Kyle Rittenhouse Trial?

Discussion in 'Legal' started by wiscoaster, Nov 11, 2021.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Corpral_Agarn

    Corpral_Agarn Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2012
    Messages:
    3,231
    Location:
    Northern CA
    I'm just now listening to "fatlock's" closing argument.

    Makes me want to puke.
     
    RetiredUSNChief and Big Bore 44 like this.
  2. loadedround

    loadedround Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    3,500
    Location:
    Valley Forge, Pa
    Awaiting the judge to declare a mistrial in this sordid display of a legal comedy!
     
    RetiredUSNChief likes this.
  3. Kleanbore

    Kleanbore Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Messages:
    14,663
    what basis, at this time?
     
    RetiredUSNChief likes this.
  4. lsudave

    lsudave Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2007
    Messages:
    938
    As an aside, when do we expect to see the other "firearms" legal questions from this case, and who does it"
    • Gaige Gross... GG- admitted conceal carry without a license. Admitted, under oath
    • Rittenhouse (really, Dominic Black's dad), and the issue of a straw purchase
    • if Rittenhouse is acquitted, do we go after GG for assault with a deadly weapon?
     
  5. Gun4Fun90

    Gun4Fun90 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2020
    Messages:
    118
    yeah pretty constantly throughout the trial. Primarily by failing to get objections on the record but also things like the defenses witness list was not entered into the record. So ineffectiveness of council would be his best bet.
     
    RetiredUSNChief likes this.
  6. Madcap_Magician

    Madcap_Magician Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    Messages:
    2,377
    Location:
    MN
    Looks like Branca was as unimpressed as I was with the defense's closing argument, which was all-around terrible. Richards was needlessly combative, scatterbrained, and failed to deliver a coherent close that addressed exactly how Rittenhouse met all the legal standards for the justified use of deadly force.
     
    RetiredUSNChief likes this.
  7. lsudave

    lsudave Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2007
    Messages:
    938
    Since I worked and missed catching this live, and have only seen excerpts- is the actual law regarding self defense read to the jury, at some point? Not the prosecutor's interpretation, not the defense's, but someone (maybe the judge) giving the impartial definition of what a person is legally allowed to do, in whatever circumstance?

    I ask this, because the last thing I saw was the prosecutor's rebuttal (which was rambling), but which stated something to the effect of "sometimes you need to take a beating", that it was cowardly to defend oneself with force that may harm/kill another.

    I know he's trying to make his case, but I felt like he was blatantly misrepresenting the law. Felt like he was lying at that point, not about what Rittenhouse did, but what he COULD do.
     
    RetiredUSNChief likes this.
  8. Spats McGee

    Spats McGee Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2012
    Messages:
    5,530
    Location:
    Arkansas
    Objections during opening and closing arguments are pretty rare. At least in Arkansas, the jury is instructed that 'statements of counsel are not evidence,' and the attorneys have much more leeway during arguments than they do during direct and cross examinations.

    I don't speak for anyone else, but when I play defense, I've always found it difficult to pin down my closing argument until I've heard the plaintiff's closing. I might have a rough framework, but I spend the time during their closing making notes, so that I can be sure to respond to the points they make. Sometimes, that means I come across as meandering. Others, it looks like I know what I'm doing.
     
  9. armydog

    armydog Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2021
    Messages:
    208
    Most likely GG won't be charged. He's been a good little boy for the prosecutors. And the prosecutor already chose his scapegoat. Plus as a matter of record, the prosecutor called him and everyone else trying to beat down or kill KR a hero. lol
     
    RetiredUSNChief likes this.
  10. browneu

    browneu Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2004
    Messages:
    809
    Location:
    ohio
    As a parent I thought suggesting a 17 year old kid should just take a beating by an adult regardless of size was extremely off putting. I hope there are other parents on the jury that caught that and thought the same thing.
     
  11. Madcap_Magician

    Madcap_Magician Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    Messages:
    2,377
    Location:
    MN
    I can understand that, especially the need to address and rebut the prosecution's closing arguments, since you won't get another chance. But Richards basically gave a speed run of going through every witness and providing commentary on that witness extemporaneously, even though it wasn't really necessary and the prosecution's close didn't address it. I thought Binger's close was inflammatory and factually full of errors, but he at least told a coherent story. I really thought it would be better if Richards had stuck to rebutting the specific inflammatory and factually wrong statements by Binger (i.e. "you give up the right to self-defense if you bring a gun to a fistfight"), impeaching Binger's credibility (without directly calling him a liar and an idiot - the way most of the trial went for Binger almost the best thing Richards could do would be to just step aside and let Binger hang himself), and hammer again on the legal elements of self-defense - the imminence, severity, and reasonableness of the threat from Rosenbaum, Huber, and Grosskreutz.

    I did like that Richards hammered Binger on the shift in the prosecution's case - how at the closing it now hinges on a single blurry video still that the prosecution says shows Rittenhouse provoked Rosenbaum's attack but that they only tried to hang the case on this after the rest of their case fell apart and all the prosecution witnesses ended up supporting the defense's narrative.
     
