17-year-old arrested in killing of 2 people in Kenosha

Laura said:
How many think Kyle will be convicted on all counts?
Click to expand...
Probably not all. Most.

The tell was the court's reaction to the clear evidence that the jury was being targeted. Rather than order sequestration and a VIGOROUS police investigation - if not an immediate mistrial - it was, basically, "Ssssthop that!!1!"
 
Laura said:
How many think Kyle will be convicted on all counts?
Click to expand...

Based on what happened today, here's my thoughts.

On the Rosenbaum charge: iffy it depends on whether the jury accepts the provocation enhancement.
On yellow pants kick guy: not guilty
On Grosskruetz: not guilty
On Huber: not guilty
On the gun charges: not guilty since the jury will be using the defense instructions.


So me it all comes down to whether or not the jury buys the argument that Kyle was leveling a weapon at the crowd based on a video that is so fuzzy it's almost impossible to tell.

But based on the outcome of the McCloskeys and this trial we could see a new legal standard developing that showing someone you have a gun can be viewed as provocation and that you will have no protection in the event of self defense which is ultimately ridiculous. The takeaway for me is to get state legislatures to fix this so that it cannot be used in trials. I won't hold my breath waiting, but that's what I see coming out of this if Kyle doesn't walk.
 
I don't buy the provocation theory for one glaring reason. Let's assume for sake of argument Kyle DID point his rifle (which I don't beleive). After that he turns and flees. He doesn't START or CONTINUE a fight. He's clearly retreating from Rosenbaum TWICE.

Any "confrontation" that may have been caused by pointing a rifle (not at Rosenbaum who was off to the left) would end when Kyle lowers and runs away.
 
VetteGirlMA said:
However I do want to point out that during all of this Kyle's defense team looked like they were sitting on their hands doing nothing.
Click to expand...
The non agent 47 looking defense lawyer almost got into law fisticuffs with the prosecutor that looks like a human lunch box 🤣 I think it was about the quality of the 4k tv, but I might be misremembering.
So I wouldn't say they were sitting on their hands the whole time.

At one point I thought the judge was going to ask Kyle for help on how to save his text messages.
 
xtry51 said:
I don't buy the provocation theory for one glaring reason. Let's assume for sake of argument Kyle DID point his rifle (which I don't beleive). After that he turns and flees. He doesn't START or CONTINUE a fight. He's clearly retreating from Rosenbaum TWICE.

Any "confrontation" that may have been caused by pointing a rifle (not at Rosenbaum who was off to the left) would end when Kyle lowers and runs away.
Click to expand...

Like vettegirl, I can’t believe the judge is allowing that instruction on provocation. They watched the video 8 times at regular speed, slo mo, zoom and you can’t tell a thing about it. You can’t even see zeminski an adult male, never mind a rifle in someones hands. The defense was winning the argument then stopped arguing so some unknown reason. That doesn’t make sense.

Even with the prosecution BS claim of provocation, that somehow allows pedo to chase someone 30 yards and throw his bag at him, then grab rittenhouses rifle when he’s cornered? GIVE ME A BREAK.

Self defense cases hinge on who the aggressor is, who is not the aggressor and they are not necessarily constant during an event. Even if one were to accept fat boys BS that rittenhouse raised his rifle, his then running 30 yards makes his the non aggressor. An initial aggressive act doesn’t make that person the aggressor in perpetuity.

And just common sense wise. Rittenhouse was on video A LOT that night and there isn’t a single video showing him raise his rifle or do anything aggressive with it. And when he’s surrounded by the others at the car dealer, he never was aggressive. But fat boy wants the jury to believe when he was alone suddenly rittenhouse raised his rifle? Doesn’t pass the laugh test.

And while the jury isn’t supposed to know pedo is a violent nutcase (they heard he’s bipolar), they probably heard things about him prior to the trial. And most importantly, the prosecution knows exactly who rosenbaum the pedo was as a person, who Huber was and how each were violent whack jobs. They know those people attacked rittenhouse because that’s who they always were as people and it’s documented in their convictions. The prosecution should never have pursued this case, they know exactly what happen3d but as lying to the court and inventing this narrative to railroad an innocent person.
 
xtry51 said:
I think that chance is next to Biden reopening the Keystone Pipeline project.

