The Trial of Kyle Rittenhouse Continues to Be Unnervingly Weird

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  john-russell  •  4 weeks ago  •  88 comments

The Trial of Kyle Rittenhouse Continues to Be Unnervingly Weird
Binger began to show Rittenhouse drone footage from the night of the shootings that seemed to contradict some of Rittenhouse’s account of what happened. Binger quite naturally asked the detective who was operating the iPad on which the drone footage was being shown to use the pinch-zoom function common to any of us who have an iPhone.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T







The Trial of Kyle Rittenhouse Continues to Be Unnervingly Weird


CHARLES P. PIERCE NOVEMBER 10, 2021


ESQUIRE ›

Annotations

The Trial of Kyle Rittenhouse Continues to Be Unnervingly Weird

CHARLES P. PIERCE NOVEMBER 10, 2021

The prime video on Wednesday from the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse, who killed two men and wounded a third in Kenosha, Wisconsin during the disturbances there that followed the police shooting of Jacob Blake in August 2020, is going to be Rittenhouse’s operatic breakdown under the questioning of defense attorney Mark Richards. Either that, or yet another high-decibel scolding of the prosecutors by Judge Bruce Schroeder.

(A note: while I thought it odd that a 17-year old who’d so coolly turned himself in to police after shooting three people in the middle of a riot would come apart so completely while testifying in his own defense, I would point out that the witness box is a godawful place to be. I have testified twice in my life, both in civil actions in which I was neither plaintiff nor defendant. It’s a goddamn nerve-wracking experience even in the most benign circumstances.)

However, late in the afternoon session, as Rittenhouse was being cross-examined by prosecutor Thomas Binger, the trial veered into a very strange place. Binger, as I noted, has been the target of Judge Schroeder’s ire on several occasions, including earlier on Wednesday, when Schroeder told Binger, flatly, “I don’t believe you when you say you were acting in good faith.” (Binger had attempted to introduce, through a side door, evidence that Schroeder already had refused to admit under other circumstances.) When they came back from recess, the defense accused Binger of trying to incite a mistrial, and then moved for a mistrial with prejudice, which would mean Rittenhouse would walk and then he never could be tried again. Schroeder took the motion “under advisement,” keeping it in his pocket where it could function as a warning against angering him further.

Which is about when things got weird. Binger began to show Rittenhouse drone footage from the night of the shootings that seemed to contradict some of Rittenhouse’s account of what happened. Binger quite naturally asked the detective who was operating the iPad on which the drone footage was being shown to use the pinch-zoom function common to any of us who have an iPhone. The defense leaped to object on the grounds (I think) that “artificial intelligence” in the pinch-zoom changed the pixels according to what Richards called the “logarithms” of the device’s design. The software, Richards argued, might create “what it thinks is there, not what necessarily is there.”

Frankly, I didn’t know what in the hell Richards was talking about. Artificial intelligence? Logarithms? (I guess he was going for “algorithms,” but I can’t be sure.) But Judge Schroeder then leaped in and further confused matters. From the New York Times:

That objection set off a 10-minute discussion among the lawyers and Judge Bruce Schroeder. Mr. Binger said zooming in on images shown on iPads, iPhones and other similar devices is a routine part of daily life that all jurors would understand, and that the procedure would not affect the integrity of the image.

He argued that if the defense lawyers thought otherwise, they should have to present expert testimony saying so. But Judge Schroeder said that the burden was on Mr. Binger to prove that zooming would not distort the video. “Is the image in its virginal state?” the judge asked.

(Ed. Note: Oh, dear god in heaven.)

Mr. Binger then asked for an adjournment, but Judge Schroeder denied the request. Instead, he ordered a 15-minute recess and suggested that Mr. Binger could, perhaps, get somebody to testify to the zoomed video’s accuracy “within minutes.”

Were I a cynical fellow, I might conclude that Richards knows better, but that he was counting on the judge being something of a Luddite, which turned out to be a pretty good bet. So the judge gave the prosecution 15 minutes to find an expert to testify that something every baby’s grandma knows to be true is actually the way things are. Right now, that witness box Kyle Rittenhouse is in looks an awful lot like the catbird seat.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io




Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1  seeder  JohnRussell    4 weeks ago

To me, the case involving Rosenbaum hinges on whether or not he grabbed Rittenhouse gun and there was a struggle. 

It appears to me from this video that Rosenbaum had not gotten close enough to Rittenhouse to grab the gun when he was shot. 

