This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.
NOTICE: Some online security services are reporting that information for a limited number of users from this site is for sale on the "dark web." As of right now, there is no direct evidence of this, but change your password just to be safe.
The RPGPundit's Own Forum Rules
This part of the site is controlled by the RPGPundit. This is where he discusses topics that he finds interesting. You may post here, but understand that there are limits. The RPGPundit can shut down any thread, topic of discussion, or user in a thread at his pleasure. This part of the site is essentially his house, so keep that in mind. Note that this is the only part of the site where political discussion is permitted, but is regulated by the RPGPundit.

Author Topic: So, how about that Rittenhouse trial?  (Read 8327 times)

3catcircus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • ?
  • Posts: 161
Re: So, how about that Rittenhouse trial?
« Reply #15 on: November 10, 2021, 07:54:54 AM »
I suspect the jury will find him guilty of the underage possession charge, but that’s it. Since he has no priors I doubt he’ll get much or any prison time. However, I’m not a lawyer in any way, just a rando spouting an opinion.
I wouldn't.

Three of the many travesties of the US "justice" system are the overwhelmingly all-encompassing and numerous laws that ensure that everyone breaks some law every day; the way prosecutors, instead of finding the law that most fits the situation, find all the laws that might be vaguely relevant, and then stack them all up like cordwood in the hopes that at least one catches fire; and that being charged, processed, and tried is itself a very serious punishment.

It's bad enough when they include all the different varieties of murder and manslaughter in a list of charges, but it becomes ridiculous when, tacked on at the end of the long list, there's some truly minor technical violation. If you cast someone as this horrible criminal, dragged them through court, and couldn't prove your case, a conviction on a minor offense is just adding insult to injury. I'm not going to give you the satisfaction of punishing them again.
You may not, but I think the Jury will. I suspect they will feel a lot of pressure, even if that pressure is self-inflicted, to find Rittenhouse guilty of something. Safety charges are a thing because they often work. The question from the OP as I understood it was along the lines of what does one think will happen, not what should happen.

It's a funny thing - Wisconsin has some leftist craziness, but many Wisconsinites, regardless of political leaning, are rural hunters who believe in gun rights and believe in self defense. Kenosha is in that area of Wisconsin that swung to the right between 2012 and 2016. It may depend upon who amongst the jury has the most sway, but we've already seen the judge toss potential problem jurors.  Or course, if the judge orders a directed verdict, there's not much they can say about it.
« Last Edit: November 10, 2021, 08:02:50 AM by 3catcircus »

Ghostmaker

  • Chlorine trifluoride
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2704
Re: So, how about that Rittenhouse trial?
« Reply #16 on: November 10, 2021, 07:57:04 AM »
De Bruin testimony is a hoot...  Within the first 10 seconds he makes the prosecution look like the scumbags they are.  And it just gets better after that

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sW3dn_ui2Vw

Do you object to the adversarial system of justice?

You obviously failed to understand the point - that the prosecution is grasping at straws - their case has disintegrated when vaporized bicep guy confirmed that Rittenhouse fired in self defense.  De Bruin's cross confirmed that the prosecutors engaged in misconduct.

How does doing their utmost to make a case for the prosecution make the attorneys in question "scumbags"?
Suborning perjury and possibly concealing exculpatory evidence (remember, the detective noted that the DA's office instructed them NOT to execute the search warrant on Grosskreutz's phone) is not lawful prosecution. Sit. Down.

3catcircus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • ?
  • Posts: 161
Re: So, how about that Rittenhouse trial?
« Reply #17 on: November 10, 2021, 08:00:59 AM »
De Bruin testimony is a hoot...  Within the first 10 seconds he makes the prosecution look like the scumbags they are.  And it just gets better after that

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sW3dn_ui2Vw

Do you object to the adversarial system of justice?

You obviously failed to understand the point - that the prosecution is grasping at straws - their case has disintegrated when vaporized bicep guy confirmed that Rittenhouse fired in self defense.  De Bruin's cross confirmed that the prosecutors engaged in misconduct.

How does doing their utmost to make a case for the prosecution make the attorneys in question "scumbags"?
Suborning perjury and possibly concealing exculpatory evidence (remember, the detective noted that the DA's office instructed them NOT to execute the search warrant on Grosskreutz's phone) is not lawful prosecution. Sit. Down.

It's also "curious" that the prosecution somehow had additional drone footage that the evidence fairy miracled up over a weekend.  The defense got the lead detective to about it wasn't conclusive, but they should have objected to his declaring pixel soup to be definitive at all.

