17 Year-old Blue Lives Matter Activist with AR 15 Charged With Murder After Two Killed at Protest

SuperMatt

Site Master
Posts
7,862
Reaction score
15,004
I listened to the first 7 min and most of what this guy says seems reasonable. He even changed my mind on the judge not allowing the victims to be referred to as victims, from a legal standpoint point. One thing I disagreed with is not allowing the video where Rittenhouse says he wished he could shoot two people outside of a CVS drug store that took place 2 weeks prior because this is his vigilante frame of mind on display, just prior to the protests.
Normally, the defense must file a motion to have possibly prejudicial terms like “victim” disallowed. And that is often denied by a judge. This judge did the defense’s job for them, without being asked. And the truly absurd thing is that he allowed terms like “rioter” or “looter” to be used to describe the shooting victims. He was biased, period. Look at other trials and you’ll see how slanted this guy was for Rittenhouse. As mentioned before, the jury selection was a complete joke; the judge actually wanted to KEEP people that admitted they were too biased due to their strong 2nd amendment support (aka being a gun nut).
 

Huntn

Whatwerewe talk'n about?
Site Donor
Posts
5,289
Reaction score
5,233
Location
The Misty Mountains
Normally, the defense must file a motion to have possibly prejudicial terms like “victim” disallowed. And that is often denied by a judge. This judge did the defense’s job for them, without being asked. And the truly absurd thing is that he allowed terms like “rioter” or “looter” to be used to describe the shooting victims. He was biased, period. Look at other trials and you’ll see how slanted this guy was for Rittenhouse. As mentioned before, the jury selection was a complete joke; the judge actually wanted to KEEP people that admitted they were too biased due to their strong 2nd amendment support (aka being a gun nut).
Agreed on these points! The latter is unacceptably bias.
 
Last edited:

SuperMatt

Site Master
Posts
7,862
Reaction score
15,004
I recall there was another person a while back who shot somebody at a protest and claimed self-defense. The police treated him a bit differently than they did Rittenhouse.


Gee, I wonder what the difference was?
 

Huntn

Whatwerewe talk'n about?
Site Donor
Posts
5,289
Reaction score
5,233
Location
The Misty Mountains
Imrememb
I recall there was another person a while back who shot somebody at a protest and claimed self-defense. The police treated him a bit differently than they did Rittenhouse.


Gee, I wonder what the difference was?
I remember for Rittenhouse, don’t know if it was before or after the shootings some cops supposedly told him good job…
 

JayMysteri0

What the F?!!!
Posts
6,612
Reaction score
13,752
Location
Not HERE.
I think it’s an interesting mindset that I don’t have. If in a potentially dangerous situation I think my reflex reaction would be to get away from it, not bust out my phone and start filming it. I might also be a bit paranoid about this, but I think becoming an impromptu on the scene reporter might also make you a target. It seems like we’re starting to get to the point where filming something is no longer plays a part in defusing a situation, might even serve as an irritant to some true believer (in whatever) who is willing to be some kind of martyr to the cause. But luckily there’s no shortage of other people who want to film anything and everything. I even believe there are people hoping to catch something juicy with little empathy for the actual situation. I suppose if it helps justice then the actual motivation for recording it doesn’t really matter.
I think it might be a mindset you don't feel you need. For others as George Floyd's murder clearly showed, it's become a necessity.

Yes there's a danger, as the old thread elsewhere about the 'mask triggered' demonstrated. Or even the video I shared last week of the 45 banner fan acting a fool in a public airport, but slapping the phone of another individual recording, suddenly claiming privacy concerns. Hell, let's go big & remember a certain get together on Jan 6th that one party & people would have you believe was more tame the most peaceful BLM protest. The days of when some people would regain their common sense faced with being recorded, passed with the rise of "Karen". Now it's a necessary documenting tool, because those same people haven't only lost common sense, but shame as well. They will deny anything happened and depend on the 'privilege' a court system that will often favor them, so video proof is a necessity.

It's a necessity.