I wonder if that is what the "enhanced" video that the judge would not allow showed. 

This might be the worst judge in a high profile case since Julius Hoffman and the Chicago 7. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  JohnRussell @1    4 weeks ago

Am I imagining things, or was Rittenhouse being chased through a parking lot by someone and when the man got close to him Rittenhouse wheeled back and shot the guy 4 times . Was Rosenbaum armed?  What did Rittenhouse use deadly force to defend himself from? A fistfight? 

 
 
 
squiggy
Sophomore Quiet
1.1.1  squiggy  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1    4 weeks ago

What did Rittenhouse use deadly force to defend himself from? A fistfight? 

I'll leave the innuendo alone but self-defense isn't a weapons match - you use what you have. The amount of force allowed depends on the beating-recipient's reasonable belief that he is in imminent danger. A fear of a manual beating to death by a large human gets you over the threshold.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.1.2  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  squiggy @1.1.1    4 weeks ago

Rittenhouse doesnt appear to be tiny.

 I dont recall Rosenbaum being armed. Unless there is video evidence that Rosenbaum grabbed Rittenhouse's gun , I think the kid has to face the music. The video is not entirely clear, but it did not appear to me that Rosenbaum grabbed the barrel of the gun.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
1.1.3  Kavika   replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.2    4 weeks ago

 Viewing the video and it looks like Rittenhouse turned and shot Rosenbaum two of the shots were at a downward angle.

The video is on you tube but I can't link it here for some reason.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
1.1.4  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.2    4 weeks ago

Legal news from one of the most deranged leftists out there. Good one.  

One of Rosenbaums friend fired a shot directly behind Rittenhouse as he was trying to taken Rittenhouse's gun..

You are allowed to defend yourself with a gun if you are reasonably threated with bodily harm. The gun shot, being chased by an unstable man who was threatening to kill people and who  attempted to take his gun creates a threat of bodily harm. I think anyone who claims they wouldn't be threatened in Rittenhouse's situation is lying. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.1.5  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.4    4 weeks ago

Where is the video of Rosenbaum trying to take Rittenhouse's gun? The video I see shows Rosenbaum being shot before he reached Rittenhouses gun. Maybe I am missing something. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
1.1.6  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.5    4 weeks ago

You have the eyewitness testimony, the video, the medical evidence. The state examiner said he was either touching the gun or was very close when he was shot

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.1.7  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.6    4 weeks ago

So he shot an unarmed man four times because he was getting too close to him. Unless Rosenbaum grabbed the gun I dont see what the defense is. 

You can just shoot someone because they said they wanted to kill you? 

I still think he is going to get off but the fact that the judge wont allow video that contradicts Rittenhouse story is disturbing.  I am not sure this trial has been on the up and up. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
1.1.8  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.7    4 weeks ago

ou can just shoot someone because they said they wanted to kill you? 

It's a factor. You add up all the circumstances and the issue is whether he reasonably  thought he  was in danger of being killed or seriously hurt.  Rosenbaum's actions make that a credible threat.  

Even Jeffrey Toobin is now admitting he has a good case.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.9  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.7    4 weeks ago
"I am not sure this trial has been on the up and up."

It hasn't been.  That judge is a fucking idiot.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.10  Tessylo  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.8    4 weeks ago
"Even Jeffrey Toobin is now admitting he has a good case."  

LOL!

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1.11  Texan1211  replied to  Sean Treacy @1.1.8    4 weeks ago

Seeing the reactions from our progressive liberals here, what are the odds that riots will happen if Rittenhouse is not convicted?

 
 
 
GregTx
Sophomore Participates
1.1.12  GregTx  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.11    4 weeks ago

It is getting close to Christmas, probably about time to do some gift looting....

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
1.1.13  Sean Treacy  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.11    4 weeks ago

Pretty damn high. 

They will destroy Kenosha for the right to riot, loot, commit arson and threaten people without any consequences.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1.16  Texan1211  replied to    4 weeks ago
Who votes this shit up?

Thinking folks who actually follow the news and read links provided to them.

 
 
 
GregTx
Sophomore Participates
1.1.17  GregTx  replied to    4 weeks ago

What shit would that be?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.18  Tessylo  replied to    4 weeks ago
"Thinking folks who actually follow the news and read links provided to them."

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
GregTx
Sophomore Participates
1.1.20  GregTx  replied to    4 weeks ago

No, I hadn't heard that Christmas was dead. I did hear it was going to be really freaking expensive this year though.....