This prosecution is a combination of incompetent and evil - perfect candidates to serve in any Dem administration.

wmarshal

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • w
  • Posts: 409
Re: So, how about that Rittenhouse trial?
« Reply #18 on: November 10, 2021, 08:37:36 AM »
I suspect the jury will find him guilty of the underage possession charge, but that’s it. Since he has no priors I doubt he’ll get much or any prison time. However, I’m not a lawyer in any way, just a rando spouting an opinion.

I don't necessarily know.  IANAL also, but it appears that Sec 948.60  (underage possession) only applies if he was in violation of 948.28 which is a short-barrelled weapon.  Given that the weapon he is reported to have been armed with is a DPMS Oracle .223, it's legal at 16" barrel length.

"(c) This section applies only to a person under 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the person is in violation of s. 941.28 or is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593. This section applies only to an adult who transfers a firearm to a person under 18 years of age if the person under 18 years of age is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593 or to an adult who is in violation of s. 941.28."

The ss 29.304 and .593 are with regard to those under age 16 and to those seeing a hunting license.  Neither of which is applicable.

Unless there is some way to twist the law, this looks like a loophole since they don't issue license to hunt antifa scum.
That loophole was brought up by the defense before the trial began in an attempt to get the charge dismissed, but the judge let the charge stand. This is because judges sometimes refuse to allow “the exception to swallow the rule.” This may seem to go against the plain meaning of a law, but it is very much a thing in case law that occurs as judges try to follow the spirit of the law intended by the legislature rather than a literal reading of the law. One might not agree with this approach, but it’s the approach the judge has taken in this case. An article briefly covering this towards the bottom can be found:
https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/crime/2021/10/05/judge-kyle-rittenhouse-case-mulls-expert-witnesses-use-force/6001900001/

The judge did say he might revisit this decision, but that’s no guarantee. If it looks like all the other charges are going to result in not guilty, the judge may feel a lot of pressure to let this safety charge remain. On the other hand the judge may feel so disgusted by the prosecution’s poor effort so far that he decides to disallow the safety charge so that they get nothing.

There are sites on the internet that explain the reasoning behind judges not allowing the exception to swallow the rule, but I’ve found the explanations to be either too long to include here, too arcane for me to paraphrase or presented in a manner that I cannot copy here. In regards to the last reason I did find at Google Books a section from a book titled “Thinking Like a Lawyer: An Introduction to Legal Reasoning” that avoided the first two difficulties, but I’m unable to copy the text in question. :-( Maybe a lawyer-type person here can give a succinct explanation for why sometimes judges refuse to allow the exception to swallow the rule.

I’ll repeat what I mentioned earlier, the OP’s question was along the lines of what one thinks will happen, not should.

Ghostmaker

  • Chlorine trifluoride
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2704
Re: So, how about that Rittenhouse trial?
« Reply #19 on: November 10, 2021, 08:56:10 AM »
On a side note, if you want sane analysis, I strongly recommend Andrew Branca's coverage over at Legal Insurrection.

Branca has written books on the law and self defense as well as being a practicing lawyer, so it's not like he's some nobody off the Internet.

wmarshal

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • w
  • Posts: 409
Re: So, how about that Rittenhouse trial?
« Reply #20 on: November 10, 2021, 09:00:26 AM »
On a side note, if you want sane analysis, I strongly recommend Andrew Branca's coverage over at Legal Insurrection.

Branca has written books on the law and self defense as well as being a practicing lawyer, so it's not like he's some nobody off the Internet.
I’ve been doing so. He doesn’t agree with the weapon possession charge remaining, but the charge remains, and that’s why I think Rittenhouse will likely be found guilty on that charge. Maybe that’ll get appealed, but I have no clue at the moment as to what chance such an appeal would have at success.

Ghostmaker

  • Chlorine trifluoride
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2704
Re: So, how about that Rittenhouse trial?
« Reply #21 on: November 10, 2021, 09:03:26 AM »
On a side note, if you want sane analysis, I strongly recommend Andrew Branca's coverage over at Legal Insurrection.

Branca has written books on the law and self defense as well as being a practicing lawyer, so it's not like he's some nobody off the Internet.
I’ve been doing so. He doesn’t agree with the weapon possession charge remaining, but the charge remains, and that’s why I think Rittenhouse will likely be found guilty on that charge. Maybe that’ll get appealed, but I have no clue at the moment as to what chance such an appeal would have at success.
Remember, the point (at least for the bad guys) is to convict Rittenhouse on the murder/attempted murder charges.

If all he gets gigged for is the weapons charge, they STILL effectively lose. Especially as the judge has expressed doubts as to the law's scope (this came up early on).

