Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, October 26, 2021

Kyle Rittenhouse's lawyers can refer to the men he shot as "rioters" and "looters," but prosecutors still may not call them "victims" at any time during the teen's upcoming murder trial, a judge ruled Monday.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

That seems weird as they certainly were victims by definition. Whether they were rioters or looters would have to be proven.

#1 | Posted by TFDNihilist at 2021-10-26 06:45 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 7

"Rittenhouse illegally procured an AR-15"

Thoughts And Prayers.
Nothing Can Be Done.

#2 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-10-26 06:52 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

"That seems weird as they certainly were victims by definition. Whether they were rioters or looters would have to be proven.

#1 | POSTED BY TFDNIHILIST "

Victims of self-defense?

The lawyers should call the 3 animals put down a repeat child sex offender that fled AZ and refused to register on the sex offender list, a convicted domestic abuser, and a felon in illegal possession of a gun that travelled 40 miles to participate in a riot.

#3 | Posted by Skeptical at 2021-10-26 07:02 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Stooge

#4 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2021-10-26 07:07 PM | Reply

When are the parents going on trial?

#5 | Posted by arthurmann at 2021-10-26 07:28 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

".... in illegal possession of a gun that travelled 40 miles to participate in a riot."

Careful, that's pretty close to describing dear Kyle.

#6 | Posted by arthurmann at 2021-10-26 07:30 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 5

Yeah, this isn't going to turn out well. It already has an air of self-defense.

#7 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2021-10-26 07:32 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Wouldn't the judge's statement be construed as biased towards the defendant and therefore they're unable to rule impartially?

Isn't this clearly a mistrial?

#8 | Posted by ClownShack at 2021-10-26 07:43 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

When are the parents going on trial?

I'm willing to bet they've all been treated like heroes.

They're Trumper celebrities.

#9 | Posted by ClownShack at 2021-10-26 07:45 PM | Reply

When there's rioting and looting going on the place to go is home.

They chose to be out there and to their shock met someone sicker than them.

#10 | Posted by Tor at 2021-10-26 07:46 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

It's probably intended to be a show trial to gin up support for Trump's next insurrection.

#11 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-10-26 07:48 PM | Reply

The lawyers should call the 3 animals put down a repeat child sex offender that fled AZ and refused to register on the sex offender list, a convicted domestic abuser, and a felon in illegal possession of a gun that travelled 40 miles to participate in a riot.

#3 | Posted by Skeptical

How far did rittenhouse travel to shoot them? He wanted to be a white supremacist vigilante and he commuted for the job.

It's not self defense if you drive far away to a riot with a gun. He went looking for trouble and he found it.

#12 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-26 08:46 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

What is the legal grounds the prosecution would have for getting a new judge/venue? If they are actually even interested in pursuing the case. They could be close sympathizers who want Rittenhouse to win. I mean they are DAs...

#13 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2021-10-26 09:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

This is disgusting, can the defense PROVE the victims of this Nazi POS were rioters, looters or arsonists? Because in a court of law, if you can't PROVE a victim is something, then you are slandering him by saying those things. Just because looting, rioting and arson occurred at some of the protests, many times proven to be done by Reichwing operatives, if there is no direct evidence that these victims took part, then that's slander. This judge needs to be removed from this case, and perhaps from the bench. I've never seen such a prejudicial ruling prior to trial.

#14 | Posted by _Gunslinger_ at 2021-10-26 10:00 PM | Reply

It's not the first... interesting... ruling in this case.

A Kenosha County judge has denied two motions from prosecutors to issue an arrest warrant for Kyle Rittenhouse and raise his bail.
apnews.com

#15 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-10-26 10:09 PM | Reply

#14. Did you watch any of the video when this originally took place?

#16 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-26 10:09 PM | Reply

"How far did rittenhouse travel to shoot them?"

Is it important?

What about the three who tried to attack him?

Does proximity to the fight matter?

#17 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-10-27 12:59 AM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

This was a case of trouble makers killing trouble makers.

Would anyone here be wetting their pants if Anthony Huber had killed Rittenhouse with his skateboard, or if Gaige Grosskreutz had gotten off a kill shot?