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Junior Quiet
1.1.21  Jack_TX  replied to    4 weeks ago
This promises to only get uglier.

You are not wrong.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.22  Tessylo  replied to  Tessylo @1.1.18    4 weeks ago

We all know that leaves the alleged conservatives/republicans/supporters of killers - out.

 
 
 
gooseisback
Freshman Silent
1.1.23  gooseisback  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.7    4 weeks ago
So he shot an unarmed man four times because he was getting too close to him.

Yes, he shot the stupid the felon who had threatened to kill him earlier in the evening.  What was he suppose to do, you never answer that. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.1.24  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  gooseisback @1.1.23    4 weeks ago
Yes, he shot the stupid the felon

Irrelevant

 
 
 
gooseisback
Freshman Silent
1.1.25  gooseisback  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.24    4 weeks ago
Irrelevant

The "stupid" was referring to anybody chasing someone who has a firearm. Never answered what he was suppose to do.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.1.26  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  gooseisback @1.1.25    4 weeks ago

If Rosenbaum grabbed the barrel of his gun, Rittenhouse will be acquitted. 

His entire presence there, in Kenosha, doing what he was doing, was unjustified. 

 
 
 
gooseisback
Freshman Silent
1.1.27  gooseisback  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.26    4 weeks ago
His entire presence there, in Kenosha, doing what he was doing, was unjustified

So Rosenbaum chasing with intent to do bodily injury is "Justiifed"?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.1.28  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.26    3 weeks ago
His entire presence there, in Kenosha, doing what he was doing, was unjustified. 

See, this is America. He doesn't have to justify his presence to you or anyone else. He had every right to be there.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.1.29  Trout Giggles  replied to    3 weeks ago

The Usual Suspects of course

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
1.1.30  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.2    3 weeks ago

Considering the whack a doodle judge is running his own 3 ring circus, I don't expect him to be found guilty unless they jury has a collective IQ higher than the judge's shoe size.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.2  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @1    4 weeks ago

Rittenhouse defense incorrectly claims iPad pinch-to-zoom modifies footage

d1edc6f0-42f3-11ec-99e7-b08ae4bd2106
James Armstrong, a photographic expert in the Wisconsin State Crime Lab, testifies about drone video during the Kyle Rittenhouse trial in Kenosha (Wisconsin) Circuit Court in Kenosha, Wisconsin, U.S., November 9, 2021. Mark Hertzberg/Pool via REUTERS
Jon Fingas
· Weekend Editor
Thu, November 11, 2021, 9:21 AM
A lack of technical knowledge may have just influenced an important court case. The New York Times   reports  the defense for shooter Kyle Rittenhouse incorrectly claimed that an iPad's pinch-to-zoom function could modify footage of the incident, "creating what it thinks is there, not what necessarily is there." That sparked a debate between lawyers and Judge Schroeder, who maintained the burden was on the prosecution to show the imagery remained in its "virginal state," not on the defense to prove manipulation.

The judge may have accepted the argument. He denied the prosecution's request for an adjournment and instead called for a 15-minute recess, suggesting the team could find an expert to support their claim in that space of time. They didn't, and   The Verge   noted   that the trial resumed with the jury watching zoom-free video on a Windows PC connected to the courtroom TV.

As you might imagine, the defense's claim played fast and loose with the truth. Pinch-to-zoom on all devices may use algorithms, but only to scale the image — it doesn't change the content itself. This was an attempt to prevent the jury from getting a clearer view of the action, not a genuine challenge to the integrity of the video.

The court scene underscored a recurring problem with technical inexperience in criminal cases. When judges and law enforcement don't understand how technology works, they may set unrealistic expectations or even skew the outcome of a case. Police have repeatedly   asked for Alexa recordings   on the unfounded assumption that smart speakers are always recording, for instance. While it's not clear if the inaccurate pinch-to-zoom claim will significantly affect Rittenhouse's fate, it certainly didn't help jurors.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Junior Quiet
1.3  Jack_TX  replied to  JohnRussell @1    4 weeks ago
This might be the worst judge in a high profile case since Julius Hoffman and the Chicago 7.

Lance Ito says hello.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.4  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @1    3 weeks ago

247960542_248404090724506_6786876872383090716_n.jpg?_nc_cat=1&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=LVDzCCC31MgAX8Er9nR&_nc_ht=scontent-iad3-1.xx&oh=899c34303994b314b11c857ff031ec7a&oe=6192A3FC

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.4.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @1.4    3 weeks ago

Do you believe that silly poster?

