Prosecutors Move For Mistrial As Jury Has Been Tainted By Clear Video Evidence Of Kyle Rittenhouse

[TreeFrogTrader]

As I have said more than a few times, I am unwilling to just cave and agree with many others who assert that "well we know that at least the prosecution is going to bag him on the gun crime." The media is on that trip too. I have said that I don't see the evidence and I have looked at the statute and the language is fucky-poo and you need a batman decoder ring to figure out how it applies. I think I might have agreed with it earlier on, but I did not see it coming together and I looked at the statute and saw that it could require some work to make that dog hunt.

Now, i see in this article that the judge is bracing his legs and resisting like when you try to pot a lobster in the pot. Apparently the judge is having trouble with his batman decoder ring too.

I am not getting cavalier though. Rittenhouse has some serious risk from that second degree reduced charge. But no way I give the prosecutor the higher level charges and never did- although I guess most including the prosecutor have concluded that now too- and no way am I willing to concede on that gun charge. I could end out there but I have not seen anyone work for it yet such that I could see what they have and what the arguments are. Frigging judge doesn't even understand it well enough to instruct the jury and he does not see how anyone else can understand it. Also, that gun across state line fake scenario that I heard repeated here until I could puke, NEVER HAPPENED.

WOMP.

I don't see it on the gun charge or at least I dont see it as the easy-peasy consolation prize for the prosecution that the majority has or still does.

Also, of course, the judge knows how the game works. If he puts it to the jury and they convict, they are going up on appeal for the same reasons that the judge has problems with it.


Judge questions Rittenhouse gun charge, raising doubts about prosecution's case
Unlawful possession of the gun has been prominent fact cited not only by prosecutors but press.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/judge-questions-rittenhouse-gun-charge-jonathan-turley

 

[Bugenhagen]

20 without parole for a warning shot? That would be surprising except, it's America, one of the most unjust to the poor nations on earth.

A friend of a friend was taken to jail over refusing to pay extensive fees to an animal shelter a block from her home who were unable to read the cat's perfectly functioning chip and held it for nearly ten days. The cat was not a stray. He had to call a lawyer for her.

 

[El OchoCinco]

As I have said more than a few times, I am unwilling to just cave and agree with many others who assert that "well we know that at least the prosecution is going to bag him on the gun crime." The media is on that trip too. I have said that I don't see the evidence and I have looked at the statute and the language is fucky-poo and you need a batman decoder ring to figure out how it applies. I think I might have agreed with it earlier on, but I did not see it coming together and I looked at the statute and saw that it could require some work to make that dog hunt.

Now, i see in this article that the judge is bracing his legs and resisting like when you try to pot a lobster in the pot. Apparently the judge is having trouble with his batman decoder ring too.

I am not getting cavalier though. Rittenhouse has some serious risk from that second degree reduced charge. But no way I give the prosecutor the higher level charges and never did- although I guess most including the prosecutor have concluded that now too- and no way am I willing to concede on that gun charge. I could end out there but I have not seen anyone work for it yet such that I could see what they have and what the arguments are. Frigging judge doesn't even understand it well enough to instruct the jury and he does not see how anyone else can understand it. Also, that gun across state line fake scenario that I heard repeated here until I could puke, NEVER HAPPENED.

WOMP.

I don't see it on the gun charge or at least I dont see it as the easy-peasy consolation prize for the prosecution that the majority has or still does.

Also, of course, the judge knows how the game works. If he puts it to the jury and they convict, they are going up on appeal for the same reasons that the judge has problems with it.


Judge questions Rittenhouse gun charge, raising doubts about prosecution's case
Unlawful possession of the gun has been prominent fact cited not only by prosecutors but press.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/judge-questions-rittenhouse-gun-charge-jonathan-turley

Bruce Schroeder, the judge who is overseeing the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse, the man charged in the shooting deaths of two men and wounding of another in Kenosha, Wisconsin, has come under fire for making a racially-charged joke about Asian cuisine.


Now the joke made was stupid but was not some Asian-wide diss or insult. That being said, the judge and the prosecution are fucking up things so repeatedly there is no way a true fair and balanced trial is even possible anymore.

Although society does not want people taking up guns and shooting whoever they want in the streets like Bernie Goetz, a criminal trial cannot make that kind of decision, it can only address the facts and charges in the present case and it is up to the legislature to criminalize further such activity.

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

it can only address the facts and charges in the present case and it is up to the legislature to criminalize further such activity.

Correct and thus I do not see the easy-peasy alleged freebie for the prosecutor coming together. The current statute is wobbly and squishy. But that may have to be sorted out on appeal. My comments at a minimum were that it is not an easy hit and trophy and will require work in this trial or on appeal.

And yes, to various issues by the judge and prosecutor, such that even if Ritten is convicted on a lesser, "more to come."