Somehow...I don't think so.

#18 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-10-27 01:01 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Dumb. As usual you always draw the wrong conclusion from every thread. This is obvious judicial bias. The trial should be scuttled and a new judge appointed to hear a new trial.

Rittenhouse will get probation from this judge even if a jury convicts on double murder.

This is a show trial, not a trial.

#19 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2021-10-27 01:35 AM | Reply

Rioters and looters. Is he wrong?

#20 | Posted by phesterOBoyle at 2021-10-27 07:10 AM | Reply

If he walks there will be many copycat murders in the coming elections, certainly the midterms and in 2024 if Trump runs. And more demonstrators will be carrying weapons...

#21 | Posted by Hughmass at 2021-10-27 07:40 AM | Reply

Copycat? How many people do we have lining up to attack people with AR-15s they are mad at because.. what was it again? mad because they were trying to set a dumpster fire and roll in to a gas station?

#22 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2021-10-27 08:37 AM | Reply

".... in illegal possession of a gun that travelled 40 miles to participate in a riot."

Careful, that's pretty close to describing dear Kyle.

#6 | Posted by arthurmann at 2021-10-26 07:30 PM | Reply | Flag

Close?

That's a bullseye.

#23 | Posted by Nixon at 2021-10-27 10:30 AM | Reply

This judge appears to be pretty biased in favor of the domestic terrorist on trial.

#24 | Posted by Nixon at 2021-10-27 10:32 AM | Reply

I always bristle when a prosecutor refers to the "victims" of my client's behavior during a trial. The whole point is that the prosecution needs to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the people hurt or killed were "victim" of the clients behavior before the injured parties can be referred to in that way. As a defense attorney, I fight to prove that either the people involved were not "victims", and if they were victims then they were not victims of my client's behavior but rather something or someone else. It is very prejudicial to the defense to have people referred to as "victims" before the case has even been proven.

#25 | Posted by moder8 at 2021-10-27 12:10 PM | Reply

"How far did rittenhouse travel to shoot them?"

Is it important?

#17 | Posted by madbomber

The fact that you're dodging the question implies you know it's important.

Rittenhouse wasn't a local defending his home. He was a loser white supremacist wannabe vigilante who saw an opportunity to shoot black people and drove a long distance to where he could do just that.

#26 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-27 12:36 PM | Reply

Why didn't he shoot black people then?

#27 | Posted by kwrx25 at 2021-10-27 01:51 PM | Reply

"How far did rittenhouse travel to shoot them?"

Is it important?

#17 | Posted by madbomber

2 people would not have lost their lives that day if that moron had just stayed home.

One year for every mile he traveled to take their lives sounds about right me. For each life he took.

#28 | Posted by donnerboy at 2021-10-27 09:21 PM | Reply

Why didn't he shoot black people then?
#27 | POSTED BY KWRX25

Bad aim.

#29 | Posted by ClownShack at 2021-10-27 09:31 PM | Reply

Remind me:

How did the owner of the property Rittenhouse was protecting contact him to request the help? (Spoiler alert: he didn't.)

And why on earth are gun owners backing someone who was too young to legally own the gun? (Spoiler alert: letter after the activity.)

#30 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-27 09:35 PM | Reply

Liberals love evidence, well, this case has plenty. They like putting people on trial, just like George Zimmerman was put on trial. What they do not like is when the evidence does not support their claims, then they fall back on "Well, if the person had not been there nothing would have set our people off so it is their fault".

#31 | Posted by jdmeth at 2021-10-28 01:13 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

#30 The right likes a good Roof Korean. AR Karen would be more fitting here though, wasn't his roof to defend.

#32 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2021-10-28 07:42 AM | Reply

more racism U.S.A...

the older generation (a good portion of them anyhow)
seriously need to just expire...

there won't be a cultural shift in a positive direction
on race until many of the elders 'kick it'.

#33 | Posted by earthmuse at 2021-10-28 10:27 AM | Reply

A murder trial with no victim.

How's that supposed to work?