Hes going to get off on all charges. Either the jury will acquit or the judge will step in after the verdict and dismiss everything throwing it out.
Click to expand...
I hope you are correct and this would be the correct series of verdicts but will depend heavily not on the evidence, but on how much the jurors want to stick their necks out knowing that their pictures will shortly be in the public domain. I can see the judge stepping in and if that happens, wait for the public outcry (riots). Those could easily be worse than the underlying events which brought this trial on.
 
mu2bdriver said:
I hope you are correct and this would be the correct series of verdicts but will depend heavily not on the evidence, but on how much the jurors want to stick their necks out knowing that their pictures will shortly be in the public domain. I can see the judge stepping in and if that happens, wait for the public outcry (riots). Those could easily be worse than the underlying events which brought this trial on.
Click to expand...
Oh, don't worry - the judge is on-board now. There was A Conversation. (I'd say A Golf Game, but he doesn't strike me as a golfer in the literal sense.)
 
Hoover said:
They watched the video 8 times at regular speed, slo mo, zoom and you can’t tell a thing about it.
Click to expand...

This is why I'm not terribly concerned about its effect on the jury. Many of the jurors will look at that and, even as they're straining to be objective, realize it shows nada. Their only choice will be to disregard it.

As for the outcome, I think @VetteGirlMA nails it above. The Rosenbaum shooting is the only one he needs to be concerned about. At least, I hope so: if he's in serious trouble on the other two, his case is truly hopeless. I expect a hung jury on Rosenbaum, at worst (for Kyle). Or maybe some lesser conviction, but I'm not clear on what those lesser charges are.
 
SpaceCritter said:
Cuz as I've said repeatedly THE FIX IS IN.
Click to expand...

We are experiencing the early stages of a commie justice. Soviet Union in 1920's. Our commies learn quickly, though. This is just a beginning.
When Soviet politburo discovered that public trials, featuring 'enemies of the people', actually generate sheep's sympathy for poor victims of the commie injustice, they have quickly changed the production, and from that point on the accused had to memorize their testimonials and rehears them with their investigators. Even party members accused by the party worked in the prison holding cell very hard on memorizing false accusations in order to save their families and relatives from the wreath of the party. Drugs, torture and abuse of carefully selected family members were tools used by so called investigators from 1930 all the way to 1989.
 
So the video in question, doesn't really show squat. Doesn't the prosecution need to bring in a witness to explain to the jury what they are seeing? Or are they past that part of the trial already?
 
Kevin_NH said:
With all these "lesser included charges" being added, easy to see the jurors caving on some of these just to avoid a hung jury and also to feel like maybe the mob won't hunt them down and burn them out if they can just find Kyle guilty of something.
Click to expand...
Maybe it's time for Americans to kill the mob.....
 
allen-1 said:
Gosh, imagine if every single person in America did that.
I suspect that we wouldn't have "mostly peaceful protests" with buildings burning and being looted night after night after night.
Click to expand...
That'd be quite a festival.
return2.jpg

eboos said:
If P then Q. is the premise
P, therefore Q = True; ~P, therefore ~Q = False; ~Q, therefore ~P = True; Q, therefore P = False

This is a small truth table on the premise of "if P then Q".
Click to expand...
Far be it from me to deny the contrapositive.

eboos said:
... The state is trying to introduce evidence of S in the P then Q derivation. As someone stated in the case, the prosecution is hoping that a jury who is not convinced on the greater charge is more inclined to convict on the lesser regardless of the basis of acquitting on the greater and finding guilty on the lesser not being a matter of evidence presented, but simply being a compromise on the jury's part.
Click to expand...
(I absolutely agree on those jury-trial pragmatics).


But I went back and crossed out that part of my post,
because it's not true in general
(even though I think it doesn't matter in the case of
an affirmative defense of "self-defense").

If someone was waging a classic defense against (say) first-degree murder,
and spent a week proving that there could be no premeditation -
say the defendant was an illiterate native who just stepped off
the gangplank for the ferry from Ellis Island,
and shoved a knife-wielding Manhattan Mugger who hit his head on the kerb and expired -
but didn't lift a cuticle in court to defend against any other element of the crime...

And then after the defense rested the prosecution said,
"oh, and we also want the jury to consider negligent manslaughter" -
that wouldn't be cricket.

In this case I presume that the affirmative defense of self-defense
applies to all lesser included offenses.

