ccm75
NES Member
The dopey prosecutor said he needs up to 2.5 hours for his closing argument.
The jury will give an NG just for that.
The jury will give an NG just for that.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/Pioneer Valley Arms February Giveaway ***Smith & Wesson SD9VE 9MM***
17-year-old arrested in killing of 2 people in Kenosha
- Thread starter Toast
- Start date
Sure.
Any government can try anyone for anything, as the current trial proves. It's just a question of whether they can link it to an existing statute (they usually can, using some interpretation of that statute) and/or convince a grand jury. Right now, there are probably a couple of junior US Attorneys somewhere, parsing every piece of evidence from this trial and seeing if they can link it to a federal statute.
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2017
- Messages
- 285
- Likes
- 514
If they can generate enough evidence, sure. But USA's have a 99.9% conviction rate for a reason, they only take slam dunks. This isn't a slam dunk since this case basically makes it a justified self defense. Not sure how you'd make the jump to a civil rights case when the guy was defending himself. But I'm rational, so who knows.
If Trump had said something and Kyle was a BLM supporter, people would be pushing for it on those grounds alone.
Bad enough we are getting more whacked out far left liberals
KBCraig
NES Member
I'm sure this has been covered here before, but it's time to repeat it.
Many people have said that Kyle Rittenhouse lost his claim of immunity because he was illegally carrying the rifle.
That is incorrect, and I'll link to the law so that you can read it yourself.
Wisconsin statute 939.48 is "Self-defense and defense of others."
It does indeed say in 939.49(1m)(b) that the presumption of self-defense does not apply if "1. The actor was engaged in a criminal activity or was using his or her dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business to further a criminal activity at the time."
Was it illegal for Rittenhouse to carry a rifle in public? It appears so, at least until you read to the end of the statute. The last paragraph changes everything.
948.60(2)(a) says, "Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor."
But then paragraph (c) adds, "This section applies only to a person under 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the person is in violation of s. 941.28 ( . . . )"
Got that? If the "deadly weapon" is a rifle or shotgun, the law only applies if the person is in violation of 941.28.
What is 941.28? It is "Possession of short-barreled shotgun or short-barreled rifle." The definitions match federal law: 16" for rifles, and 18" for shotguns.
The rifle that Rittenhouse carried was not a short-barreled rifle. Therefore, 948.60 did not apply, and he was not carrying the rifle illegally.
Since he was not engaged in criminal activity, he retains the presumption of self defense.
Many people have said that Kyle Rittenhouse lost his claim of immunity because he was illegally carrying the rifle.
That is incorrect, and I'll link to the law so that you can read it yourself.
Wisconsin statute 939.48 is "Self-defense and defense of others."
It does indeed say in 939.49(1m)(b) that the presumption of self-defense does not apply if "1. The actor was engaged in a criminal activity or was using his or her dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business to further a criminal activity at the time."
Was it illegal for Rittenhouse to carry a rifle in public? It appears so, at least until you read to the end of the statute. The last paragraph changes everything.
948.60(2)(a) says, "Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor."
But then paragraph (c) adds, "This section applies only to a person under 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the person is in violation of s. 941.28 ( . . . )"
Got that? If the "deadly weapon" is a rifle or shotgun, the law only applies if the person is in violation of 941.28.
What is 941.28? It is "Possession of short-barreled shotgun or short-barreled rifle." The definitions match federal law: 16" for rifles, and 18" for shotguns.
The rifle that Rittenhouse carried was not a short-barreled rifle. Therefore, 948.60 did not apply, and he was not carrying the rifle illegally.
Since he was not engaged in criminal activity, he retains the presumption of self defense.
nstassel
NES Member
Probably not, notwithstanding the other opinions. First, there is a custom that the Attorney General won't usually prosecute a set of facts if the state has already taken a shot. But beyond that most civil rights crimes are committed under color of law. The other type is a killing or injury if 1) the crime was committed because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin of any person, or 2) the crime was committed because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any person and the crime affected interstate or foreign commerce or occurred within federal special maritime and territorial jurisdiction. I think that would be a real stretch.
alan226
NES Member
I was thinking of prior cases where someone was found not guilty but prosecuted for a civil rights violation later.
But then you mentioned that the violation was made under color of law. NOW it makes sense.
Thanks....
Buck F
NES Member
I believe the correct term is "allies"
kevin9
NES Member
Comrades
ToddDubya
NES Member
KBCraig
NES Member
I'd say pursuing straw purchase charges are more likely.