(Granted, this doesn't give Rittenhouse his lost time back, and he should sue for wrongful prosecution. Whether that has a chance in hell is... eh.)

3catcircus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • ?
  • Posts: 161
Re: So, how about that Rittenhouse trial?
« Reply #22 on: November 10, 2021, 09:13:51 AM »
On a side note, if you want sane analysis, I strongly recommend Andrew Branca's coverage over at Legal Insurrection.

Branca has written books on the law and self defense as well as being a practicing lawyer, so it's not like he's some nobody off the Internet.
I’ve been doing so. He doesn’t agree with the weapon possession charge remaining, but the charge remains, and that’s why I think Rittenhouse will likely be found guilty on that charge. Maybe that’ll get appealed, but I have no clue at the moment as to what chance such an appeal would have at success.
Remember, the point (at least for the bad guys) is to convict Rittenhouse on the murder/attempted murder charges.

If all he gets gigged for is the weapons charge, they STILL effectively lose. Especially as the judge has expressed doubts as to the law's scope (this came up early on).

(Granted, this doesn't give Rittenhouse his lost time back, and he should sue for wrongful prosecution. Whether that has a chance in hell is... eh.)

That the prosecution was shown as trying to get a witness to change their statement and he specifically stated that they did in testimony might be enough to draw the lawsuit for wrongful prosecution.  Regardless, over would hope that the Wisconsin Bar would have concerns over their conduct and seek to dis-bar them.

Then again, this is the way it *always* send to go: lawyer is ambitious, but not all that competent (but devious and cunning), so goes to work as prosecutor.  Make all the necessary political moves to become DA, state attorney, judge, it other ring in political ladder - all the while fucking over innocent people, ignoring police misconduct, and choosing plea deals with the actually guilty.

The truly competent who are in the prosecutors office become defense attorneys in private practice...

wmarshal

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • w
  • Posts: 409
Re: So, how about that Rittenhouse trial?
« Reply #23 on: November 10, 2021, 09:17:01 AM »
On a side note, if you want sane analysis, I strongly recommend Andrew Branca's coverage over at Legal Insurrection.

Branca has written books on the law and self defense as well as being a practicing lawyer, so it's not like he's some nobody off the Internet.
I’ve been doing so. He doesn’t agree with the weapon possession charge remaining, but the charge remains, and that’s why I think Rittenhouse will likely be found guilty on that charge. Maybe that’ll get appealed, but I have no clue at the moment as to what chance such an appeal would have at success.
Remember, the point (at least for the bad guys) is to convict Rittenhouse on the murder/attempted murder charges.

If all he gets gigged for is the weapons charge, they STILL effectively lose. Especially as the judge has expressed doubts as to the law's scope (this came up early on).

(Granted, this doesn't give Rittenhouse his lost time back, and he should sue for wrongful prosecution. Whether that has a chance in hell is... eh.)
The Woke and pro-Antifa media will wail and gnash their teeth if Rittenhouse is only found guilty of the weapons charge. No doubt about that. Personally I think Rittenhouse actions were foolish, but none of that precludes him being able to defend himself. One thing Antifa would especially fear from Rittenhouse being found not guilty on the homocide related charges is that this would provide an real world example to others trying to protect their communities from the mobs that yes, one can use lethal force to protect oneself. They’d much rather there be a lot of ambiguity, if not outright fear among people considering resisting the mob.

Ghostmaker

  • Chlorine trifluoride
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2704
Re: So, how about that Rittenhouse trial?
« Reply #24 on: November 10, 2021, 09:38:17 AM »
On a side note, if you want sane analysis, I strongly recommend Andrew Branca's coverage over at Legal Insurrection.

Branca has written books on the law and self defense as well as being a practicing lawyer, so it's not like he's some nobody off the Internet.
I’ve been doing so. He doesn’t agree with the weapon possession charge remaining, but the charge remains, and that’s why I think Rittenhouse will likely be found guilty on that charge. Maybe that’ll get appealed, but I have no clue at the moment as to what chance such an appeal would have at success.
Remember, the point (at least for the bad guys) is to convict Rittenhouse on the murder/attempted murder charges.

If all he gets gigged for is the weapons charge, they STILL effectively lose. Especially as the judge has expressed doubts as to the law's scope (this came up early on).

