General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTwo more very unusual things about the Rittenhouse trial
Much has been written about the way the judge is antagonistic to virtually all defense attacks - one comment saying it is as if the judge is protecting a beloved grandchild. However, thinking about the trial, one thing I have NOT seen is anything to characterize or humanize the victims. Think of most murder trials, it is almost always the case that the victim's family or friends are there providing a visible measure of the pain of the loss of the one killed. Unless I missed something, I have seen nothing - at the trial or even in the media - on the victims as people. (Compare to the Aubrey or George Floyd case.)
Consider yesterday, Rittenhouse's mother was out speaking of how it was not in his character to seek trouble. (echoing his own definition of himself as a lifeguard and inflating his connections to EMT, fire and police). In addition, the right has of course amplified the very real violence of the reaction to the police actions against Blake.
Why are we only now getting the removal of the gun charge? The size of the assault weapon's barrel has been known long before any indictments were made. What they CLEARLY indicate is Wisconsin has ridiculous gun laws. Was that charge there to try to reassure people that Rittenhouse would be found guilty on something? Does its removal by the biased judge at this point mean that they think he will be acquitted on all counts.
Girard442
(6,070 posts)The judge is clearly angling for a clean sweep.
MichMan
(11,912 posts)A conviction wouldn't be appropriate under that circumstance
Deuxcents
(16,190 posts)Any repercussions for this judge.. maybe disbarred?
karynnj
(59,502 posts)As a layman, I don't know if there any any checks or balance on a rogue judge. Further, have his actions risen to the level to be seen as a rogue judge. He certainly looks biased to me, but the question is whether their are rules or customs that he has violated.
Bev54
(10,048 posts)obvious bias in Rittenhouse's favour, there is no room for appeal.
Ray Bruns
(4,093 posts)to seek trouble".
Wait. What.
She drove him to a town he did not live in with an AR-15.
How is that not "seeking trouble"?
rockfordfile
(8,702 posts)It's said he drove himself which makes it even worse. A gun was given to the loser by another loser. He made the choice at 17 to shoot three people with a gun. This kid said something like "it was cool' to why he had a AR-15. That way of thinking and some loser puts a gun in his hands.
Piasladic
(1,160 posts)wasn't this debunked?
suegeo
(2,573 posts)Walleye
(31,015 posts)At least not that I heard. Someone who is forced to kill someone they dont want to is usually devastated by their own action. Doesnt seem to bother Kyle.
karynnj
(59,502 posts)In fact, if his lawyers had scripted that - I would imagine he would have said that the entire thing was a nightmare and the deaths are something he will live with his entire life and that he has had difficulty with that. As it was, it came out like a very spoiled kid unhappy that his view of himself was at odds with the things he did that he was having to answer for.
Walleye
(31,015 posts)Some people, the right wing particularly, think that apologizing is admitting you did wrong. And they will never admit that
rockfordfile
(8,702 posts)"Consider yesterday, Rittenhouse's mother was out speaking of how it was not in his character to seek trouble" His mother is a pos just like him. He went to I guess a bar, and partied with right-wing domestic terrorist "proud boys". His mother goes on a un-American pos network. It proves a lot of things about those people.
inthewind21
(4,616 posts)His mother was at that bar as well. I could be wrong about that.
Yes, Yes she was.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/kyle-rittenhouse-out-bail-flashed-white-power-signs-bar-prosecutors-n1254250
Sympthsical
(9,073 posts)Why? They have things in their pasts that would affect the jury's view of them. Heavy note - this does not mean they deserved to die.
But this is particularly at issue with Rosenbaum. He spent ten years in prison for raping children. He was released from a mental facility the day before because of a suicide attempt. In my opinion, he wasn't mentally stable that night given the video and testimony we've seen of his behavior.
Because Rosenbaum's death is the key, the prosecution didn't want to go near it. If Rosenbaum is self-defense, then the other two men can be self-defense. If the prosecution admits evidence and testimony of his good qualities, then the defense can go to absolute town on his bad ones.
You'd have the jury sitting there going, "Rittenhouse killed a child rapist." If you want a guilty verdict, would you introduce that?
To your second point. Honestly, given the way the gun laws are written, the prosecution shouldn't have brought that particular charge. We're getting an argument about it now, because the defense made a motion about it.
karynnj
(59,502 posts)It makes the prosecution's decision very understandable. The gun charge comment makes sense.
I_UndergroundPanther
(12,463 posts)That's why during his"emotional outburst"had no tears to show for it.
He was faking that remorse. All psychopaths when caught want to elicit pity and convince others they deserve pity when they dont deserve it.
He needs to be locked up for the rest of his life.
MichMan
(11,912 posts)Did they not understand the laws? Once the Judge ruled he wasn't allowing that charge, they didn't object at all.