The media casts it as half but i bet in this case it's more like 80 / 20. Lots of people are sick of these commies. It's easy to cast doubt in zimms case, not so much here.
-
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.
17-year-old arrested in killing of 2 people in Kenosha
- Thread starter Toast
- Start date
D
Deleted member 12999
This is a landmark case honestly and its time that we put some $$ towards this.
If felon shitbags can get millions, this kid should be SWIMMING in money
If felon shitbags can get millions, this kid should be SWIMMING in money
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,534
- Likes
- 33,577
The attorney can plant a seed of doubt by asking the question, but the judge could rule that as hearsay defense counsel could not ask a leading question and could only ask "what did you say?".
I still predict a plea bargain. This kid won't roll the dice on a life without no matter how strong his case.
DarthRevan
NES Member
If I was getting that kind of legal aid I’d fight it all the way. f*** commies.
VetteGirlMA
NES Member
One thing I have been thinking is that the prosecution is going to have a difficult if not impossible task locating reliable witnesses for the prosecution side. I mean what are the odds that the only 3 criminals at the riot were those shot? Or put it another way, what are the chances that a lot more people in the crowd were convicted felons? Getting reliable felons to testify in a court of law as a reliable witness? I just don't see that happening. It's all going to come down to forensics and that in itself is also very shaky in a court of law.
No matter what, expect no real motions until sometime next year.
HorizontalHunter
NES Member
EJFudd
NES Member
I sure hope your prediction is wrong. The kid is not a criminal. His motives and intentions were good. Then he was attacked and attacked again. He'd be dead if he didn't defend himself.
If he has to accept a plea bargain, it would be tragic.
![[thinking]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/010.gif "Thinking [thinking]")
Sucking for a plea here is stupid, as a deal will still likely involve "lots of prison" and at that point, what difference does it make. They're not going to let him walk w/no prison if he sucks for a
plea.
hillman
NES Member
There will be literal bus loads of people showing up claiming they saw everything. Reliable, no. Paid well? Probably.
They are only Charging Rittenhouse with a crime to keep the Kenosha Riots from going Nuclear.
Malodave
Malodave
IMHO a guy getting acquitted on charges based on SD really isn't much of a precedent, it happens all the time. The DA still "wins" because they got their dog and pony show, blah blah.
Ironically if the commies win it is more dangerous- people will lose faith in the system and possibly stop acting in such a way to comply with it. For example instead of doing the right thing, like what Kyle did, and only shooting threats.... maybe the next guy or lady is going to be like "f*** it, I'm going to jail anyways, I might as well take out as many of these shitheads as I can in the
process" EG, if Kyle gets persecuted, then the next victim might be more likely to rage-quit....
ummm...care to elaborate?
he DID kill 2 people in public. arrest/charge able offense regardless of situation and the details to be sorted out later.
this isn't to say that I don't think he's getting Texas Roadhouse for dinner every night and friendly slaps on the back every time he has to leave his cell...but there was no 'choice' in the matter to arrest and charge him. that was necessary and inevitable.
Last edited:
You are high. There’s no choice but to arrest someone for a crime they didn’t commit because someone’s dead? Good point. Why bother with investigations and probable cause.
The DA will never charge them for perjury. Just like noodle arm getting away with being a felon in possession and not being charged with attempted murder.
The people rioting in Kenosha aren't from Kenosha. The locals aren't the ones burning their city down. There were peaceful protests during the day by locals. All the nighttime stuff is out of town commies, criminals, and professional activists coming in under a fig leaf.
You are high. There’s no choice but to arrest someone for a crime they didn’t commit because someone’s dead? Good point. Why bother with investigations and probable cause.
so he didn't kill two people?
i think you're assuming (and i think you put the ASS in assume) that this is 'CLEAR CUT'...no questions asked 'self-defense' and that everyone involved was forced to watch the 20 videos before making a decision to charge him and what with. then watch 20 videos about each of the 20 videos and get the Monday morning quarterbacking and commentary from each perspective? because I'm pretty sure that's not how it works.
do i think the charges are 'off'...yes. manslaughter would have been a little more appropriate, but over-charging someone can often lead to their benefit.
i'm not a cop or a judge, but i really don't think they had much of a choice here. i'll ASSUME you've been both though and know what you're talking about since your so confrontational about it.
dick head.
you tell me then, how should this have played out?
Last edited:
Lol. Prosecutors don’t care about besetting taxpayer money, politically motivated witch hunts or not. That’s not a deterrence.
amm5061
NES Member
I suspect that more than a few people are reaching this point already.
VetteGirlMA
NES Member
Admissible in a court of law? Definitely not.
Is that what I said, implied, or suggested? Or is this just an pointless rhetoric question?
Ironic you are ASSUMING that I’m assuming something, don’t you think? You’re wrong by the way. I even spelled out what I think. It was a short four sentence post. Read them all. Try the fourth and last sentence.