Where society or various persons are pissed off at the judge for being insensitive via some comment is neither here nor there for me or the the issues before the court right now.

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

CNN Says Rittenhouse Judge Is Biased Since He Has A U.S. Flag In Courtroom

"It's clear that this judge cannot be impartial," said CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, who was wearing a large trenchcoat and nothing else for some unknown reason. "The American flag is a symbol of oppression and white supremacy. Any judge who would allow that hateful symbol in his courtroom has no business presiding over this important case."

Further reports indicated that the Judge is a white male, has a family, and is a model citizen— and these are all serious red flags.


https://babylonbee.com/news/cnn-says-rittenhouse-judge-is-biased-since-he-has-a-us-flag-in-courtroom

 

[El OchoCinco]

I predict he will get at best the lesser of all charges nad separately some illegal possession charge of the weapon if he did not carry it over state lines. Still was underage with a weapon. Jury instructions were about homicide/manslaughter with depraved indifference or negligence. Plenty of negligence in there but tough to call how a jury would see it.

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

I predict he will get at best the lesser of all charges nad separately some illegal possession charge of the weapon if he did not carry it over state lines. Still was underage with a weapon. Jury instructions were about homicide/manslaughter with depraved indifference or negligence. Plenty of negligence in there but tough to call how a jury would see it.

I will keep it short but just say that I do not see the gun charge sticking over time. It might require some appeal but I don't see it. Note that the "gun charge/s" are more complicated than just "underage with gun." He is charged with a crime that alleges that he had an illegal weapon on him- for a minor, not just that he was illegal via being underage. He is charged with carrying a short barrelled weapon allegedly per the language of the statute but no one has submitted evidence of the length of the barrel. Thus even, as late as today, the judge has said that he reserves the right to dismiss it subjec to someone just measuring the lenght of the fucking barrel sincd dildo prosecutor did not do it.

Again, my point on the gun charge has only always been that someone is going to have to some minimal work to get there. It is not an automatic win for Prosecutor Dildo. The barrel length comes into play because minors can only carry full lenghth long guns. Not handguns or scaled down long arms.

 

[gwb-trading]

I predict he will get at best the lesser of all charges nad separately some illegal possession charge of the weapon if he did not carry it over state lines. Still was underage with a weapon. Jury instructions were about homicide/manslaughter with depraved indifference or negligence. Plenty of negligence in there but tough to call how a jury would see it.

Judge dismisses gun charge against Kyle Rittenhouse
https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/kyle-rittenhouse-trial-11-15-21/

Judge Bruce Schroeder just dismissed Count 6 of the indictment against Kyle Rittenhouse, a misdemeanor charge for possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18.

The charge was punishable by up to nine months in prison and a $10,000 fine.

Rittenhouse now faces five charges.

Some more context: The count that the judge just dismissed, which was listed as Count 6 in the indictment, was a misdemeanor stating that Rittenhouse was under 18 years old with a dangerous weapon.

Rittenhouse, now 18 years old, still faces five felony charges from the events of Aug. 25, 2020. If he is convicted of the most serious charge against him, he faces a mandatory sentence of life in prison. Rittenhouse has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

Judge dismisses gun charge against Kyle Rittenhouse
https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/kyle-rittenhouse-trial-11-15-21/

Judge Bruce Schroeder just dismissed Count 6 of the indictment against Kyle Rittenhouse, a misdemeanor charge for possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18.

The charge was punishable by up to nine months in prison and a $10,000 fine.

Rittenhouse now faces five charges.

Some more context: The count that the judge just dismissed, which was listed as Count 6 in the indictment, was a misdemeanor stating that Rittenhouse was under 18 years old with a dangerous weapon.

Rittenhouse, now 18 years old, still faces five felony charges from the events of Aug. 25, 2020. If he is convicted of the most serious charge against him, he faces a mandatory sentence of life in prison. Rittenhouse has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

BOOM!

 

[El OchoCinco]

I will keep it short but just say that I do not see the gun charge sticking over time. It might require some appeal but I don't see it. Note that the "gun charge/s" are more complicated than just "underage with gun." He is charged with a crime that alleges that he had an illegal weapon on him- for a minor, not just that he was illegal via being underage. He is charged with carrying a short barrelled weapon allegedly per the language of the statute but no one has submitted evidence of the length of the barrel. Thus even, as late as today, the judge has said that he reserves the right to dismiss it subjec to someone just measuring the lenght of the fucking barrel sincd dildo prosecutor did not do it.

Again, my point on the gun charge has only always been that someone is going to have to some minimal work to get there. It is not an automatic win for Prosecutor Dildo. The barrel length comes into play because minors can only carry full lenghth long guns. Not handguns or scaled down long arms.

For some reason unless I missed it, the gun charge was not part of this trial...it is not something that goes to trial, you are cited for it at the moment of arrest so not sure what happened to the charge.