Imagine a 'what if'. 'What if' there was video of the murder of Trayvon Martin? What if there was video to go along with the dispatcher's plea to Zimmerman to let the police handle the situation he imagined, but he ignored & initiated the situation? Would such video be enough to hammer home the unnecessary stupidity on Zimmerman's part to a jury? Seeing someone run up on Black kid with no proof, a third party screaming to stop as they film it, then panic and fire. Taking your scenario, perhaps Zimmerman shoots both people including the person filming, does that make Zimmerman look more sympathetic?

Recording is unfortunately the only thing PoC are allowed to 'open carry', and NOT get "legally" shot on sight for. ( Yes, I am walking around cases like Isiah Brown & Stephon Clark where having a phone gets you shot, I think that's overkill in hammering how some people can't win no matter what ) Yet. It's why there's an app developed after police stops & shooting Black motorists, that records video that is NOT stored on the phone but sent to the ACLU.

These things are needed!

That's the world some people are living in. A mindset isn't an option for them.

You never know what situation is an Ahmaud Arbery or George Floyd, and what situation is someone acting like they hadn't heard masks were necessary in public places yet this year.
 

JayMysteri0

What the F?!!!
Posts
6,612
Reaction score
13,752
Location
Not HERE.
I recall there was another person a while back who shot somebody at a protest and claimed self-defense. The police treated him a bit differently than they did Rittenhouse.


Gee, I wonder what the difference was?
Yeah that was making the rounds, because after press investigations & the former president's own words, it seemed like one of the more glaring examples in recent times of an "extra judicial killing". As you said, we saw who investigated, and who didn't. Then again at the time we did have a UAG that also cobbled together his own "secret police" for Washington DC BLM protests.

Ah, good authoritarian times, that some "patriots" want to eagerly return to. :mad:
 

Chew Toy McCoy

Pleb
Site Donor
Posts
7,559
Reaction score
11,811
Serious question: does anybody really watch these youtube commentaries? I absolutely hate everything about these. Write it down so I can read it 5x faster.
BTW, WTF is "based"? It's like terms like gaslight or narcissist, SocMed Y-ers pick it them up and use them as catch-alls for everything.

I find his channel a good source for legal information for those of us not in the profession. The video wasn’t a random suggestion on YouTube based on current events. I subscribe to his channel. He usually covers current cases if there are big ones in the media and a lot of people’s opinions are driven more by bias or passion than legal understanding.

In this case it seemed like a lot of outrage was driven by summary clickbait headlines either taken out of context or worded to be as clickbaity as possible. So I found it interesting to get more context in both this case and the judge‘s decisions compared to his history. It also made me realize that if people felt differently about this case then they might agree with the judge’s decisions that attempted to make it less of a forgone verdict from the start.
 
U

User.45

Guest
I find his channel a good source for legal information for those of us not in the profession. The video wasn’t a random suggestion on YouTube based on current events. I subscribe to his channel. He usually covers current cases if there are big ones in the media and a lot of people’s opinions are driven more by bias or passion than legal understanding.

In this case it seemed like a lot of outrage was driven by summary clickbait headlines either taken out of context or worded to be as clickbaity as possible. So I found it interesting to get more context in both this case and the judge‘s decisions compared to his history. It also made me realize that if people felt differently about this case then they might agree with the judge’s decisions that attempted to make it less of a forgone verdict from the start.
Fair enough. Appreciate the response, as always.
 

SuperMatt

Site Master
Posts
7,862
Reaction score
15,004
There is another ongoing case in Kenosha involving a teenager using a firearm for self-defense.


The judge in this case was much less kind to the defense. Surprised? Rittenhouse is allowed to claim self-defense despite provoking the situation. The judge denied this teenage girl that defense despite being sexually abused and trafficked by the person she fired on.

Her lawyers are having to appeal to the state Supreme Court simply to be able to argue an affirmative defense. Even if successful, the prosecutor could charge her with 2nd-degree homicide and put her in prison for decades.

There is NOTHING just about the justice system in Wisconsin, it appears.
 

