Kyle Rittenhouse Trial began today

[Corbi]

For those of you with FB try this little experiment, use the search function for "Kyle Rittenhouse" and let us know what you come up with for postings, articles, video's, etc.

[mtpockets]

Manson? You are one stupid bastard comparing Manson to Kyle.

Here you are calling someone stupid while you show your ignorance yet again

I am not comparing Rittenhouse to anyone. I published a Meme, here is what a meme is








Pay attention, I post memes on all sides of the issue, not just one one side and it doesn't always reflect how I feel on the subject. I post memes on Trump and Biden for example, pros and cons for each, If you look in this thread, I have been posting memes on both sides of the fence regarding the trial. Are you keeping up so far?

Do you understand that it wasn't me comparing Manson to Rittenhouse yet? But it was the meme I posted that did that? I am sorry the meme didn't fit into your agenda, however, if I only posted one sided memes. I would look like a narrow minded bias little fuktard like yourself, just taller. Can't have that, there is only room for one like you in here.

You know what tater? When you post Sh!t like this, I picture you in your onesie on Saturday morning at 43 years old watching cartoons and yelling at the Coyote because the anvil didn't hit the road runner. Am I close or are you a roadrunner fan?

Just be grateful that I post both sided memes, it gives your shortass an opportunity to get on a milk crate and preach the new found wisdom that you just searched off google. Call it the "Milk crate challenge for dumb short asses" if you will.

Enjoy your day Tater I expect things will be looking up for you

[NorwichGrad]

For those of you with FB try this little experiment, use the search function for "Kyle Rittenhouse" and let us know what you come up with for postings, articles, video's, etc.

I tried. FB says

"We couldn't find any posts to show for Kyle Rittenhouse."

But some were smart enough to trick algo. So they misspelled "Rittlehouse."

Just like I misspell gubmint, see eye ey, and eff bee eye. LOL.

[DustinTheHuss]

1. It wasn’t his business, it wasn’t even his state
2. He’s a minor and doesn’t need a semi automatic to protect himself. He had no business going there being a child. He had no business having that gun
3. If it was his family’s business or home and people were rioting and coming to damage his property, that would be totally different. He traveled states looking to literally kill people.
4. There is a major difference in defending yourself and looking for a fight.
5. BLM people that act out to damage property are in the wrong and in these cases are no longer fighting for any civil rights movement and deserve to go to jail for a very long time.

Agree with snails on this one even though I got negged to high hell on the main Misc. He should have been home playing video games.

You would let your child to travel to another state in the middle of a riot with a semi automatic? Really?

I also agree with Cass. No pink knight

And also this:

Predicting a hung Jury

[LWW]

Here you are calling someone stupid while you show your ignorance yet again

I am not comparing Rittenhouse to anyone. I published a Meme, here is what a meme is








Pay attention, I post memes on all sides of the issue, not just one one side and it doesn't always reflect how I feel on the subject. I post memes on Trump and Biden for example, pros and cons for each, If you look in this thread, I have been posting memes on both sides of the fence regarding the trial. Are you keeping up so far?

Do you understand that it wasn't me comparing Manson to Rittenhouse yet? But it was the meme I posted that did that? I am sorry the meme didn't fit into your agenda, however, if I only posted one sided memes. I would look like a narrow minded bias little fuktard like yourself, just taller. Can't have that, there is only room for one like you in here.

You know what tater? When you post Sh!t like this, I picture you in your onesie on Saturday morning at 43 years old watching cartoons and yelling at the Coyote because the anvil didn't hit the road runner. Am I close or are you a roadrunner fan?

Just be grateful that I post both sided memes, it gives your shortass an opportunity to get on a milk crate and preach the new found wisdom that you just searched off google. Call it the "Milk crate challenge for dumb short asses" if you will.

Enjoy your day Tater I expect things will be looking up for you

You sound like an idiot with your explanation above. First you still dodge my question on Zappas prime years ( I bet you think it was 70s) and it sounds like you are jealous of short people because you are so uncoordinated you can't even squat anymore, although you only wish that you could.

Now come back at me just like an angry old fart that watches road runner cartoons would do.

[mtpockets]

You sound like an idiot with your explanation above. First you still dodge my question on Zappas prime years ( I bet you think it was 70s) and it sounds like you are jealous of short people because you are so uncoordinated you can't even squat anymore, although you only wish that you could.

