Rittenhouse Trial

oldngray

nowhere special
They gave the jury a path to conviction with a jury instruction on provocation. If a juror decided to convict long ago, this gives them an out to do it. It only takes one idiot to serve injustice in this case.
The prosecution made a lot of claims that weren't true. Evidence says otherwise. No provocation.

They knew they had a weak case so when it fell apart were forced to try to spin what really happened. Some of the "spin" was outright lies. Either they don't know what the law says or blatantly ignored it.
 

oldngray

nowhere special
I predict a hung jury. Pass it off to another jury.
The judge should have declared a mistrial with prejudice but wanted it decided by a jury unless absolutely forced to decide otherwise. He didn't want to be the convenient scapegoat for the sham trial. Now it will probably be blamed on the prosecutor for losing an unwinnable case.
 

DriveInDriveOut

Inordinately Right
The prosecution made a lot of claims that weren't true. Evidence says otherwise. No provocation.

They knew they had a weak case so when it fell apart were forced to try to spin what really happened. Some of the "spin" was outright lies. Either they don't know what the law says or blatantly ignored it.
The judge instructed the jury to decide whether it was self defense, and if it was then they were to throw out all lesser charges as well.

But he also instructed that if Kyle provoked Rosenbaum, then it wasn't self defense.

The prosecution is trying to use this blurry video that the evidence fairy magically dropped on their doorstep at the end of the trial as proof of provocation. It isn't, certainly not beyond a reasonable doubt.

But one rogue juror who is looking for any excuse to convict has it now.
 

oldngray

nowhere special
The judge instructed the jury to decide whether it was self defense, and if it was then they were to throw out all lesser charges as well.

But he also instructed that if Kyle provoked Rosenbaum, then it wasn't self defense.

The prosecution is trying to use this blurry video that the evidence fairy magically dropped on their doorstep at the end of the trial as proof of provocation. It isn't, certainly not beyond a reasonable doubt.

But one rogue juror who is looking for any excuse to convict has it now.
1 for a hung jury I think. I see no possibility of all 12 voting to convict.

The prosecution was just trying to leave the door open for lesser charges.
 

oldngray

nowhere special
It was a nice way to show that the prosecutor is not responsible enough to handle a weapon, but that Kyle is.
Every photo shows Kyle carrying his rifle with his finger outside the trigger guard (which is proper)

The prosecutor seemed to know almost nothing about guns. Remember his "exploding bullets"?
 

Sportello

Well-Known Member
FEU9PSqWYAQgwfa
 

TearsInRain

IE boogeyman
Arbery's past is relevant, because it confirms that they were right about him.

It doesn't matter if they knew that past. It matters that they clearly had enough background in the area, neighborhood, and context clues to be right about him. They were acting on what counted as immediate knowledge.
it doesn't matter if they were right about him, without him actively stealing it didn't justify an armed intervention
 
Top