#34 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-10-28 11:09 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

This Trumper judge needs to be removed from his position and an ethics investigation started on him.

#35 | Posted by a_monson at 2021-10-28 11:16 AM | Reply

He's a Democrat, appointed by a Democrat, then elected to the position.

#36 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2021-10-28 11:28 AM | Reply

I'm curious if there has ever been a murder trial in the United States where the word "victim" was never used to describe the decedent.

#37 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-10-28 12:49 PM | Reply

#33 White people shooting white people who are rioting is a racist thing now.

The shooter is a teenager, and it's the older generations fault.

fun post

#38 | Posted by kwrx25 at 2021-10-28 12:57 PM | Reply

Snoofy, we had a murder case from about 25 years where the so-called "victim" of a murder turned out to have been a suicide. So, in what I think is an unfair set of circumstances, during the trial the deceased was referred to by both the court and the DA as a "victim" throughout the trial. With the defendant being the only one there accused of the crime, the inference was pretty clear to the jury that the deceased was a victim of the defendant's actions. That is so poisonously prejudicial and it should not be allowed. Fortunately, in that instance the jury acquitted.

#39 | Posted by moder8 at 2021-10-28 01:05 PM | Reply

#36 no no no... as I pointed out in another thread, this is the move now.

Assign anyone who disagrees into random disliked group, In this case Trump supporter. Then continue on to bash that person and group.

Then wonder come the next election why more people weren't swayed to support your views, and why another R was elected.

I'll wait for snoofy to say things like Mexicans and welfare queens now since he doesn't understand analogies and comparisons at all.

#40 | Posted by kwrx25 at 2021-10-28 01:23 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Then wonder come the next election why more people weren't swayed to support your views, and why another R was elected.

I have zero doubts why Republicans are elected.

They've gerrymandered and rigged every state they control so the majority Democratic population's votes are worthless.

Republicans don't give a shht about Justice, liberty or America.

They don't need to.

They're guaranteed the win.

#41 | Posted by ClownShack at 2021-10-28 01:53 PM | Reply

From APNews:

The expert, John Black, spent hours outlining the moments that led to Kyle Rittenhouse's decisions to shoot Joseph Rosenbaum, Anthony Huber and Gaige Grosskreutz, offering a preview of the defense team's strategy when Rittenhouse's trial begins next month. Black testified that video shows Rosenbaum chasing Rittenhouse and reaching for the teenager's gun, Huber attacking Rittenhouse with a skateboard and trying to wrestle away his gun, and Grosskreutz running at him with a pistol in his hand.

"A citizen in that position, given those indicators, would it be reasonable for them to believe they were about to be assaulted?" Black said. "I would argue yes."

apnews.com

#42 | Posted by MSgt at 2021-10-28 02:06 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

They should spend more time outlining the moments that led to Kyle Rittenhouse's decisions to have his parents drive him for miles into another state in order to go kill protestors.

#43 | Posted by ClownShack at 2021-10-28 02:24 PM | Reply

Fine. Call the "victims" anything you want.

After all we don't want to hurt your widdle feelings.

As long as before it's all over rittenhouse is called a murderer.

#44 | Posted by donnerboy at 2021-10-28 02:34 PM | Reply

"A citizen in that position,"

... a citizen who purposely put himself in that position unnecessarily and illegally. In order to be able to use his gun to defend himself.

#45 | Posted by donnerboy at 2021-10-28 02:37 PM | Reply

As long as before it's all over rittenhouse is called a murderer.

That's for the jury to decide. He is entitled to a fair trial under our system of justice.

#46 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-28 02:39 PM | Reply

"He is entitled to a fair trial"

Is it a fair trial when the people he is charged with murdering can't be called victims?
It is necessary for the government to censor the word "victim" to ensure a fair trial?

I wonder how many times the defense is going to call Rittenhouse a victim, while the prosecution is barred from using that word...

#47 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-10-28 03:01 PM | Reply

#42 | POSTED BY MSGT

Now do the ex-jarhead who punched the guy with the gun in the convenience store.

#48 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2021-10-28 10:11 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2021 World Readable

Drudge Retort