He admits that he gave his friend money to buy the rifle for him.
Randy Lahey
NES Member
Probably nothing to do with Floyd’s “nephew” making threats about having people taking pictures of jurors.so now the antifa harassment of jurors families is about to begin.
'deputy asked to delete the video' . ha.
Rittenhouse judge says person caught filming jurors, orders deletion along with 'new procedures'
The Wisconsin judge overseeing the murder trial of Kyle Rittenhouse announced Tuesday that deputies had caught someone recording video of the jurors earlier in the day and would be taking new steps to ensure the incident did not happen again, in addition to ordering the person to delete the images.www.foxnews.com
View: https://youtu.be/9smqIhalzdM
Last edited:
If he gave his friend $$ to buy the rifle for him, isn't that like a father or uncle buying a boy his first .22 rifle and holding it for him til he's older? Is that a straw purchase? It was never in his son's actual possession, but he only used it at times, then returned. When he's older, it will be his.
Also, there will be no federal/DOJ civil rights prosecutions since the persons shot where Caucasian.
I was also surprised that when the defense attorney presented the Glock 27 to officer Bray for ID, he didn't ask "who the owner of the gun was". Clearly it wasn't Rittenhuose's gun, it was the gun pointed at his head. The question and answer would have solidified the self defense claim.
Also, there will be no federal/DOJ civil rights prosecutions since the persons shot where Caucasian.
I was also surprised that when the defense attorney presented the Glock 27 to officer Bray for ID, he didn't ask "who the owner of the gun was". Clearly it wasn't Rittenhuose's gun, it was the gun pointed at his head. The question and answer would have solidified the self defense claim.
Last edited:
Randy Lahey
NES Member
Is all you need a hat that says something? I guess official Female Body Inspectors across the nation will soon be vindicated and their sexual assault charges will be dropped, in exchange for a medal of valor from Brandon.
Randy Lahey
NES Member
This is how he’s being portrayed to the general public:
Attachments
barnabus
NES Member
barnabus
NES Member
Randy Lahey
NES Member
I think the first guy at least tried to fight back with a katana. Sadly that was not enough. I’m not sure they should be shamed for being murdered. But it is a good reminder to... not let yourself get murdered.
KBCraig
NES Member
Don't forget Ahmaud Arbery. He tried to fight back after being chased down and cornered, but he was unarmed.
cathouse01
NES Member
- Joined
- May 10, 2018
- Messages
- 2,497
- Likes
- 4,849
Feds can only go after people who are "acting under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom" (that is, under governmental authority or the pretense of authority) who “willfully” violates another person’s civil rights. (18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law.). So the Feds can go after LEOs but not un-deputized citizens. So no, in this case the feds can’t go after him on a civil rights violation since he was not acting “under color of law”.
The Internet Research Agency, which is part of the propaganda wing of the Russian government creates thousands of memes on both sides intended to cause extreme division in America. They have thousands of accounts on Fb, twitter, Instagram and any other social media sites. i would think the chincoms have something similar, and it‘s working as planned to tear the country apart. Then celebs and keyboard warriors eat it up and run with it. They‘ll setup protests of opposing groups right near each other, douse it in gasoline and hope for the worst. Throw in some antifa vans handing out bricks and cups full of cement and let the fun begin.Just another example of the left's propaganda machine hard at work:
Pick your divisive topic, and this shit will be pasted all over Imdur, Twatter, Faceplant, etc. This one is from Imdur. I really have to get away from that site for image hosting, it's a F-ing cesspool of leftist propaganda. The sad thing is that young people think it's spontaneous content generated by their peers...
nstassel
NES Member
I"d need to see some solid evidence from an unbiased source before I'd go for the "Russia, Russia, Russia" finger pointing that the Donks tried so hard to sell before and after the 2016 election. How much poking of the bear has happened since Dementia Joe was elected? One must keep in mind that Russia abhors Marxism now and would not be fueling its spread.
China? Definitely. North Korea? Possibly, if they have the skill set. I suspect much of it is internal to the US.
namedpipes
NES Member
Thank God I'm not the only one. I'm still trying to chase that other car to the finish line in the second scenario.
GaryO
NES Member
I am watching Fox and they were showing clips from other networks calling the kid a murderer, haven't they learned anything from the Sandmann fiasco? Those liberal networks and newspapers had to pay bigly.
Similar threads
