouble with the video equipment. Near the beginning, Judge Schroeder quips:
“What do you want for $50,000, right?”
(snip)
DA Binger argues police interaction with Rittenhouse on the night of 25 October, has no relevance.
The Defense and Prosecution reach an agreement on the issue of expert witnesses. Dr. Black, the expert witness for the Defense, will be able to testify as to timing and how people’s subjective view of time is often different. The Prosecution agrees and agrees to not to have the prosecution expert testify.
Judge Schroeder says he is not going to muzzle the Defense in the terms used in court to describe the people who were shot. The Defense will be allowed to present evidence and make their case based on the evidence. Terms such as “rioter, looter, arsonist” will be allowed. It is up to the defense to make their case to the jury.
An incredible exchange takes place, starting about 1:58 (one hour and 58 minutes) and continuing to 2:10 in the video.
It starts with evidence about events shortly before the shooting, on the night of the event, bearing on the character of the first person shot and killed, Joseph Rosenbaum.
Judge Bruce Schroeder Listens to DA Binger claim, who was the aggressor does not matter, in a self defense case (Rittenhouse case)
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...
From what I know, Binger has set himself up for prosecution misconduct.
I nominate this prosecutor for the Michael Nifong Award.
So, who the aggressor was doesn’t matter? By the prosecutor’s perverted “thinking,” Rittenhouse had no right to defend himself against having his head stomped, being whacked with a skateboard and having a weapon pointed at him.
That is the only thing that IS relevant.
Self defense is racist.
DA Binger claims: Who is the aggressor, has nothing to do with self-defense.
Judge Schroeder appears puzzled. At first, he cites rules of evidence, from federal guidelines:
It fits Leftist assumptions about reality very well. Consider, individuals and individual guilt or innocence does not matter, in the Leftist world-view. Only group guilt, group "oppressors" or group "victims" matter.
What matters in an individual case is:
Did his actions advance the cause of Lefist power?
If they did, then he is innocent.
If they did not, then he is guilty.
Kyle Rittenhouse's actions worked against the takedown of Western Civilization, therefore, he is guilty, case closed, from a Leftists viewpoint.
DA Binger is a socialist commie who is part of the new wave of SOROS style prosecutors who want to disemmble the justice system.
Of course Binger wants to rule out evidence before the trial even begins.Bnger wants to substitute “Leftist anti gun morality for the rule of evidence, the law of self defense, and due process. This means we want to use the traditional commie approach of abandonment of the presumption of innocence until proven guilty beyongd a reasonale doubt.
There is a big problem here for Binger. Binger has to prove mens rea or intent to kill with malice of forethought, and the defense will be self defence which relies on the issue of who the aggressor was.Clearly the perps shot by Rittenhouser were aggressors, and the test applied is a subjective one, whether it is reasonable in the circumstances for Rittenhouse to be in fear of his life or in fear of maiming in the circumstances he found himself. Any jury as finders of fact would saw yes. Its all on video tape.
Binger knows full well that Rittenhouse will be found not guilty of all charges.Thats why Binger is squeeling like a stuck pig. Judge Shroeder should be commended for sticking to the law.
Rittenhauser will be granted a fair trial. These commie bastards like Binger want to remove it and ignore tha facts.
Wow. Who the aggressor was is irrelevant.
Not when you are the aggressed. Than it is really, really relevant.
Any charge will do.
Then Binger can force another trial, with a more pliable judge.
I suspect Binger’s strategy is to push and hope for a mistrial >>>>>>>>>>>>
If so, Shrioeder can actually have Bing removed from representing the state because of copnducting himself so as to create a mistrial in front of the jury.
A true judge who stands for due process can re,pve a prosecutor for such misconduct anmd insist that another be appointed by the state.Such a situation also can result in disciplinary action against Binger by the Bar Association and Binger would be in jeaopardy of disbarrment.
Thats the way commie prosecutors with no respect for due process need to be handled.
The entire power of the Democrat party, (which controls the executive branch in Wisconsin), the Media, and the far left mob, are eagerly anticipating some small error on his part, which they will use to take him out of the trial.
Judge Schroeder knows he has to be absolutely correct in his rulings, or it will be used to put another, more pliable judge in his place.
The Media is already attempting to paint him as partisan and anti-prosecution, insufficiently "woke" and partial to "white supremacists".
If Rittenhouse walks..... cities will burn.
Who was the aggressor is irrelevant. Hm.
That sounds about correct with respect to the thought process of Leftists.
If that is the case we are in a situation where we must let them burn.
“DA Binger claims: Who is the aggressor, has nothing to do with self-defense.”
This is why my starting point is that Kyle is innocent and my requirement in similar cases is an airtight case by the prosecution (reasonable doubt only works when there is at least a tiny bit of honesty in prosecutors). In this case, unless the prosecution has video evidence of Kyle saying something like “I’m going to kill me some Antifa tonight”, then no conviction vote will come from me and the prosecution will have to find a new jury (at best), and start over again.
We have a JURY system for a reason, and this is about as good an example as I’ve ever seen. Would this DA make the same claim to try to lock up a woman who shoots guy in her bedroom who had smashed his way into her house, and had already forcibly raped her? He could...by the rationale he’s trying to use here.
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.