Well your last sentence is indeed quite accurate. “Over-charging” is another way to say “false charges”, btw. And when you say for “their benefit” that’s quite clearly not the same as “in the interest of justice”, right?
But I digress. And because I’m feeling nice, I’ll explain again what I said in my last post that you didn’t understand. In a legitimate system, you only arrest someone upon probable cause after an investigation. People being killed doesn’t mean you get to forgo this. They instead arrested him immediately with no serious investigation and their own charging statement doesn’t support the charges they did bring. That’s only “necessary and inevitable” in a corrupt system.
i'll be honest with you, i'm not 100% familiar with the process and how much time they have to charge someone with something before they have to just let them go.
i honestly think the kid is safer in police custody right now than not.
THIS!!!
![[bow]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/027.gif "Bow [bow]")
I am surprised by the volume of posters who do not understand this new reality yet. They are stuck in the old normal and that alone represents a potentially dangerous situation which has many historical examples.
One for many:
After WWII., when Allies gave Stalin half of Europe Stalin had to solve a huge dilema; Poland, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia were democratic states which were actually fighting Nazis and had their governments in exile. Communists were weak or were anti-Stalin and anti-Soviet back then. The exiled governments were residing in London. Stalin immediately created another set of exiled governments in Moscow. When WWII. came to the end free elections were organized. But before that Stalin pressured governments in exile to "integrate" his well trained commies. Confused and weak democrats from London wanted to show how nice they are and integrated commies by giving them interior, defense and education. New elections were full of frauds and stuffing of boxes. Nobody investigated, nobody cared and those who did care were investigated by commie police as enemies of the people.
YOU CAN'T COMPROMISE WITH COMMIES! Your only option is to accept them and let them rule for 50-60 years. Commies will always fail and they will destroy the country, but that will take few decades and none of us will be around to bitch about it!
Ahh there it. Can’t argue on merits so use personal attacks.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2009
- Messages
- 7,080
- Likes
- 6,999
His legal team say they are taking it to the mat. God bless them. Legal Team for Kenosha Shooter Kyle Rittenhouse Releases Full Statement
Kyle, his family, the team at Pierce Bainbridge and his other lawyers intend to fight these charges every step of the way, take the case to trial and win an acquittal on the grounds of self-defense before a jury of his peers.
Well your honest is nice to hear. I do appreciate that you are acknowledging your ignorance on the subject which does help explain things. If they don’t immediately arrest and charge him it doesn’t, for some reason, preclude them for ever arresting or charging him later. That’s not how the system works. I’m not sure what or even if there is a statute of limitations, but it’s almost certainly measured in years, not hours.
you started it.
and for some reason I thought they could only hold for 24 hours before charging someone?
i'm trying to put myself in arresting officers shoes (remember, they picked him up across state lines in IL).
WI had to request that this individual be arrested in connection with the murders of 2 dudes...cops have very little beyond this to go on at this point. 2 dead dudes, and no kenosha kid to question.
i'll give you that they could have held off on charging him (but for how long), but I don't know that they really had ANY other choice but to arrest him. i just don't see a scenario where that makes sense from an officers standpoint from across state lines where this kid was wanted in connection with 2 deaths (murder or otherwise). from their perspective now, it looks like he was running (and I would have done exactly the same thing).
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,534
- Likes
- 33,577
They ALWAYS say that at the beginning, just like civil litigants always start with "My demands are non-negotiable".
As an attorney, he will be professionally obligated to present the client with any offer made by the state. It might be hard for the kid to turn down "youth detention until 21 or we can go to the mat with an adult trial and risk life without parole".
An attorney once told me about a case he was taking to the mat and would never plead out. A year or so later when it was resolved he told me what a great plea bargain he negotiated for his client.
Last edited:
AHM
NES Member
If convicted, Antifa will riot in celebration.
On the other hand,
if acquitted, Antifa will riot in protest.
Or blade away at 180° and GTFO through alleys and back yards like Ferris Bueller,
instead of desperately trying to surrender to every passing cop, fireman, and Uber driver..
Lawyers.com: Wisconsin Criminal Statutes of Limitations
Murder ("first degree intentional homicide," “second degree intentional homicide,” or “felony murder”): No time limit
Reckless homicide, first degree: No time limit
Reckless homicide, second degree: 15 years
Put the friend on the stand first, he has to testify that Lefty said it to him because if he says otherwise he'll face a perjury charge, or just ask the friend, "did you post this" and show the post. This avoids the possibly perjury and prevents taking the 5th because all he's being asked is to confirm what is already clear. Then when Lefty is on the stand just act as if his friend basically testified that it was said, if Lefty denies ask why would your FRIEND lie....prosecutor will object because it requires drawing a conclusion, defense withdraws the question. Seed of doubt for anything Lefty says that doesn't work for the defense has been planted. And they never have to ask Lefty what he said
Similar threads
