#rittenhouse verdict

[grayheartart]

One and a half hour video of a lawyer going through the civil lawsuit of convicted child rapist Joseph Rosenbaum's estate, filed in court by attorney Kimberly Motley of Matthews, NC. The lawyer examining this civil lawsuit proceeds to tear it apart and call it out for what it is. Deceitful Law-fare that preys upon the general public's unfamiliarity with Rittenhouse's criminal trial. It is standard practice of the left and Democrats to deliberately misunderstand why they are wrong and openly lie, even to the courts, about settled facts that have been tested and supported.

#politics #youtube #biden administration #democrats #left wing #liberals #democrats are corrupt #leftists #progressives #kyle rittenhouse #rittenhouse trial #rittenhouse case #rittenhouse verdict

[reasoningdaily]

As the world braced for the verdict of the Chauvin trial, in Columbus, Ohio, there was another fatal shooting of 16-year-old Black girl named Ma’Khia Bryant. Many who watched the graphic and gut-wrenching bodycam video have decried the officer who deemed it necessary to use lethal force to defuse a physical altercation involving the Black teenager.

When juxtaposing what feels like a never-ending pattern of police brutality against Black people with the treatment of white perpetrators, there is an obvious disparity that highlights the pervasive nature of systemic racism. White gunmen who commit heinous crimes are often treated differently, with police being able to apprehend white suspects and bring them safely into custody.

Three recent examples of this: 21-year-old Dylann Roof, who was safely arrested after entering Emanuel African Methodist Church in Charleston, South Carolina and killing nine people in 2015. What’s even more disturbing is reports that police brought Roof Burger King following his arrest. In 2020, during protests of the shooting of Jacob Blake in Kenosha, Wisconsin, a 17-year-old gunman, Kyle Rittenhouse, used an AR-15 assault rifle to kill two people and injured a third. Law enforcement apparently offered Rittenhouse and a group of militia members water at some point before the shooting took place.

In March 2021, after a gunman shot and killed eight people, with six of them being Asian, Cherokee County Sheriff’s Office Director of Communications remarked that the shooter was having a “really bad day.” These comments drew public outrage at the humanization of the mass shooter. Black youth aren’t given the opportunity to be humanized, with a number of tragic stories illustrating this.

Over a decade ago, 7-year-old Aiyana Stanley Jones was fatally shot by Detroit police who were looking for a murder suspect. In 2012, the world was gripped by the killing of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, who was shot by neighborhood watch captain George Zimmerman, who thought Martin looked suspicious. In 2014, a Black youth named Tamir Rice was shot by police. Rice, who was only 12 years old, was thought to be 20 years old. In 2015, a video of McKinney, Texas police officer Eric Casebolt went viral. Casebolt was filmed yelling at Black teenagers and threw one teenage girl to the ground while kneeling on her back. The video sparked rightful outrage at the excessive force used on the young girl.

Examining patterns of police treatment towards Black youth highlights a prominent issue: the adultification bias, which is the phenomenon where adults perceive Black youth as being older than they actually are. When the adultification bias was examined, one study found that Black girls as young as five years old were perceived as being less needing of protection and nurturing, compared to their white counterparts.  

Research indicates that Black boys are perceived as older and less innocent when compared to their white counterparts. “Black boys can be seen as responsible for their actions at an age when white boys still benefit from the assumption that children are essentially innocent,” shared Phillip Atiba Goff, Ph.D., who authored a study examining this phenomenon in more detail. Black girls are treated disparately compared to their white counterparts and are more likely to be seen as older, while having to navigate the combined effects of racism and sexism.

The adultification bias contributes to the continued harm and abuse that Black youth face, not just at the hands of law enforcement, but also in the education system. When Black women and girls are mistreated, harmed and abused, it is less likely to be reported on. The Say Her Name campaign co-founded by scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw was designed to bring greater awareness to this issue.

Disrupting the adultification bias must first begin with awareness that this problem even exists. Despite the wealth of evidence detailing the ways it manifests, greater understanding is necessary. Training about the adultification bias should be mandatory, especially for folks working with and around Black youth populations. Understanding the ways that the adultification bias manifests as well as how to mitigate this type of bias is imperative.