(Granted, this doesn't give Rittenhouse his lost time back, and he should sue for wrongful prosecution. Whether that has a chance in hell is... eh.)
The Woke and pro-Antifa media will wail and gnash their teeth if Rittenhouse is only found guilty of the weapons charge. No doubt about that. Personally I think Rittenhouse actions were foolish, but none of that precludes him being able to defend himself. One thing Antifa would especially fear from Rittenhouse being found not guilty on the homocide related charges is that this would provide an real world example to others trying to protect their communities from the mobs that yes, one can use lethal force to protect oneself. They’d much rather there be a lot of ambiguity, if not outright fear among people considering resisting the mob.
That was my take too. There's a saying: don't go to stupid places, associate with stupid people, and do stupid things.

But that's my opinion, and it certainly does not preclude self-defense. A girl who leaves the club and tries to take a shortcut down a dark alley may be foolish; it doesn't mean she should be assaulted and it doesn't mean she doesn't have the right to shoot an assailant stone dead.

3catcircus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • ?
  • Posts: 161
Re: So, how about that Rittenhouse trial?
« Reply #25 on: November 10, 2021, 09:49:04 AM »
On a side note, if you want sane analysis, I strongly recommend Andrew Branca's coverage over at Legal Insurrection.

Branca has written books on the law and self defense as well as being a practicing lawyer, so it's not like he's some nobody off the Internet.
I’ve been doing so. He doesn’t agree with the weapon possession charge remaining, but the charge remains, and that’s why I think Rittenhouse will likely be found guilty on that charge. Maybe that’ll get appealed, but I have no clue at the moment as to what chance such an appeal would have at success.
Remember, the point (at least for the bad guys) is to convict Rittenhouse on the murder/attempted murder charges.

If all he gets gigged for is the weapons charge, they STILL effectively lose. Especially as the judge has expressed doubts as to the law's scope (this came up early on).

(Granted, this doesn't give Rittenhouse his lost time back, and he should sue for wrongful prosecution. Whether that has a chance in hell is... eh.)
The Woke and pro-Antifa media will wail and gnash their teeth if Rittenhouse is only found guilty of the weapons charge. No doubt about that. Personally I think Rittenhouse actions were foolish, but none of that precludes him being able to defend himself. One thing Antifa would especially fear from Rittenhouse being found not guilty on the homocide related charges is that this would provide an real world example to others trying to protect their communities from the mobs that yes, one can use lethal force to protect oneself. They’d much rather there be a lot of ambiguity, if not outright fear among people considering resisting the mob.
That was my take too. There's a saying: don't go to stupid places, associate with stupid people, and do stupid things.

But that's my opinion, and it certainly does not preclude self-defense. A girl who leaves the club and tries to take a shortcut down a dark alley may be foolish; it doesn't mean she should be assaulted and it doesn't mean she doesn't have the right to shoot an assailant stone dead.

This is one of those things that *anyone* with any common sense and a sense of right and wrong understands.  Unfortunately, there are too many leftists who've led sheltered lives where mommy and daddy continue to take care of all of their needs.  These people have never had to deal with the possibility that people who commit crimes might actually not just need help and might actually just be entitled cunts.  It isn't always society's fault.  Especially in this case where the turds that Rittenhouse shot were all convicted felons who apparently didn't learn their lesson since they were involved in criminal rioting.  The best part is watching vaporized bicep guy completely try and justify his criminal behavior whilst on the stand.  You can't fix stupid.

Ghostmaker

  • Chlorine trifluoride
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2704
Re: So, how about that Rittenhouse trial?
« Reply #26 on: November 10, 2021, 09:50:49 AM »
On a side note, if you want sane analysis, I strongly recommend Andrew Branca's coverage over at Legal Insurrection.

Branca has written books on the law and self defense as well as being a practicing lawyer, so it's not like he's some nobody off the Internet.
I’ve been doing so. He doesn’t agree with the weapon possession charge remaining, but the charge remains, and that’s why I think Rittenhouse will likely be found guilty on that charge. Maybe that’ll get appealed, but I have no clue at the moment as to what chance such an appeal would have at success.
Remember, the point (at least for the bad guys) is to convict Rittenhouse on the murder/attempted murder charges.

If all he gets gigged for is the weapons charge, they STILL effectively lose. Especially as the judge has expressed doubts as to the law's scope (this came up early on).

(Granted, this doesn't give Rittenhouse his lost time back, and he should sue for wrongful prosecution. Whether that has a chance in hell is... eh.)
The Woke and pro-Antifa media will wail and gnash their teeth if Rittenhouse is only found guilty of the weapons charge. No doubt about that. Personally I think Rittenhouse actions were foolish, but none of that precludes him being able to defend himself. One thing Antifa would especially fear from Rittenhouse being found not guilty on the homocide related charges is that this would provide an real world example to others trying to protect their communities from the mobs that yes, one can use lethal force to protect oneself. They’d much rather there be a lot of ambiguity, if not outright fear among people considering resisting the mob.
That was my take too. There's a saying: don't go to stupid places, associate with stupid people, and do stupid things.