Now come back at me just like an angry old fart that watches road runner cartoons would do.

Ha Ha... I don't watch cartoons, I get enough laughs reading your posts..Like this one where you lie and say I don't squat anymore. Why do you lie about people? I squatted this morning dumbass. Not the first time you lied about me or others for that matter. Pathetic at 43 you have to make up stories like some old broad gossiping, you should start your own stitch and bitch club all you do is complain and spread gossip.. Pathetic

I am not dodging any questions, don't confuse my ignoring you with dodging. I seen all your posts, you are like that toddler tugging on daddies pants in dollar general wanting a toy. I raised and been around kids all my life tater. I can handle your little tantrums as well as ignore them. You need to read my post again and try to digest it.

You are supposedly a Zappa fan, you should know this answer. If you don't, then get those pork sausage digits typing and get an answer from google, I am done spoon feeding you. It's a simple query, I will give you a little hint though, it's between the mid 50's and 93, perhaps it was only a weekend in there somewhere, perhaps it was the entire time, put on your big boy panties and figure it out.

You won't get anything else out of me on the topic other than Zappa Sucks, so hissy fit away.

[mtpockets]

Apparently, the prosecution are looking at lesser charges, but I don't know what that's all about. We will find out on Monday I guess.

[coachcalande]

I watched the OJ trial…


Literally got away with double homicide.

How
Quickly folks forget- jury tampering works.

[Mark1T]

I watched the OJ trial…

Literally got away with double homicide.

How
Quickly folks forget- jury tampering works.

These days a jury may not vote on whether there is guilt or not, but on their ingrained ideological and political beliefs with no regard of the consequences. In this case, guns.

[7Seconds]

Apparently, the prosecution are looking at lesser charges, but I don't know what that's all about. We will find out on Monday I guess.

It’s not additional charges, its jury instructions about lesser included charges.

The state needs to ask the court for permission to have the court instruct the jury on any lesser included offenses. So basically the prosecution provides a list of lesser versions of the existing charges they would like to include. The defense doesn't want the lesser charges included because although they may have convinced the jury that Kyle did fire in self defense, the jury's human mind can justify that even if they agree with the defense it's justifiable to include the lesser charge because it's less 'bad'.

So the roles become reversed where the defense has to argue that the bigger act is all that's needed to justify the lesser charge and its redundant, and the prosecution has to argue that the lesser charge happened independent of the larger charge.

[mtpockets]

It’s not additional charges, its jury instructions about lesser included charges.

The state needs to ask the court for permission to have the court instruct the jury on any lesser included offenses. So basically the prosecution provides a list of lesser versions of the existing charges they would like to include. The defense doesn't want the lesser charges included because although they may have convinced the jury that Kyle did fire in self defense, the jury's human mind can justify that even if they agree with the defense it's justifiable to include the lesser charge because it's less 'bad'.

So the roles become reversed where the defense has to argue that the bigger act is all that's needed to justify the lesser charge and its redundant, and the prosecution has to argue that the lesser charge happened independent of the larger charge.

Thanks for that my man...

Not as simple as I thought, much appreciated

[Tommy W.]

Thanks for that my man...

Not as simple as I thought, much appreciated

so i guess maybe they'll throw the prosecution a bone so they can say he didn't get away scot free.

[eomrat]

so i guess maybe they'll throw the prosecution a bone so they can say he didn't get away scot free.

Who?

[LWW]

Ha Ha... I don't watch cartoons, I get enough laughs reading your posts..Like this one where you lie and say I don't squat anymore. Why do you lie about people? I squatted this morning dumbass. Not the first time you lied about me or others for that matter. Pathetic at 43 you have to make up stories like some old broad gossiping, you should start your own stitch and bitch club all you do is complain and spread gossip.. Pathetic

I am not dodging any questions, don't confuse my ignoring you with dodging. I seen all your posts, you are like that toddler tugging on daddies pants in dollar general wanting a toy. I raised and been around kids all my life tater. I can handle your little tantrums as well as ignore them. You need to read my post again and try to digest it.

You are supposedly a Zappa fan, you should know this answer. If you don't, then get those pork sausage digits typing and get an answer from google, I am done spoon feeding you. It's a simple query, I will give you a little hint though, it's between the mid 50's and 93, perhaps it was only a weekend in there somewhere, perhaps it was the entire time, put on your big boy panties and figure it out.

