Several shot during 3rd night of Kenosha riots

[DanRydell 799]

They’re known as the racist gun couple. I have no idea of their real names.

Speaking at the 2020 RNC is unequivocal proof of being racist

[Mantis Toboggan, MD 1499]

No, you’re wrong, from the same opinion. “Defensive evidence which is merely consistent with the physical evidence at the scene of the alleged offense will not render the State's evidence insufficient since the credibility determination of such evidence is solely within the jury's province and the jury is free to accept or reject the defensive evidence. A jury verdict of guilty is an implicit finding rejecting the defendant's self-defense theory. Jenkins, 740 S.W.2d at 438.”

 

You seem to be confused about the use of the word “raised”. 

 

 

 

That is about sufficiency on appeal, not about jury instructions in trial. I don’t feel like explaining what that means to you. This is what I do for a living and you aren’t paying me.

 

[Texaspython 231]

1 minute ago, Mantis Toboggan, MD said:

 

That is about legal sufficiency on appeal, not about jury instructions in trial.

 

Sure but it explains what you’re leaving out of your explanation. Yes, merely raising a scintilla of evidence gets you self defense on the jury charge. You still have the burden of producing sufficient evidence for the jury to buy it.

If you’re practicing any other way, stop.

 

[Red Six 131]

9 minutes ago, Texaspython said:

Sure but it explains what you’re leaving out of your explanation. Yes, merely raising a scintilla of evidence gets you self defense on the jury charge. You still have the burden of producing sufficient evidence for the jury to buy it.

If you’re practicing any other way, stop.

 

No, legally, the burden of persuasion is on the government to disprove self-defense once the evidence gives rise to the issue.

Practically, the hard part is holding the jury to their duty to follow the law. That's why voir dire and concisely explaining the law in a way that permits them to return a "not guilty" on the facts is so important.

[BrazilHorn 6576]

This kid is absolutely a total COD Cosplay idiot of the 1 billionth degree. To me his parents should be charged as accessories as how did he have free access to the weapon?

I am eagerly awaiting his "fearing for my life" defense where he tries to show videos of other people rioters have beaten as proof that's what he was afraid of.

Then ideally prosecutor asks " if you know that type of situation could occur why did you knowingly place yourself in harm's way in a state/city where you don't even fucking live in?"

I would bury this kid in state charges then add federal weapons trafficking charges as well. Send a powerful message that idiocy like this is not allowed. Every city has enough homegrown crazies in them without out of town/state dipshits riding in (on either side)

[South Austin 52154]

16 minutes ago, Red Six said:

No, legally, the burden of persuasion is on the government to disprove self-defense once the evidence gives rise to the issue.

Practically, the hard part is holding the jury to their duty to follow the law. That's why voir dire and concisely explaining the law in a way that permits them to return a "not guilty" on the facts is so important.

And when there's a strenuous objection, all bets are off.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13414]

12 minutes ago, BrazilHorn said:

This kid is absolutely a total COD Cosplay idiot of the 1 billionth degree. To me his parents should be charged as accessories as how did he have free access to the weapon?

I am eagerly awaiting his "fearing for my life" defense where he tries to show videos of other people rioters have beaten as proof that's what he was afraid of.

Then ideally prosecutor asks " if you know that type of situation could occur why did you knowingly place yourself in harm's way in a state/city where you don't even fucking live in?"

I would bury this kid in state charges then add federal weapons trafficking charges as well. Send a powerful message that idiocy like this is not allowed. Every city has enough homegrown crazies in them without out of town/state dipshits riding in (on either side)

Kid came of out of some teen cadet police program for future law enforcement. WTF are the programs teaching kids that they feel they can take the law into their own hands? Is he a one off bad apple, or is this the tone of these programs? 

[MNLonghornFUKM 8799]

We’re seriously calling people racists for not wanting their property potentially ransacked and burned?

 

What the fuck? I know, I know, if it was your gated community they broke into and your mansion they were outside of- you would invite them all in for tea and crumpets.

[yoladu 4067]

2 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

We’re seriously calling people racists for not wanting their property potentially ransacked and burned?

 

What the fuck? I know, I know, if it was your gated community they broke into and your mansion they were outside of- you would invite them all in for tea and crumpets.

you're seriously mischaracterizing the event and ignoring what people actually posted in order to make some sort of bogus point?!!

[Texaspython 231]

35 minutes ago, Red Six said:

No, legally, the burden of persuasion is on the government to disprove self-defense once the evidence gives rise to the issue.

Practically, the hard part is holding the jury to their duty to follow the law. That's why voir dire and concisely explaining the law in a way that permits them to return a "not guilty" on the facts is so important.

Legally, the jury finds whether you’re guilty or not, then they decide whether your actions were reasonable. Self defense hasn’t changed all that much over the years. Again, raising the issue only gets you an issue.

