Kyle Rittenhouse - teen who shot three people in Kenosha

All I can say after skimming through both sides closing arguments is I hope I never have to be tried in front of a Jury..

From the evidence I've seen and listening to all the main witnesses, I think I'd come down in favour of it being self defence, but honestly listening to (mainly the prosecution, but the defence at times) arguments, it's just cobblers half the time.. you watch the video's and listen to the argument and wonder wtf they are smoking..

I wouldn't even want to be on the Jury as there's gish galloping and all sorts of sillyness you are presented with and have someone's future freedom at stake.

I honestly thought most movies do a deliberate parody of the legal system to dumb it down for artistic reasons, turns out they've been 100% accurate all this time.
 
deuse said:
"Yes I did vote bmp and 100,000s of others did as well to get the gov of the day to change it's direction.
Guess what. It worked. I and others said the same in that thread."
Click to expand...

So basically a protest vote rather than a "the BNP is great" one would possibly be a good way of describing it.
 
Demon said:
All I can say after skimming through both sides closing arguments is I hope I never have to be tried in front of a Jury..

From the evidence I've seen and listening to all the main witnesses, I think I'd come down in favour of it being self defence, but honestly listening to (mainly the prosecution, but the defence at times) arguments, it's just cobblers half the time.. you watch the video's and listen to the argument and wonder wtf they are smoking..

I wouldn't even want to be on the Jury as there's gish galloping and all sorts of sillyness you are presented with and have someone's future freedom at stake.

I honestly thought most movies do a deliberate parody of the legal system to dumb it down for artistic reasons, turns out they've been 100% accurate all this time.
Click to expand...

this is the whole point of the jury and it’s up to the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. They can say (within reason) what they want to craft there story, like believe that he pointed the gun first in the drone footage. Nice story but does the evidence prove that.

it’s up to the jury to call BS on that if they feel it is showing that.

the defence only has to poke holes and provided doubt. Part of me feels the defence team strategy is to make the state look like a bunch of crazy fools by letting them talk.
 
Demon said:
All I can say after skimming through both sides closing arguments is I hope I never have to be tried in front of a Jury..

From the evidence I've seen and listening to all the main witnesses, I think I'd come down in favour of it being self defence, but honestly listening to (mainly the prosecution, but the defence at times) arguments, it's just cobblers half the time.. you watch the video's and listen to the argument and wonder wtf they are smoking..

I wouldn't even want to be on the Jury as there's gish galloping and all sorts of sillyness you are presented with and have someone's future freedom at stake.

I honestly thought most movies do a deliberate parody of the legal system to dumb it down for artistic reasons, turns out they've been 100% accurate all this time.
Click to expand...
But your using your rational side of your brain to considering what's been presented. From what I've seen in the types of trails that have a big public interest is the jury more often then not will have made up their minds regarding someone's guilt or innocence before the trail starts and I can see the same with case and it wouldn't surprise me if the jury came back with a unanimous guilty verdict on the most serious charge (on the minor charge of breaking an emergency order he will probably and fairly get found guilty) even though the prosecutions evidence and arguments have all blown up in their faces.
 
I don't know why you guys are so worried. Weren't the victims a mix of peado, blacks and mentally ill? The jury is 10 white folk from the town this hero came to protect. Most of them are probably already switched off and ready to vote not guilty.
 
dLockers said:
I don't know why you guys are so worried. Weren't the victims a mix of peado, blacks and mentally ill? The jury is 10 white folk from the town this hero came to protect. Most of them are probably already switched off and ready to vote not guilty.
Click to expand...
Wrong
And again showing you haven't read anything about the case!
 
Demon said:
All I can say after skimming through both sides closing arguments is I hope I never have to be tried in front of a Jury..

From the evidence I've seen and listening to all the main witnesses, I think I'd come down in favour of it being self defence, but honestly listening to (mainly the prosecution, but the defence at times) arguments, it's just cobblers half the time.. you watch the video's and listen to the argument and wonder wtf they are smoking..
Click to expand...

Yup, they try to twist anything they can, the video evidence is pretty clear but you only have to look at this thread to see how credulous some people can be* and if you have a good prosecutor who can tell a good convincing story during closing then there is still plenty of risk in spite of flimsy evidence.

*Like, imagine you're in a jury room and one juror makes some assertion/opinion but when asked for an explanation or argument they simply casn't provide one, it's their view, they can't explain it but they're sticking with it and they become entrenched.
 
Freddie1980 said:
From what I've seen in the types of trails that have a big public interest is the jury more often then not will have made up their minds regarding someone's guilt or innocence before the trail starts
Click to expand...

This is quite a statement, if this is the case then the whole legal system is a pointless.

I would hope that members of the jury have more backbone than this and should review the evidence as presented.
 
crazyDAJT said:
This is quite a statement, if this is the case then the whole legal system is a pointless.

I would hope that members of the jury have more backbone than this and should review the evidence as presented.
Click to expand...
In a way he does have a point, our legal system and jury based verdicts dates back long before the current age of 24 hour news, misinformation and journalistic integrity having gone out the window that even the most unbiased person will be affected by whatever they have seen prior.
 
chroniclard said:
lol pull the other one, as if anyone would vote for a far right racist party as a protest vote.
Click to expand...

People voted for the monster raving looney party for years as a protest and both parties had the same chance of gaining any actual power, that's the point of the protest - show your discontent but don't screw the country.

Thats my take on using a protest vote anyway, I wouldn't have voted BNP as a protest but I can understand why people would, especially when, rarely in this case, it seemed to have actually had the desired effect on the Government of the time.
 
crazyDAJT said:
This is quite a statement, if this is the case then the whole legal system is a pointless.

I would hope that members of the jury have more backbone than this and should review the evidence as presented.
Click to expand...
Just to reiterate I'm only talking about high profile cases not day to day cases that go unreported.

If your looking for statement however how about this? Joseph Rosenbaum died how lived, trying to touch a minor.
 
He'll walk.

A child shouldn't be walking the streets with a weapon of war. Its a failure of both the state and parenting. As much as he appears to revel in his infamy, he still took the lives of 2 people. I would imagine in years to come that is going to keep him awake at night.
 
ianh said:
People voted for the monster raving looney party for years as a protest and both parties had the same chance of gaining any actual power, that's the point of the protest - show your discontent but don't screw the country.

Thats my take on using a protest vote anyway, I wouldn't have voted BNP as a protest but I can understand why people would, especially when, rarely in this case, it seemed to have actually had the desired effect on the Government of the time.
Click to expand...

Voting for the Monster Raving Loony Party might be a protest vote but more against the whole system and it certainly doesn't embolden a bunch of racist *****. A vote for the BNP did exactly that, it legitimised them and their heinous policies. You don't vote for an organisation that had repatriation of non whites as one of its policies and then claim you didn't agree with them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom