Posted on 11/02/2021 9:43:04 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
One potential juror in the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse wondered out loud during jury selection why anyone would need a “machine gun.” On August 25, 2020, Rittenhouse was carrying a legally owned semi-automatic Smith & Wesson M&P rifle. Another juror expressed how “scared” she was to be so close to where Rittenhouse lived. And still another said she couldn’t be impartial because her family wasn’t impartial. And so went jury selection in the most consequential American self defense case in years.
These people aren’t alone. According to now former Rittenhouse attorney, Robert Barnes, who did pre-trial polling, fully two-thirds of potential jurors in Kenosha believe the 18-year-old is guilty … of something, anything.
A pool of 150 potential jurors was rounded up to hear the case. The cattle call jury selection reportedly ended, according to the AP, out of view of cameras. Twenty jurors — 12 regulars and eight alternates — were expected to be retained and seated to hear the Rittenhouse case. The judge says there’s a 1% chance they could be sequestered.
BREAKING: A jury has been selected for the homicide trial of Kyle Rittenhouse, who shot three people, two fatally, during a protest against racial injustice last year in Kenosha, Wisconsin. Rittenhouse's lawyers plan to argue that he acted in self-defense.
https://t.co/i6plqaTVou— The Associated Press (@AP) November 2, 2021
Opening statements are scheduled to get underway on Tuesday, and the trial is expected to take two weeks or more at the courthouse in Kenosha — the same courthouse rioters attempted to destroy during their violent days of rioting following the police shooting of Jacob Blake, a black man wanted on a warrant for domestic violence and sexual assault.
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
30 to life with those dem voters. Poor kid.
Mistrial-— Voir Dire of the “jury” is completely screwed up if this is the result.
Grounds for a mistrial.
For which self defense would be an over-riding reason to BE a gun owner in Kenosha. Who were armed as the BLM/AntiFA Communists burned what is left of their city.
Seriously: the prosecutor just ran thru the events of the first shooting, and either presented it as self-defense outright or opened doors wide open for the defense to exhaustively tear down Kyle’s first attacker.
Incredible.
Defense lawyer could just about say “yes, the prosecutor is exactly right, and I could rest my case as a solid defense right there. Let me fill in a few gaps that aren’t already made clear...”.
It depends on who counts the jury votes.
So the Defense should make this plain to the Judge who should protect the JURY from such Communist threats. Jury should not be INTIMIDATED like the Mafia used to do, or be “bought”.
Internal affairs of the Judicial office needs to keep close watch on the jurors.
Final question— is the jury sequestered/domiciled in a secure place that cannot be attacked by these a@@clown AntiFA and BLM thugs?
The reward for making the "wrong" decision as an impartial juror is to be targeted for retaliation by Antifa. Avoiding that seems to be a very rational choice.
The threat was both to the jurors after the trial, as well as to towns. Blm was threatening retaliation, and governors or mayor’s were egging it on in the Chauvin trial.
One female juror who was kept as part of the final jury, said her friends and neighbors told her to get rid of her American flag because it would make her a target. Instead, she went out and bought her first gun. I think it’s safe to say she’ll be on the side of self defense. Not guilty. I don’t know if she made the final 12 or if she’s a backup.
Prosecutor enumerates & acknowledges:
- The rifle was purchased and stored in-state on Kyle’s behalf (eviscerated the “he brought it across state lines” trope), possessed & used only in presence of actual purchaser.
- Kyle was present to defend property he had an interest in, and was observed performing other socially constructive actions (offering aid, etc).
- Kyle was involved in the “flaming dumpster” incident (demonstrably helpful).
- Kyle ran toward Rosenbaum, as shown by FBI overhead surveillance (which couples with the ground video showing Kyle _running_past_ Rosenbaum, with Rosenbaum immediately attacking & pursuing Kyle).
- Kyle turns to see Rosenbaum, shirtless and screaming threats with a flaming city as backdrop, closing fast. Kyle attempts to deter Rittenhouse, who persists.
- Surprise gunshot occurs within 30 feet.
- All considered, Kyle fires 4 shots (sure seems justified at this point).
- Last shot enters Rosenbaum’s back. (This is the only shot which can be questioned, fitting well within body mechanics of a falling perp and the shooter firing properly until threat ends.)
Incredible opening.
Notice how the names of the Chauvin trial jurors were released just a few days ago.
That was just a gentle reminder to these jurors that they should fall in line.
But is it the right choice?
It’s always “rational” to submit to tyranny, isn’t it.
From comments on this thread, it appears we need a little prompt on how criminal trials work.
2/3 of potential jurors want to get out of serving on this jury
First the political and show-trial aspects of what is happening. The politicians, the media, and the “BLM-ANTIFA” activists all want a public lynching.
Second, to be a juror in this case will require great courage. If the jury doesn't deliver a guilty verdict there will be violence and riots. Members of the jury will likely be threatened by both activist and politicians. I can fully understand why people would disqualify themselves. Not ethical and not required for justice to be served, but understandable.
Tyranny is here whether I like it or not. We've been going downhill since the 20th century began, and the thing about going downhill is that you pick up speed. The farther you go down the hill, the faster you go.
So I view the tyranny as similar to cold weather in Minnesota in January. Nothing I do will change the weather. My best choice is to figure out ways to have it affect me the least.
That doesn't mean I go around wearing a mask when I can avoid it. The only three times I've worn a facemask since Covid started is the three times I've been to the dentist's office to get my teeth cleaned. Putting up with the mask for five minutes once every six months or so seems like a better alternative than absolutely refusing to submit to the tyranny of somebody insisting that I wear one.
If the lawyer has anything going for him he will focus on the effect he was being chased and not allow anything about type of guns or riots or anything else.
He was being chased by people with guns he shot them before they could shoot him
Tyranny is not the weather. False comparison.
People with terminal cancer and few assets and no close relatives could have been chosen to serve as jurors.
Some people can’t be easily intimidated.
Are you unfamiliar with the concept of an analogy?
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.
