Rittenhouse found not guilty on all counts
- Thread starter moosedog
- Start date
For the record, he didn't cross the stateline with the weapon. He picked it up here.
Not a felon but he (Grosskreutz) did have a handgun, pointed it at Rittenhouse and then testified that Rittenhouse only shot him after he pointed the handgun at Rittenhouse. And Grosskreutz was a prosecution witness!
sigp220.45
US Veteran
Because the prosecution filed “riot prevention” charges. And the impetus for the original riot - the Jacob Blake shooting - was also found to be justified.
All they do with this stuff is kick the can down the road until there is an acquittal, then you get some more riots. I suspect the jurors dragged it out to either give the appearance of a thorough deliberation, or more likely they took their time and carefully looked at each charge and the jury instructions before they acquitted him of the whole mess.
How about they just stop the riots?
I get it - just because you can go somewhere doesn’t mean you should. But this kid was never the aggressor. Not doing something that is legal and your right to do because you fear being wrongly charged? Where would we be if that had been the norm for the last few hundred years?
Last edited:
Most folks here are saying Kyle shouldn't have been there. I know at least some here know that a large part of Kyle's family lived in Kenosha. Why shouldn't he have been there? The mobs were burning down people's businesses, burning their cars, looting and beating people. I personally saw video of an older woman trying to get the rioters to leave her business alone, and was beaten with a 2x4 for her efforts. I suspect Kyle went to Kenosha to try to protect his family there. He took the gun because he knew it was dangerous, like most of us would.
Always thought having a record expunged just removed/sealed the record of the conviction, not overturned it. If he was asked on Fed/state firearm if he was ever convicted of a felony, and answered no, wouldn't he have lied on that form? There are some lawyers on here who might be able to shed some light?
Doug M.
Member
It's not my duty (any more) to go to bad stuff and try to stop it. I avoid places that I think will be stupid. I would not have been there, but that's after 40+ years of development after Kyle's age. Teenage me? Heck, I don't like that guy - and we should all remember that our teen selves might have been less than wonderful.
Ok, that all aside: This prosecution was shameful. I have been a part time and cop and full time prosecutor in two states. What I saw here was a collection of deliberate fabrications by "prosecutors" who bring shame to the title; who should not be lawyers at all. The dynamics shown were clear self-defense.
To me, it seems like this prosecution stems from the same garbage that allowed for the knowingly fabricated "consent decree" in Seattle, which really increased the deterioration of the city, and that lead directly to the occupation of Capitol Hill and the functional end of honest policing (and prosecution) in King County. We have a collection of people who cannot tell the difference between actual questionable or improper police conduct (there are a couple of incidents involving the Louisiana State Police that simply cannot stand scrutiny) and the collateral consequences of criminals being criminals. Protesting the death of the latter group is just insane, reflecting in part the influence of the Balko-Wexler Axis of Evil.
I limit where I go. I may change my retirement plans. But I do not intend to be a target of corrupt prosecutors of this nature ever.
ETA: Generally state law controls the legal effect of the process to remove a conviction and to "expunge" it will usually mean it is gone as a matter of law and there is no longer a conviction. Apparently the person in question was not convicted anyway.
Ok, that all aside: This prosecution was shameful. I have been a part time and cop and full time prosecutor in two states. What I saw here was a collection of deliberate fabrications by "prosecutors" who bring shame to the title; who should not be lawyers at all. The dynamics shown were clear self-defense.
To me, it seems like this prosecution stems from the same garbage that allowed for the knowingly fabricated "consent decree" in Seattle, which really increased the deterioration of the city, and that lead directly to the occupation of Capitol Hill and the functional end of honest policing (and prosecution) in King County. We have a collection of people who cannot tell the difference between actual questionable or improper police conduct (there are a couple of incidents involving the Louisiana State Police that simply cannot stand scrutiny) and the collateral consequences of criminals being criminals. Protesting the death of the latter group is just insane, reflecting in part the influence of the Balko-Wexler Axis of Evil.
I limit where I go. I may change my retirement plans. But I do not intend to be a target of corrupt prosecutors of this nature ever.
ETA: Generally state law controls the legal effect of the process to remove a conviction and to "expunge" it will usually mean it is gone as a matter of law and there is no longer a conviction. Apparently the person in question was not convicted anyway.