But that's my opinion, and it certainly does not preclude self-defense. A girl who leaves the club and tries to take a shortcut down a dark alley may be foolish; it doesn't mean she should be assaulted and it doesn't mean she doesn't have the right to shoot an assailant stone dead.

This is one of those things that *anyone* with any common sense and a sense of right and wrong understands.  Unfortunately, there are too many leftists who've led sheltered lives where mommy and daddy continue to take care of all of their needs.  These people have never had to deal with the possibility that people who commit crimes might actually not just need help and might actually just be entitled cunts.  It isn't always society's fault.  Especially in this case where the turds that Rittenhouse shot were all convicted felons who apparently didn't learn their lesson since they were involved in criminal rioting.  The best part is watching vaporized bicep guy completely try and justify his criminal behavior whilst on the stand.  You can't fix stupid.
At this point you might as well call it 'uncommon sense', cause it sure as fuck isn't common.


wmarshal

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • w
  • Posts: 409
Re: So, how about that Rittenhouse trial?
« Reply #27 on: November 10, 2021, 10:51:22 AM »
I think many in the Woke media are anticipating an acquittal on most charges. I haven’t been able to find any recent articles on the trial at Salon, Huffpost, Mother Jones or Slate. Is MSNBC the only Woke media covering the trial in any kind of detail? My reading of the other media entities lack of interest is that they want to minimize the exposure of the Rittenhouse trial since they’re expecting disappointment. Or perhaps their journalists just “can’t deal” with a successful use of self-defense.

moonsweeper

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 893
Re: So, how about that Rittenhouse trial?
« Reply #28 on: November 10, 2021, 10:54:51 AM »
I suspect the jury will find him guilty of the underage possession charge, but that’s it. Since he has no priors I doubt he’ll get much or any prison time. However, I’m not a lawyer in any way, just a rando spouting an opinion.

I don't necessarily know.  IANAL also, but it appears that Sec 948.60  (underage possession) only applies if he was in violation of 948.28 which is a short-barrelled weapon.  Given that the weapon he is reported to have been armed with is a DPMS Oracle .223, it's legal at 16" barrel length.

"(c) This section applies only to a person under 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the person is in violation of s. 941.28 or is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593. This section applies only to an adult who transfers a firearm to a person under 18 years of age if the person under 18 years of age is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593 or to an adult who is in violation of s. 941.28."

The ss 29.304 and .593 are with regard to those under age 16 and to those seeing a hunting license.  Neither of which is applicable.

Unless there is some way to twist the law, this looks like a loophole since they don't issue license to hunt antifa scum.

The reason it only applies to the SBRs is because of the way they did hunting laws in WI.  Under 18 is viewed as underage unless it is a rifle/carbine that fits their definition of hunting weapon...which the Panther does.  Then anyone 16+ can open carry it in WI.  The guy who is his attorney now did a youtube presentation and walked through all the stuff around a year or so ago, before he was involved with the case.
"I have a very hard time taking seriously someone who has the time and resources to protest capitalism, while walking around in Nike shoes and drinking Starbucks, while filming it on their iPhone."  --  Alderaan Crumbs

"Just, can you make it The Ramones at least? I only listen to Abba when I want to fuck a stripper." -- Jeff37923

"Government is the only entity that relies on its failures to justify the expansion of its powers." -- David Freiheit (Viva Frei)

3catcircus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • ?
  • Posts: 161
Re: So, how about that Rittenhouse trial?
« Reply #29 on: November 10, 2021, 10:57:01 AM »
I think many in the Woke media are anticipating an acquittal on most charges. I haven’t been able to find any recent articles on the trial at Salon, Huffpost, Mother Jones or Slate. Is MSNBC the only Woke media covering the trial in any kind of detail? My reading of the other media entities lack of interest is that they want to minimize the exposure of the Rittenhouse trial since they’re expecting disappointment. Or perhaps their journalists just “can’t deal” with a successful use of self-defense.

Well, their "journalists" can't deal with reality in general... The problem with leftists is that want to force others to see the world that they want, rather than the world as it actually is.

*None* of their fucked-up opinions and wishes is anything that any sane person would want, but if they keep publishing it, they push it to become "truth." Most everyone else is, unfortunately, not paying attention when this happens to give them a back-handed bitch slap.  Those in positions of authority who should are typically corrupted to the point that they can't or won't respond in a manner that would show the ridiculousness of the left for every to see, point at and laugh.