That isn't even the best part.
The dumbfuck tweeted DURING the trial implying he was aware of Kyle's gun having malfunctioned when he made his move.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rittenhouse Trial
- Thread starter hollowoutadime
- Start date
That isn't even the best part.
The dumbfuck tweeted DURING the trial implying he was aware of Kyle's gun having malfunctioned when he made his move.
Someone in the comments called her a female Bender.................
The fact that there is even a trial going on with the mounds of evidence easily obtained is a real shame. Kyle's being there and having a rifle is another matter but as far as self defense goes, he's got a very clear and easily verifiable case.
Prosecutor keeps trying to make Gaige seem like a victim because at some point he raised his hands while holding a pistol. This officer witness the prosecutor called just said that an armed person holding up hands does not eliminate the threat of said person shooting anyway....
Defense attorney just fucked up. The reason the cop didn't suspect Kyle & sprayed him with OC to get him away was because shots were still being fired and obviously not from Kyle. This fact should have been brought to light.
And now a comment that they may bring the Feeb agent back on to reintroduce the HD drone footage they claimed they had lost.
I think we are getting close to seeing a directed verdict here. Never thought a high profile case like this would get that!
Perfect analogy for liberals and 2017-2020.
I think the defense missed a perfect opportunity with Grosskreutz. Prosecution spent all day pumping up Grosskreutz as a medic and downplaying defendant's credentials as such. Binger states and Grosskreutz agrees that people were calling for a medic and that's why Grosskreutz starts running down the street towards Rosenbaum shooting. Then he encounters defendant and questions him.
You're the medic, why didn't you go to the patient?
You're the medic, why didn't you go to the patient?
The image is grainy but it almost looks like the detective is flipping the prosecutor the bird when asked to display the gas canister.
Indeed. Maybe it's because I am not a defense lawyer, and don't know the details of how/what you should do in an actual defense. But like you say, the prosecutor is painting that narrative about discrediting Kyle's "medic" cred, and he has also kept trying to paint the chase after the Rosenbaum encounter simply as, "people trying to disarm," Kyle, "an active shooter." I would think the defense would want to keep impugning that with questions about why are they chasing Kyle to "disarm" him when Kyle is running straight toward a wall of police vehicles, all while yelling, "Get his ass!" and pouncing on him before he reaches the police? It's quite obvious that what they really wanted, was to reach Kyle and exact their own version of vigilante justice on Kyle BEFORE he reached the police.
I'm certainly not an attorney either, nor even a big perry Mason fan....
I think in general, when a defendant has the facts on their side, the lawyers generally just try to not muddy the water with anything that doesn't directly apply to those clear facts, and that may be why the defense attorney didn't point out some things... just a thought
considering what we have seen so far, this is possible, but omg can they be this retarded?
they still have control of the narrative and left choid news is still saying that kyle is guilty.
of course, they want riots because people will tune in 24/7 to watch them.
they still have control of the narrative and left choid news is still saying that kyle is guilty.
of course, they want riots because people will tune in 24/7 to watch them.
Watched most of the trail today. Definitely seemed like a very bad day for the prosecution. Grosskreutz testifying did not work out very well for himself.
Yes. Normally, I would agree that's enough, because I think someone like myself would be able to compute that those clear facts, do indeed contradict the prosecutor's case. But over the last decade or so, I've developed a sense that many people no longer have that ability to discern; look at much of the nonsense we've seen online about this case where the objective video and facts already known, are completely ignored in favor of the "painted picture" that was spuriously drawn. It seems to me that many people are no longer capable of discerning these types of things from pure fact, but rather still need a very explicit counter-narrative picture drawn for them and that's what I'm left wondering if perhaps defense attorneys maybe need to do for possible jurors that are lacking this sense? Maybe I'm jaded or misjudging the average person because I'm becoming a cranky old guy that assumes, "all those youngin's are idiots, these days."
Get off my lawn!
this is reuters...and the narrative they are reporting
the guy that runs the reuters news service is on the board of directors at pfizer.
the guy that runs the reuters news service is on the board of directors at pfizer.
Grosskreutz has a tattoo on the arm where he was shot. It is the common medical image of a snake wrapped around a staff, and at the top it has a banner that says, "Do no harm" and at the bottom, a banner reading "Do know harm."
Ironically Kyle blew off the lower banner..........Now he knows
Ironically Kyle blew off the lower banner..........Now he knows
People are fucking stupid.
Juries are really fucking stupid.
The local political machine is looking for a scalp.
I'm thinking right now there are 3-4 jurors who are leaning Not Guilty and just as many who want to hang him because he's a Nazi or whateverthefuck goes through the average Democrat's brain these days.
No I don't think you misjudged anything. That's pretty much how the general population is and we have mounds of examples of such. I just think it's a calculated risk if you will. The attorney is likely going to paint that alternative (and factually correct) story at a later time, since people get so easily confused. Constantly repeating the same basic facts tends to work when the jurors start to get tired of hearing details of this and that. They remember what the attorney keeps simple and says over and over. That's just one strategy I've seen work so I'm just speculating that's his plan based only on what's been said ITT. But I definitely agree with your take on " our society in general and their ability to discern and think"...
That's an excellent point. All of us who have jobs and responsibilities tend to get out of jury duty when in reality, it's the responsible hard working people of this country that need to be on the jury and make sure these cases get shut down so they aren't tried again
I bitched an moaned my first jury duty. I went, answered honestly and I was on jury. All I can say is Thank GOD I was. People just were willing to throw the guy in jail based on his looks. I think he was likely guilty, but the prosecution did NOT meet what I'd consider the requirement was to show he was DUI (he did refuse breath test, but the story the cops told as well as video evidence showed differently IMO).
Second trial was even more interesting and more important. None of us thought the guy was going to be guilty...we knew he was a POS. Well, once they read the LAW we were like..oh...guilty....guilty as F...except for one guy (the foreman since I refused since I'd done that before), who needed to have the law explained AGAIN. But even though I was not foreman, I pushed it. It's pathetic. ZERO ability to reason for at least half the jury and probably 75% of jury pool #1.
You make a good point that the defense will likely paint that story later, and it helped remind me that so far, contrary to what the "prosecution" has brought up so far is a bunch of witness testimony that helps the defense, the defense hasn't even started.
On further thought, it actually makes more sense to let that go for now, not push at Gaige's true intentions in cross, because he could very well blurt out, "I was trying to disarm." Rather, it is probably more clever to let that go for now, but wait for closing to point out Gaige's true actions of running after Kyle when he explicitly is heard on video asking what he's doing, Kyle responds, "going to get police," but Gaige chases him instead. Without testimony contrary to that, and without a possible refutation, the defense can now simply point out that Kyle was running toward a wall of police, Gaige chased him instead of rendering aid to anyone, and very likely since Kyle was headed straight toward police, in plain view, Gaige apparently tried to exert vigilante justice; closings are just a summation and some inference can be made from what was presented so far, and neither Gaige, nor anyone else, can refute during closing statements.
Yeah, I've been the foreman once before when I was younger. The lack of most people being able to apply the law as it's written is pretty scary actually. It's not about what we want or "what should" happen. It's about applying the law and the standard by which it is to be applied.
That's pretty much what I expect to happen as well as when the defense gets their turn, they will pound several of the facts and give good reason to dismiss all else. Then sum it up for them at the end. A good defense attorney knows how to do it. I watched my attorney defend me and man it was so hard for me not to yell out at times... (and it wasn't a criminal anything, so I can only imagine what it would be like if my freedom hung in the balance). When the facts are on your side, a good defense attorney can make you laugh out loud when he kicks the shit out of some idiot whose obviously lying. I hate lawyers as much as anyone, and so does everyone else..... until you need one that is..... watching a good one is a sight to behold for sure. Just watching my attorney listen was something I will never forget.
The one armed antifa medic was a ccw permitee. Key word is was. It had expired before this riot and it was illegal for him to be carrying that glock that night. Another point that is not being reported.
From
Comment to me from a 37 year Federal prosecutor after a bad verdict.
"Never underestimate the stupidity of a Jury."
Comment to me from a 37 year Federal prosecutor after a bad verdict.
"Never underestimate the stupidity of a Jury."
Gaige first gets shot in the arm by Kyle, then shoots himself in the foot while on the stand during cross exam. Poor old gaige is running out of limbs fast!
LOL slant much??? you statement is wrong
He didn't commit a burglary, Maybe he had in the past but he didn't have anything on him and wasn't on any private property when they guys chased him down.
District Attorney George Barnhill, the second prosecutor to take the case before recusing himself, sent an April 7 email noting “video of Arbery burglarizing a home immediately preceding the chase and confrontation.”
New video in Ahmaud Arbery case offers a view of what happened moments before the deadly shooting
A new video obtained by First Coast News shows a man, whom a prosecutor identifies as Ahmaud Arbery, entering a home...
www.google.com
YOU are full of it. He was jogging, and may have been casing houses. He looked like someone caught days earlier on surveillance cameras. Persons in pickup followed him, and jumped him. He had no clue what for, and fought back like everyone else here would. Shooter killed him, without cause.
Ok, that is absurd. He was not out for a jog. Who the fuck drives out to a random neighborhood to go for a jog?
He was casing homes under construction.
However, those fucks murdered him and need to pay.
Similar threads