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
1.5  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @1    3 weeks ago

No, that honor goes to the judge on the OJ murder trial.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2  seeder  JohnRussell    4 weeks ago
Alex Mohajer
@AlexMohajer
·
2h
The defense in the Rittenhouse murder trial just objected to viewing drone video of the murder by saying that Apple iPhones have algorithms that create a simulation of what they think the videos show when you zoom in and therefore change it. Judge is agreeing with him. Bonkers.
=================================================================
Mara G, DBA   2600.png2763.png1f316.png1f4a5.png1f30a.png
@DbaMara
·
1h
Rittenhouse Trial: showing a drone video and enlarging it so everyone can see is NOT altering the video w/AI anymore than increasing the volume on a microphone is altering the voice or the words that are said. This judge is clearly on the side of the defense.
 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
2.1  Ozzwald  replied to  JohnRussell @2    4 weeks ago
This judge is clearly on the side of the defense.

Add to this the judge's refusal to allow the people shot to be called "victims".

 
 
 
gooseisback
Freshman Silent
2.1.1  gooseisback  replied to  Ozzwald @2.1    4 weeks ago
people shot to be called "victims".

They were criminals right up until the time the bullet went through them and they magically became victims. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Senior Principal
2.1.2  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Ozzwald @2.1    4 weeks ago
Add to this the judge's refusal to allow the people shot to be called "victims".

The judge doesn't allow people in his courtroom to be referred to as victims. ANY people.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
2.1.3  Ozzwald  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.2    4 weeks ago
The judge doesn't allow people in his courtroom to be referred to as victims. ANY people.

That is NOT true.  He has been known to use that restriction, but that true for every case of his.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
2.1.4  Ozzwald  replied to  gooseisback @2.1.1    4 weeks ago
They were criminals right up until the time the bullet went through them and they magically became victims.

What crime is that?  Being on a public street?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
2.1.5  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Ozzwald @2.1    3 weeks ago
Add to this the judge's refusal to allow the people shot to be called "victims".

Seems like the prosecutors proved the people shot weren't victims.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.6  Tessylo  replied to  Ozzwald @2.1.4    3 weeks ago

It's just sickening how some folks applaud this fat little pig killer for being the judge, jury, and executioner for killing alleged criminals (with some posters going into graphic detail about one of his murdered VICTIMS being an alleged pedophile 'penetrating little boys anally') - I mean what kind of sick fucking shit is that and how would they know and why do they applaud their death for these alleged wrongdoings? Applauding this little killer for taking out folks who were alleged criminals - how would this little republican know that?  I forgot what hateful things this poster said about the other alleged criminal.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
2.1.7  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Ozzwald @2.1    3 weeks ago

He just knocked down the firearms violations.  This little POS will be let loose and he will kill again.  Bet on it.

 
 
 
gooseisback
Freshman Silent
2.1.8  gooseisback  replied to  Ozzwald @2.1.4    3 weeks ago
What crime is that?

Assault, assault with intent to do bodily harm, Assault with a deadly weapon, assault with intent to kill.  Maybe YOU should answer why they where attempting to "assault" Rittenhouse or do you not believe your lying eyes. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3  seeder  JohnRussell    4 weeks ago
NORTHERN LIGHTS
@nort_lights
Judge Proud boy calls for intermission when drone footage contradicting Killer Rittenhouse testimony, killer looks terrified!
 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3    4 weeks ago

A complete joke of a comment!

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
4  bbl-1    4 weeks ago

Will Rittenhouse skate because Trump has thus far?  I look for a hung jury.  It only takes one.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.1  Texan1211  replied to  bbl-1 @4    4 weeks ago
Will Rittenhouse skate because Trump has thus far?

How on earth are they even remotely related to each other??????

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
4.1.1  bbl-1  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1    4 weeks ago

Because of the unsheathed pecker that went into The Stormy Who.  That is why they're related.

 
 
 
GregTx
Sophomore Participates
4.1.2  GregTx  replied to  bbl-1 @4.1.1    3 weeks ago

jrSmiley_88_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.1.3  Texan1211  replied to  GregTx @4.1.2    3 weeks ago
jrSmiley_88_smiley_image.gif

Amen, brother, amen!

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
4.1.4  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1    3 weeks ago

It triggered his TDS.

