……but played the good quality video on the last day of trial. I have not seen it, but apparently it shows Rittenhouse pointing the rifle at the people in the crowd who later came after him which would mean that he lied In the trial, and that he had a role in inciting violence. Defense lawyers are now asking for a mistrial.
This does not change the fact that Rittenhouse later acted in self defense, but it does open up the potential for other charges, and certainly for a civil case.
What happened is what happened, so I am glad the video has come out, but I hope the prosecutors are disbarred after all of 5eir shenanigans. But we all know how rare it is for lawyers to police themselves meaningfully.
Yet, no mention of the Manhattan DA announcing today to vacate the convictions of two black men wrongly convicted of murdering Malcolm X. They served 20+ years, yet unworthy of your attention today re miscarriages of justice. Not a peep from anyone on this Board.
Last week, a lawyer repping one of three defendants accused of murdering Ahmaud Arbery, asked the trial judge to remove black pastors from the gallery, because their presence might intimidate the jury. Not a peep from any of the “fair trial” monitors on this Board.
Kyie Rittenhouse deserves a fair trial.
So does everyone else.
BOLO.
Link: https://apnews.com/article/Malcolm-X-Assassination-Exoneration-0b44b78f40bbbb9bfa7b5d1673ae0e01
And I've made mention of it before, I know for sure on my Facebook page and maybe here.
But for some reason, stories about people being wrongly convicted don't garner any appreciable outrage while perceived wrongdoers who get acquitted, like George Zimmerman, do.
Here's the tragedy of Valentino Dixon with, finally, justice (link).
Link: Golf Artist Exonerated
case were appalling?
There are dozens of criminal trials each week in America, involving defendants with their the same liberty interests at stake as Mr. Rittenhouse. Such defendants are no less presumed innocent than Mr. Rittenhouse, and no less deserving of a fair trial. Their defense counsel — often a diligent and talented public defender — fight like hell to protect their clients from unfair prosecution tactics or overzealous police conduct.
Many dedicated lawyers handle post-conviction litigation, which can take years of painstaking efforts and resources, before a wrongful conviction is overturned. These efforts require $$$.
The right to effective counsel requires adequate funding and resources. I don’t recall you ever posting about the need for States (especially in the South) to ensure that our judicial system is appropriately funded and staffed, particularly for the indigent who cannot afford counsel.
The prosecution is also entitled to fair trial. Hence, I mentioned the Abrery case, where the trial judge found it reprehensible for defense counsel to ask the Court to remove black pastors from a public courtroom.
There are stories about criminal cases everyday in national and local news. Yet, Kyle Rittenhouse seems to be the one that has garnered so many threads on this Board. I get that the case is a national news story. But, perhaps posters ought not view this case as a sporting event, by voicing their outrage over every misstep by the prosecution, or feeling entitled to a certain verdict.
Surprise us sometime, and start a thread about a conviction being overturned, and sharing your compassion for the defendant and his family over the loss of liberty for so many years, because of an unscrupulous prosecutor or detective who buried exculpatory evidence.
(no message)
No one opposes justice in the case you mention. Or in the Arbery case. Start all the threads you want on those cases.
Interestingly, though, if the Rittenhouse case had not been on TV, we would not know a lot of facts that exonerate him. Would just have the mainstream media lying to us about him being a white supremacist...many people would incorrectly believe the case had something to do with race when it has nothing to do with race. Now, the far left is going after the judge and the jurors to make sure justice is not done, and not a peep out of you, other than to distract to other cases.
I suppose it is possible that the Arbery defendants have a story to tell. Everyone deserves their day in court. But Rittenhouse deserved not to have a day in court at all.
(no message)
The defense should have a chance to argue based on the best evidence (not a facsimile thereof)...and it should be presented before not just before closing argument, but before trial.
Here’s a thought: Let the trial judge make rulings. Let the Appeals Court review his rulings, should there be a conviction.
It gets ugly when Dems attack. I suspect the jurors know this.
(no message)
(no message)