meh
NES Member
The only actual "news" there is that they imply they are going to sue, probably Kyle and the Kenosha PD. The rest is an emotional outburst.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Taurus G3C Optics Ready***
17-year-old arrested in killing of 2 people in Kenosha
- Thread starter Toast
- Start date
pdm
NES Member
Kyle has no assets. His family has no assets. He's judgment proof.
Rockrivr1
NES Member
Until he starts winning some of the defamation lawsuits.
I was thinking about the most likely civil suits that will be coming and I was wondering what would be the outcome if Kyle is found guilty.
I think he comes from a divorced household and so I would venture to say he a doesn’t have a shit ton of assets?..Are they able to sue his family for any assets that Kyle will inherit? Also, will they be awarded any of Kyle’s settlement money he will get from various media that slandered him? Just wondering what would come of it because OJ got croaked in his civil suit but he obviously had some serious assets.
I think he comes from a divorced household and so I would venture to say he a doesn’t have a shit ton of assets?..Are they able to sue his family for any assets that Kyle will inherit? Also, will they be awarded any of Kyle’s settlement money he will get from various media that slandered him? Just wondering what would come of it because OJ got croaked in his civil suit but he obviously had some serious assets.
I believe (IANAL) that a civil judgement remains against him pretty much forever, until he pays it off. That means a lifelong future of payment plans, wage garnishment, and complicated tax returns. I think they'd be unable to go after his future inheritance, but once he inherits it it becomes fair game.
This is why there's a booming industry of people who are good at hiding money from things like this. One hopes Kyle and his parents will seek the help of an experienced financial advisor if the judgement goes against him.
Wow! So any future earnings? That’s nuts! I’m sure he’s got some serious scratch coming his way and he’s probably going to have to settle with those idiots.
Again, I don't really know. Even if I was a lawyer, I wouldn’t be one in Wisconsin. But that’s how civil judgments work in some other states.
Just because you’re poor, it doesn’t absolve you of that judgement. They’ll just wait until you’re not poor anymore, then collect. As they should.
Usually, it has a 20 year expiration date.
Interesting.
Dadstoys
NES Member
Scumbag's Mom : Muh baby was just minding his own business peacefully protesting when this crazy madman shot him.
Kyle's lawyer :
Defense rests.
CatSnoutSoup
NES Member
But it was just a skateboard not a gun!
View: https://youtu.be/xsd0qpUmcwQ
Edit:
Mistrial declared in skateboard attack of security guard
A San Francisco jury on Tuesday deadlocked on whether to convict Jesse Vieira, 24, of assault in the November 2018 attack on US Army veteran Dan Jansen, 57, who lost a portion of his skull.
meh
NES Member
I didn’t say it was invalid because it was emotional. The press is helping grieving, irrational parents make fools of themselves. In this statement they admit to being ignorant of the evidence in the case, defend their decision to remain ignorant, and in their ignorance declare someone a murderer. Their recalcitrant prejudice is forgivable, but making sure as many people as possible know about it is exploitive. People do love to gawk.
Looking to cash in on there dirtbag son
It’s not the media‘s responsibility to protect people from making fools of themselves.
Put yourself in the press’ shoes: a “victim” gets shot in a high-profile case. The family contacts you wanting to make a statement. OF COURSE you run that statement. You’re there to report the news and make money, and so are all the other media outlets afraid of being scooped.
I think you’re expecting way too much from the press.
Sharpton still owes from when he defamed people in the early 1990s. I believe tawana brawley had her wages garnished 4 years ago because she wasn’t paying what she owed either. I’m not sure if declaring bankruptcy can reduce or eliminate a civil judgement but time doesn’t.
meh
NES Member
You have a penchant for strawman arguments. Every single time I respond, I have to disavow your interpretation of what I said. I didn’t say it was their “responsibility”. I said they shouldn’t do it. There’s a difference.
But why shouldn’t they?
Why do you think the media exists?
I think you’re holding them to an impossibly flexible standard. Your beliefs about how they “should” behave aren’t something they should care about. Their own bottom line is what makes sense to them.
amb
NES Member
FWIW, Goetz declared bankruptcy shortly after the civil judgement against him, and got to leave some massive legal bills behind because of it but I'm 90% sure he still has the judgement hanging over him. That said, FisherTech said "usually" and there was nothing usual about either of the cases in question.
Another thing I learned out of the Goetz judgement is that by NY law wage garnishment to repay judgements is limited to 10%. Not sure how that plays out for the self-employed but it's a lot better than I was assuming.
meh
NES Member
I think what you think I think is not what I actually think.
I also think nobody wants an essay from me on the reason the media exists, whether I'm "holding them" to a standard at all by questioning their motives in publishing this particular information, and if so, precisely what that standard might be.Well then, with respect, why bring it up?I think what you think I think is not what I actually think.
What “should” they do when newsworthy people issue press releases?
meh
NES Member
Seemed like a good idea at the time.
I heard Judge Schroeder after the verdict was read say he was dismissing all charges "with prejudice". That probably has no effect on civil suits. I would think it would be very bad karma for the relatives of the criminals who attacked Kyle to file suit, and bad karma can have consequences. Just sayin'...
Just gots to remember: the standard of proof is different in a civil trial.
Criminal trials use a "reasonable doubt" standard, civil ones use a "preponderance of the evidence" standard. It's entirely possible to be acquitted criminally, but held civilly liable: happens all the time, in fact.
Criminal trials use a "reasonable doubt" standard, civil ones use a "preponderance of the evidence" standard. It's entirely possible to be acquitted criminally, but held civilly liable: happens all the time, in fact.
He's 18. He's supposed to be naive.
meh
NES Member
This is true, but is there any evidence that Kyle was not acting in self-defense? The prosecution in the criminal case was so dumfounded by the lack of evidence in court that they tried to fabricate evidence of provocation with no witnesses and no clear photographic or video evidence. How are they going to go from 0% to 51%, and bear in mind that their obstacles will be greater, since the criminal history of those who were shot and what they were doing there won't be excluded. Seems to me that when you open things up for the civil litigation, things get worse for the plaintiffs, not for Kyle, even though the bar is lower.
I think, and hope, you're right. But as I understand it, the burden goes something like this: "Is it more likely than not that Kyle wrongly caused their deaths?" I don't know how wrongly is defined in WI civil statute, and I don't care enough to look it up. I am heartened that nothing's been filed yet. I think the longer the plaintiffs wait, the more of an indication it is that their case is weaker than they'd like it to be.
I can see Rosenbaum going the other way, given the wrong jury. But, again, I'm not as knowledgeable about the ins and outs of the case as the lawyers will be by the time this goes to trial.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2014
- Messages
- 23,746
- Likes
- 46,768
Meh, this isn't going anywhere if it goes civil. The dossier of the three scumbags he shot will get put front and center and that's the end of that. Good luck getting a jury to "feel bad" for the 3 scumbags in a flyover state. Not happening. Plus there's no pot of gold for the ambulance chaser.
Actually WRT self defense- "no it doesn't". A civil suit, let alone a successful one, in the wake of a clean SD shooting is pretty rare, regardless of what Ayoob wants people to think.
Let's put it this way, Rittenhouse is not OJ simpson. There's no "edge" here for the plaintiffs.
Hope and trust you're right. I just never say never.
