Rittenhouse

[Avery]

I don't know that much about them but in a YouTube video of a battle between those smashing, looting, and burning versus those beating on the smashers, looters, and burners, I'm likely to pull for the latter. Beyond my short attention span while watching a video, it isn't anything that resonates with me.

I do find it interesting that even in ANTIFA-crazy Portland, the city council unanimously voted to massively boost the police budget to get ANTIFA under control. Apparently ANTIFA smashing up the Mayor's apartment was enough to change his mind on the whole 'de-fund the police' idiocy.

I would root for neither. Antifa is largely based on just wanting to create anarchy and isn't even technically an organized group, just a bunch of idiots who like to break stuff and cause mayhem because they weren't hugged enough as children I guess.

Proud Boys are a hate group quite frankly - if you spout white nationalist nonsense, anti-Muslim, misogynistic towards women and a bit too fond of the whole 'Anglo-Saxon is King' mantra, than yeah, you can be classified as a terrorist organization.

 

[Safetydan]

Throw the book at them. Things are tense enough, the jury needs to do its work properly.

Absolute moron.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

For those who think Rittenhouse will be acquitted, the clues coming from the jury do not support that. Bellow is jury request #5. The phrase "Mr. Rittenhouse put down the fire extinguisher" was used by the Prosecution. The video and event mentioned is the one the Prosecution used to claim Rittenhouse had provoked the confrontation by pointing a gun at Joshua Ziminksi. The way the request is phrased indicates someone who is telling, not asking. It appears to professionals who do this sort of thing for a living that Karen is trying to build a presentation to convince other jurors and she isn't going to back down on believing Rittenhouse provoked this. If these experts are correct, the best Rittenhouse can hope for now is a hung jury.

 

[Gameface]

For those who think Rittenhouse will be acquitted, the clues coming from the jury do not support that. Bellow is jury request #5. The phrase "Mr. Rittenhouse put down the fire extinguisher" was used by the Prosecution. The video and event mentioned is the one the Prosecution used to claim Rittenhouse had provoked the confrontation by pointing a gun at Joshua Ziminksi. The way the request if phrased indicates someone who is telling, not asking. It appears to professionals who do this sort of thing for a living that Karen is trying to build a presentation to convince other jurors and she isn't going to back down on believing Rittenhouse provoked this. If these experts are correct, the best Rittenhouse can hope for now is a hung jury.

So hung jury then? Is that good or bad for Rittenhouse? Prosecution has been kind of poor and judge seems pro-defense. So it seems that mistrial is good for prosecution.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

So hung jury then? Is that good or bad for Rittenhouse? Prosecution has been kind of poor and judge seems pro-defense. So it seems that mistrial is good for prosecution.

If the judge is pro-defense then a hung jury is good for Rittenhouse, but that is a big ‘if’. So far, despite the sound bites, the judge has not been pro-defense. It only appears that way on the surface.

Prosecution ADA Binger made a reference to Rittenhouse’s post-arrest silence in a way that implied guilt. That is a huge no-no. He was ripped by the judge in spectacular fashion but absolutely no sanctions of any kind were issued. Binger also blatantly overran a pretrial decision by introducing evidence the judge had specifically forbid, and was ripped verbally, but again no sanction.

The two biggest issues are that the Prosecution knew the identity of “jump-kick man” but didn’t release it to the Defense, and worst of all was the altered drone footage. The prosecution had high-resolution drone footage and didn’t provide it to the Defense but instead made a version of the drone footage that only had 1/16th of the resolution and only provided their newly generated low resolution file to the Defense. Either one of those issues is a violation of Brady Disclosure laws and should be an automatic mistrial, but the judge allowed this evidence in again without any sanction of the Prosecution.

The Defense has filed a motion for Mistrial with prejudice, meaning it can’t be retried. So far the judge has sat on it. He hasn’t ruled one way or the other. If the judge is really pro-defense, all he has to do is wait for the jury to come back hung and rule on the motion in favor the Defense to free Rittenhouse of all charges. If the judge is not pro-defense, then he’ll rule against the motion and we can count on doing this whole thing again because it will be easy for the Defense to make a claim for an appeal on the ground of all the f-ups by Binger and the Prosecution. At least that is how I understand it.

 

[Avery]

So hung jury then? Is that good or bad for Rittenhouse? Prosecution has been kind of poor and judge seems pro-defense. So it seems that mistrial is good for prosecution.

My guess is if it was a hung jury, the judge will ask them to reconsider a couple times to try and reach a consensus. If that doesn't happen, it's a mistrial and the prosecution would likely take it up again to re-try the case assuming the judge would allow it (which is probably a formality).

There's also a lot of counts to consider with some being stronger than others IMO.

