Judge in Rittenhouse case might be a tad biased.

[Schadrach]

No it doesn't really. So it's a good thing that didn't happen in this case.

At least not yet. Hopefully if he's found not guilty he basically goes into hiding for a bit. Likewise for the jurors.

monitoring polling stations (not at all intimidation, wink wink)

That's funny, because Minister King Shabazz standing in front of a polling place in an NBPP uniform armed with a billy club and shouting racial epithets in 2008 apparently wasn't. And by that, I mean I can find plenty of folks who will defend that happening as not being voter intimidation, and the DOJ started charges against Shabazz and the NBPP, the defendants didn't bother to show up to answer the charges (this is normally a free win), then the federal government dropped all charges for totally not political reasons.

If a dude in uniform with a weapon shouting racial epithets isn't voter intimidation, why would "monitoring" polling places be one?

It's simple, the interpretation the defense offered up is bunk, and the judge went along with it because he's biased. Everyone else seemed to have understood the law as it meant for years because laws are in fact interpreted. But this law was challenged in court at the start of the trial and the judge sat on it until the end, right before jury deliberation. And further he flat out said that they couldn't appeal his decision because he didn't make it until it was too late, it's obvious bullshit and there's no reason to believe in it.

In other words interpreting "This section only applies if" as meaning that the situation has to meet the conditions following that phrase is just wacky nonsense, and instead you should just ignore that entire paragraph entirely? That...doesn't sound right. Like, that's not even a reasonable interpretation of the wording. I wonder how many cases you can find where a 17 year old with a long rifle was convicted under 948.60 for possessing it while not hunting and not transferring it to someone else illegally. Now, I don't doubt that will happen in the future after amending the law to close this particular gap, likely next legislative session.

And no, you don't get to argue "but the public policy intent was X, we just worded it horribly" as grounds to enforce whatever you feel like it should be.

Hell, there was a brief period where a poorly worded "safe haven" law in Nebraska had parents abandoning teenagers between July 2008 and November 2008 (when they amended it to apply to infants under 30 days of age rather than minors) - and yes, for those 4 months the law was applied as written. There was even a case where a woman from CA drove to Nebraska dropped off an unruly teenager (neither state charged her, mostly because what she did in Nebraska was legal in Nebraska at the time) and a single father of 9 who dropped off all of his kids (aged 1-17) with no charges because what they were doing was legal by the law as written at the time.

So now MSNBC had one of their reporters follow the bus with the jurors on it and has been barred from the courtroom henceforth. WTF is wrong with people?

How else are you supposed to be able to publicly identify the jurors if the judge is being silly and not letting you photograph them in the courtroom?

 

[crimson5pheonix]

In other words interpreting "This section only applies if" as meaning that the situation has to meet the conditions following that phrase is just wacky nonsense

Saying that your client is always hunting when he's armed is in fact wacky nonsense. Who was Kyle hunting in the middle of Kenosha?

Hell, there was a brief period where a poorly worded "safe haven" law in Nebraska had parents abandoning teenagers between July 2008 and November 2008 (when they amended it to apply to infants under 30 days of age rather than minors) - and yes, for those 4 months the law was applied as written. There was even a case where a woman from CA drove to Nebraska dropped off an unruly teenager (neither state charged her, mostly because what she did in Nebraska was legal in Nebraska at the time) and a single father of 9 who dropped off all of his kids (aged 1-17) with no charges because what they were doing was legal by the law as written at the time.

This law hasn't been on the books for a few months with many obvious problems coming forward, this law has been on the books for years with no issue until now when a judge decided to usurp legislative authority.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

So now MSNBC had one of their reporters follow the bus with the jurors on it and has been barred from the courtroom henceforth. WTF is wrong with people?

Video of the relevant court section on tweet


MSNBC is banned from the courtroom fully not just the reporter.
The reporter claimed they were instructed by their bosses in Ney York to follow the Jury bus

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

How else are you supposed to be able to publicly identify the jurors if the judge is being silly and not letting you photograph them in the courtroom?

I mean generally they wait until they can get the trial notes etc online and find those details but I suspect this judge and other judges round the USA have been getting wise to this so the Jury details are often sealed and not put as part of the court records anymore.

 

[meiam]

Saying that your client is always hunting when he's armed is in fact wacky nonsense. Who was Kyle hunting in the middle of Kenosha?

Honestly is the prosecutor wasn't bent on failing as hard as he possibly can he would have used that to his advantages.