 
 
 
bbl-1
Professor Quiet
4.1.6  bbl-1  replied to  GregTx @4.1.2    3 weeks ago

That is all there is to the Trump.  Nothing more, nothing less.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
4.1.7  Texan1211  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.4    3 weeks ago

I don't know what triggered him, but the subsequent posts didn't make any sense either!

Maybe he got confused with this topic and Helsinki again?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
4.1.8  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Texan1211 @4.1.7    3 weeks ago
Maybe he got confused

The smell of air change?

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
4.2  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  bbl-1 @4    3 weeks ago

If he is found guilty, I bet that Jackass of a judge will overturn the conviction.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.2.1  Tessylo  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @4.2    3 weeks ago

Yup, he's been sucking that fat killer's dick the whole time.  

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
5  Sean Treacy    4 weeks ago

Prosecutor asks Kyle Rittenhouse why a man with a handgun pointed at him is a threat when he has an AR-15.

How is this real?

— David Hookstead (@dhookstead)   November 10, 2021

The Rittenhouse prosecutor is just flailing. He just asked Rittenhouse (a firehouse cadet) why he ran toward a fire with an extinguisher.

Rittenhouse: "It was a fire?"

This is how insane the prosecution is. It's no wonder people believe the prosecution is trying for a mistrial to avoid going to a jury. 

 
 
 
GregTx
Sophomore Participates
6  GregTx    4 weeks ago

A liberal blogger, a HuffPost contributor and someone called "Northern lights"? Mmmmkay....

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
6.1  Tessylo  replied to  GregTx @6    4 weeks ago

Truth/reality = LIBERAL BIAS

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
6.1.1  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @6.1    4 weeks ago
Truth/reality = LIBERAL BIAS

Said no one TRUTHFULLY----EVER!

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
6.1.2  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Tessylo @6.1    3 weeks ago

That's funny coming from the person who thinks Biden isn't a failure.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
6.1.3  Tessylo  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @6.1.2    3 weeks ago

Your opinion of me means DICK, nada, zip, zilch, ZERO, diddly squat.  

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
6.1.4  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Tessylo @6.1.3    3 weeks ago

Apparently it means something to you.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
6.1.5  Tessylo  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @6.1.4    3 weeks ago

Not at all.  I don't give a shit what you think.  Why the fuck would you think it did?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
6.1.6  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Tessylo @6.1.5    3 weeks ago

Then why do you keep responding?  And it's just not on this seed.  Its not like you add anything of value to a conversation.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Senior Principal
6.1.7  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @6.1.6    3 weeks ago
Its not like you add anything of value to a conversation.

Nailed it..................

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
6.1.8  Tessylo  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @6.1.6    3 weeks ago
"Then why do you keep responding?  And it's just not on this seed.  Its not like you add anything of value to a conversation."
 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
6.1.9  Tessylo  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @6.1.6    3 weeks ago

Because it's a public form and I can comment whenever and wherever I wish, DUH

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
6.1.10  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Tessylo @6.1.9    3 weeks ago

[removed]

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
6.1.11  Tessylo  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @6.1.10    3 weeks ago

[removed]

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
6.1.12  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Tessylo @6.1.11    3 weeks ago

[Deleted.]

[This should have been addressed either via chat or PN with charger, or in Metafied.]

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
6.1.13  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @6.1.12    3 weeks ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7  Tessylo    4 weeks ago

Right on cue some never fail to disappoint.

 
 
 
squiggy
Sophomore Quiet
8  squiggy    3 weeks ago

You want weird? This dick is doing his own TV trial -

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Principal
9  sandy-2021492    3 weeks ago

Thread 6.1 locked and comments deleted as a meta derail.

 
 
 
Drakkonis
Masters Guide
10  Drakkonis    3 weeks ago

Am watching the trial. Friggin prosecution vid is three hours long in cross examining Rittenhouse and it's mostly him asking irrelevant questions, like does Rittenhouse know the difference between a FMJ round and a hollow point. Who bought the ammo. Why did he choose an AR15 rather than a handgun. 

Still watching it but so far it seems to be the prosecution's case that because Rittenhouse shot someone it must therefore be murder. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
10.1  Tessylo  replied to  Drakkonis @10    3 weeks ago

It was murder.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
10.1.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Tessylo @10.1    3 weeks ago

Premeditated murder at that.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
11  Paula Bartholomew    3 weeks ago

I thought I had seen it all with this trial, until now.  They put the names of the potential jurors into a container and let Rittenhouse pull out the names to determine his own jury. Unfreaking believable.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online


49 visitors