Update on the Rittenhouse trial

guno said:
Rittenhouse went to Pudgy's Pub in Mount Pleasant following his arraignment and while there he was seen flashing an "OK" hand sign associated with white supremacist groups.
Click to expand...

Racism. What 'white supremacist groups'? It is DEMOCRATS that are white supremacists...and racist. It is DEMOCRATS that created the KKK, and still fund and support it. It is DEMOCRATS that fund and support BLM and Antifa. It is DEMOCRATS that fought to preserve slavery. It is DEMOCRATS that use racism in college admissions, job applications, etc.

Inversion fallacy.
 
Walt said:
The most remarkable part of the whole exchange was when the judge announced what Rittenhouse's mindset was, and that no evidence to the contrary was admissible. That must be some judge, being able to look into a defendants mind, and not needing to hear any evidence.
Click to expand...

Persecution is not evidence.
 
guno said:
5fff8f99dcc18.preview.jpg



and more

https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.tow...a3dc6/5fff91f24da65.image.jpg?resize=1200,927


https://media.nbcchicago.com/2021/01/Screen-Shot-2021-01-14-at-10.43.34-AM.png
Click to expand...
And why does the left arm have a long sleeve but the right arm have a short sleeve...odd???
 
Damocles said:
I'd put him in jail for.contempt after the trial. He's clearly and brazenly trying to force a mistrial.
Click to expand...

You are buying into the hype, the judge will not grant a mistrial and he will not hold anyone in contempt and he will not report anyone to the bar association, he's just blowing off steam and playing for the cameras. As long as he does not do it in front of the jury, I don't really care.

It seems there is good reason you are not a judge.

A judge does not have plenary power to simply put someone in jail, there has to be good reason and it is appealable. Judges have been sanctioned for doing it.
 
Damocles said:
The prosecutor did such a poor job that he now feels he will lose, so instead of just realizing he had no case to begin with he's trying to force a mistrial by ignoring constitutional rights and ethics in the trial by trying to taint the jury bringing up subjects that have already been ruled on and he knows he should not. The judge has had to chastise him several times. If this does get dismissed with prejudice it will be his own fault. And if he loses by default like that he deserves to have some consequences.
Click to expand...

The prosecutor is doing a good job with the facts he has. The judge is an ass who clearly does not like the prosecutor because he refuses to treat the judge as if he were a king. The good thing about the judge is that he appears to make fair rulings and does his antics outside the presence of the jury.
 
Damocles said:
I was listening to that exchange and the condescension in the voice of the prosecution was astounding to me. I would have been tempted to flat stop him before he got far enough into his explanation to tell him to guard his tone or he'd find himself in a cell tonight while he waited for the trial to start tomorrow. I've seen judges do it before. Contempt was clearly in the voice of the prosecution as he tried to "explain" like he was talking to someone who hadn't already ruled on that subject.
Click to expand...

You would put someone in jail based on the tone of his voice? Wow, I'm very glad you are not a judge.
 
Jarod said:
The prosecutor is doing a good job with the facts he has. The judge is an ass who clearly does not like the prosecutor because he refuses to treat the judge as if he were a king. The good thing about the judge is that he appears to make fair rulings and does his antics outside the presence of the jury.
Click to expand...
The Prosecutor talking about Rittenhouse remaining silent is clearly a 5th amendment rights violation. The Judge was right to give him a tongue lashing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top