Fred's Myth
Nonhyphenated American
You've already convicted him, go back and read your own posts.
Good thing you're not on the jury.
Rittenhouse Trial
- Thread starter El Correcto
- Start date
-
- Tags
- saint
Good thing you're not on the jury.
floridays
Well-Known Member
I've already acquitted, with the evidence I've seen.
Good thing I'm not on the jury as well.
zubenelgenubi
I'm a star
He sticks with what he knows.
zubenelgenubi
I'm a star
He's innocent until proven guilty. There's no proof he's guilty of any crime, so he's innocent.
floridays
Well-Known Member
No doubt, there is the presumption of innocence.
With what I have seen from day one he is a hero.
I would have been dismissed as a potential juror.
zubenelgenubi
I'm a star
The judge should have dismissed the case at the evidentiary hearing, since It's clearly self-defense. So much so, the prosecutor is doing a better job at making the case for the defense than the defense.
I'm scratching my head on your position. The kid tried to put out a fire. Was attacked by those who set the fire. Did he open fire on them then? No, he fled and was chased by them. One had a gun. One attempted to hit him with a skateboard. He defended himself with a gun. For this you've referred to him as a vigilante, a terrorist, an active shooter. Are you saying he had no right to defend himself? That he had to just stand there and take whatever bodily harm they inflicted on him? He didn't assault them, they assaulted him and he defended himself. What part of that aren't you getting?
Seems that 17 year old was better at making that determination than you would be.
TearsInRain
IE boogeyman
He gets his talking points from the 6 guys that own 90% of US media
oldngray
nowhere special
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
Fake news.
rod
Retired 23 years
Obama's kids
Old Man Jingles
Rat out of a cage
Wrong!
That's not news!
PT Car Washer
Well-Known Member
I agree that he is innocent until proven guilty which is why he is standing trial. Evidently the prosecution believes there is enough proof or they would not spend the time and money for a trial. I don't believe he will get life if convicted but society can't have 17 year olds running around with assault rifles behaving like a vigilante.
El Correcto
god is dead
Nope, another political show trial.
sailfish
Master of Karate and Friendship for Everyone
How many years in the army or whatever and you still think an AR15 is an assault rifle. Did you just wash cars there too?
So you're saying every trial where someone is declared innocent is a sham because the prosecutor believed there was enough proof of guilt to convict? Apparently you aren't aware of the political pressure put on prosecutors by district attorneys who have to win elections and are swayed by the media and others. Tell me, overall what kind of coverage did the mainstream media give the 2020 riots? Were they outraged that people would dare loot, burn, and assault? Or were they mostly supportive because they were sympathetic to the outrage over George Floyd's death? In that environment what kind of pressure do you think was put on the district attorney to bring charges against Rittenhouse? How many other trials are taking place of perpetrators of murders, arson, looting are you aware of from the riots?
oldngray
nowhere special
He wasn't charged at first. Not until the DA felt the pressure to go after him.
TearsInRain
IE boogeyman
imagine still believing this in TYOOL 2021
zubenelgenubi
I'm a star
17 year olds wouldn't have to do the police's job if the police would just do it. Both the prosecution and the defense only wanted to take this to trial for the book deals.
Similar threads