Although research indicates that those who are marginalized are likely to internalize some of the biases and stereotypes about their own identity group, it is likely that having more Black people working with Black youth populations would lessen the occurrence of the adultification bias. One can assume that having experience and exposure to Black youth may increase one’s understanding, and limit the adultification bias from taking place. Resources must be allocated to support education about the adultification bias and how it can be interrupted. Lastly, rather than resorting to punitive measures when dealing with Black youth, we must encourage the learning of de-escalation and conflict resolution strategies.

#How The Adultification Bias Contributes To Black Trauma #adultification of Black Children #adultification #Black Children Matter

[beardedmrbean]

The episode plunged one of America’s most ubiquitous brands into crisis.

In April 2018, two Black men entered a Starbucks shop in the Rittenhouse Square neighborhood of Philadelphia for a business meeting with a white man who had not yet arrived. While they waited, and before ordering, one of the two asked to use the bathroom. He was refused. Eventually, they were asked to leave. When they did not, an employee called the police.

The subsequent arrests, captured in videos viewed millions of times online, prompted accusations of racism, protests and boycott threats. The company’s CEO apologized publicly, describing the way the men had been treated as “reprehensible.” Starbucks took the extraordinary step of temporarily closing 8,000 stores to teach workers about racial bias.

On Monday, in a surprising twist, a federal jury in New Jersey ordered Starbucks to pay $25.6 million to a former regional manager after determining that the company had fired her amid the fallout from the Rittenhouse Square episode because she was white. The jury found that Starbucks had violated the federal civil rights of the former manager, Shannon Phillips, as well as a New Jersey law that prohibits discrimination based on race, awarding her $600,000 in compensatory damages and $25 million in punitive damages.

Laura Carlin Mattiacci, a lawyer for Phillips, said she and her client were “very pleased” with the unanimous verdict, adding that “she proved by ‘clear and convincing evidence’ that punitive damages were warranted” under the New Jersey law.

A Starbucks spokesperson declined to comment.

At the time of the episode, Phillips oversaw about 100 stores in Philadelphia, southern New Jersey, Delaware and parts of Maryland. She had been promoted to the job in 2011 after what she called her “exemplary performance” in six years as a district manager in Ohio.

Phillips said in the suit that Starbucks, as part of its damage-control effort after the arrests, had sought to punish her and other white employees in and around Philadelphia even if they had not been involved in the events that led to the police being called.

Phillips said she had thrown herself into the company’s efforts to restore its credibility and had sought to support hourly workers, organizing managers to staff stores and cover for employees who were scared to run a gantlet of protesters.

Amid the image-burnishing campaign, Phillips said one of her superiors, a Black woman, told her to suspend a white manager who oversaw stores in Philadelphia, though not the one in Rittenhouse Square, because of allegations that he had engaged in discriminatory conduct — allegations that Phillips said she knew to be untrue.

In contrast, Phillips said, no action was taken against the manager who oversaw the Rittenhouse Square store, a Black man who Phillips said had promoted the employee who called the police.

Phillips said she was fired not long after balking at the order to suspend the white manager. She said that she had not been previously told that she was doing a bad job and that the only explanation she was given for the firing was that “the situation is not recoverable.”

Starbucks denied in court filings that Phillips had been fired because she was white and said she was let go because she performed poorly in response to the episode that led to the arrests.

“During this time of crisis,” a lawyer for Starbucks wrote in a court filing, the company’s “Philadelphia market needed a leader who could perform,” adding that “Ms. Phillips failed in every aspect of that role.”

Starbucks ultimately chose not to press charges against the men at the center of the episode, Donte Robinson and Rashon Nelson, both 23 at the time. Before suing over the ordeal, they reached a confidential financial settlement with the company and got a commitment from the city of Philadelphia to invest $200,000 to help young entrepreneurs.

“I want to make sure that this situation doesn’t happen again,” Robinson said in an interview at the time. “What I want is for young men to not be traumatized by this, and instead motivated, inspired.”

Efforts to reach Robinson and Nelson on Tuesday were unsuccessful.

#nunyas news #nice

[association-of-freed-people]

gamergate 😂 been too long since I’ve heard it mentioned.

The all-in defense of heard is weird af considering there was quite literally a public trial with ample evidence that she’s not only a liar but a domestic abuser.

This is kinda like the reaction to the Rittenhouse verdict. These people don’t give a flying shit about justice. The narratives must always be sustained and god help you if you find yourself on the wrong side of them.