Last edited:
My fifth Great Grandfather enlisted in the Colonial Army when he was 14 (in place of his father, who had fought in the French and Indian War) and was 17 when he helped load and fire the first cannon at Yorktown. Many years later, when applying for his Revolutionary War Pension he answered the question (in court under oath) of what officers he personally knew and would know him, that he personally knew General Wayne, General Lafayette and General Washington.
Last edited:
What's scary is the wide open social media sites are on fire about this. The Internet Warriors are resorting to vile name calling and threats. It doesn’t bode well for the future
What distresses me about what I'm seeing online is this insistence that Rittenhouse somehow "got away" with something, and that the "fight for justice" will continue...
As I have stated many times here on the Forum, I don't think he should have been there...but a jury heard the testimony, reviewed the evidence, deliberated for 25 hours, and found him not guilty. People have to respect that...being upset at a verdict doesn't mean said verdict was unfair...
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2012
- Messages
- 3,345
- Reaction score
- 5,562
The lovely mantra of Progressivism has spent the last 100+ yrs convincing you that is the norm.
It's not that he shouldn't be there, it's that he shouldn't have had to be there.
When do the folks that shirked their duty to protect life and property get charged?
There were several groups of armed men in various locations around Kenosha, especially after rumors emerged that the mobs were going after the more outlying neighborhoods. Then there were those of us sitting up at home, watching the storm live-streamed on Facebook, prepared but hoping to God that it didn't come our way.
He did do an interview with Chris Cuomo on CNN and can be found on Youtube. Look up "Chris Cuomo" and "Mark Richards".
Last edited:
Puller
Member
These people, the internet warriors, the rioters, the "groups" who think they have been wronged in this, have no respect. They don't respect the institutions of the legal system, whether they think it works or not. They do not respect anyone who disagrees with them as their side is the only side. Heck, they don't even respect each other because when they're not wantonly destroying someone else's city, they do nothing to fix their own communities as the body counts increase while they prey on each other.
Last edited:
CAJUNLAWYER
Member
What really pisses me off is the disrespect shown for the jury verdict by of all people the president of the United states.
But on the other hand, this outrage probably matches the outrage felt after the OJ verdict-just from a differing perspective. I suspect the vitriole felt is of equal level-but the OJ vitriole of 25 or so years old and ancient history. But I don't remember Clinton saying he was angered by the OJ verdict.
Our country survived the OJ verdict, I suspect it will survive this one as well.
But on the other hand, this outrage probably matches the outrage felt after the OJ verdict-just from a differing perspective. I suspect the vitriole felt is of equal level-but the OJ vitriole of 25 or so years old and ancient history. But I don't remember Clinton saying he was angered by the OJ verdict.
Our country survived the OJ verdict, I suspect it will survive this one as well.
Last edited:
I think the prez — who is a progressive, after all — showed the right attitude to take for those who are unhappy with the verdict. His position is the jury's decision must be respected.
In a statement later Friday afternoon, Biden acknowledged that the verdict in the trial "will leave many Americans feeling angry and concerned, myself included." He said that everyone "must acknowledge that the jury has spoken."
"Look, I stand by what the jury has concluded," he said. "The jury system works, and we have to abide by it."
Biden reacts to Rittenhouse verdict: 'The jury system works, and we have to abide by it' - CNNPolitics
Let's try to confine our comments to the Rittenhouse verdict, and reactions to it, only. Otherwise we will surely run afoul of the forum's ban on political discussion.
In a statement later Friday afternoon, Biden acknowledged that the verdict in the trial "will leave many Americans feeling angry and concerned, myself included." He said that everyone "must acknowledge that the jury has spoken."
"Look, I stand by what the jury has concluded," he said. "The jury system works, and we have to abide by it."
Biden reacts to Rittenhouse verdict: 'The jury system works, and we have to abide by it' - CNNPolitics
Let's try to confine our comments to the Rittenhouse verdict, and reactions to it, only. Otherwise we will surely run afoul of the forum's ban on political discussion.
Last edited:
I think that the jury did a good job, and came to the correct verdict.
I also hope that things like this never happen again, but that would be naive on my part.
I also hope that things like this never happen again, but that would be naive on my part.
Thank you. Yours are more eloquent words than had I for this state of affairs.
My bet is on 'no.'