 

[Cajun 11675]

I couldn't place it yesterday, but then last night it came to me in a FLASH!

 

[youdunnf'dup 2147]

15 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

We’re seriously calling people racists for not wanting their property potentially ransacked and burned?

 

What the fuck? I know, I know, if it was your gated community they broke into and your mansion they were outside of- you would invite them all in for tea and crumpets.

When you start fear mongering, talking about how “Democrats are going to take over our suburbs” it doesn’t take a fucking genius to know what they mean. Read between the lines. 

[MNLonghornFUKM 8799]

you're seriously mischaracterizing the event and ignoring what people actually posted in order to make some sort of bogus point?!!

Nice guy Eddie said they were racist. Dahobbs didn’t know they were racist but they were shitty people.

So just because they’re potentially shitty and maybe but unconfirmed racist people, they deserve the pitchfork and torch treatment?

[Fondren & Main 6670]

Don’t think I’d call that kid a Keymaster...

[elguapo 4583]

13 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

We’re seriously calling people racists for not wanting their property potentially ransacked and burned?

 

This is a lie, no one was there to "ransacked and burned". These are shitty racist pussies who shouldn't own lethal weapons, unfortunately I'm not surprised you and others here are defending them.

[dcar00 14036]

18 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

We’re seriously calling people racists for not wanting their property potentially ransacked and burned?

 

What the fuck? I know, I know, if it was your gated community they broke into and your mansion they were outside of- you would invite them all in for tea and crumpets.

thats what the mayor of Chicago would do for sure...

[Dahobbs 17449]

8 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

Nice guy Eddie said they were racist. Dahobbs didn’t know they were racist but they were shitty people.

So just because they’re potentially shitty and maybe but unconfirmed racist people, they deserve the pitchfork and torch treatment?

They aren't potentially shitty, they are shitty people. Seriously, he sued his dad over a birthday card. Them being shitty doesn't mean they don't have the right to defend themselves, but that isn't what happened. They assaulted the protesters (pointed guns at people), not the other way around. 

Edited August 27, 2020 by Dahobbs

[BrazilHorn 6576]

19 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

We’re seriously calling people racists for not wanting their property potentially ransacked and burned?

 

What the fuck? I know, I know, if it was your gated community they broke into and your mansion they were outside of- you would invite them all in for tea and crumpets.

In this kid's case it was not his property. Would be huge difference if in the course of defending his property and family from protesters (meaning they were actually on his property/attacking) that he discharged his weapon and killed someone vs driving across state lines to live out some fantasy. I am not even calling kid racist. I think he is just some fucking moron who views his weapon as a penis extension and his soft stay-puft ass feels tough holding it.

[bad_teammate 13133]

It wasn't the McCloskey's private gate or private street. The gate and street are owned by a separate entity. No one threatened them or their property. Protesters had not been going after homes or homeowners; they were not "defending" anything.

[Cheeseweasel 26437]

1 hour ago, DanRydell said:

Speaking at the 2020 RNC is unequivocal proof of being racist

CR------------------->

[Genco 3038]

9 hours ago, dcar00 said:

tasers are fucking pointless.

Well except in the case of Rayshard Brooks. Then it's a deadly weapon that requires three shots in Mr. Brooks's back so the officer could just get home safely after his shift. 

[Pancho 44492]

28 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

 for not wanting their property potentially ransacked and burned?

 

 

 

Where are you getting this because that is not what happened or what was going to happen. 

[fattyflattie 4636]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

It wasn't the McCloskey's private gate or private street. The gate and street are owned by a separate entity.

How is this?  I was under impression it was a gated hood that was breached. Is it not like Texas where the streets inside of gated hood are owned and maintained (funded) by the residents of said gated community? 

[dcar00 14036]

4 minutes ago, Genco said:

Well except in the case of Rayshard Brooks. Then it's a deadly weapon that requires three shots in Mr. Brooks's back so the officer could just get home safely after his shift. 

taser are pointless.  Georgia declared it a deadly weapon not me.

[Js1 85121]

11 minutes ago, Pancho said:

 

Where are you getting this because that is not what happened or what was going to happen. 

Its the talking point du jour. 

YOUR SUBURBS WILL BE RANSACKED AND BURNED BY SCARY BLACK PEOPLE 

[bad_teammate 13133]

8 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

How is this?  I was under impression it was a gated hood that was breached. Is it not like Texas where the streets inside of gated hood are owned and maintained (funded) by the residents of said gated community? 

They are part of an organization that owns it, but they are not "the owners". There's a major difference, and in that difference lies duty to defend; something they don't have.

Just now, Js1 said:

Its the talking point du jour. 

YOUR SUBURBS WILL BE RANSACKED AND BURNED BY SCARY BLACK PEOPLE 

These people are depressingly predictable.