JayMysteri0

What the F?!!!
Posts
6,612
Reaction score
13,752
Location
Not HERE.
I think it’s an interesting mindset that I don’t have. If in a potentially dangerous situation I think my reflex reaction would be to get away from it, not bust out my phone and start filming it. I might also be a bit paranoid about this, but I think becoming an impromptu on the scene reporter might also make you a target. It seems like we’re starting to get to the point where filming something is no longer plays a part in defusing a situation, might even serve as an irritant to some true believer (in whatever) who is willing to be some kind of martyr to the cause. But luckily there’s no shortage of other people who want to film anything and everything. I even believe there are people hoping to catch something juicy with little empathy for the actual situation. I suppose if it helps justice then the actual motivation for recording it doesn’t really matter.
Coincidentally enough...

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1464352751949955074/

When the police start a campaign asking you to NOT film, you realize the importance of filming.
 
U

User.45

Guest
There is another ongoing case in Kenosha involving a teenager using a firearm for self-defense.


The judge in this case was much less kind to the defense. Surprised? Rittenhouse is allowed to claim self-defense despite provoking the situation. The judge denied this teenage girl that defense despite being sexually abused and trafficked by the person she fired on.

Her lawyers are having to appeal to the state Supreme Court simply to be able to argue an affirmative defense. Even if successful, the prosecutor could charge her with 2nd-degree homicide and put her in prison for decades.

There is NOTHING just about the justice system in Wisconsin, it appears.
IIRC @yaxomoxay (adequately) brought her case up as a comparative example. There do seem to be two justice systems.

Coincidentally enough...

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1464352751949955074/

When the police start a campaign asking you to NOT film, you realize the importance of filming.
Well, I think most of us will remember the initial statement below. This hollow police PR campaign probably aims to get rile up some civilians to go against civilians camming. This campaign could be adequate if it came with a concurrent push for body cams on al beat cops and serious penalties for those tampering with their body cams. Until then, keep calm and keep camming.

EzcrJJcWQAAW9jj
 

SuperMatt

Site Master
Posts
7,862
Reaction score
15,004

SuperMatt

Site Master
Posts
7,862
Reaction score
15,004
It’s official. Everybody responsible for the deaths in Kenosha gets a pass!


On Friday, Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger filed a proposed plea agreement. It suggested Black would plead no contest to a pair of citations, and pay a $2,000 fine, and the felony counts would be dismissed.
Seems like he’s getting off pretty easy, but he still has to pay $2,000 more than the person who actually killed 2 people with the gun.
 

Yoused

up
Posts
5,629
Reaction score
8,956
Location
knee deep in the road apples of the 4 horsemen
It’s official. Everybody responsible for the deaths in Kenosha gets a pass!



Seems like he’s getting off pretty easy, but he still has to pay $2,000 more than the person who actually killed 2 people with the gun.
Curiously, he bought the gun in Ladysmith, some 350 miles away by road from Kenosha. Not clear what the deal is with that.
 

JayMysteri0

What the F?!!!
Posts
6,612
Reaction score
13,752
Location
Not HERE.

SuperMatt

Site Master
Posts
7,862
Reaction score
15,004
I am so sure the jurors believed the boy was sincere when he broke down on the stand...

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1504627665097089027/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1504638979265732608/

When you demonstrate that those tears you shed on command to get off for killing people, makes for good jokes...

I hear there's property elsewhere now that needs protecting, perhaps the kid could heed 'the call' again?

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1504264782802784256/
Disgusting. But even at the jury selection phase, we saw the judge was going to make sure Killer Kenosha Kyle got off scot-free.
 

GermanSuplex

Elite Member
Site Donor
Top Poster Of Month
Posts
2,711
Reaction score
6,584
Just saw the story on Rittenhouse… what a tool. His parents and the GQP aren’t doing him any favors in life.

The ironic part? He’s proving Lebron James correct, and if he had a defamation case against him… well, he better hope he gets a judge like the one he had at trial.

That trial was such a joke, but it happens all the time. Judges across this country are sympathetic to young white men, even when the victims are young white girls who were sexually abused, or other young white men.

The verdict may have ended up the same regardless of the judge, but that goofy old sack certainly boosted Rittenhouse’s chances of acquittal.

Much like Zimmerman, this kid will probably dig himself into being a pariah.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom
1 2