Jump to content

Several shot during 3rd night of Kenosha riots

clapclapclap

By clapclapclap
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 5.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Poe It Up
Poe It Up

The “I used to vote Republican” line is the CR’s version of “I have a black friend.”   

hayden_horn
hayden_horn

so, yeah, this is the problem writ large. unarmed black dude, may be a threat, shot several times in the back. armed white dude, with an assault rifle present and visible, who just shot some people, w

CORN
CORN

Kenosha's very own Sweet Corn Fest, held every August Jerry Smith Produce and Pumpkin Farm (7150 18th St.), would like you to know that they are here to support you during this difficult time. Wh

Posted Images

hayden_horn

hayden_horn 11362

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Incredulity said:

You didn't ask about both in the post I quoted.

 

I responded directly to a direct question and am somehow accused of Q'ing, disinformation.....

 

Fucking bullshit.

settle down and try not to take all this shit so personally. jesus, i have enough problems with my teenage sons. this is just a forum. act like a grown up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hayden_horn

hayden_horn 11362

Posted
Posted
Just now, Cheeseweasel said:

>there's a reason this thread is a disaster 

Im sure you’ll go back and correct all of the  “He shot three black men” and “crossed state lines with an illegal weapon” statements, right?

i'm sure i will.

i haven't really been paying attention to this thread, as i prefer to do news + opinion on cloak room. you want to point out other disinformation, i guess that's fine. i'll correct them if you link them, unless it was fog of war lack of information, which is distinct from disinformation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Johnny Sack

Johnny Sack 8397

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

um, i asked about both.

i thought the motion to dismiss was old news that i read yesterday, and it was:

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-kyle-rittenhouse-defense-mistrial-prosecutorial-misconduct-20211116-awjig565ynf3xknzhavdxdh7tm-story.html

the kick man, you're getting your news from am radio.

what i dislike, especially on this thread, is people making news assertions without news links. @Johnny Sack what i thought you were doing is presenting new news that just happened without a link. this thread is a shitshow of people just saying fuckall without any kind of news backup. 

you want opinions? go to cloak room. you want news? post real news. there's a reason this thread is a disaster.

I did not see the MTD posted yesterday, so it was new to me.  Was it posted here? Before I mentioned it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hayden_horn

hayden_horn 11362

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

I did not see the MTD posted yesterday, so it was new to me.  Was it posted here? Before I mentioned it?

i dunno. 

i just know you didn't link to any news information about it. that's what i was simply asking about. it sounded like a new development that had just been breaking news. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Moby Ric

Moby Ric 2058

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, BabaYaga said:

What the actual fuck?

I heard the lawyers on that Rekieta youtube channel discussing it.  

 

https://www.wisconsinrightnow.com/2021/11/16/maurice-freeland-jump-kick-man/

 

WISN 1130 talk radio host Dan O’Donnell first broke the storythat prosecutors had identified Jump Kick Man, although he chose not to name him. Our source then provided his name and gave additional details, also confirming O’Donnell’s account that prosecutors told the defense team that Freeland allegedly wanted immunity for an ongoing criminal case, which prosecutor Thomas Binger didn’t grant.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
washparkhorn

washparkhorn 9939

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Is the video even admissable?  Seems this needs to be determined before bantering about how many times the jury can see it?  Such a cluster

The videos are already in evidence. 

The Monday Defense motion to dismiss based on the failure to provide HD footage is under advisement. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
washparkhorn

washparkhorn 9939

Posted
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

How is it even appropriate  that the defense wasn't supplied with the higher resolution version the prosecution held back?

Potential Brady violation (deprivation of due process for the Defendant). https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/brady_rule

https://www.yalelawjournal.org/pdf/260_waifagsn.pdf (Remedies for Brady violation)

Edited by washparkhorn
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

How is it even appropriate  that the defense wasn't supplied with the higher resolution version the prosecution held back?

It’s not appropriate if it happened. I’ve had defendants in civil cases pull this crap. It’s shady as fuck but likely wouldn’t be grounds for a mistrial in a civil case. Dunno about a criminal case though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
washparkhorn

washparkhorn 9939

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Harrison Bergeron said:

For the real lawyers here ... not looking good for the defense, eh? The jury taking this long points to conviction on something?

Traditionally, quick verdicts were seen as signs of guilty and longer verdicts favored the defense. I am not sure those metrics are proven true by research. Some juries take their responsibilities seriously and take longer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NotActuallyALonghorn

NotActuallyALonghorn 4976

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Traditionally, quick verdicts were seen as signs of guilty and longer verdicts favored the defense. I am not sure those metrics are proven true by research. Some juries take their responsibilities seriously and take longer.