So if Kyle's lawyers spent a solid week asserting that,
"yes, we stipulate that our client did bust a cap on 2½ scumbags -
but it was purely in self-defense",
that ought to work against all the other killy offenses, no?
 
Picton said:
This is why I'm not terribly concerned about its effect on the jury. Many of the jurors will look at that and, even as they're straining to be objective, realize it shows nada. Their only choice will be to disregard it.

As for the outcome, I think @VetteGirlMA nails it above. The Rosenbaum shooting is the only one he needs to be concerned about. At least, I hope so: if he's in serious trouble on the other two, his case is truly hopeless. I expect a hung jury on Rosenbaum, at worst (for Kyle). Or maybe some lesser conviction, but I'm not clear on what those lesser charges are.
Click to expand...

I’m optimistic they’re decent people with decent minds and see what a joke it it. But you never know for certain what they’ll do. I hope in closing the defense hammers several points over and over.

The mob were the attackers all night and rittenhouse was a peaceful person and putting out fires and giving basic first aid to anyone injured

Rittenhouse exercised great control. He fired 8 shots, 4 in a fraction of a second into pedo and only after he was chased, cornered and had no other option. Pound the table about Richie McGinnis’s testimony, he was feet away and saw pedo grab for the rifle. And in each of the other cases, there were people very close to rittenhouse yet he never fired a single shot towards anyone who wasn’t attacking him. Grosskruetz testified rittenhouse didn’t fire when he had a gun in his hand and hands raised, rittenhouse only fired when grosskruetz pointed the gun at rittenhouse

And the times. The 4 shots were nearly instantaneous and the other shots where very brief and while rittenhouse was under attack and on the ground.


You know the defense is going to do things that are illegal and not within the courts rulings. Hopefully the judge stops those instantly
 
Baby Billy said:
So the video in question, doesn't really show squat. Doesn't the prosecution need to bring in a witness to explain to the jury what they are seeing? Or are they past that part of the trial already?
Click to expand...

The jury needs to decide the facts, a person not at the event can’t tell a jury what they see.

If the prosecution really stresses that video and blurry picture, I think it hurts the prosecution. No one can look at those and see anything at all. Even if someone says that right there is a rifle and points to it directly, no one can see it at all. If the push those images I think it turns the jury off because they’ll view it as disingenuous
 
I was listening to whoever was filling in for Howie Carr tonight and he quoted Keith Langer, it was something like if Rittenhouse was such a racist in a target rich environment he wasn't very good.
 
Still absolutely f***ed Kyles facing provocation charges when we have testimony that Rosenbaum threatened to kill him if he got ahold of him alone that night, and was chasing him. The grounds for provocation by Kyle should NEVER have been allowed. Maybe the judge knows the truth and is just going to give the Jury a chance.
 
mu2bdriver said:
I hope you are correct and this would be the correct series of verdicts but will depend heavily not on the evidence, but on how much the jurors want to stick their necks out knowing that their pictures will shortly be in the public domain. I can see the judge stepping in and if that happens, wait for the public outcry (riots). Those could easily be worse than the underlying events which brought this trial on.
Click to expand...


The jury problem seems like the largest issue here, They are not being protected, are not being sequestered, and there have been several obvious threats made publicly without any sort of response. After the trial, should they deliver a verdict the burn loot murder crowd doesn't approve of they are in real danger, and they likely know it already. It wouldn't surprise me if they suck for some kind of "We will let him go on the murder charge, but we have to get him on something or a couple somethings just to keep ourselves safe." and really f*** him over because of the threats.
 

Similar threads

Man Faced 115 Years In Prison & $17 Million In Fines After ATF Falsely Arrested Him
Replies
8
Views
487
Uzi2
U
85-year-old Idaho woman hailed as 'hero' in fatal shooting of home invasion suspect
Replies
7
Views
170
Tartakovsky
Tartakovsky
Grand Jury Declines to Prosecute Texas Mother Who Shot 14-Year-Old Boy During Break-In
Replies
2
Views
179
Agnotology
Agnotology
We need 200 people like this in congress. NH residents, you need this woman in congress.
Replies
14
Views
538
Broc
Broc
2 men found guilty of murder in Jam Master Jay killing
Replies
9
Views
292
inerlogic
inerlogic
Back
Top Bottom