This is the trial of Rittenhouse who killed two and injured i protester. I feel bad about the ones killed and kyle too. Out youth are very mixed up bunch now a days, You have to log in to watch the violent shooting.
Yes from what I see they are trying to stop evidence from being presented by defence. This is a sad story all the way areound. But the PTB seems to be taking the side of violence. And the ignorant and naive listen to the hateful libs who inyice these younger peopel to do their bidding. The first man who was shot by Kyle had just hot out of mental ward that day. He had a very bad life and spent years in prison. he was 38 I think.Kyle was tired of seeing his nation be destroyed by these protestes which are mostly products of drugs and fatherless homes.Drugs our leaders open the borders for. known as Antifa,BLM and was helping to guard small businesses from them like the car dealrship being burned. Antifa is mostly admitted communist. I just wish none of it was going on.
As time has gone by, I really do not know how to judge some of the people involved in those riots. Show of force and use of force are the ingredients of my indecision. The McCloskey’s were using a show of force to fend off BLM members who had broken into a gated community ergo one would think that BLM was the perpetrators of an illegal act but it was the McCloskey’s who were prosecuted. Mrs. McCloskey had an unusable pistol and Mr. McCloskey didn’t even know how to properly load his AR. Whole towns made a show of force when the citizens came out armed running BLM and Antifa out when they arrived but those towns people received nationwide attaboys for their efforts. Now we have the subject of appreciation in the debacle involving an AR-15 toting young man who didn’t just have a show of force but a use of force. Antifa and BLM members were ransacking and burning down whole areas of large cities not counting the number of citizens who were beaten and left for dead but to my knowledge, no one faced any serious charges for those crimes. Yet, rightly or wrongly thinking that he could help protect people and property by being armed, Kyle Rittenhouse is facing several charges for the use of force. Throughout all the confusion I’m displaying there is one thing in particular that I am wondering. If Kyle had been a member of Antifa or BLM and had done the same thing, would we even know his name right now?
You see, that’s the direction of my thinking also. People like Kamala Harris threw some heavy duty money at getting criminals out of jail and I’m thinking if Kyle had been one of the Antifa members and caught, then he’d have been exonerated also.
Kyle explains what he is doing there,or at least trys to. I edited the video out ,it not the one I thought.
I believe the judge has now forbidden the prosecution from referring to those killed as "victims". The are to be referred to as arsonists, rioters, etc. It is making the Left livid to be treated as they treat others.
Playing the devil’s advocate, it took a while but as I thought about it I have to admit that I believe the judge to be Constitutionally incorrect for that judgment. Whilst I do love when the far left has to sit down and shut up, in this case we have a judge pronouncing guilt upon people who have not been charged and previously declared “looters and rioters” by their peers in a court of law. I’m not sure but I think even a dead looter is innocent until proven guilty and guilty or not a dead looter by 5.56 is still a victim.
There may be other terms they can use, but "victims" is not a term they can use, as it may prejudice the jury according to the judge. Similar things have occurred during the trials of the "mostly peaceful" protestors.
As I wrote, I’m just sort of playing the devil’s advocate here. Still, I do understand why the judge would nix the victim thing but doesn’t using rioters and looters essentially have the potential to carve out some subconscious leanings as well? Notably, I hope Rittenhouse gets off with a slap on the wrist and have to wear “stupid” written with indelible ink on his forehead for as long as it takes for it to wear off but I am wondering how the rulings in regard to language will play out. For me, the whole charade is enigmatic to be sure but there’s one thing I am fairly certain of and that is that the prosecutors are going to be screaming mistrial at some point if their hands are tied even a little more.
I am sure that the prosecution will not use the terms I mentioned, but the inability to use the term "victim" is still a positive thing, since the "victims" were the aggressors.
Bobby I think what the judge was saying that if the killing was in self defence they couldn't be victims. But using the term rioters,looters were evident by the live feeds of their actions . Not sure but just saying?
Because I have no inclination of being a crook, I’m not a lawyer but in the wake of the judge’s decision and if I were the prosecutor, I’d insist that any descriptive terminology other than deceased be used. Again, I’m all for Rittenhouse but I’m having a little fun playing Perry Mason.