Please Support FR
Click The Pic To Donate.
Posted on 11/01/2021 9:38:53 AM PDT by rellimpank
With jury selection set to begin Monday in Kyle Rittenhouse’s murder case, his defense team has signaled it intends to put the men he shot on trial, too.
It’s a strategy bolstered by a series of pretrial rulings by a Kenosha County judge with a long-held reputation for giving defendants wide latitude to present a defense and a hard rule against using the word “victim” in his courtroom. In a nuanced case that hinges on the Antioch teen’s state of mind, legal experts say pretrial rulings regarding what jurors can — and cannot — hear will set a tone for the proceedings in a legally justifiable way the public may struggle to understand.
“I’ve never seen a case that’s so complicated to try to disentangle the motives and countermotives of all of the players in the street,” said Dr. Ziv Cohen, a forensic psychiatrist who has consulted on more than 50 murder cases. “I think that this is a very unpredictable case, and that’s partly why the judge’s decisions are so momentous.”
Rittenhouse has pleaded not guilty to the charges and says he acted in self-defense when he fatally shot Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber and wounded Gaige Grosskreutz in August 2020.
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...
those guys are gonna get grilled
they will be destroyed on the stand during cross examination
They’re going to try dead men?
Easier that way.
It would be nice if the cops had tracked down and prosecuted the anarchist who fired the first shot.
If the Trib means “his assailants” they’re right.
Please Support FR
Click The Pic To Donate.
Un-fricking-beleivable
Well, they did deserve killing.
Considering one of the men he shot was a PEDOPHILE I can see why the left is defending him..after all pedo’s always vote Dem
The three felons?
Self defense always centers around the actions of those you defended yourself against...
Their actions, and your actions in response to them... Self defense all revolves around whether your actions were justifiable. IN this case, it’s pretty damn clear they were, however reality and courts, particularly clearly politically driven prosecutions, don’t always agree.
This headline is garbage, and I am sure the article is even worse.
Bkmk
As it should be. We’re so used to politically unpopular defendants being railroaded that were unaccustomed to defendants being allowed to mount a full-throated defense. The activities of the victim are relevant and should be fully exposed
Please find out if Gaige Grosskreutz is an FBI informant and possibly paid agitator.
If that turns out true, then we have a LOT more questions to ask.
The man who lost his bicep to a Rittenhouse shot is captured in recording that he intended to kill Kyle with his sidearm.
1. It’s the defense attorneys’ job to “put the assailants on trial”. If the people chasing Rittenhouse were polite non-violent political operatives, that would be a weak strategy. Since in reality they were criminals engaged in riot and arson at the time, their backgrounds and conduct are material factors in why Rittenhouse feared for his life.
2. “I’ve never seen a case that’s so complicated to try to disentangle the motives and countermotives of all of the players in the street,” said Dr. Ziv Cohen, a psychiatrist...”
Leftists want this to be tried as COMPLEX case. In reality the case is simple, and the judge is resisting efforts to convert it into an Antifa/BLM circus, with America on trial, with Rittenhouse as a proxy for White Supremacy. Hate to disappoint Dr. Ziv, but subjective “motives and counter-motives of the various players on the street” are not evidence and have no place in this case. Stick to the facts.
Since Rittenhouse will argue self-defense, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that:
Rittenhouse attacked his assailants first;
Rittenhouse did NOT fear serious bodily harm or death;
Rittenhouse was not assaulted with a heavy skateboard (i.e., a deadly weapon);
Rittenhouse was not chased by multiple criminals while he was trying to defend property from rioters and arsonists;
That a firearm was not discharged near Rittenhouse while he was being chased; and,
Rittenhouse did not retreat from them until knocked down.
From videos and witness statements, proving any such thing is impossible. The State’s only play is to prejudice jurors against the Defendant, but they can’t change the facts of the incident. There is no case here, and the prosecutors know it. That makes the trial a matter of prosecutorial misconduct. I hope this judge comes down on them hard.
They should have been on trial without being shot.
Well,if they can vote........
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.