In The News Today...

Here's a comparison: Travis Scott/Astroworld vs Kyle Rittenhouse.

Scott apparently had already been cited for encouraging violence in his audience on other occasions. We see where that led.

Kyle won't be convicted on the poor judgement which placed him in a city he didn't live in, underage, with a rifle during rioting. Can't wait to see if people will start inviting him as a hero after he is acquitted. He still acted like idiot to be in the circumstances he got himself in. You think he was trained in any kind of crowd dynamics, or had enough experience. No way. It'd be totally different if he had just randomly been in that kind of environment and acted.

Scott would never be even charged with a murder charge in any case. Even if twice as many people had died. At least I don't think so. Hope he at least gets his ass sued off.

Quote: rxwine

Here's a comparison: Travis Scott/Astroworld vs Kyle Rittenhouse.

Scott apparently had already been cited for encouraging violence in his audience on other occasions. We see where that led.

Kyle won't be convicted on the poor judgement which placed him in a city he didn't live in, underage, with a rifle during rioting. Can't wait to see if people will start inviting him as a hero after he is acquitted. He still acted like idiot to be in the circumstances he got himself in. You think he was trained in any kind of crowd dynamics, or had enough experience. No way. It'd be totally different if he had just randomly been in that kind of environment and acted.

Scott would never be even charged with a murder charge in any case. Even if twice as many people had died. At least I don't think so. Hope he at least gets his ass sued off.

Are the people in various groups and the media that convicted Rittenhouse before he even came to trial any better than those who will support him? I would say they are no better than equal because I don't see him as a hero but I also don't see them as caring about actually letting people be tried before pronouncing them guilty in the court of public opinion.

Scott and a lot of others will be the subject of more lawsuits than already have been filed. I don't think charges will be brought.

Quote: rxwine

Here's a comparison: Travis Scott/Astroworld vs Kyle Rittenhouse.

Scott apparently had already been cited for encouraging violence in his audience on other occasions. We see where that led.

Kyle won't be convicted on the poor judgement which placed him in a city he didn't live in, underage, with a rifle during rioting. Can't wait to see if people will start inviting him as a hero after he is acquitted. He still acted like idiot to be in the circumstances he got himself in. You think he was trained in any kind of crowd dynamics, or had enough experience. No way. It'd be totally different if he had just randomly been in that kind of environment and acted.

Scott would never be even charged with a murder charge in any case. Even if twice as many people had died. At least I don't think so. Hope he at least gets his ass sued off.

I think he definitely should be convicted on the ‘underage firearm’ charge. He probably does not get convicted of murder. As little as you can tell from biased media reports, it seems to be going poorly for the prosecution. I’m sure we’ll get a few riots out of an acquittal.

Britney is free!

Quote: RonC

Britney is free!

Oh, she doesn't charge for it any more?

Still, I'll pass.

Quote: SOOPOO

I think he definitely should be convicted on the ‘underage firearm’ charge. He probably does not get convicted of murder. As little as you can tell from biased media reports, it seems to be going poorly for the prosecution. I’m sure we’ll get a few riots out of an acquittal.

Oh it is a complete $hit$how for the DA.
If Kyle doesn't get off on all the major charges, it will be unbelievable.
The Defense may have got him off the gun charge as well in Instruction arguments today.
DA's on this case are idiots, well the fact may be that they had a case they should not have prosecuted.
But beside that, Binger is a complete moron.
It was great to watch the Judge basically tell Binger to STFU.
Binger questioned Kyle as to why he invoked his right to remain silent after the incident.
The judge lit him up suggesting this was 40-50 year settled Constitutional Law as inadmissible line of questioning.
Then Binger tried to bring in evidence that the Judge had specifically excluded in a pre-trial motion.
I think the defense filed a motion for mistrial with prejudice after the break following these two incidents.
I wouldn't put it passed the Judge to grant a summary judgement acquittal or the mistrial with prejudice.
Except, he probably knows this is going to a Not Guilty Verdict & why give the rioters anymore reason to burn Kenosha again.

Quote: JCW09

I wouldn't put it passed the Judge to grant a summary judgement acquittal or the mistrial with prejudice.

Do you have the slightest clue as to what you are talking about?

"Summary judgment of acquittal?"

What is that?

The case will go to the jury unless a mistrial is declared, and I've never heard of a judge granting a mistrial "with prejudice" nor a "summary judgment of acquittal."

You're right, should have said summary judgement of dismissal.
I kinda knew it didn't sound technically right, but you get the jist of it.
What would you call it if the judge at the end of the case determines there is no way the prosecution proved their case?
They can take it out of the hands of the jury via a dismissal, correct?
The defense suggested in open court that they might seek a "mistrial with prejudice" due to the actions of the DA.
The DA was stepping all over himself right before the defense responded to the judge on the matter.
Take it is a posturing or whatever, but evidently it can be granted given the right circumstances.
I can tell you this, the judge is not impressed with the DA's case & strongly reprimanded their tactics at times as unethical & illegal.
Have you watched much of the trial?

I believe judges can enter a directed verdict before it goes to a jury, but I've only heard of it rarely used, and then in civil, not criminal trials: it might be an option there.

Or if it goes to the jury and they tell the judge their decision he can enter judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) but as with a directed verdict it is rare and I've only seen it in civil trials.

The "mistrial with prejudice" is a new one on me; the whole idea of a mistrial is that some error occurred during trial that warrants a "do over" aka a new trial.

Quote: missedhervee

The "mistrial with prejudice" is a new one on me; the whole idea of a mistrial is that some error occurred during trial that warrants a "do over" aka a new trial.

Defense brought this one up when the DA went into the "why didn't you tell your story of what happened that night before now?"
It's a huge No No to bring up invoking the right to remain silent.
The Defense actually argued the DA did it to get a mistrial because they are losing the case so badly.
I doubt either this or the directed verdict route happens.
But it has been quite entertaining to watch the DA perform so poorly.
Classic was when the guy with the vaporized bicept had to admit Kyle only pulled the trigger on him after he pointed his pistol at Kyle.
The Face Palm of the lead DA over this in the background of the court scene was epic fail material.