You won't get anything else out of me on the topic other than Zappa Sucks, so hissy fit away.

I dont need to google it but I see you did. There are bands I dont like but at least im not a little guy like you and admit I like maybe a tune here or there, its obvious you are a big talker but really just a little man with an Internet insecurity.

Dont hit your head on the way out and dont fall over squatting the empty bar.

[AlBHappy]

Why hasn't the judge tossed this?

[mtpockets]

Why hasn't the judge tossed this?

Can he do that? For what reason?

[mtpockets]

[Corbi]

Anyone see the crap the media is trying to stir up about the judge? Claiming he made a racist joke because he said he hoped the asian food they ordered wasn't stuck on a boat off the coast of Kalifornia.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ho...cid=entnewsntp

[mtpockets]

[LWW]

Can he do that? For what reason?

Pockets its sad you are trying to learn law from a bb forum.

Put it this way you once wrote about running threw some auditoriums naked or some chit and laughing about it, good thing you didn't get charged because if you did and got convicted you'd be labeled a sex offender and you would be on every parents radar.

[steffo99]

I sense some tension (not sexual by any means) between you guys. Just shake hands and let Chaz send you a Tolle vid for some deeper insight.

[mtpockets]

Pockets its sad you are trying to learn law from a bb forum.

I asked a question, you should ask more questions instead of pretending to be a know it all.

Put it this way you once wrote about running threw some auditoriums naked or some chit and laughing about it, good thing you didn't get charged because if you did and got convicted you'd be labeled a sex offender and you would be on every parents radar.

***Through ** See note about asking questions

Threw is something you did yesterday.. Example: Tater tot threw another hissy fit.


It was a bingo hall, I streaked a bingo hall. It was all in fun and everyone had a good laugh. If I had gotten caught I would have probably gotten off due to lack of evidence. It was mighty cold in there.


Do you ever laugh and have fun Tater, All I see from you in here is you being a miserable son of a bitch with LMS

[mtpockets]

I sense some tension (not sexual by any means) between you guys. Just shake hands and let Chaz send you a Tolle vid for some deeper insight.

You gotta be sh!tting me, I tried to watch one of those videos, almost nodded off. Besides taking advice from Chaz would be like taking advice from an 80's Valley girl except instead of saying "like" 1000 times he says "dude"

[LWW]

I asked a question, you should ask more questions instead of pretending to be a know it all.




***Through ** See note about asking questions

Threw is something you did yesterday.. Example: Tater tot threw another hissy fit.


It was a bingo hall, I streaked a bingo hall. It was all in fun and everyone had a good laugh. If I had gotten caught I would have probably gotten off due to lack of evidence. It was mighty cold in there.


Do you ever laugh and have fun Tater, All I see from you in here is you being a miserable son of a bitch with LMS

I've got a great sense of humor, I'm a Frank Zappa fan, you are not, so your idea of humor sucks. Did you listen to song I posted for you about the little old man who lived in Montreal? I doubt it, and if you did you be disgusted and offended, guaranteed, even though you post the most perverted stuff on this forum a pumpkin that looked like an ******* is right up Zappa's alley too, that's why it makes zero sense you don't like him. I'll also post a serious tune by him, which you will secretly like but since your a duce bag you'll just say "nah" like a narrow minded little old "pervert" of a boy/man.

[mtpockets]

I've got a great sense of humor, I'm a Frank Zappa fan, you are not, so your idea of humor sucks. Did you listen to song I posted for you about the little old man who lived in Montreal? I doubt it, and if you did you be disgusted and offended, guaranteed, even though you post the most perverted stuff on this forum a pumpkin that looked like an ******* is right up Zappa's alley too, that's why it makes zero sense you don't like him. I'll also post a serious tune by him, which you will secretly like but since your a duce bag you'll just say "nah" like a narrow minded little old "pervert" of a boy/man.

It's douchebag, Why is spelling so hard for you?


I sure did get under your skin by not being a Zappa fan, you have been mentioning it in just about every post for weeks. My work here has been complete You need to give it a rest though, I will never like his stuff.

If you have a sense of humor, knock the dust off it and lets see some. I think if you smiled your face would crack. You sure do seem to follow my posts though, I forgot about the pumpkin, posted it because it reminded me of you.






