17-year-old arrested in killing of 2 people in Kenosha

meh said:
What does PORTUONDO v. AGARD have to do with anything? First of all, that case was about comments during summation. Second, the judge's ire as I understand it had nothing to do with questioning Rittenhouse's veracity.
Click to expand...

Agree. That case was about summation where the prosecution said he testified after hearing all other witnesses so he could have tailored his testimony to what he heard. Binger was suggesting Rittenhouse was guilty because he didn’t give previous statements. This law prof is way off base. He’s teaching the next generation of lawyer ☹️
 
Waher said:
The Judge would dismiss with prejudice to prevent a second trial due to prosecutorial misconduct, which is what the Prosecutor wants; to be able to blame a lack of conviction on the Judge and not the state's case being political garbage.
Click to expand...
Anyone who thinks that if (if) the judge brooms the case
that he'll do it with a single sentence order and a bang of the gavel -
without issuing an exhaustive and pointed written explanation -
ought to be in for a surprise.

If the prosecutor screwed the pooch,
the court will publish a memo that names names
and leaves a mark.

Similarly, if the court thinks a just verdict can't be issued
because of threats to the jury,
that implies that he ought to lay out who wasn't doing their job
to ensure that justice was operational in the county.

Hoover said:
Binger is not good at this. I’m sure Rittenhouse was prepared for the past few weeks but experienced prosecutor shouldn’t get embarrassed like that by an 18 year old.
Click to expand...
If this trial was released on a DVD box set,
there ought to be an optional captioning
where expert litigators state what narrative
each question is obviously phrased to establish.
 
Hoover said:
This law prof is way off base. He’s teaching the next generation of lawyer ☹️
Click to expand...
It is typical, unfortunately. I guess he couldn't think of a cogent response to what the judge was actually saying, so he mischaracterized what the judge was upset about and responded to that instead, knowing that most people wouldn't understand what he was actually doing. How many times have we seen that tactic?
 
Screenshot_20211110-162257_Chrome.jpg
 
headednorth said:
Ive only followed along on NES, but its seems like anything that could go wrong has gone wrong for the prosecution. Sounds like a complete clown-show. Him being convicted anyway would be the ultimate show of power. The message would be "if we want to ruin you, we will and there is nothing you can do about it."
Click to expand...
We all know liberty and justice are aboard a sinking ship. A conviction would be on par with hitting a glacier big enough to sink the Titanic. I pray to God that glacier is avoided.
 
bigbravehog said:
he is but he should shorten his answers to "correct" or "incorrect"
Click to expand...
Binger: "Once again, just answer the question I asked."
KR: "I did!"

I'm pretty sure the defense attorneys were just letting the prosecution tie their own noose.

It was really bad, and while it was almost all objectionable, it was more valuable to the defense to let it just play out.
 
cams said:
I can think of just a handful of cops right here on NES, a couple of them I know personally from work. If you add up our combined careers it could easily be 150+yrs of LE not murdering anyone, so there’s that, or we can adjust fire onto the medical community who kills a couple hundred thousand a year from negligence or incompetence. I don’t judge. lol
Click to expand...

We already have a thread for that LOL : https://www.northeastshooters.com/xen/threads/covid-vaccine-megathread.402700/page-705#post-7581475
 
KBCraig said:
I'm pretty sure the defense attorneys were just letting the prosecution tie their own noose.

It was really bad, and while it was almost all objectionable, it was more valuable to the defense to let it just play out.
Click to expand...
It's a cinch it wasn't going over defense counsels' heads.

It had to be some kind of deliberate strategery to not
jump up and object to every objectionable solitary prosecution question.
 
GaryO said:
The anger of the judge was a little surprising.I wonder if the prosecution is just screwing up to get the judge to explode.
Click to expand...
That was their best chance on appeal: judicial prejudice.

It doesn't come anywhere close to their own prosecutorial misconduct and incompetence, but they're grasping at straws by now.
 
Hoover said:
Grosskruetz ran after rittenhouse and asked him what he did (he didn’t know firsthand). He watched rittenhouse be assaulted several times including by Huber, who was then shot, before grosskruetz pointed his gun at rittenhouse and charged at rittenhouse.

Look at what the morons in GA are being prosecuted for in GA in the death or Arbery. They’re claiming they were acting legal under GAs civil arrest law (I doubt Wisconsin has one or anything close to that which would allow someone to use force to detain or neutralize a person fleeing)

The morons in GA were idiots from start to finish but legally they’re trying to use that civil arrest law, saying they had the legal right to do it. But that law requires firsthand knowledge of a current crime, not speculation or a good faith belief. They didn’t have knowledge of a current crime, they believed Arbery “may” have been a person involved in theft weeks and months ago.
Click to expand...
I'm glad you brought up the Arbery case, because I had the same thought.

People right here on NES have claimed that McMichael shooting Arbery was justified, because Arbery lunged for the shotgun.

Key difference: Rosenbaum was chasing Rittenhouse, and lunged for his gun after cornering him; Rittenhouse was trying to escape. The McMichaels had chased Arbery through the neighborhood, and the unarmed Arbery only lunged for the gun after he had no more options.
 
KBCraig said:
I'm glad you brought up the Arbery case, because I had the same thought.

People right here on NES have claimed that McMichael shooting Arbery was justified, because Arbery lunged for the shotgun.

Key difference: Rosenbaum was chasing Rittenhouse, and lunged for his gun after cornering him; Rittenhouse was trying to escape. The McMichaels had chased Arbery through the neighborhood, and the unarmed Arbery only lunged for the gun after he had no more options.
Click to expand...
Ah, he was going to be held for police to take him in if he was a robber, he got shot because he went for the gun.
 
KBCraig said:
That was their best chance on appeal: judicial prejudice.

It doesn't come anywhere close to their own prosecutorial misconduct and incompetence, but they're grasping at straws by now.
Click to expand...

Well... since the prosecution can't "appeal" regardless, I'm not sure what they'd have to gain.

A defense attorney who gets the judge to lash out? Sure. If a prosecutor is deliberately alienating a judge in a court that prosecutor practices in regularly? That's just stupid. Like, "I'm going to need to find a new gig" stupid.
 

Similar threads

85-year-old Idaho woman hailed as 'hero' in fatal shooting of home invasion suspect
Replies
7
Views
139
Tartakovsky
Tartakovsky
Grand Jury Declines to Prosecute Texas Mother Who Shot 14-Year-Old Boy During Break-In
Replies
2
Views
154
Agnotology
Agnotology
We need 200 people like this in congress. NH residents, you need this woman in congress.
Replies
12
Views
379
Qwikdraw45
Qwikdraw45
2 men found guilty of murder in Jam Master Jay killing
Replies
9
Views
267
inerlogic
inerlogic
Pennsylvania Court Upholds Right of Young People to Carry Guns in Public
Replies
6
Views
213
Coyote33
Coyote33
Back
Top Bottom