Even yesterday the dissenting opinion in the Supreme Court on the NY gun law made no efforts to cite precedent or reference laws and statutes to argue why the majority was wrong, it was just whiny nonsense and emotional appeal.

[wythers]

"the verdict is a win for all domestic abuse survivors!"

Experts say that the amount of attention on this trial is offering abusers a look at a whole new way of potentially exerting power over a survivor. — The 19th

"'I'm not a predator': Doctor Who star Noel Clarke hits back at allegations in explosive first interview." Noel Clarke was accused of sexual harassment and verbal abuse by more than 20 different women.

Marilyn Manson files defamation lawsuit against Evan Rachel Wood over rape and abuse allegations: Manson accused Wood and another woman of having "recruited, coordinated, and pressured prospective accusers" in a conspiracy against him. — NBC

Kyle Rittenhouse says Johnny Depp's win over Amber Heard is 'fueling' him to get moving on suing the media for defamation — Insider

Taylor says she has already been contacted by "hundreds" of survivors wishing to retract public statements they have made in the press, or pulling out of court cases against their abusers. — Rolling Stone

yeah keep telling yourselves that

#anti johnny depp #amber heard #abuse mention #r*pe mention

[dizzymoods]

nanny is not that good visually and the DP Rina Yang was liking pro rittenhouse tweets after the verdict so 😬

But it’s annoying how wrong and conservative these takes are like i know i’m a broken record but black people have been teaching film on an institutional level since the 1950s.

also what does “honest with black skin mean” lol

[schooltrashers]

Innocent Until Proven Guilty: Why The Court Of Public Opinion Is Based On Emotion, Not Facts

So I was watching the Casey Anthony Documentary on Peacock and it got me thinking about the time I noticed how emotional people were about the case. They all assumed that Casey Anthony is guilty because of how the media was portraying her. Doesn't matter if it came from Fox News, CNN, or MSNBC, they don't look at all the facts, they will spoonfeed the people into believing whatever they want you to believe.

This documentary however points out facts that you may have missed, such as George Anthony contradicting himself by claiming his daughter's innocence in an interview, while testifying against Casey Anthony in court claiming she is guilty. I could never trust George Anthony with how manipulative he was. Which made me think that is possible that Casey Anthony is actually innocent. I think George knew more than what he led on and I'm also certain he did sexually abuse both Casey Anthony and Caylee Anthony.

This is exactly why it's important to see both sides of the story and do some research on things that people may have missed and why the jury would come to the conclusion that Casey Anthony is not guilty. Yes she lied to the cops, she owns up to the fact. But she would never take credit for the death of her own daughter, which is why she plead not guilty. She didn't care if she were to be found guilty and put on death row, she wasn't about to agree with a plea bargain and admit to a crime she swears she didn't commit. This is understandable because if I know I wasn't guilty of a crime I was accused of, I would plead not guilty.

Another fact that I noticed is that she was receiving death threats after the case. Which made me think that there are people who didn't pay closer attention to the case nor did they understand why the jury found her not guilty. It also made me realize that the people who think she's guilty, are most likely Atheists, Satanists, Commies, & Democrats due to their history of making death and rape threats. No Christian or Conservative would make those kinds of threats because of how bad that would look on them and how immoral it is.

Those are the emotions I was talking about, the type that causes people to make death threats. They did the same to Kyle Rittenhouse, it got to the point where Darrell Brooks ran over multiple innocent people at the Waukesha Parade. He did not like the verdict of Kyle Rittenhouse being found not guilty. Darrell Brooks's emotions turned him into a murderer, that's how dangerous it is to think emotionally and not rationally. When O.J. Simpson was found not guilty, you did not get the same reaction from white conservatives who thought he was guilty. Yes, they were upset, but they didn't go out of their way to kill people over this verdict.

However there were racist white liberals who decided to burn O.J. Simpson memorabilia, but that was the only legal extent as to how much they could get away with at the time because if this were the 1950's during the height of the KKK's popularity, they would get away with murdering innocent black Americans who supported O.J. Simpson. This reminds me, both Antifa and BLM murdered innocent people, rioted, looted, and burned down black-owned businesses, they got away with their crimes because they are DEMOCRAT. Which is the exact same reason the KKK got away with their crimes because they were DEMOCRAT.

Keep in mind that Oprah Winfrey went out of her way to try and paint Mark Fuhrman as a good guy to her audience because she herself is a Democrat and an Uncle Tom. She is the same woman who endorsed Barack Obama. She also promotes wokeism. So why in the fuck is she supporting a racist Nazi cop? Because she is an Uncle Tom!!!