Round
Almost red from being mad constantly
Crusty
an ass hole and
a big Twat





Of course you will post Zappa songs, it's the weekend, you spend it drunk with Zappa on repeat. We all know Tater. Nothing new.

[7Seconds]

Can he do that? For what reason?

The fifth amendment protects you from self-incrimination, which means you can't be compelled to give testimony against yourself by the state. During trial this also means that the prosecutors, should you take the stand, can't allude to the fact you didn't give them an interview before asking for an attorney; it also means that if you don't take the stand, the prosecution can't point this out to the jury during closing arguments or make insinuations about your guilty based on these facts. The prosecutor, at the beginning of his cross-examination of Kyle, pointed this out and the defense attorney, objected. The judge sustained it with a warning. Not five minutes later the prosecutor attempted to ask the same question and the judge asked the jury to leave the court before admonishing him. Judge even said he believed he may have stepped over the line in terms of prosecutorial misconduct.

Later on, prosecutor attempts to introduce evidence that had previously been excluded because it is considered propensity evidence, which is evidence used to assert that a person has a character trait and that the person had acted on that trait in a particular instance and is in general not admissible. During pre-trial motions, the judge excluded video evidence of Kyle and a friend watching what looks like the looting of a CVS, and Kyle saying he wished he had his rifle to shoot them. Prosecutor attempted to bring that up in front of the jury, leading to the defense to object and the judge to, again, ask the jury to step out. At that point defense asks the court to "strongly admonish" prosecutor for his actions, and that if he did something like this again he'd motion for a mistrial with prejudice, meaning the judge rules that the prosecutors have acted in such a way that they have contaminated the case and done it in such a way as to force a mistrial, where they could retry the defendant and improve their case. Judge states that another f*ck-up by prosecutors would lead to him doing just that, but left it open-ended.

[mtpockets]

The fifth amendment protects you from self-incrimination, which means you can't be compelled to give testimony against yourself by the state. During trial this also means that the prosecutors, should you take the stand, can't allude to the fact you didn't give them an interview before asking for an attorney; it also means that if you don't take the stand, the prosecution can't point this out to the jury during closing arguments or make insinuations about your guilty based on these facts. The prosecutor, at the beginning of his cross-examination of Kyle, pointed this out and the defense attorney, objected. The judge sustained it with a warning. Not five minutes later the prosecutor attempted to ask the same question and the judge asked the jury to leave the court before admonishing him. Judge even said he believed he may have stepped over the line in terms of prosecutorial misconduct.

Later on, prosecutor attempts to introduce evidence that had previously been excluded because it is considered propensity evidence, which is evidence used to assert that a person has a character trait and that the person had acted on that trait in a particular instance and is in general not admissible. During pre-trial motions, the judge excluded video evidence of Kyle and a friend watching what looks like the looting of a CVS, and Kyle saying he wished he had his rifle to shoot them. Prosecutor attempted to bring that up in front of the jury, leading to the defense to object and the judge to, again, ask the jury to step out. At that point defense asks the court to "strongly admonish" prosecutor for his actions, and that if he did something like this again he'd motion for a mistrial with prejudice, meaning the judge rules that the prosecutors have acted in such a way that they have contaminated the case and done it in such a way as to force a mistrial, where they could retry the defendant and improve their case. Judge states that another f*ck-up by prosecutors would lead to him doing just that, but left it open-ended.

Ahh ok, I seen some of this and it makes more sense now that you laid it out. I assume this is why they never brought up him being in the bar and photo op with the proud boys as well.

[7Seconds]

Ahh ok, I seen some of this and it makes more sense now that you laid it out. I assume this is why they never brought up him being in the bar and photo op with the proud boys as well.

Yep the prosecution tried to get those photos into evidence but were denied by the judge pre trial as well. Character evidence is usually not admissible unless it shows motive rather than action in accordance with character.

[Tommy W.]

Yep the prosecution tried to get those photos into evidence but were denied by the judge pre trial as well. Character evidence is usually not admissible unless it shows motive rather than action in accordance with character.

good info

[mtpockets]

Yep the prosecution tried to get those photos into evidence but were denied by the judge pre trial as well. Character evidence is usually not admissible unless it shows motive rather than action in accordance with character.

Excellent, Thanks