Kyle Rittenhouse Trial - Day 10 - Closing Arguments

PBS NEWS ^ | 11/15/2021 | pilgrimsprogress

[1Old Pro]

Where are the guys on the side of the constitution and law-abiding?

The GOP is tepid and timid, not leaders.

[Candor7]

If there is rioting when KR is acquitted, it will only be perpetrated by the radical leftists.>>>>>>>>>>

People do not understand. They are ready to riot in Kenosha regardless of the trial outcome. Marxists just want to destabilize America. Thats the goal.Just like Binger tried to destabilize the Justice System of Kenosha, but on a larger scale.

“If” they riot should be “when “ they riot.

I hope the WNG cuts them down ......period. Arson and Looting are acts of war.And these Marxist BLM and ANTIFA cannon fodder idjits for the “Obamatron Revlooshun”need a taste, even if the FBI is drone surveilling the riot hoping for civil rights violations.

These Marxists need to be neutralized not only in Kenosha, but all across America.

[Openurmind]

Thank you for sharing that...

[Guenevere]

Bttt

[Openurmind]

Yep, we are now to a point where they are just waiting for an excuse to have a big BBQ and party.

[Political Junkie Too]

Thanks.

So, given what you've just posted, how do you interpret the militia exception in the 5th amendment?

Does this mean that any armed citizen aged 17 to 45 who is involved in putting down a riot can be subject to a military court? Does it mean they are excepted from indictment in criminal court?

-PJ

[Cboldt]

-- Does this mean that any armed citizen aged 17 to 45 who is involved in putting down a riot can be subject to a military court? Does it mean they are excepted from indictment in criminal court? --

That's not how I read it. The genesis and process for criminal charges depends on your relationship within the government. If you are not sworn into government-sponsored organized militia, you don't get swept into rules that apply to sworn members.

I think the issue at the time was the public did not want to be under military court, so some comfort that unless they are military, the charge against them (supposedly) comes from their peers on the GJ, not from the local commanding officer.

[Political Junkie Too]

I'm trying to understand what they were thinking in 1791.

-PJ

[Cboldt]

-- I'm trying to understand what they were thinking in 1791. --

Separation of military and civilian court systems for crimes. If you aren't in the military, you get a GJ. Dovetails with the requirement that Congress is the only branch with authority to suspend habeas corpus.

Also doevtails with the notion of never a standing army (whcih notion has been abandoned so the powerful can loot our treasury for international adventures)

[Political Junkie Too]

You say that, but how do you square the "militia" exception in the 5th amendment with your definition that the militia are all able-bodied citizens between 17 and 45, whether they are in the military or not?

I'm not trying to debate the point, I'm still trying to frame the discussion around the language.

My thinking to my earlier point about timing is this: the Articles of the Constitution were written in 1787; the Articles were ratified in June 1788; the Bill of Rights were ratified in December 1789 after the first Congress was seated.

The 2nd amendment didn't create the militia, it affirmed the right of the people to keep and bear arms. The militia was referenced directly in the earlier Articles. Furthermore, the militia was included in the 5th amendment. Why? In 1789, what did the first Congress intend when they included the militia exception in the 5th amendment?

Federalist 29 discusses the militia as a check on a standing army, and Federalist 45 discusses the militia as a check on a tyrannical government (federal and state, when the state aligns with a tyrant). Also, Congress must reapprove the funding for a standing army every two years as a check on an adventurous President. These were a part of the debate on the Articles, not the amendments.

Was the militia exemption in the 5th amendment intended to protect the people when they oppose a tyrannical government as a check on despotic power? What happens if a despotic government uses a segment of the population by proxy to harm the people (like how the blue-state governors let Antifa and BLM burn down cities in 2020)?

Again, I'm still trying to frame the discussion in my mind about how to interpret the militia exception in the 5th amendment, instead of focusing narrowly on what is the militia itself. The two go together, but it's not enough to stop at the definition of the militia. I want to understand how to apply the 5th amendment militia exemption.

-PJ

[Cboldt]

The 5th amendment reference is a guarantee that non-org-militia members of the public would not be subject to charges from military leadership. Only a jury of (the public’s) peers has the power to charge, and that via Grand Jury.

It’s not an exception, it’s a venue guarantee - to the extent written words can guarantee anything in the long run.\\

I say belt and suspenders because “only Congress can suspend habeas” should have the same effect. Habeas being the power of a civilian court to take a case away from military court (among other reasons to bring a body before the court).

The militia in the 5th isn’t all the able bodied, it is those pressed into service by the government, for mutual defense. The “when in service” part of “when in actual service in time of War or public danger” means their actions are taken in response to orders from a government-approved leader. After the action has concluded, these people blend in with the general public and are no longer subject to military discipline. Those in military service have less freedom under the law than those outside.

[Political Junkie Too]

Got it. Thanks.

-PJ

[vivenne]

They use the board but mainly the metal on the bottom where the wheels are attached to do the most damage to people. The metal can be lethal if hit in the head or face. It is very sharp and obviously hard metal. They then use them to get away fast.

[vivenne]

That was stunning, especially given the Alec Baldwin thing. Did he get the ok from glove boy that it was a “Cold gun”?

[Avalon Memories]

Every jury does different, but all of them I have been on take a straw poll right away.

Well, there's a 90% chance the black guy is a Democrat. There's at least a 50% chance most, if not all of the women are Dems. Hard to say about the other guys, but the odds favor at least one or two being Rep or conservative. Given this mix, to me it seems a hung jury is quite possible because one or more will dig in on their political position.

I know if I was on that jury, I'd vote not guilty on all counts and could not be moved no matter what the other jurors might say or do.

[NautiNurse]

Jury has been deliberating 7.5 hours. The judge is going to meet with the jury at 5:00 CT to inquire whether they wish to continue deliberating later this evening or break until morning.

[NautiNurse]

Jury has ceased deliberating for the night. 8 hours 34 minutes spent in the jury room today.

[Guenevere]

Thanks!!....I have been waiting and praying all through the day,

[djstex]

Thank You.

I don't get why the jury now selected is not sequestered.

[Segovia]

“Joseph Rosenbaum died as he had lived...trying to touch an unwilling minor.”