[fattyflattie 4636]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

They are part of an organization that owns it, but they are not "the owners". There's a major difference, and in that difference lies duty to defend; something they don't have.

These people are depressingly predictable.

Oh, so they own it. That’s what I figured.   And the gate out front?  Also part of the “organization” that owns it I assume?  

[bad_teammate 13133]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

Oh, so they own it. That’s what I figured.   And the gate out front?  Also part of the “organization” that owns it I assume?  

No, they do not own it. They're part of an organization that owns it.

This isn't a hard concept to understand. It's not their property, it's a collectively-owned property and they are part of the collective.

[fattyflattie 4636]

Ok, that is fine.  To me that means they are not the sole owner, but partial owner.  The protesters were not.  The protesters wanted to ruffle feathers, so they went to a private road via a private gate, and ruffled them.  These people came out and told them to gtfo.  It was pretty fucking clear thru the entire event. 

[MNLonghornFUKM 8799]

Bwahaha. Speaking of predictable responses, everything here is predictable. Seattle and Chicago’s mayors asked for LE protection from the protestors. Are they racists? Was that predictable? All because it was happening on their fucking street. Is mckloskey supposed to ask each individual one by one if they’ve looted a Macy’s? He’s supposed to assume they have because while you have in one screen shot- a line of people with their hands in the air screaming hands up don’t shoot...but behind them is people burning liquor stores, stealing shoes, cell phones etc.

This would all be a much clearer message if BLM would stop saying “they’re(the rioters, looters) not with us, they’re not apart of our group” etc and start beating the fuck out of them as they come out of stores through broken windows.

[TheStoicPaisano 9904]

[bad_teammate 13133]

10 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Ok, that is fine.  To me that means they are not the sole owner, but partial owner.  The protesters were not.  The protesters wanted to ruffle feathers, so they went to a private road via a private gate, and ruffled them.  These people came out and told them to gtfo.  It was pretty fucking clear thru the entire event. 

It is not the McCloskey's duty to defend the gate or the street. The residents, who are also partial owners in greater number than them, openly condemned the McCloskeys.

A group of more than three dozen people who live in the private neighborhood where a couple brandished guns at protesters Sunday night released an open letter Wednesday condemning the couple.

The McCloskeys themselves do own property... which was never under threat.

They were not defending their property, they were unwanted vigilantes threatening deadly violence as vengeance for a broken gate and people walking on a street that they "owned" only very slightly more than the people they were pointing guns at with a finger on a trigger.

Also, regarding the underlined section, where were the protesters trying to go?

Edited August 27, 2020 by bad_teammate

[Rougarou 594]

1 minute ago, TheStoicPaisano said:

Definitely a female, right?

[bad_teammate 13133]

5 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

He’s supposed to assume they have because while you have in one screen shot- a line of people with their hands in the air screaming hands up don’t shoot...but behind them is people burning liquor stores, stealing shoes, cell phones etc.

This wasn't happening. There was not looting happening at or near the scene.

What you're describing is people in their homes who have deranged their minds with the Internet and cable television and have taken their mental disease out into the real world.

When this freak walked outside she didn't see any burning or looting. It's a demon in her mind.

What she saw with her eyes was a bunch of people walking and shouting who had no idea who she was and had made zero moves to get on her property.

[fattyflattie 4636]

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

A group of more than three dozen people who live in the private neighborhood where a couple brandished guns at protesters Sunday night released an open letter Wednesday condemning the couple.

In other words, please don't come back to our neighborhood because of these idiots. 

[seven 1366]

2 hours ago, workswithseed said:

Racist couple? Do you have proof of that? Also they broke down the gate of thier private community as well, that road is theirs as well.

From what I understand, according to city zoning, the street and sidewalk of that gated community are open to public pedestrians. 

[fattyflattie 4636]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

What she saw with her eyes was a bunch of people walking and shouting who had no idea who she was and had made zero moves to get on her property.

What she saw were people that were behind gates they paid a premium for, to avoid bullshit like that.  Kind of how a gated community works.  Figured you'd know this, considering the area you call home.

[fattyflattie 4636]

3 minutes ago, seven said:

From what I understand, according to city zoning, the street and sidewalk of that gated community are open to public pedestrians. 

Its thats the case, 100% in agreement these people are assholes.  Not really sure of the purpose of the gate in that scenario, but ok. 

[bad_teammate 13133]

Just now, seven said:

From what I understand, according to city zoning, the street and sidewalk of that gated community are open to public pedestrians. 

The streets are serviced by public resources (police, fire) at the very least.

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

What she saw were people that were behind gates they paid a premium for, to avoid bullshit like that.  Kind of how a gated community works.  Figured you'd know this, considering the area you call home.

And anyone in my neighborhood who pulls a gun on marching protesters is a piece of fucking shit I don't want for a neighbor.

