Rittenhouse trial is over before it begins
- Thread starter Crazyhole
- Start date
LOL What a moron. If you're hellbent on tampering with a jury, you need to be a rich Republican multimillionaire with the goods on Trump so when you get caught, he can issue you a pardon.
He works for NBC, lol. Now NBC is banned from the courthouse.LOL What a moron. If you're hellbent on tampering with a jury, you need to be a rich Republican multimillionaire with the goods on Trump so when you get caught, he can issue you a pardon.
When I first heard that the prosecution allegedly withheld video tape evidence, I wondered how the District Attorney's office could be so stupid.
But it turns out that the defense did have the same video evidence. But the DA used a video compression process in order to send it to the defense electronically and the result was a lower-quality video. We're supposed to believe a higher quality video showing Rittenhouse's shenanigans would have made a difference for the defense's tragedy?!?!? Both tapes showed the same damn thing.
But it turns out that the defense did have the same video evidence. But the DA used a video compression process in order to send it to the defense electronically and the result was a lower-quality video. We're supposed to believe a higher quality video showing Rittenhouse's shenanigans would have made a difference for the defense's tragedy?!?!? Both tapes showed the same damn thing.
You can't be this obtuse. Both sides are supposed to have the exact same evidence.
By lower quality, the video the defense had was of such poor quality that almost everything was unrecognizable. Then they introduce the high quality video into evidence in the 11th hour of the trial and their theory of the crime is centered upon it (after not mentioning that theory once during opening statements). There's no excuse for that and it is blatant prosecutorial misconduct.
Soooooo...this was a devious attempt by the DA's Office to thwart justice?
Exactly how was the prosecution supposed to know that the video they emailed to the defense didn't download at the appropriate resolution?
Seems to me that if the video was "of such poor quality that almost everything was unrecognizable" it was on the defense to followed up and ask why the DA was submitting such a horrible video (if it was horrible) as evidence don'tcha think?
It's always conspiracy theories with you guys.
Last edited:
Some went to the hospital, and there have been reduced 'quality of life' issues for people as a result of batteries. But none of those were charged.
Whew...it was lucky for Rittenhouse was prepared to defend himself with an AR-15 assault rife so he could keep from being killed that night.
Forget the part where he was the only one there who killed that night. Not just one person but two and injured a third.
This is like people who focused only on the nuclear bombings in WWII, and ignore all the fire bombings. Seriously ... pull your head out of your @$$ and watch video out there.
This is an incredibly ignorant question so you can’t be surprised that no one is answering it. Especially when you won’t listen to anything anyone is telling you.
Im now convinced that you aren’t interested in discussion anyways and are just trolling now.
Funny, I could have sworn you and our other Usual Suspects were telling us HOW DANGEROUS this protest was. That's the reason why this 17 year old vigilante took an assault rife with him.
Given this 'war zone' he was entering, you'd assume a lot of other people had to 'defend themselves,' right?
Nope, I'm not surprised in the least.
Not that I disagree with the verdict but the floodgates just opened up for "patriots" to go out and shoot someone.
I would be shocked if that happened. More likely it will give people pause before they attack someone armed with a rifle, no matter the political persuasion.
Wait until the next riot and watch how many "patriots" show up and try to agitate someone into assaulting them. Y'all underestimate the stupidity of a lot of people.
If they provoke the attack it’s Almost certainly not self defense. If they’re walking around in an open carry state and minding their own business, then your ire should be on the attackers not the people acting legally.
and crossing State Lines to do it. Every Proud Boy just got a shot of validation to cause more confrontation like a militia ..but that is the country that at least 40% seem to want …
You'd be a fool if you believe that every person who grabs his/her gun in the name of protecting a community from rioters does not wish for a little confrontation.
Honest question: why are you guys so upset about the "crossed state lines" thing? Why is that a big deal?
glad they finally came back with the not guilty verdict, I assumed there was at least one loon on the jury pushing hard for a conviction since it took so long. Anyone with 2 or more functioning brain cells knows he was not guilty.
No, from my experience with far-right wackos. It's ok to admit that I'm right. I won't think any less of you for toeing the company line.
I know it's not a gun, so don't bring that up, but it's a far-right wacko that was looking to hurt people.
Maybe their son shouldn’t have decided to assault a 17 year old with a skateboard as part of a violent mob.
No, I’m going to say that you have no idea what you’re talking about. But since you think that anyone who carries a gun for protection or wants to protect their property is a far-right whacko, there’s absolutely no arguing with you.
If, OTOH, you want to break out of your bubble, go look up the murder of David Dorn.
I get it… they need the world to validate the little bit of hope that their son didn’t die doing something wrong. They got dealt a blow in that quest for validation today.
JFC, are you a woman by chance? You have an uncanny knack of totally ignoring what I said and turning it around.
So are you saying that you understand and can speak for all gun owners (myself included) instead?
I never said "anyone". Go back and reread. Never said anything about protecting "their" property. Rittenhouse was not protecting his own property. The fact that you can't understand the point I was making makes discussing this moot now. Go ahead and keep responding and digging yourself a deeper hole.
So are you saying that you understand and can speak for all gun owners (myself included) instead?
I never said "anyone". Go back and reread. Never said anything about protecting "their" property. Rittenhouse was not protecting his own property. The fact that you can't understand the point I was making makes discussing this moot now. Go ahead and keep responding and digging yourself a deeper hole.
