This defence team are incompetent
Kyle Rittenhouse | Now crowdfunding LOLsuits against Whoopi Goldberg, LeBron James, and The Young Turks
- Thread starter Drainy
- Start date
Right, so defense attorneys who want to get their name out there for folks who are illegally carrying their rifles around like they're SEALs have said "oh, that's ambiguous, we can try this!"
My state has the exact same statute. It applies to hunting. It's bullshit to suggest otherwise.
who knows more about Wisconsin law a 30 year Wisconsin judge or you?
The fact that the Judge is instructing the jury on provocation based on a blurry image that the judge himself said he couldn't see, that the only testimony in the favour of was from a cop who watched it on his iPhone...
this judge is putting a lot of faith in the jury
the defence is utterly incompetent - they were winning the judge over and then just stopped after the prosecutor made his final point
this judge is putting a lot of faith in the jury
the defence is utterly incompetent - they were winning the judge over and then just stopped after the prosecutor made his final point
It's been mentioned but deserves highlighting again.
This is one of the worst comments I've heard from a lawyer. This Kevin Gough is probably the worst human being I've seen practicing law recently (although I'm sure there are others out there just as bad as this). When talking about biases, this sounds like blatant racism.
"A defense attorney for one of the three White men charged in Black jogger Ahmaud Arbery's killing objected this week to nationally recognized civil rights leaders attending the trial to support the victim's family.
"If we're going to start a precedent, starting yesterday, where we're going to bring high-profile members of the African American community into the courtroom to sit with the family during the trial in the presence of the jury, I believe that's intimidating and it's an attempt to pressure -- could be consciously or unconsciously -- an attempt to pressure or influence the jury," attorney Kevin Gough said Thursday in court in Brunswick, Georgia."
https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/11/us/ahmaud-arbery-trial-defense-attorney-black-pastors/index.html
This is one of the worst comments I've heard from a lawyer. This Kevin Gough is probably the worst human being I've seen practicing law recently (although I'm sure there are others out there just as bad as this). When talking about biases, this sounds like blatant racism.
"A defense attorney for one of the three White men charged in Black jogger Ahmaud Arbery's killing objected this week to nationally recognized civil rights leaders attending the trial to support the victim's family.
"If we're going to start a precedent, starting yesterday, where we're going to bring high-profile members of the African American community into the courtroom to sit with the family during the trial in the presence of the jury, I believe that's intimidating and it's an attempt to pressure -- could be consciously or unconsciously -- an attempt to pressure or influence the jury," attorney Kevin Gough said Thursday in court in Brunswick, Georgia."
https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/11/us/ahmaud-arbery-trial-defense-attorney-black-pastors/index.html
Must not get sucked in again
Is anyone not incompetent in this trial? Sure seems like they're all idiots.
I know CR but for self defense agrument I may be wrong but I don't think it matters much . He will be charged for illegal possession I'm sure of it
Its been a shoddy affair.
Such a high profile case too, it's not a great sign for the American justice system perhaps. You'd think this was the one case where all sides involved would be at their best.
You would need to have a valid hunting license to claim you were using to hunt game. A hunting license is specific to the animals it covers and their seasons. Larger species require you must possess a tag with you.
Great popcorn entertainment at times though.
Jury results are a crapshoot at this point.
You realize that I have access to legal opinions as well, thanks to the internet. Opinions on this very case.
You act like you're the only one reading about it.
See, this was your mistake. Stop all the reading. The only thing that matters is what the legal experts (especially right wing ones) say on TV. Reading is for commies.
Ah, silly me! I should have known I wasn't watching enough OAN.
Tell me, has something changed since Tuesday when the judge (again) dismissed the defense's motion to have the illegal possession charge dropped?
https://www.kenoshanews.com/news/lo...cle_ffc2241b-2b71-5a1a-a863-838837ee1a8b.html
yes, I've talked about that.
The prosecution failed to make the case that the gun was illegal, and they are currently at the jury instruction stage and wanted to hear the facts. He indicated that his instructions may adopt the defences framing or may dismiss now.
Overall today has been a massive win for the prosecution.
Of all the stupid things Rittenhouse has done, outside of the proud boys photo, the most stupid thing was hiring Richards as an attorney.
You can tell that judge is on Rittenhouses' side. The old cnut probably celebrated the killings when the news broke. Gotta show those damn lefties they mean business!
I’d say it was pretty stupid to be under 18 carrying a loaded rifle on a city street after dark with no hunting permit. But what do I know?
Nothing, all you do is read.
I agree and have said so before.
It’s like it’s his last day in the job and he’s decided to feck about.
Unbelievable that he’s a judge.
Folks, we've entered the Night Court simulation dimension.
That's great. It's also illegal... Because he's under 18, within city limits, after dark, without a hunting license. Not to mention Kyle himself said he was carrying the rifle "to protect myself in case I was attacked".
What a fecking clown.
Is there no educational requirement to be a judge in the US? Do these people just get picked at random?
They get elected by the people!
Wait, I was kidding. Surely you can only be elected if you studied law something similar?
The fact he allowed evidence in without any expert explanation of how the interpolation would work after it was allegedly received last Friday with the testimony of a proven incompetent cop who swore he saw Rittenhouse raise his gun because he watched it on an iPhone, and is now using it for the grounds for a provocation claim that the prosecution had previously failed to make any viable grounds on (because they know the carrying of a gun and running/jogging in a hostile crows with out being hostile himself etc is a bullshit argument and any attempt to supplement the claim on those basis were promptly dropped at any scrutiny from the judge) and is now expecting a jury to decide a case where that might be the evidence that has allowed a conviction with a long prison sentence that might otherwise not have is more baffling than him being eccentric.
Boomer judge explains in excruciating detail how technologically illiterate he is. Details at 11.
Back to you, Bob.
Dude might as well start whistling Dixie during cross examination.
Was watching some of Nate the Lawyers stream on Arbery earlier and he seems more down than he had been.
Thinks the defence has had some wins starting with rolling back the home owners story where he was saying he wasn't bothered by Arbery using police logs.
If people are fuming about the Rittenhouse 'victims' decision, I heard Arbery isn't being allowed to be referred to as a jogger.
Oh feck this guy. A disgrace to the profession.
Or they get appointed for life.
He literally described the gun his sister's boyfriend was holding for him. He went to Kenosha and killed people with said gun. Yeah, I reckon he would. It's called ideation.
And did you want to answer point 3.? What would it be like to be called a "mother fecking white supremacist cum bucket" all day? Would you keep your temper? Or do you think he was doing the Steve Bannon thing of owning your racism?
Would you shoot him once, or 4 times?
Aren't you British?
So, for hunting game, right. Not for defending yourself when you decide to join a militia??
He's not.
Yeah, but people who didn't want protecting needed protecting. He should have worn his pants on the outside.
So, surely you can see how that behaviour is provocative?
As much times as necessary to eliminate what I would deemed to be a threat against my life.