Not entirely sure what you think your point is. I don't think you know, either.

The McCloskeys are angry, mentally-deranged people... do we agree?

[South Austin 52154]

8 minutes ago, TheStoicPaisano said:

Ah, Jad Dean, the dreaded aggy killer.  Give this good man some rep.

[MNLonghornFUKM 8799]

This wasn't happening. There was not looting happening at or near the scene.
What you're describing is people in their homes who have deranged their minds with the Internet and cable television and have taken their mental disease out into the real world.

When this freak walked outside she didn't see any burning or looting. It's a demon in her mind.
What she saw with her eyes was a bunch of people walking and shouting who had no idea who she was and had made zero moves to get on her property.

Yep. If BLM would drop their fucking hands in their peaceful stand off with a line of police and take a bat to someone carrying 3 cases of beer out of a looted liquor store, the message would be clearer. But until that happens, the messengers will always be linked to the savages because they don’t stop it themselves

[bad_teammate 13133]

Just now, MNLonghornFUKM said:

But until that happens, the messengers will always be linked to the savages because they don’t stop it themselves

In whose mind? Yours? Psychopaths like the McCloskeys?

Plenty of people like BLM just fine even with all the unrest.

[fattyflattie 4636]

5 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

The McCloskeys are angry, mentally-deranged people... do we agree?

At that moment, they appeared so.  They could have also legitimately felt scared for their property, and life.  Who's to make that distinction?    If they paid a premium to live in an area that is closed to outsiders, and outsiders break thru and trespass, then I can understand pretty well their fear.  There's plenty of people who will die/kill to protect everything they've worked for.  It's not that hard to understand. That particular protest wasn't violent, many were.  How do you expect them to know which way that particular protest was?  I mean they had already taken down the gate they weren't supposed to cross, where do they stop?  Aren't all protests peaceful until the first brick flies?

eta: I've been told it's OK to be angry and filled with rage.  In fact, predictable and completely understandable. 

Edited August 27, 2020 by fattyflattie

[Captainant 27471]

3 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

Yep. If BLM would drop their fucking hands in their peaceful stand off with a line of police and take a bat to someone carrying 3 cases of beer out of a looted liquor store, the message would be clearer. But until that happens, the messengers will always be linked to the savages because they don’t stop it themselves

If cops would stop pointing deadly weapons in their peaceful standoff with a lineof protesters and do something about their buddy taking a bat to someone holding up a sign, the message would be clearer. But until that happens, all cops will always be linked to the criminal cops because they don't stop it themselves.

[Js1 85121]

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

In whose mind? Yours? Psychopaths like the McCloskeys?

Plenty of people like BLM just fine even with all the unrest.

The amount of parroting of Fox News talking points here is staggering.

Brainwashed. 

[Captainant 27471]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

At that moment, they appeared so.  They could have also legitimately felt scared for their property, and life.  Who's to make that distinction?    If they paid a premium to live in an area that is closed to outsiders, and outsiders break thru and trespass, then I can understand pretty well their fear.  There's plenty of people who will die/kill to protect everything they've worked for.  It's not that hard to understand. That particular protest wasn't violent, many were.  How do you expect them to know which way that particular protest was?  I mean they had already taken down the gate they weren't supposed to cross, where do they stop?  Aren't all protests peaceful until the first brick flies?

The McCloskeys didn't pay shit for their house - they won it in a lawsuit. Like everything else in their lives. Shit, they had active litigation against the community they live in to try and take an 1100sqft grass plot for """reasons"""

[Dahobbs 17449]

27 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Oh, so they own it. That’s what I figured.   And the gate out front?  Also part of the “organization” that owns it I assume?  

 

19 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Ok, that is fine.  To me that means they are not the sole owner, but partial owner.  The protesters were not.  The protesters wanted to ruffle feathers, so they went to a private road via a private gate, and ruffled them.  These people came out and told them to gtfo.  It was pretty fucking clear thru the entire event. 

If you own stock in a company, you are a "partial owner" of the company. But that doesn't make the company's assets yours in any respect. For instance, you couldn't legally go to a McDonald's and barricade the door because you're a partial owner of the company. It would be a very good way for you to end up in jail. 

[Gourmand 7774]

 

 

[MNLonghornFUKM 8799]

In whose mind? Yours? Psychopaths like the McCloskeys?
Plenty of people like BLM just fine even with all the unrest.

Plenty huh. Lol. Well if BLM want “psychopaths” to hear them, they need to separate and that’s pretty fucking easy but they choose not to. Why not?

[seven 1366]

3 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Its thats the case, 100% in agreement these people are assholes.  Not really sure of the purpose of the gate in that scenario, but ok. 

I'm not sure how the traffic works, but there are other entrances to the neighborhood that don't have any gate at all.