It's like people have never even seen Twelve Angry Men...

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

Hate 20108

Posted
Posted

The jury is likely weighing two things:

1. Do they want to see their town burn again even if they acquit an innocent kid

2. How safe do they feel after there have already been threats of them being recorded? Do they need to sacrifice KR for their own safety

Edit: fixed a spelling issue

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JBJ

JBJ 3654

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

1 hour ago, hayden_horn said:

um, i asked about both.

i thought the motion to dismiss was old news that i read yesterday, and it was:

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-kyle-rittenhouse-defense-mistrial-prosecutorial-misconduct-20211116-awjig565ynf3xknzhavdxdh7tm-story.html

the kick man, you're getting your news from am radio.

what i dislike, especially on this thread, is people making news assertions without news links. @Johnny Sack what i thought you were doing is presenting new news that just happened without a link. this thread is a shitshow of people just saying fuckall without any kind of news backup. 

you want opinions? go to cloak room. you want news? post real news. there's a reason this thread is a disaster.

There are two motions.  This one is tied to the prosecutor trying to introduce previously excluded evidence and trying to make an issue of out the defendant's pre-trial silence.

There's a new one this morning because the state showed the jury during closing arguments enhanced drone footage that was not included in evidence.

The Jumpkick Man is a developing story.  We seem to know that he approached prosecutors to testify for immunity, and that the prosecutors disclosed this to the defense last Thursday.  We don't know when the prosecution was aware he was Jumpkick Man.  He was convicted of a misdemeanor battery in October and was arrested again yesterday if this guy is indeed Jumpkick Man.

Edited by JBJ
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BabaYaga

BabaYaga 15298

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Hate said:

The jury is likely weighing two things:

1. Do they want to see their town burn again as an if they acquit an innocent kid

2. How safe do they feel after there have already been threats of them being recorded? Do they need to sacrifice KR for their own safety

This is utterly terrifying and should send shivers to everyone, regardless of which side of the isle that you sit on.  

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
washparkhorn

washparkhorn 9939

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Hate said:

The jury is likely weighing two things:

1. Do they want to see their town burn again as an if they acquit an innocent kid

2. How safe do they feel after there have already been threats of them being recorded? Do they need to sacrifice KR for their own safety

They shouldn't be doing that, but it is what it is - and they probably will speculate on the impact of their decision.

Not guilty or guilty, it is best that they go through the evidence in painstaking detail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hate

Hate 20108

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

They shouldn't be doing that, but it is what it is - and they probably will speculate on the impact of their decision.

Not guilty or guilty, it is best that they go through the evidence in painstaking detail.

They shouldn't be, but look at the CR thread on this topic and it becomes clear why the have to.  There are posters actually hoping this kid gets murdered on his way out of the court house while others would settle for 3 weeks afterwards. 

  • Hook 'Em 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Harrison Bergeron

Harrison Bergeron 1798

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Hate said:

They shouldn't be, but look at the CR thread on this topic and it becomes clear why the have to.  There are posters actually hoping this kid gets murdered on his way out of the court house while others would settle for 3 weeks afterwards. 

They've probably already started a bail fund for the killer. I continue to be fascinated by what triggers the crazies.

Edited by Harrison Bergeron
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Incredulity

Incredulity 11671

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Hate said:

They shouldn't be, but look at the CR thread on this topic and it becomes clear why the have to.  There are posters actually hoping this kid gets murdered on his way out of the court house while others would settle for 3 weeks afterwards. 

Surly mods be like

Hillary Clinton Idk GIF

  • Haha 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
immortal13

immortal13 4059

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, hayden_horn said:

um, i asked about both.

i thought the motion to dismiss was old news that i read yesterday, and it was:

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-kyle-rittenhouse-defense-mistrial-prosecutorial-misconduct-20211116-awjig565ynf3xknzhavdxdh7tm-story.html

the kick man, you're getting your news from am radio.

what i dislike, especially on this thread, is people making news assertions without news links. @Johnny Sack what i thought you were doing is presenting new news that just happened without a link. this thread is a shitshow of people just saying fuckall without any kind of news backup. 

you want opinions? go to cloak room. you want news? post real news. there's a reason this thread is a disaster.

So you can't post opinions in DT now? Where is that fucking rule?

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


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...