Well… he knew he was chasing him and going for the gun. Everything else is incidental, really.
Hey, littering is bad enough it can land you on the group W bench with all the mother rapers, father stabbers, and father rapers.
Rittenhouse was arrested and tried… and a jury- who saw all the evidence- ruled him not guilty. Thus justice has been served. I respect the jury’s decision.
There were no heroes. Just a terrible tragedy.
Byron De La Beckwith was arrested, tried, and found not guilty also.
There are bad judges just like there are bad cops.
The Judge did not make the ruling.
You didn’t have to say you didn’t follow the trial closely, I could tell when I read this. This case is such losing position for liberals. He won his case and he’s gonna be collecting some settlements in the coming years. The media coverage is a disgrace and you’re a sucker for falling for it.
Judge Schroeder issued rulings that favored Rittenhouse’s defense.
You think Rittenhouse will be successfully suing the families of the people he shot?
No, CNN et al., for defamation.
That seems to be Schroeder’s MO. As I understand it, he has a bit of a reputation for being hard on prosecutors.
I would define a tragedy differently. Taking a loaded weapon into an agitated situation seems like a foregone conclusion. Yes, I know the jury acquitted. I disagree with them.
If we are going to legalize human hunting, would hunting seasons and/or the requirement of tags be an infringement of the 2nd Amendment?
Ya, good luck with that. I hope he does not hire you as his lawyer.
CNN settled with Mr. Sandmann for $275 Million, so there’s precedent.
This site is progressive which means pro crime when it serves their ideological agenda. Yet, when someone defends themselves from politically motivated rioters that are trying to create a state of anarchy they hypocritically call for the same police they wish to abolish.
You really need to cut back on the peyote.
Since it was a situation where one of the persons shot by the person on trial brought a loaded weapon themselves, even a foregone conclusion doesn’t seem mutually exclusive to a tragedy. It seems like a loaded firearm is the easiest ingredient to precipitate one. To be honest, I’d have a hard time disagreeing with the jury either way.
Or maybe ingest a lot more. With psychedelics, it’s hard to tell. Either way, lock the firearms away and forget where you hid the key.
More judges need to do this. Especially when the defendants are being set up on weak charges, such as this case or (probably more imprtantly) the millions of black people convicted on poor evidence.
The system is supposed to be heavily biased towards the defendant.
The judge is supposed to be impartial; not issue rulings that favor one side or the other.
And the guiding principle is to protect the innocent - not to protect the accused. If we were just seeking to protect all defendants, we could just dismiss every case. The goal is to separate the rightfully accused from the wrongfully accused. The wrongfully accused should be set free but the rightfully accused should be found guilty and punished. A trial in which a guilty man is set free is a miscarriage of justice even if it’s a lesser one that a trial in which an innocent man is imprisoned.
Finally, I don’t see why you feel the charges in this case were weak. Rittenhouse was accused of shooting three people and he openly admitted he did that. So his defense was that he was forced to defend himself.
The prosecution had evidence that discredited this defense. They had a video, taken shortly before Rittenhouse shot the victims, in which he talked about how he wished he could shoot some people he saw in the street. This is strong evidence that Rittenhouse was acting on prior intent. But Judge Schroeder wouldn’t allow it to be entered as evidence at the trial.
Really? Is that what you were saying when OJ was acquitted? Justice served!!!