Make it clear to the jury that the only reason he was legally allowed to have the gun was because it was considered a hunting weapon (point to the gun to underline how completly crazy it is that the weapon which is obviously not a hunting weapon still count) and that therefore he was there on the day of as a hunter. What was he hunting that day in Kenosha? Well if you want to know what someone hunted you look at what they bagged the day they went hunting, if someone comes back with a dead Elf, they went hunting Elf, if they have dead duck, they hunted duck. What did he bagged that day in Kenosha? That speaks volume about his intention.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Apparently outside the courthouse there's been some level of peace achieved over Pizza

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

What did he bagged that day in Kenosha? That speaks volume about his intention.

An angry criminal gnome, and a domestic abuser.

 

[tstorm823]

Apparently outside the courthouse there's been some level of peace achieved over Pizza

Peace between the peaceful demonstrators isn't particularly surprising or meaningful. Nobody there in the daylight was ever going to turn around at night and start burning the city down. The people who riot are not on a side, they're just opportunists who show up and use the crowds for cover.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Honestly is the prosecutor wasn't bent on failing as hard as he possibly can he would have used that to his advantages.

Make it clear to the jury that the only reason he was legally allowed to have the gun was because it was considered a hunting weapon (point to the gun to underline how completly crazy it is that the weapon which is obviously not a hunting weapon still count) and that therefore he was there on the day of as a hunter. What was he hunting that day in Kenosha? Well if you want to know what someone hunted you look at what they bagged the day they went hunting, if someone comes back with a dead Elf, they went hunting Elf, if they have dead duck, they hunted duck. What did he bagged that day in Kenosha? That speaks volume about his intention.

I absolutely agree, but I have to quote you because I want to know where I can bag an elf.

 

[SilentPony]

Oh hey lookie here, more right-wing nut jobs armed with AR15s heading into Wisconsin! And its one of my peeps from just down the road!

Maserati Mike: Fired cop Jesse Kline showed up at Rittenhouse's trial with an AR-15

Maserati Mike aka Jesse Kline followed a woman to another man's house, poked the man with a gun's barrel, called the woman

meaww.com

Fired for stalking a woman and her boyfriend and threatening them with a pistol, allowed to resign when the couple was intimidated into not testifying. Great showing St. Louis! Keep on proving our cops are just an armed gang that can shake you down consequence free!
See this is kinda of shit we're going to see more and more of if Rittenhouse gets off. Armed right-wing militias deciding to just show up and acting as law enforcement, and if they kill a few liberals, well there's legal precedent that's okay.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

Fired for stalking a woman and her boyfriend and threatening them with a pistol, allowed to resign when the couple was intimidated into not testifying.

Now, now. You're only allowed to hold someone's previous criminal record against them if A) they're liberals and B) it justifies a white man shooting them.

 

[Agema]

I'm sure we can find distinctions between volunteer community policing and vigilantism, though there may be some overlap.
Vigilantism itself can be a warning sign of a major problem itself. Example, the US Government is failing to do its job: protect our border. It is being posited that this failure at this time is willful.

I would suggest the main difference between volunteer community policing and vigilanteism is that the former are officially sanctioned by the police.

Although, honestly, I have limited trust in the police. No matter what country you look at, they have a habit of being friendly with the more fascist-inclined because police officers and right wing authoritarians tend to have in common a mindset that puts high premium on social order and high willingness to use force to make it happen. I think a major reason that the police tend not to approve of such groups is merely that they'll cop too much bad publicity when people notice.

I do not doubt that vigilanteism is likely to increase with crime. However, it's also hard to avoid that it frequently has overt political tones as well. After all, these guys around at the moment aren't relatively apolitical or neutral citizens merely worried about crime. They have other objectives to push.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

I absolutely agree, but I have to quote you because I want to know where I can bag an elf.

View attachment 4925

Look we all should know from hentai that you may not want to bag an Elf.........

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Oh hey lookie here, more right-wing nut jobs armed with AR15s heading into Wisconsin! And its one of my peeps from just down the road!

Maserati Mike: Fired cop Jesse Kline showed up at Rittenhouse's trial with an AR-15

Maserati Mike aka Jesse Kline followed a woman to another man's house, poked the man with a gun's barrel, called the woman

meaww.com

Fired for stalking a woman and her boyfriend and threatening them with a pistol, allowed to resign when the couple was intimidated into not testifying. Great showing St. Louis! Keep on proving our cops are just an armed gang that can shake you down consequence free!
See this is kinda of shit we're going to see more and more of if Rittenhouse gets off. Armed right-wing militias deciding to just show up and acting as law enforcement, and if they kill a few liberals, well there's legal precedent that's okay.

