The Rittenhouse Trial

Tarheel Baptist said:
Great insight from noted legal analyst King James.
www.foxnews.com

LeBron James mocks Kyle Rittenhouse's courtroom breakdown: 'What tears? Knock it off'

Los Angeles Lakers star LeBron James mocked alleged Kenosha shooter Kyle Rittenhouse over a video showing the 18-year-old crying in court while testifying in his murder trial.
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com
Click to expand...
I'm not a fan of Lebron James...He's proven himself to be nothing but a boil on the behind of America and of the game he represents!
 
ALAYMAN said:
I don't know how customary in criminal court proceedings it is but the judge's constant rebuke of the prosecution seems bizarre, and makes me wonder if there will be any jury or legal ramifications of such interruptions. He truly does seem hostile towards the prosecutor.
Click to expand...
On first blush it seems excessive to me as well. However, this being a jury trial, the purpose of the judge is not to judge the facts of the case, but to ensure that the procedure of a fair trial is followed. Where I've seen clips of the judge rebuking the prosecutor, he's been doing so for violating the defendant's rights. Which would seem to fall under the purview of ensuring a fair trial.

Time will tell if he's overstepped, I guess.

Personally, I'm half-convinced the prosecution knows the state has no case, but the case is so high-profile they felt compelled to go through the motions to appease the angry masses. If Rittenhouse is found guilty of anything more serious than an illegal weapons charge, or the jury doesn't render a verdict quite quickly, I'll be surprised.
 
ALAYMAN said:
I don't know how customary in criminal court proceedings it is but the judge's constant rebuke of the prosecution seems bizarre, and makes me wonder if there will be any jury or legal ramifications of such interruptions. He truly does seem hostile towards the prosecutor.
Click to expand...
The prosecutor is asking questions that don't belong in this trial...things that have already been deemed not to be asked in this trial...he's as dumb as a post, and very antagonistic towards the judge, even telling the judge he has a right to do this, and a right to do that, though the law clearly shows he doesn't. Certain evidence or alleged evidence is always blocked in trials. He needs to pick up his panties and go home!
 
Just looking over my news feeds and social media from last evening until now, I see examples of the prosecutor questioning Kyle Rittenhouse's right to remain silent, questioning a journalist, who was at the scene in Kenosha and whose video was used as evidence, if his use of the word "apparently" in a tweet meant he was compromising his journalistic objectivity, and questioning the same journalist as to why he felt he needed to submit his video to the court through a lawyer.

None of which is relevant to the case, and this, I believe, is the reason that the judge is getting exasperated with the prosecutor and rebuking him. It seems to me that the prosecutor is following that old lawyer's adage that says if you don't have the facts and law on your side, pound the table.

I'll admit that the accounts I follow on social media are, though not exclusively to one side or the other, generally slanted toward one side. Which is why I'm not fully assured that I'm right about the outcome. (For the same reason, I guessed the Chauvin case wrong, though in that instance I woudn't have been surprised by either verdict.)
 
I believe the judge is, by all accounts, experienced and competent. He also knows he’s under a microscope.The battle of public opinion is dominated by the voices on the left…the corporate media. It saddens me that the judicial system, arguably the foundation of our freedom, has been obviously compromised and affected by threats of violence and repercussions.
The incoming mayor of New York has also been duly threatened by the same people.
 
ALAYMAN said:
I don't know how customary in criminal court proceedings it is but the judge's constant rebuke of the prosecution seems bizarre, and makes me wonder if there will be any jury or legal ramifications of such interruptions. He truly does seem hostile towards the prosecutor.
Click to expand...
You think that it might be even a smidge due to the outlandish nature of the prosecution's case?
 
Tarheel Baptist said:
The incoming mayor of New York has also been duly threatened by the same people.
Click to expand...
For those unaware, BLM in NYC threatened violence if the new mayor made good on his promise to reactivate some NYPD crime units.

Which is to say, they've justified his decision for him.

Morons.
 
I think Kyle is looking at some prison time. I see this jury getting him on an illeagle weapon charge. Once this case concludes I expect the feds will pick him up for strawman purchase.
I really expected the prosecution to argue along the lines that if he had not willfully violated the law in his purchase, his disregard for the curfew, and illeagley driving to WI these two men would still be alive and one less vaporized bicep. Seems that would have been the strongest case. Trying to convince a jury that someone pointing a pistol at you, hitting you with a skateboard, and trying to take your gun is not a threat is not an easy task.
 
Heh. The trial isn't even finished, and I'm already wrong:

www.nbcchicago.com

Judge Dismisses Weapons Charge at Kyle Rittenhouse Murder Trial

The judge at Kyle Rittenhouse’s murder trial has dismissed a count of possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18.
www.nbcchicago.com www.nbcchicago.com

TL;DR: The prosecutors conceded that since the AR-15 Rittenhouse had was not a short-barreled rifle, it wasn't illegal for a 17-year-old to possess. So the judge dropped the weapons charge.

Which means only the five charges related to homicide or reckless endangerment remain. And I'm still convinced he's going to walk on those.
 
Ransom said:
Heh. The trial isn't even finished, and I'm already wrong:

www.nbcchicago.com

Judge Dismisses Weapons Charge at Kyle Rittenhouse Murder Trial

The judge at Kyle Rittenhouse’s murder trial has dismissed a count of possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18.
www.nbcchicago.com www.nbcchicago.com

TL;DR: The prosecutors conceded that since the AR-15 Rittenhouse had was not a short-barreled rifle, it wasn't illegal for a 17-year-old to possess. So the judge dropped the weapons charge.

Which means only the five charges related to homicide or reckless endangerment remain. And I'm still convinced he's going to walk on those.
Click to expand...
I think you're probably right although it would only take one anti-gunner to make it a hung jury. Still not convinced the feds won't find charges to pick him up on. I've already heard the leftist describing the ones shot by Kyle as being like civil rights workers.
 
tmjbog said:
I think you're probably right although it would only take one anti-gunner to make it a hung jury. Still not convinced the feds won't find charges to pick him up on. I've already heard the leftist describing the ones shot by Kyle as being like civil rights workers.
Click to expand...
It's strange to me how the left likes to equate everything and everyone to "civil rights" this or that! Horse puckey for brains!
 
Ransom said:
On first blush it seems excessive to me as well. However, this being a jury trial, the purpose of the judge is not to judge the facts of the case, but to ensure that the procedure of a fair trial is followed. Where I've seen clips of the judge rebuking the prosecutor, he's been doing so for violating the defendant's rights. Which would seem to fall under the purview of ensuring a fair trial.

Time will tell if he's overstepped, I guess.

Personally, I'm half-convinced the prosecution knows the state has no case, but the case is so high-profile they felt compelled to go through the motions to appease the angry masses. If Rittenhouse is found guilty of anything more serious than an illegal weapons charge, or the jury doesn't render a verdict quite quickly, I'll be surprised.
Click to expand...
After watching more subsequent trial coverage it appears that he is quirky but he is not as authoritarian/abrasive/contrarian as he was first made out to be in the TV news snippets
 
Ekklesian said:
You think that it might be even a smidge due to the outlandish nature of the prosecution's case?
Click to expand...
Whether the prosecution's case is weak or not does not have any bearing up on the expected objectivity of the judge to ensure due process, which I at first thought the judge might be interfering with.
 
Ransom said:
Or cite "He crossed state lines!" as an exacerbating circumstance.
Click to expand...
I heard on the radio that his father and grandmother live in Kenosha, and it's only 20 minutes from where he lives in Illinois. So he had every right "crossing state lines". The media plays it like he went on a long journey. Of course, the media plays everything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top