Ask Your Question
Any of yall watchin this shit show of a trial? Lol
This trial seems to be self defense as a concept being on trial here.
It is the textbook definition of self defense. Adding the flavor text of (out of state, illegal weapon, curfew) is not up to the debate of whether or not its self defense.
It’s scary that a judge can get away with being so biased in such a high profile case…imagine what all the right wing judges across the country are doing in cases that nobody is paying attention to.
How is the judge biased?
He wont admit how biased he actually is about this case. No matter what valid argument you raise it will never be enough to convince him that what kyle did was completely justified. It's the judges bias because hes unable to come up with the reasonable facts that would cause kyle to be guilty of first degree homicide.
What just because he had a god bless america ringtone?
What about all the charges that he refused to drop for the defense?
Is it just because you didnt see any of the trial including when gage specifically said he pointed the gun at Kyle. Or rossemabalm grabbed kyles gun?
Are you just hung up on the proven false narrative that he crossed state lines with a gun? Or giving a victim blaming mentality of he shouldnt be out there in a town during a damaging riot were his father lives in and where he works that's a convenient 20 mile drive from where he lives?
You are clearly in the losing position here. Like all the other leftist cultists that still belive that kyle is a racist that killed black people.
What was bias?
Man, I really need to remember to start putting trigger warnings on any of my comments about this activist judge. Sheesh.
I’ve stopped watching the trial because the fix is clearly in. It’s probably going to be declared a mistrial with prejudice so they won’t have to risk a jury convicting a murderer of murder, but I’m sure they’ve stacked the jury just in case. But the obvious biases include not letting the prosecution refer to the victims as victims(while leaving open the possibility to refer to them as rioters or looters without them being convicted of anything of the sort),, not admitting the video of Rittenhouse saying “I wish I had my AR, I’d start shooting rounds at them,” while watching people leave a CVS, not allowing the prosecution to point out that the far right witness the defense called works for Steve Bannon and is the type of person that helps radicalize mass shooters like Rittenhouse. I wonder how many people don’t even realize that the videos they’re using to claim “self defense” were edited together by far right extremists who don’t even try to hide their views that they want a civil war and anybody who stops them from taking over the country should be shot and killed. That’s like calling Hitler as a witness for a Goebbels trial and the judge not letting the prosecution talk about his political views, after telling the jury they should stand and applaud the witness before he testifies.
At the end of the day though your complaints are all political. In the eyes of the law jt doesnt matter if he was literally dressed in a nazi uniform and telling all the protestors to go fuck themselves. He still has the right to defend himself if someone puts his life in danger. Idk what you mean by the video being edited by far right extremists. I doubt you're saying its CGI. But most of the videos presented were actually recorded and uploaded online by other protestors who arent right wing.
If you take the politics out of it and you just see that video of a mob of people chasing a guy running for his life then attacking him, kicking his face, skateboard to the head, then pistol stuck in his face. You'd say yeah thats definitely self defense. But because you have interjected politics in it I believe it's swaying your views of the situation. Try to be more impartial.
I’m not sure what you mean by my complaints are political. Do you mean the judge’s biases that I’m pointing out are political? If so, yes, I agree. I can’t take political out of it though, that’s up to the judge, and he’s chosen not to do that. Drew Hernandez, who works for Steve Bannon, admitted under oath that his video was edited together from multiple cameras and not the raw footage. No CGI here, despite the judge’s asinine claim that zooming in on a video might alter the pixels and therefore the prosecution couldn’t do so. A lot of the early coverage was lead by far right people who knew they had to get ahead of the story and push their agenda, while everybody else was trying to figure out what actually happened. As the old saying goes, a lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.
You have to stop looking at it so emotionally. “Running for his life” is an emotional response, try to be more objective. Kyle Rittenhouse, completely unprovoked, pointed a gun at somebody and that person did what anybody would do, they tried to defend themselves. And Rittenhouse shot them four times, including twice in the head and back as they were falling to the ground. Rittenhouse had successfully done what he said he wanted to do in a previous video at a different protest. Then two other people also ended up getting shot for doing what lots of people would do in an active shooter situation, try to stop the murderer who they just saw murder someone.
I'm some what watching it and I feel sorry for the guy so far. He seems to have acted in self-defense.
No op enlighten me
The prosecutor said "so you were erasing graffiti from the school walls?"
When kyle said yes he said
"Did you know what the graffiti said when you erased it?" Then looks at the jury like thats some awesome point. Wtf
to me the divide seems to be that if kyle walks free counterprotesters will be free to open carry and put out fires/block areas and if you are the aggressor they have the right to shoot you.
the left doesn't like this since it would make protesting harder, while the right is totally fine with this.
Protesting is one thing. Rioting, arson, & robbery are another.
Why is it interesting?
Because someone was too eager to go for an indictment before they really had a case. The witnesses for the prosecution seem more like witnesses for the defense. The prosecution is really desperate. Like watching someone throw spaghetti at a wall and hoping something is going to stick. So he keeps trying to get away with questionable courtroom antics and the judge keeps calling him out on them.
If I was the prosecutor I'd call in sick and go fill out job applications or apply to a trade school.
"You were chasing Kyle"
"You were running towards kyle as he ran away?"
"That is a fair statement"
"You were running towards him to help him as a medic because of his injuries?"
"You then placed a gun to his head"
"That is correct."
Yeah that was a real spit-take when he admitted pointing the gun at Rittenhouse when he was shot. Then the prosecutor seemed to think Rittenhouse should have waited for the guy to shoot him in the head first before defending himself.
The prosecution is also trying to get the frame of mind of rittenhouse for every frame of a 3 second high stress moment. When kyle testified the guy clearly has ptsd from that shit.
Its so funny because anytime the prosecutors come up with a new stupid conspiracy all the defense has to do is rewind the video since its all on tape. Its kind of funny. Its laughable that they're even trying. I love how they built gauge up to be a model citizen and then the defense just presses play on the video LOL
I would love to see how things will turn out.
Whether innocent or guilty there will be people unhappy with the outcome.
Copyright 2022 isitnormal.com
All Rights Reserved
Pro bono lawyer needed