Oh, it's coming down the pike. My guess is his lawyer will let them sweat a while, then pull the trigger.bignflnut wrote:Barnes should file defamation suits against 10+ news orgs on KR's behalf tonight.
No pun intended.....
Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators
Oh, it's coming down the pike. My guess is his lawyer will let them sweat a while, then pull the trigger.bignflnut wrote:Barnes should file defamation suits against 10+ news orgs on KR's behalf tonight.
Maybe a little intended...?docachna wrote:No pun intended.....
Dimitrius said that despite her usual title as a “jury consultant,” she was largely hired by Rittenhouse’s defense team to help determine whether Rittenhouse should take the witness stand. She said the determination was “a consensus by the entire trial team.”
I partly agree with the part I bolded, except I disagree with the word "perceived." I too wish some people didn't need to arm themselves, but reality is reality. Banning guns or punishing people who use guns to protect themselves is not going to change that reality, except maybe in a bad way for crime victims. The criminals won't be affected because they don't obey the law anyway, and it's not like the government is going to actually lock up all violent criminals forever. (or in some cases even overnight )“My job — the way that I look at my job — is as a supplemental expert,” she said. But she added that “the whole team gelled and had the same mindset.”
Rittenhouse had to testify, the team concluded, “because he was the only one that could talk about what was going through his mind and what was happening” when he pulled the trigger — and in the points leading up to it.
“What was a 17 year old doing with an AR-15 and a medic bag calling out that he was a medic?” Dimitrius queried. “Kyle was the only one who could explain that. He was the only one who could explain what happened with these individuals.”
She was referring to the men Rittenhouse shot. Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber were killed; Gaige Grosskreutz’s bicep was “vaporized,” as he put it.
In a piece published at approximately the same time Law&Crime was talking to Dimitrius, defense attorney Richards told the New York Times on Friday that the defense conducted mock trials — one including Rittenhouse’s testimony, one without it — to determine that the case was much better for the defense with Rittenhouse on the stand.
“Mock juries are an expense and a luxury most defendants cannot afford,” celebrity attorney Lisa Bloom retorted on Twitter while citing the Times piece. “Who paid for this?”
Richards later told CNN that “there’s too many guns in our society” and that he wished “our society wasn’t perceived as being so dangerous that people needed to arm themselves.” He said Rittenhouse regrets going to Kenosha that night “a hundred times over” but added that his actions were not illegal.
This possibly explains the delay in reaching the verdict, some woman choosing emotion over the law and facts and logic. Not criticizing women, some men do this too.She criticized prosecutor Thomas Binger for “changing the spectrum” of the case. She was referring to accusations that the state didn’t hand over high-resolution drone video to the defense. Prosecutors said that the footage was emailed, not sent through a Dropbox link, and that the file was accidentally compressed in the process.
“They were very poker faced,” Dimitrius said of the jury. “Out of the two weeks of trial, I saw two reactions. One was the reaction by one of the jurors when Mr. Rosenbaum’s fiancee was talking. She was very visibly upset and emotional. There was another reaction — actually during closings — by another juror when something was mentioned about Mr. Binger living in a fairy tale land. Other than that, that was it.”
This is about the jury selection. Sounds like an episode of "Bull" on CBS almost, as shadow jurors were not used.Dimitrius said a female juror seated close to Rosenbaum’s fiancee shared a moment of “sympathy and empathy” with the fiancee as the witness recounted the loss of Rosenbaum. Dimitrius described both the juror and the witness as “emotional.”
The comment about Binger resulted in a laugh from another female juror.
“This judge did not allow either side to utilize a juror questionnaire in advance of this trial,” Dimitrius said. “The judge only allowed an hour and a half a piece for each side during voir dire . . . the only information we had . . . was their name, their age, their area of residence, and their occupation. We had no other information, unlike some of the other big trials I’ve worked on.”
“It made it much more difficult,” Dimitrius said, to understand the jury. That included attempts to “do social media searches” of the jurors to see what they may have been saying about the events in Kenosha or about Rittenhouse. She noted that both the defense and the prosecution scoured the jurors’ social media platforms as best they could.
“There were many of our perspective jurors that we didn’t know anything about,” she said. “There really wasn’t a profile that was developed. When we did our research, that really wasn’t the target of what we were seeking to explore. The actual component of the research we were asked to address was whether or not Kyle should testify.”
Dimitrius said “shadow jurors” — people who are employed to sit through trials if they were jurors and who report their observations to attorneys every night as cases progress — were not employed in the Rittenhouse trial.
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) introduced a bill on Tuesday to award Kyle Rittenhouse the Congressional Gold Medal for "protecting the community of Kenosha, Wisconsin, during a Black Lives Matter (BLM) riot on August 25, 2020."
The Congressional Gold Medal is the highest honor Congress can award an individual or institution. It is highly unlikely the bill will go anywhere in the Democratic-controlled House and Senate, and it has no co-sponsors.
"Kyle Rittenhouse deserves to be remembered as a hero who defended his community, protected businesses, and acted lawfully in the face of lawlessness. I’m proud to file this legislation to award Kyle Rittenhouse a Congressional Gold Medal," Greene said in a statement to The Hill.
