Kenosha is probably going to be burnt either way. Oh darn.
Prosecutors Move For Mistrial As Jury Has Been Tainted By Clear Video Evidence Of Kyle Rittenhouse
- Thread starter TreeFrogTrader
- Start date
The night of the incident,
Who's the real victim here?
- A convicted child molestor threatened to touch a minor.
- A convicted strangler and domestic abuse repeater battered the fallen accused with a blunt object.
- A convicted gun-toting drunk pointed his gun at the accused.
Who's the real victim here?
You are.
Whoa. Hold on. I knew the general outline of their criminal history but what is this:
"The man accused of attacking and shooting at Wauwatosa Police Officer Joseph Mensah was also affiliated with that group. Grosskreutz was charged with second-offense drunk driving after the shootings, but the case was dismissed on a prosecution motion right before the Rittenhouse trial."
Looks like Snidely Whiplash there the prosecutor cut a deal with him to help keep him peppy in his upcoming testimony. Or else he wanted to just keep his recent background as pretty as possible at trial.
So that means that he gave GrossKrotch two passes as a reward for his (hopefully) favorable testimony. I saw the other one which is that he was concealed carrying without a permit when he brandished the handgun but was not charged. And now I see another perk he was given. In the article linked and quoted above.The sweet irony though is that karma paid Snidely a little visit didn't it. No one cut his balls off quite as abruptly as GrossCrotch with his surprise testimony.
I read sentences such as in that article summarizing their rap sheets. I read quickly but it is never good when you see words such as "11 children" and "anal rape" in the same sentence. Never. You have all those scumbags- well let me correct that- minus two now- running around on the streets with criminal records that would scare the horses. But as I have said several times a bunch of lefties here are scratching their heads on how much prison time they might be able to see for Rittenhouse on a misdemeanor gun possessionn charge that probably will not stand up either. You had an anal raper of children, already convicted versus a guy who crossed state lines driving from his mom's house twenty miles up the road to his father's town. They say that he crossed with the gun but that has not been proven. Illinois declined to prosecute because they could not establish that he had the/a gun there.
Crazy people, those lefties
Last edited:
Not even going to watch it, because it's just another blogger giving his "expert legal opinion" on the matter. So what is the point, Here4?
The video stresses that the prosecutor got him to admit to lying the mob that wanted him dead. Is that a crime anywhere in the known universe? Then, the prosecutor got him to testify rioter Gaige Grosskreutz pointed a gun at him when his gun was pointed down.
It sounds like the prosecutor graduated from the "Hamilton Burger School of Law."
The woman appears to have gotten the short end of the stick, but relevance?