By the way, there were plenty of facts to support the idea that O.J. Simpson did not murder Nicole Brown Simpson or Ron Goldman. Hence why the jury found him not guilty. I had to pay attention to both sides of the story to find out why the jury came to that conclusion and I think it's racist to assume that the jury voted emotionally because of their skin color.

Facts in a case matter. Not emotion. This reminds me, the Left tried to pressure the jury into giving Kyle Rittenhouse a guilty verdict. Despite evidence clearly showing that he defended himself against violent protesters. The Left still considers him a murderer not because they think he's guilty, but because he killed Antifa members and lived to tell about it. For example, if Kyle had killed two KKK members back in the 1950s, Democrats would be angry about that because he killed one of their own and lived to tell about it.

"But the parties switched." No, they didn't. The Democrats tell you that lie in order to sucker black people into voting for them. Democrats want to erase their own history. They want to steal credit for what the Republicans did (freeing the slaves) but they can't because history shows that Abraham Lincoln is a Republican and that the Democrats created the KKK. You can't erase history. Parties don't switch. 1 or 2 senators switching parties is not enough to switch an entire party. Robert Byrd is the grand wizard of the KKK and he died as a Democrat. Joe Biden has said many racist things in both his past and his present. Kamala Harris kept people in prison (heavily populated by blacks) beyond their sentence. So no, I don't trust the Democrats.

That's not to say that Republicans are trustworthy because there are still some Republicans I don't trust at all, mainly pro-establishment Republicans, especially the ones who are friendly with Democrats. Mitch McConnell, Mitt Romney, George W Bush, and Liz Cheney are prime examples of Republicans I don't trust. Anyways the point of this entire blog post is that you really have to dig deeper and look at both sides of the story in order to get a proper conclusion of what the truth really is, whether you agree with it or not is up to you. Don't blindly trust the mainstream media or politicians on the matter, they will not be unbias about it. You gotta do the research yourself and stop falling for the bullshit that both the media and politicians push on you. That is all.

#kkk #democrats #history #casey anthony #O.J. Simpson #Kyle Rittenhouse #Darrell Brooks #Oprah Winfrey #Antifa #BLM #Black lives Matter #Liz Cheney #George W Bush #Mitt Romney #Mitch McConnell #Atheists #Satanists #Christians #Conservatives #Republican #mainstream media #leftist #liberal #violent #violence

[hockeygossip101]

I know you said you wouldn’t post anymore on this but I hope you’ll read this anyway 🤍

The reason why many of us are upset and sending in asks about the trial is because you say you side with Depp, but then say you don’t care about the trial. Mat Barzal liking Depp’s post gets a red heart emoji from you, but then you say you know nothing and haven’t been following the trial. This is exactly the problem. There has been a concerted effort from Depp’s team, which is massive, and others (I do believe the GOP has a stake in this) to portray Heard in a bad light. So all you’ll see in your recommended posts and fyp is videos making fun of her or calling her a liar. The evidence is there, he has admitted it, and it has been upheld in other courts: he carried out a campaign of emotional and physical abuse for years. And it’s a real blow to see someone with massive reach to women side with him.

I will say, too, that exactly what we feared would happen is now happening: Kyle Rittenhouse, the man who travelled across state lines and murdered BLM protestors, is now saying “in light of the Depp verdict” he’s going after sources who libeled him. This is what the pekoe behind this smear campaign wanted and we’re gonna see it happen more, and fewer women will get justice. Not because Heard is a liar. Because Depp is more powerful, and powerful people in this country have a stake in seeing him win this.

Anyway. Thanks for listening. Hope you’re okay.

Last ask that I'm posting about this, but I just wanted to address the first part. I don't know much about the trial and I'm also not very interested in it. You're right a lot of the stuff I have seen is biased towards Johnny and I'm still siding with him for now. Maybe if I was to watch the case completely my opinion would change, but that's my opinion for now.