 

[Gameface]

If the judge is pro-defense then a hung jury is good for Rittenhouse, but that is a big ‘if’. So far, despite the sound bites, the judge has not been pro-defense. It only appears that way on the surface.

Prosecution ADA Binger made a reference to Rittenhouse’s post-arrest silence in a way that implied guilt. That is a huge no-no. He was ripped by the judge in spectacular fashion but absolutely no sanctions of any kind were issued. Binger also blatantly overran a pretrial decision by introducing evidence the judge had specifically forbid, and was ripped verbally, but again no sanction.

The two biggest issues are that the Prosecution knew the identity of “jump-kick man” but didn’t release it to the Defense, and worst of all was the altered drone footage. The prosecution had high-resolution drone footage and didn’t provide it to the Defense but instead made a version of the drone footage that only had 1/16th of the resolution and only provided their newly generated low resolution file to the Defense. Either one of those issues is a violation of Brady Disclosure laws and should be an automatic mistrial, but the judge allowed this evidence in again without any sanction of the Prosecution.

The Defense has filed a motion for Mistrial with prejudice, meaning it can’t be retried. So far the judge has sat on it. He hasn’t ruled one way or the other. If the judge is really pro-defense, all he has to do is wait for the jury to come back hung and rule on the motion in favor the Defense to free Rittenhouse of all charges. If the judge is not pro-defense, then he’ll rule against the motion and we can count on doing this whole thing again because it will be easy for the Defense to make a claim for an appeal on the ground of all the f-ups by Binger and the Prosecution. At least that is how I understand it.

If the mistrial is a result of a hung jury than I imagine that it's 90%++ that a new trial will happen. I highly doubt the judge sits on the request for a mistrial with prejudice and then approve it based on a hung jury. That does not make sense to me.

If this trial was okay to send to deliberations than it is okay to try Rittenhouse again.

The prosecution seems to have done a poor job in this trial. A fresh crack at it seems like it would be good for the prosecution to me.

I don't think this judge has been unethically favorable to the defense, but I think on 50/50 calls he has typically ruled in favor of the defense. Things like not being able to call the shooting recipients "victims" but being able to call them rioters and such.

 

[Scat]

Not guilty on all counts. Let the looting begin...

 

[Gameface]

Not guilty on all counts. Let the looting begin...

What a disgusting comment.

 

[Gameface]

Seems like the jury took this case very seriously and deliberated for a pretty extensive amount of time. I think most of us expected an acquittal on the most serious charges and also didn't have strong confidence in convictions on any charges. So this is the expected result and based on current law I think it is the technically correct verdict.

 

[Avery]

I'm just glad the trial is done so we can move on to other news.

 

[Gameface]

I'm just glad the trial is done so we can move on to other news.

Like the Arbery trial?

I expect convictions in that one.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Things like not being able to call the shooting recipients "victims" but being able to call them rioters and such.

That wasn't a rule for this trial but in every trial he's ever conducted over decades. He believes only things supported by evidence should be allowed. With regards to using the term 'rioter', the Defense was forbidden from using that term in opening arguments precisely because there had not at that point been any evidence to support that they were rioters. Only after people were shown to be rioting could they be called a rioter in his court. The term 'victims' was banned throughout the trial because the trial itself was to determine if they were victims. That rule isn't pro-defense or pro-prosecution but just the way the judge attempts to minimize the use of unsubstantiated statements that could bias the jury.

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Like the Arbery trial?

I expect convictions in that one

Me too. I'd be shocked if there weren't.

 

[RandyForRubio]

What a disgusting comment.

Disgusting or unfortunate reality?

Per MSNBC, 5 schools in the Kenosha area have gone to virtual learning because of fears of what could happen with the verdict (this was reported prior to verdict).

Doesn’t seem like it’s an unwarranted fear.

 

[RandyForRubio]

Me too. I'd be shocked if there weren't.

As there should be.

 

[Gameface]

Disgusting or unfortunate reality?

Per MSNBC, 5 schools in the Kenosha area have gone to virtual learning because of fears of what could happen with the verdict (this was reported prior to verdict).

Doesn’t seem like it’s an unwarranted fear.

Who do you expect to riot?

And how do you know it wasn't in preparation for guilty verdicts?

 

[Al-O-Meter]

Who do you expect to riot?

And how do you know it wasn't in preparation for guilty verdicts?

Kenosha area elementary students, obviously.

 

[RandyForRubio]

Who do you expect to riot?

And how do you know it wasn't in preparation for guilty verdicts?

I have no idea who will riot, nor did I say that I thought I had an idea.

Just sharing pertinent information to the discussion at hand.

 

[Avery]

The Aubrey trial is a totally different story. That seems open and shut to me - no way those guys aren't found guilty.

And you can bet that if they are somehow exonerated, things are going to get ugly fast there.

I expect no unrest to happen in Wisconsin tonight which we should all be pleased with.