Jump to content

Several shot during 3rd night of Kenosha riots


clapclapclap

Recommended Posts

I get the sense that Rittenhouse is a naive, well intentioned kid ... kid being the operative word. I agree with the above that he wants to speak for himself and set the record straight. Too bad he is not old enough to realize that is not really possible in our system. The CNN headline will be: "White Supremacist who Stormed the Capitol Tells Jury He Wanted to Fight for Trump When He Killed Three Peaceful Protesters Who were Standing Up for Racial Equality."

Edited by Harrison Bergeron
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Moby Ric said:

He was put in put himself in a position that nobody wants to be in

ftfy.

Rittenhouse CHOSE TO BE THERE. He's in an interview mere minutes before he was attacked saying with a big smile and rifle in hand that he's there to run towards danger.

He should not have been there. He should not have been encouraged by the police to be there. He gets to live with blood on his hands because of everyone's bad decisions that day.

I was wrong with respect to his self defense claim, by the letter of the law he was justified in defending himself. The prosecution should not have proceeded to trial with this case if they hadn't even interviewed their own witnesses prior to the trial. It was a huge waste of taxpayer money and it's clear that the prosecution team didn't know their ass from their elbow. They didn't even bother to bring evidence to support some of their charges lol.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Fuck You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

This fucking prosecutor.  my lord.

It was certainly on purpose.  A mistrial looks better on him right now.  He did it again after the judge warned him.

Edited by JBJ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Moby Ric said:

My God this DA is flat out awful.  

He's arguing with Wisconsin's possession laws.  Judge had to remind jury that the DA doesn't decide what the law says.

Edited by JBJ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Captainant said:

ftfy.

Rittenhouse CHOSE TO BE THERE. He's in an interview mere minutes before he was attacked saying with a big smile and rifle in hand that he's there to run towards danger.

He should not have been there. He should not have been encouraged by the police to be there. He gets to live with blood on his hands because of everyone's bad decisions that day.

I was wrong with respect to his self defense claim, by the letter of the law he was justified in defending himself. The prosecution should not have proceeded to trial with this case if they hadn't even interviewed their own witnesses prior to the trial. It was a huge waste of taxpayer money and it's clear that the prosecution team didn't know their ass from their elbow. They didn't even bother to bring evidence to support some of their charges lol.

He chose to be there. His presence did not violate any laws. He did not choose to be attacked. I have not seen any evidence that points to his provoking attack.

If that is going to be your standard, fair. Now apply it equally not only to this case but to all cases as well as other issues where people put themselves in bad situations. I would be willing to bet you would not apply this standard across the board, i.e. if someone puts themself in a bad situation "they get what they deserve."

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ftfy.
Rittenhouse CHOSE TO BE THERE. He's in an interview mere minutes before he was attacked saying with a big smile and rifle in hand that he's there to run towards danger.
He should not have been there. He should not have been encouraged by the police to be there. He gets to live with blood on his hands because of everyone's bad decisions that day.
I was wrong with respect to his self defense claim, by the letter of the law he was justified in defending himself. The prosecution should not have proceeded to trial with this case if they hadn't even interviewed their own witnesses prior to the trial. It was a huge waste of taxpayer money and it's clear that the prosecution team didn't know their ass from their elbow. They didn't even bother to bring evidence to support some of their charges lol.

As a sometimes critic of your opinions on this thread, I very much appreciate your honesty in this post. No, he should not have been there and I imagine he’ll spend the rest of his life wishing he hadn’t been there.
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Harrison Bergeron said:

He chose to be there. His presence did not violate any laws. He did not choose to be attacked. I have not seen any evidence that points to his provoking attack.

If that is going to be your standard, fair. Now apply it equally not only to this case but to all cases as well as other issues where people put themselves in bad situations. I would be willing to bet you would not apply this standard across the board, i.e. if someone puts themself in a bad situation "they get what they deserve."

Did you see what she was wearing?  Basically asking for it........

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

He's a really good actor if that breakdown wasn't genuine.

well, we were told by The Others that he is a genius mastermind for faking the medical kit and the graffiti cleaning weeks before, just as a cover for shooting people at the riot...

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...