Yeah, he's in a cemetery
Talk about trolling! “Most” democrats aren’t anywhere near Reagan, but “whatever”
Kyle Rittenhouse | Now crowdfunding LOLsuits against Whoopi Goldberg, LeBron James, and The Young Turks
- Thread starter Drainy
- Start date
Defense attorneys filed a motion for mistrial with prejudice in the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse on Monday, accusing the state of intentional "prosecutorial overreach."
The seven-page defense motion, filed on Monday, was provided to CNN by the court clerk this morning.
The motion points to a testy exchange between Judge Bruce Schroeder and Kenosha County Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger over his line of questioning as Rittenhouse testified last week, which the judge had warned could be a violation of Rittenhouse’s rights under the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution to remain silent.
In court on Wednesday, the judge initially called the discussion of the defendant's silence a "grave constitutional violation," but he later said it was "right on the borderline."
Defense attorneys also pointed to a second incident in their motion from Wednesday, in which Schroeder admonished the prosecutor about an incident two weeks before the shootings that the judge said would not be permitted into evidence
The seven-page defense motion, filed on Monday, was provided to CNN by the court clerk this morning.
The motion points to a testy exchange between Judge Bruce Schroeder and Kenosha County Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger over his line of questioning as Rittenhouse testified last week, which the judge had warned could be a violation of Rittenhouse’s rights under the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution to remain silent.
In court on Wednesday, the judge initially called the discussion of the defendant's silence a "grave constitutional violation," but he later said it was "right on the borderline."
Defense attorneys also pointed to a second incident in their motion from Wednesday, in which Schroeder admonished the prosecutor about an incident two weeks before the shootings that the judge said would not be permitted into evidence
Just watching this - I just don't think (if what's being described is factual) he's going to be found guilty of anything. His presence with a gun wasn't unusual, all his med kit was bought historically, he's there protecting business and cleaning places up, putting out fires. It doesn't seem to me that he went there wanting to shoot anybody.
Eventually the mob decide they want to attack him and he has to defend himself.
Eventually the mob decide they want to attack him and he has to defend himself.
Think you're right on the money here.
A sensible view. Anyone who watched his testimony with a vaguely open mind would probably conclude the same.
Defence pointing out that the prosecution used software that says its not to be used as evidence in court...
Binger is a weasel - 'that is not in evidence' rather than its isn't true
Binger is a weasel - 'that is not in evidence' rather than its isn't true
The judge is losing it. Seems ill and under pressure
Binger should've spent a bit more time focusing on the case and less applying product to his hair
Expecting him to rip off his mask and to reveal its Jim Carey
Do we think that a guilty verdict here would be damaging to the civil cases against the city of Kenosha, Kenosha county and the local police force? Because many of us seem to have argued more effectively than the prosecution.
did Binger piss him off again?
He is avoiding ruling on the motion for mistrial. He really wants the jury to decide and he probably sees the way the prosecution and the media are going to buttfeck him if he makes the call.
The prosecution have been holding a gun against his head with their misbehaviour, knowing his proclivity to delegate to the jury and the fact he will be the one blamed.
So the judge wants to do all he can to let the jury decide but this is a potential mistrial anyway?
How he described the story of trying an African American man reminded me of David Bowie - Five Years
The prosecution have breached the constitution, tried to admit unapproved evidence, and allegedly provided deficient evidence to the defence - would think its a strong possibility in most cases, but who knows
I doubt the Judge will rule a mistrial with prejudice. As he admitted, it's right up against the line rather than a flagrant violation, and the judge has a big incentive to not want to turn the entire narrative into being about him making the decision to let Rittenhouse off free of everything.
Are you an attorney?
No, but I'm watching the trial. The judge already said that they had broken rules and did so in bad faith. The deficient evidence is a new dispute.
From what I understand that is grounds for a mistrial.
How many US trials have you watched start to finish in your lifetime?
That’s as far as your political analysis goes? He’s dead, and they are not? Ok
Edit: sorry, I thought this response was to/from @Beans
Im not sure why that’s relevant. The judge was clear when he bollocked the prosecution and seemed genuinely astonished that they’d try to comment on things like Rittenhouse's silence.
unless you’re saying the judge is just making it up as he goes along?
Chirafisi even read out the legal standard during the case
I was just curious since Drainy was so invested in Rittenhouse's defense.
And Shroeder pulled back and called it borderline, so I doubt he would declare a mistrial with prejudice here. These things aren't black or white BTW and rely on legal interpretation. It doesn't look like a situation that requires a mistrial.
The notion that Democrats are left wing let alone socialists or commies is very silly from a Dutch perspective. Even our traditional right wing party would find some of the dems views a bit on the Conservative side. Though on the right we do have 1 lunatic fake news party similar to the republicans now. Very edgy of us. They even do memes and shit.
Did you quote the wrong post? I'm somewhat confused.
People looking in on American politics should know that there is very little that separates modern Democrats and Republicans. It is all about money for re-election and to line their pockets. Republicans once were conservative, both in conserving the constitution and fiscal conservatism. Fiscal conservatism went away long ago and both parties will attempt to change the constitution if it suits their needs. The only party that has a shred of their past is progressive Democrats, but I am not sure it is worth much as they sell out on everything else.
Just for point of reference, I am Independent and at lower level elections prefer Libertarians, but will vote for the least corrupt person. The national Libertarian party is a gaggle of buffoons'.
Here is a joke for you. Republican party would be seen as a left wing hipster party where I live
. Its all about perspectiveThis is a mess
Where do you live?Here is a joke for you. Republican party would be seen as a left wing hipster party where I live
Plot twist: he's the only person living in his zip code.
____________________________________
Does anyone have a good and unbiased TLDR of this trial?
Moby is to Nicki Minaj's Secret Bedroom as Chaddy P is to....
It is possible this becomes a hung jury and a mistrial is declared.
For those not familiar with a US hung jury it proceeds as follows.
After a mistrial has been declared due to a hung jury, the prosecutor has the option of considering how to proceed. In some cases, the prosecutor may end up dismissing the charges levied against the defendant. In other cases, a plea bargain may be reached after a mistrial has been declared. If neither of these things occur, the mistrial will end up leading to the defendant being tried on all of the same charges in another trial to be held at a later date. Double jeopardy does not apply in the event of a mistrial.
After a mistrial has been declared due to a hung jury, the prosecutor has the option of considering how to proceed. In some cases, the prosecutor may end up dismissing the charges levied against the defendant. In other cases, a plea bargain may be reached after a mistrial has been declared. If neither of these things occur, the mistrial will end up leading to the defendant being tried on all of the same charges in another trial to be held at a later date. Double jeopardy does not apply in the event of a mistrial.
defence asking for mistrial without prejudice
Judge has done a shit job, prosecution has done a shit job, defense has done a shit job.
Is anyone truly unbiased in this?
This has become a shitshow.
The prosecutor arguing that the defence has a copy of their evidence because the previous defence attorney saw a copy of the video while on Tucker Carlson - they claimed that they didn't know who had it and admitted they didn't ask either fox news or the person who was credited with taking the footage. The person then dropped it off during trial, and then the evidence saved in a compressed format 21 minutes later, and was sent in a lower quality and cropped to the defence.
The prosecutor arguing that the defence has a copy of their evidence because the previous defence attorney saw a copy of the video while on Tucker Carlson - they claimed that they didn't know who had it and admitted they didn't ask either fox news or the person who was credited with taking the footage. The person then dropped it off during trial, and then the evidence saved in a compressed format 21 minutes later, and was sent in a lower quality and cropped to the defence.
fecking judge won’t understand what ‘compressed’ & ‘cropped’ means.