Crime Rittenhouse trial underway ***Verdict: Acquitted of all charges***

[WhiteMousse]

That is a clunky rejoinder.

So it's your shift today? Think everyone would agree you're at least better than Irrational POSter

 

[gluehuffer1776]

at a certain point this judge will just stop the whole deal and say enough.
it was funny for a while but towards the end it just got crazy.

the judge is a boomer who is now more worried about what the media is saying about him than doing the right thing

 

[Curmudgeon]

So it's your shift today? Think everyone would agree you're at least better than Irrational POSter

Everyday, a shitty new troll pops up and starts spewing the same retarded garbage.

 

[drstrangelov]

So it's your shift today? Think everyone would agree you're at least better than Irrational POSter

I have no idea who you are, but thank you for the kind words

 

[HereticBD]

lmao @ releasing something like this in the middle of the night, after the jury has been deliberating for days.

As if this info hasnt been out since the incident, they just didnt do their homework. Or they probably did, but chose to omit key info.

Enemy of the people

"Sorry about the defamation. Please don't sue us, Kyle. Our ratings are lower than reruns of 'Kojak'. We can't take much more."

- CNN

 

[nhbbear]

I think it's broader than the police narrative. Burning down businesses has nothing to do with local government. That's lashing out in general. Could be you hate the white patriarchy. Could be you're a commie who want's a free ride so you're throwing a fit. But in the end it's wonton disregard that amounts to a deadly level threat temper tantrum. I mean, how the fuck does burning down a car dealership and all their inventory address anything?

Acting like total fucking animals or babies. Also, “wonton disregard?” Is that some Asian slight?

 

[Fox by the Sea]

is this it guys ? will biden die with a tube up his ass and kamala becomes prezodent? two minutes later kyle gets immediate death sentence

 

[Confucamus]

So no, it is not ok to send a boy who looks 12 into a riot armed with an ar15 at nighttime to play cops and robbers. He may have been hunting people but the law does not allow for that. The right may feel using child soldiers is perfectly acceptable but sorry, it is illegal in the western world

No evidence supports any of what you said.

the judge is a boomer who is now more worried about what the media is saying about him than doing the right thing

"Boomer" might just be the ultimate term for entitled brats who have no idea how the world works. The judge hasn't done anything wrong. He's doing his best to deal with a circus of a case that involves prosecutorial misconduct and jury tampering at the hands of a racist supremacist group as well as MSNBC. Not to mention the judge has been receiving death threats towards him and his family.

 

[MichiganMMA1978]

In 2018, the Wisconsin Legislative Council Staff, a nonpartisan legislative service agency akin to the Congressional Research Service, wrote that, "Under Wisconsin law, with certain exceptions for hunting, military service, and target practice, a person under age 18 is generally prohibited from possessing or going armed with a firearm."

So no, it is not ok to send a boy who looks 12 into a riot armed with an ar15 at nighttime to play cops and robbers. He may have been hunting people but the law does not allow for that. The right may feel using child soldiers is perfectly acceptable but sorry, it is illegal in the western world

Why was the charge tossed then? Maybe because you are misunderstanding the law?

 

[Gregolian]

"Sorry about the defamation. Please don't sue us, Kyle. Our ratings are lower than reruns of 'Kojak'. We can't take much more."

- CNN

"We were already sued by that kid in the red hat please don't join him"

 

[RerouteToRemain]

Will this come up today in court? That the DA knew who a witness was and didn't tell the defense to allow them to call on them to testify?

I can use more judge yelling at that attorney



Edit: not just a witness. The man who Kyle is being charged with potentially 12 years in prison for shooting at and the defense didn't even know who it was and they had to refer to him by a moniker throughout the trial. Yet according to this fox "anonymous source", the prosecution knew before the trial and kept it hidden.

Is the defense bringing this up with the judge?

 

[Deleted member 539235]

 

[HockeyBjj]

Is the defense bringing this up with the judge?

I don’t know. I want them to tho

 

[lifelessheap]

So you’ll be pretending he’s still innocent if he’s found guilty then? I already knew that.

Have you not watched the video evidence? Charges shouldn't have been brought forward. This is purely political.

 

[Papi Chulo]

the judge is a boomer who is now more worried about what the media is saying about him than doing the right thing

I hope not. But you may be right.

But this judge needs to step in and do the right thing, end the insanity.

 

[drstrangelov]

Have you not watched the video evidence? Charges shouldn't have been brought forward. This is purely political.

So you’ll be pretending he’s still innocent if he’s found guilty then? I’ll accept an innocent verdict and admit I got it wrong, will you do the same if he’s found guilty?

 

[TeTe]

It would take way more than this case to send us spiraling to the level of Brazil corruption. With that said, Brazil has quite a few redeeming qualities when you remove “personal safety” from the equation…tagging @TeTe to validate some of the redeeming qualities of Brazil ASSets.

Crap, I hope I didn’t report myself for a off topic post!

Ban for not posting ASSets

 

[Papi Chulo]

So you’ll be pretending he’s still innocent if he’s found guilty then? I’ll accept an innocent verdict and admit I got it wrong, will you do the same if he’s found guilty?

Kyle is innocent, regardless of what this jury decides.

People who can see the truth and interpret the facts as truth are not swayed by warped and depraved minds who want Kyle's head on a platter

 

[RerouteToRemain]

So you’ll be pretending he’s still innocent if he’s found guilty then? I’ll accept an innocent verdict and admit I got it wrong, will you do the same if he’s found guilty?

Why in the face of all the evidence and testimonies would I change my opinion? I would expect appeals/challenges if he is found guilty for some reason anyway. So yes I will stand firm in my belief based on the facts that he defended himself and is not guilt.

 

[gluehuffer1776]

No evidence supports any of what you said.



"Boomer" might just be the ultimate term for entitled brats who have no idea how the world works. The judge hasn't done anything wrong. He's doing his best to deal with a circus of a case that involves prosecutorial misconduct and jury tampering at the hands of a racist supremacist group as well as MSNBC. Not to mention the judge has been receiving death threats towards him and his family.

the judge didnt sequester the jury. the judge hasnt called a mistrial with prejudice when there have been misconduct at the highest level from the prosecutors and the media.