  12. wiscoaster

    wiscoaster Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2019
    Messages:
    3,053
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    If I was on the jury, and being (I think) a reasonable person, and taking the entire circumstances of the moment into account, I would have to totally discount the prosecution's "provocation" argument as a disallower for a lawful self-defense. Further, if you're going to bring in provocation, you can't ignore the overwhelming amount of provocation coming from the other side.
     
  13. Corpral_Agarn

    Corpral_Agarn Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2012
    Messages:
    3,231
    Location:
    Northern CA
    Here's a Lawyer's take (he's got at great channel, too BTW):
     
    RetiredUSNChief likes this.
  14. Corpral_Agarn

    Corpral_Agarn Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2012
    Messages:
    3,231
    Location:
    Northern CA
    I'll be watching this stream of the trial when it starts. Right now Lawyers are just discussing the case:
     
    RetiredUSNChief likes this.
  15. Fine Figure of a Man

    Fine Figure of a Man Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2011
    Messages:
    4,014
    Location:
    Iowa
    I am sure that the prosecutors would draw a crowd if they volunteered themselves.
     
  16. Old_Grouch

    Old_Grouch Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2021
    Messages:
    336
    Location:
    Pierre, South Dakota
    Proving slander or libel is easy. The problem with a law suit is that to win any kind of an award you need to prove damages. e.g "my employer fired me because of it" or "Several of my clients told me they would no longer do business with me". I doubt he has lost anything due to the comments. It's also possible win to punitive damages IF you can prove the statements were made with the intention of causing you financial harm or causing you mental anguish. That is extremely difficult to prove.
     
    RetiredUSNChief and 270OKIE like this.
  17. Old_Grouch

    Old_Grouch Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2021
    Messages:
    336
    Location:
    Pierre, South Dakota
    The judge has dismissed the of possession of a dangerous weapon charge. The defense had argued a person of that age could carry such a weapon under Wisconsin law as long as it wasn’t a short-barreled rifle. After the prosecution conceded that the AR-15-style rifle didn’t have a short barrel, Judge Schroeder dropped the charge.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/when-could-kyle-rittenhouse-verdict-come-out-11637074669
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2021
  18. ColoradoMinuteMan

    ColoradoMinuteMan Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2015
    Messages:
    573
    A couple of basis. One is that the ADA communicating to the jury that Rittenhouse wouldn't speak to police, which is his Fifth Amendment right. There was a motion filed and I don't believe this has been ruled upon. In addition, in the ADA's closing argument, he presented to the jury that Rittenhouse shot people with "AR-15 that he knew he couldn't have." This is a false statement as the judge had already dismissed the illegal possession charge due the the fact the prosecution was unable to provide evidence that Kyle had unlawfully possessed the rifle.
     
    RetiredUSNChief and Big Bore 44 like this.
  19. GEM

    GEM Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    10,227
    Location:
    WNY
    The mistrial motion was dismissed.
     
    RetiredUSNChief likes this.
  20. ColoradoMinuteMan

    ColoradoMinuteMan Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2015
    Messages:
    573
    When did it occur, as of this morning I believe it had not been ruled upon? Perhaps I missed it.
     
    RetiredUSNChief likes this.
  21. ColoradoMinuteMan

    ColoradoMinuteMan Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2015
    Messages:
    573
    Agreed, I'm not sure what happened there. I was watching it and was really disappointed.
     
    RetiredUSNChief likes this.
  22. Neo-Luddite

    Neo-Luddite Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2006
    Messages:
    3,174
    Location:
    Northwest IL--the other 'Downstate'
    The timing and sudden all-around knowledge about the situation appeared rather contrived by all concerned...not much of a fuss either way was to be made of this. Except that almost everyone who owns guns in Wisconsin (and maybe has had kids or been a kid, who hunts/shoots) had a pretty good grasp on this, I'd expect. We live in Illinois and my kids and I understand the law quite well (regarding lawful use/transport/possession by folks under 18 of long guns). I often joked with our girls that while they *COULD NOT* lawfully have pepper spray while under 18 under any circumstances, they COULD be armed with firearms in many situations, for example; when walking the dog in our yard, they could carry their Colt M-4's...but NOT a can of MK4 OC (and yes, of course, I told them to carry the &^%$# pepper spray when walking the dog (we had pitts running wild and threatening in our area) and that I would give answer if they were questioned. I run a bit afield of my point, and so forth...going to bed now!
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2021
  23. IJ1981

    IJ1981 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2019
    Messages:
    174
    Location:
    Coral Terrace, Florida
    Believe Rittenhouse NG on all 3 major counts.

    He legitimately killed and wounded all 3 Commie/drugie/ dirt bags.Not to mention a criminal child pervert.

    So he made the world a better place
    Today.
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2021
    270OKIE likes this.
  24. GEM

    GEM Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    10,227
    Location:
    WNY
    There are 4 major charges. Typo? Because a conviction even the least of the felonies is serious and ruins his life if you believe that he is innnocent of all, in this case.

    The compromise a fake choice if the goal is to punish him. Any felony conviction is a massive hit.
     
  25. Fine Figure of a Man

    Fine Figure of a Man Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2011
    Messages:
    4,014
    Location:
    Iowa
    Difficult to prove but in this instance there is a lot of well documented evidence available.
    https://www.theblaze.com/news/dershowitz-rittenhouse-should-be-acquitted-sue-liberal-media
     
    Old_Grouch likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice