KYLE RITTENHOUSE TRIAL DAY 6 Defense Continues to Present the Case for Kyle's Innocence

Court TV (via YouTube) ^ | 11/10/2021 | pilgrimsprogress

[spacejunkie2001]

now this idiot is denying GG said what he said he said.

[Pilgrim's Progress]

Dang! Trial hasn’t even had a witness and this thread has already hit 60 posts. Kewl!

[Pilgrim's Progress]

I think that Kyle returning back to Rosenbaum’s body prove that it wasn’t his intent to kill him - and was looking to offer aid (IMO).

[LittleBillyInfidel]

From Cornell Law Directed Verdict Primary tabs Overview A directed verdict is...

Sigh... something told me that I would need to do some hand holding. The verdict (directed or otherwise) of "INNOCENCE" is not the legal standard in our system. The legal standard, per verdicts (directed or otherwise) in the US legal system is "NOT GUILTY" (or "guilty"). That's like high school level pre-law knowledge and I don't know why it escapes so many legal observers.

[Pilgrim's Progress]

The forthcoming witness is changing his story, you say?

[Pilgrim's Progress]

Maybe because in our way of thinking, NOT GUILTY is equal to INNOCENT? Thanks for holding my hand. I feel really loved.

[spacejunkie2001]

the 1st witness has been talking about 10 min

[spacejunkie2001]

refresh your link as he’s been talking for some time.

yes, he renegged his statement; said he was scared :|

[joe fonebone]

bump for later

[spacejunkie2001]

what’s the purpose of bringing the car lot guy back, just to prove he lied about having someone protect his property? I don’t get this

[LittleBillyInfidel]

I’ve been trying cases in Federal and state courts for just over forty years...

I'd be curious to hear your opinion of the purported prosecutor's "face palm" (see pic in post #2, I believe) that is put forth by some of the "FR legal analysts" here. It's my contention that even a 1-L would never do such a thing, even in a mock trial - and that he's simply holding his head while writing. However, have you ever witnessed such a reaction (as alleged by many here)?

[Pilgrim's Progress]

Thanks. I had it on that JeffMAC channel.

[Pilgrim's Progress]

He did lie, but that should probably be a separate trial . . .

[spacejunkie2001]

yeah, I can’t connect the dots on why this is relevant to Kyle’s case.

[Pilgrim's Progress]

Hopeful the defense will connect the dot!

[PapaBear3625]

I wouldn't be so sure of that. Threats have already been made against the jury.

If Kyle's innocence is clear, and the jury is being threatened, then the judge's duty would be a directed verdict of innocence (taking the jury off the hook).

[Pilgrim's Progress]

To be honest, I’m sympathetic toward the lot owner. He is a victim of all this and his world was collapsing around him if he didn’t have coverage enough for his losses.

[spacejunkie2001]

totally agree. all the more reason for the DEFENSE to state what the hell their point is

[LittleBillyInfidel]

Maybe because in our way of thinking, NOT GUILTY is equal to INNOCENT?

Ergo, that is EXACTLY why "Not Guilty" is the legal standard. Your "(our) way of thinking" is precisely why I pointed out the OJ fan base example. It's an important distinction.

[spacejunkie2001]

Kyle coming up!!~!!!!