I hope you are okay too 💕

#tbd

[hellsbellschime]

buzzfeed has tallied all the celebrities who have liked JD's post vs AH's and i'm so weirded out by how many people are feeding into his bs, but that's hollywood for you. always go with the bigger name i guess. though it's super weird seeing jason mamoa liking both their statements. buzzfeednews(dot)com/article/kelseyweekman/johnny-depps-instagram-statement-liked-by-celebrities

I honestly don't understand why a lot of these people are involving themselves given the PR fuckery it could entail, but unfortunately I'm not surprised. The overwhelming campaign has seemingly fooled a lot of people, or at least scared them into submission and silence. It's great that the mainstream media is pointing out how outrageously fucked up this whole situation is, but the fact that the likes of Marilyn Manson and Kyle Rittenhouse are feeling emboldened to sue people for saying shit that is obviously and certainly true is terrifying.

It just sucks, like there's a reason why JD became the global representative for male abuse victims instead of Terry Crews or Brendan Fraser, and it's because misogynists, racists, transphobes, and abusers can use this precedent as a shield and they know they can be as awful as defending literal child rapists and talk about having sex with burnt corpses and they can still sucker a jury into thinking they're a completely innocent victim. Not only that, but the people that they victimized can now be bullied and harassed into silence, or even forced to pay the people who hurt them.

I'm glad that the mainstream media is calling out how fucked up this all is now (Michael Hobbes of You're Wrong About probably did my favorite and most comprehensive breakdown of how nonsensical this fiasco has been), but it's really shutting the barn door after the horse has bolted. Thankfully anti-SLAPP protects most people from this kind of stuff (and ironically Virginia changed their anti-SLAPP laws AFTER JD filed, and it is speculated it was largely because he and other high profile people essentially used jurisdictional tourism to help themselves), but seeing how immediately emboldened all of the worst kind of people seem to be at this verdict should really make people question what's going on and what the motives are behind this batshit crazy PR blitz. I mean, you'd think BEN SHAPIRO spending tens of thousands of dollars on negative AH press for no obvious reason would be a red flag for people, but I guess not.

#celebrities for ts

[rebeleden]

Protests erupt across US over Kyle Rittenhouse verdict

KKKILLER THUG KKKYLE WILL KILL AGAIN ASAP

CC AMERIKKKA

STOP VANILLA ISIS

HEAR EDEN GATEKEEPER AT SPOTIFY

#Youtube

[mitchfynde]

Can't believe moronic lefties are still dying on this hill after so many years. There is no good reason to die on this hill. You can and SHOULD hate Rittenhouse. He's a total dipshit. His act of self defense has absolutely nothing to do with that. He was well within his rights to do what he did. You'd know this if you were ever in the same scenario. And you wouldn't even be happy to get the verdict he got. You'd be RELIEVED. Because having to shoot people who were trying to kill you was probably already traumatic enough.

Also, side note, killing someone =/= murder. Murder is definitionally the unjust killing of another human being. There are plenty of justifiable reasons to kill another human being. You'd never call a woman who shot a man trying to rape her a murderer. Don't call Kyle Rittenhouse a murderer. You are ruining the English language.

#kyle rittenhouse #destiny #dgg #murder #Youtube

[blueflameswordsman]

Huge update in the George Floyd situation

youtube comments

Chauvin is in double danger because he has been labeled as an anti-black racist and is also a former police officer. The fact he is innocent and was "thrown under a bus" by those who should have defended him but instead prosecuted/persecuted him is even more concerning/disgusting.

This is a complete disgrace and to add insult to injury the Supreme Court REFUSES to review this case in view of the toxicology report on St. George...I am completely disgusted by our "Justice" system

Never forget what Maxine Waters did

She openly encouraged violence, rioting, and destruction, which is NOT protected speech under the law.

They better let that man out of prison, and pay him MILLIONS ( far more then what the floyd family gotten in fact for they should never had gotten that money ) because he’s got a gigantic lawsuit. They knew he didn’t murder him.

It’s amazing that kyle Rittenhouse was able to overcome the corrupt court system. Luckily he had a good judge

He's a political prisoner. A martyr. Question is how long do the good folk just sit back and let this happen, hoping the corrupt system will do the right thing at some point

Incredible that a judge isn’t aware that “all means all” in regards to evidence.

This case made me sick to my stomach. My family has been in law enforcement for 2 generations. This was a tragedy and justice was not served.

He’s exactly right. The results of this trial has been a discomfort under my skin ever since I heard the verdict also. It’s such an outright obvious injustice. He did not receive a fair trial and it’s because he’s white and Floyd was black. Anyone who observes the facts of this case objectively will come to this conclusion. Knee was on the back , