Ongoing Trials in Ahmaud Arbery and Kyle Rittenhouse Cases.

[AU9377 5,026]

6 hours ago, Auburnfan91 said:

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10210087/Prosecutors-Kenosha-shooter-trial-WITHHELD-evidence-defense.html

A judge does not send a jury to deliberate if he is contemplating a mistrial.

[AUDub 11,178]

Infuriating

I'm all for throwing the book at anyone that tries to get close to, dox or otherwise intimidate the jury. 

Edited November 18, 2021 by AUDub

[AUDub 11,178]

Judge has banned MSNBC from the courthouse. 

[AUDub 11,178]

Surely NBC would not be that irresponsible. 

Edited November 18, 2021 by AUDub

[AUDub 11,178]

59 minutes ago, AUDub said:

Surely NBC would not be that irresponsible. 

Welp, they fessed up. Turns out they are. 

Edited November 18, 2021 by AUDub

[DKW 86 7,440]

There could only be one reason for following the jury bus....

Where the hell have we gone as a nation?

[AU9377 5,026]

1 hour ago, AUDub said:

Welp, they fessed up. Turns out they are. 

I  have no patience for it either.  NBC has issued a statement that the person cited for running a red light was not employed by NBC, but was a free lance reporter who had been used by MSNBC in the past. 

I agree with the judge.. who knows what the truth is....

[AU9377 5,026]

On 11/16/2021 at 11:13 PM, Auburnfan91 said:

Mistrial with prejudice could still be on the table.

A big issue that could be in play is that the prosecutors withheld drone footage that's in HD and much clearer showing that Rittenhouse didn't aim his rifle at the Ziminsky's. The footage wasn't provided to the defense until Saturday after both sides had rested.

edit: misspelled ziminsky

You were right and I was wrong about the mistrial motion.  When I am wrong, I don't mind saying so.  Usually, in a trial court, the judge rules on all motions to terminate the trial before he allows deliberations to begin.  This judge decided that since part of the motion was made after all parties had closed, that he would allow the jury to reach a verdict and only rule on the mistrial if a guilty verdict is returned.  That could mean that he is planning to grant the motion and just as easily could mean that he doesn't have any plans to do so.  Its hard to tell.

[AUDub 11,178]

If there's one thing that's been made abundantly clear over this whole thing, it's how many of the blue checks on Twitter are ******* morons. 

[AUDub 11,178]

21 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

I  have no patience for it either.  NBC has issued a statement that the person cited for running a red light was not employed by NBC, but was a free lance reporter who had been used by MSNBC in the past. 

I agree with the judge.. who knows what the truth is....

Name dropped an NBC producer that has since gone radio silent on social media, and for good reason.

Whatever you think of this judge he was right to boot them out when it became clear that he was doing this at NBC's behest. He has to protect the trial. 

[AUDub 11,178]

1 hour ago, DKW 86 said:

There could only be one reason for following the jury bus....

Where the hell have we gone as a nation?

Exclusive interviews. That's what they're after. They want to ID the jury so they get first bite at the apple after the ruling. 

[AUDub 11,178]

When I think about it, I can't help but chuckle at the ultimate irony of that NBC producer having to delete all of her social media. Almost like she's learning a hard lesson about how doxxing people is a bad thing...

[AUDub 11,178]

There's some noise that we may have a verdict soon. 

[AUDub 11,178]

NYTimes just confirmed deliberations are done

[I_M4_AU 7,957]

I’m glad its done before nightfall, no matter how it turns out.

[AUDub 11,178]

Live feed

 

Edited November 19, 2021 by AUDub

[AUDub 11,178]

Not guilty all counts

[AU9377 5,026]

Everyone should respect the verdict.  The state didn't prove any part of their case and the verdict reflects that.  Had they not gone for the most severe charges possible, the result may have been different.

Edited November 19, 2021 by AU9377

[The Freak 2,528]

May the rioting commence!

[I_M4_AU 7,957]

Just now, The Freak said:

May the rioting commence!

They have several hours to stew about the verdict before nightfall.  Tonight’s news from Kenosha should be entertaining, as long as you are not in Kenosha.

[AUDub 11,178]

10 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

Everyone should respect the verdict.  The state didn't prove any part of their case and the verdict reflects that.  Had they not gone for the most severe charges possible, the result may have been different.

I think the jury got it right by law.

I have 2 concerns though. 

1. There are a lot of absolute idiots out there that do not understand the nuances of self-defense and the how and why of this verdict. Afraid this could encourage more people to think vigilantism is OK.

2. I hope Rittenhouse does not get sucked into the seductive alt-right community that is making a hard sell for him right now. 

[AU9377 5,026]

17 minutes ago, AUDub said:

I think the jury got it right by law.

I have 2 concerns though. 

1. There are a lot of absolute idiots out there that do not understand the nuances of self-defense and the how and why of this verdict. Afraid this could encourage more people to think vigilantism is OK.

2. I hope Rittenhouse does not get sucked into the seductive alt-right community that is making a hard sell for him right now. 

I agree completely.  Everyone needs to keep in mind that the fact that the state didn't prove its case does not mean that doing the things that Rittenhouse did makes him some kind of hero.  He had no business being there waiving around an AR-15.  That is not what we want to normalize as acceptable behavior any more than setting cars on fire and looting businesses in the name of protesting.  We cannot accept violence from any side of a debate.

Being a vigilante will result in that person forfeiting the remainder of their lives in most circumstances. If this jury had believed that he was being a vigilante, they would have convicted him today.

[AUDub 11,178]

It's nice to have a president that isn't stark raving mad. 

 

[auburn41 492]

47 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

He had no business being there waiving around an AR-15.

The fact of the matter is that the Gov of Wisconsin, a Democrat, should have called up the Wisconsin National Guard to insure order after the Blake shooting.  Remember Trump was President at that time and the Democrats thought the protests/riots were a good thing to keep Trump from getting re-elected.  The shootings involving Rittenhouse happened on the third night of protests/riots and if the Guard had been involved there would have been no need for citizens to get involved in protecting businesses.  Something like 20 vehicles had been burned the first two nights at that car lot.  

I find it strange, now that Trump is no longer President, that Gov Evers has mobilized 500 Wisconsin Guard troops to make sure nothing crazy happens after the verdict.  If he had done that after the Jacob Blake shooting, two rioters would still be alive and Gabe G. would not be missing a bicep.

Your characterization that he was waiving around an AR-15 is laughable.  He retreated every chance and only used force when his retreat was blocked or he got knocked to the ground.  It takes an unbelievably stupid human to attack someone with an AR-15 strapped to his chest anyway.  Of course, the people doing the attacking were in that location lighting dumpsters on fire to try and damage the car dealership to begin with so some judgement could be made about their mental faculties from that. 

[AUDub 11,178]