This may be nothing more than "owning the libs" or posturing for the voting base. I don't know her motivation.Bruenor wrote:While I think he was prosecuted mainly for political reasons and he was rightly found innocent I don't believe he's a hero or deserving any award.. I don't even believes this is a good attempt at, not even sure what to call it virtue signalling, political posturing ?
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5830 ... d-medal-to" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) introduced a bill on Tuesday to award Kyle Rittenhouse the Congressional Gold Medal for "protecting the community of Kenosha, Wisconsin, during a Black Lives Matter (BLM) riot on August 25, 2020."
AMEN.bignflnut wrote:This may be nothing more than "owning the libs" or posturing for the voting base. I don't know her motivation.Bruenor wrote:While I think he was prosecuted mainly for political reasons and he was rightly found innocent I don't believe he's a hero or deserving any award.. I don't even believes this is a good attempt at, not even sure what to call it virtue signalling, political posturing ?
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5830 ... d-medal-to" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) introduced a bill on Tuesday to award Kyle Rittenhouse the Congressional Gold Medal for "protecting the community of Kenosha, Wisconsin, during a Black Lives Matter (BLM) riot on August 25, 2020."
That said, Kenosha happened because those who pound government paychecks and the MEN in the community decided to let "Lord of the Flies" rule the night. There should be a local group of men/people willing to uphold order, with force if necessary. Once upon a time in America, this group was called the local militia.
Because the men of Kenosha failed, the women and children of the area stepped up.
Public acknowledgement and encouragement of men doing what men should do, is healthy. At current, there's a public condemnation of masculinity, which must change.
University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) professor and author Kara Cooney faced backlash Wednesday over a passage of her newly released book, "The Good Kings," that falsely claims Kyle Rittenhouse shot two Black men.
In her book, Cooney asks readers to "consider 17-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse, who used his semi-automatic weapon to kill two Black men in Kenosha, Wisconsin, while waging a glorious race war on behalf of his inherited White power."
Maybe people are just fed up with all the lies."On p. 341 of THE GOOD KINGS I state that Kyle Rittenhouse shot two Black men when instead he shot two white men," Cooney wrote on Twitter Wednesday. "That was my mistake, and I apologize. The response has been a hateful stew of ridicule and denial that America has a race problem at all."
Cooney said in her response that the aggressive and nasty feedback she's received over the factual errors was a symptom of White supremacy and misogyny, calling the Rittenhouse passage a "tiny detail of the book."
Samuel Adams wrote:If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.
Damage done she owns it.Bruenor wrote:Someone better notify Kyle's attorney so he can add this to the list of defamation lawsuits.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/author-bo ... n-race-war" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) professor and author Kara Cooney faced backlash Wednesday over a passage of her newly released book, "The Good Kings," that falsely claims Kyle Rittenhouse shot two Black men.
In her book, Cooney asks readers to "consider 17-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse, who used his semi-automatic weapon to kill two Black men in Kenosha, Wisconsin, while waging a glorious race war on behalf of his inherited White power."Maybe people are just fed up with all the lies."On p. 341 of THE GOOD KINGS I state that Kyle Rittenhouse shot two Black men when instead he shot two white men," Cooney wrote on Twitter Wednesday. "That was my mistake, and I apologize. The response has been a hateful stew of ridicule and denial that America has a race problem at all."
Cooney said in her response that the aggressive and nasty feedback she's received over the factual errors was a symptom of White supremacy and misogyny, calling the Rittenhouse passage a "tiny detail of the book."
Kyle Rittenhouse's friend, who bought him an assault-style rifle when he was only 17, has agreed to plead no contest to contributing to the delinquency of a minor, a non-criminal citation, and avoid convictions on the two felonies he'd been facing.
Dominick Black, 20, was charged in November 2020 with two counts of delivering a dangerous weapon to a minor, resulting in death.
On Friday, Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger filed a proposed plea agreement. It suggested Black would plead no contest to a non-criminal citation, and pay a $2,000 fine, and the felony counts would be dismissed.
A straw purchase does not need to involve a prohibited person. In this case, since there was effectively no transfer of ownership from the purchaser to Kyle, there is no straw purchase. Had there been, it would likely have constituted a straw purchase whether or not Kyle was legally able to purchase it himself.catfish86 wrote:Remember Kyle Rittenhouse was charged with illegal possession of a firearm BUT that charge was dismissed. Which begs the question of whether one can be charged with a straw person if in fact it wasn't illegal for that third party to own a weapon.
The specific county law mentioned doesn't require the minor to have been delinquent, only that the defendant's behavior *could* have produced delinquent behavior. A very, very vague law at best.schmieg wrote:While a guilty plea would eliminate the question, how does one contribute to the delinquency of a minor when the minor (at the time) has been found not to be delinquent?
That right there is where things broke down. Why should it ever be illegal to purchase a firearm for someone who is legally allowed to possess it? Who is the victim here?JustaShooter wrote: A straw purchase does not need to involve a prohibited person.