So if Rittenhouse doesn't get off does that mean people lose all right to defend themselves and must just let the mob pummel them do death? I'm sure no-one would try to take advantage of such a ruling at all.......

Now, now. You're only allowed to hold someone's previous criminal record against them if A) they're liberals and B) it justifies a white man shooting them.

Um wasn't part of Pony's claim he didn't get a record because of intimidation thus he has no criminal record just a record of activity in the press?

I would suggest the main difference between volunteer community policing and vigilanteism is that the former are officially sanctioned by the police.

I'd suggest the main difference is with the way it's been used so far is you can shoot 2 unarmed black teens who were joyriding and face no consequences because you thought they were rampaging White Supremacist.......... or does that only count in autonomous zones like Chaz?

 

[meiam]

I absolutely agree, but I have to quote you because I want to know where I can bag an elf.

View attachment 4925

Oh wow autocomplete Elk to Elf somehow.

 

[Kwak]

So if Rittenhouse doesn't get off does that mean people lose all right to defend themselves and must just let the mob pummel them do death? I'm sure no-one would try to take advantage of such a ruling at all.......

How does your brain go to that from a post showing an unhinged armed abusive nut is parading around with weapons at the trial? Like, just HOW?

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

How does your brain go to that from a post showing an unhinged armed abusive nut is parading around with weapons at the trial? Like, just HOW?

Same way people assume Kyle getting off will lead to The Punishier roaming the streets

 

[SilentPony]

How does your brain go to that from a post showing an unhinged armed abusive nut is parading around with weapons at the trial? Like, just HOW?

Its actually pretty simple. He simply believes applying second amendment remedies is okay, so long as the recipients are of an ideological belief he disagrees with. If Kyle Rittenhouse was a black teenager out after curfew with an illegally acquired gun marching around pretending to be law-enforcement and shot and killed a few MAGA protestors no way in hell the usual suspects would be declaring it self-defense. And no way the police would have taken him alive, let alone let him walk away.
Its just the whites right to shoot.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Its actually pretty simple. He simply believes applying second amendment remedies is okay, so long as the recipients are of an ideological belief he disagrees with. If Kyle Rittenhouse was a black teenager out after curfew with an illegally acquired gun marching around pretending to be law-enforcement and shot and killed a few MAGA protestors no way in hell the usual suspects would be declaring it self-defense. And no way the police would have taken him alive, let alone let him walk away.
Its just the whites right to shoot.

You just really want me to mention Timothy George Simpkin at this point don't you lol. Which wasn't self defence.

Also isn't Kyle part hispanic?

If some black kid did what Kyle did then I'd want him being found innocent too. If what happened had been Maga protestors burning the place down etc it wouldn't change my position. I'm sensing it may change yours though.........

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Uhh... can anyone focus on the actual facts of the case?

I haven't followed the trial super close but from what I've seen concerning the actual shooting (not the political bullshit), the 1st guy was belligerent and chasing him and then lunged for the gun and that's why Kyle shot him. I'm not sure on the 2nd guy that died. The 3rd guy that got shot and testified said he pointed his gun at Kyle and then Kyle shot him.

I don't see how this isn't self-defense based on that (unless there's video evidence of the testimonies being wrong). I don't care if Kyle fake cried or legit cried in court, I wouldn't care if he had a big ass smile on his face either. That doesn't change whether it was self-defense or not. The only things that matter in the case are only the very short time the incident took place, everything else is basically meaningless. I don't care if he shouldn't have been there or shouldn't have had a gun. You still have the right to defend yourself even if you shouldn't have been there.

I was a juror for a police brutality case and the only thing after days of rather pointless testimony from doctors (and family members and him eating from a straw) about the plaintiff's jaw (the cop punched him and broke his jaw) was the testimony from what happened in probably not even a minutes time and whether the force or excessive or not. The plaintiff said he blacked out memory-wise so only the cop and the girlfriend and GF's sister had testimony of the incident and the GF and sister had contradictory testimony (one saying he moved toward the cop, the other saying he didn't). It was pretty easy, based on that, to acquit the cop of excessive force. The plaintiff's lawyer was horrible, at one point he argued that the cop should've pull his gun and shot because a gun is less excessive than a fist, and it took like everything to not bust out laughing because of how ridiculous the argument was. But, again, that bad lawyer-ing didn't matter at all to the actual case, it's just a fun anecdote I like to tell to people.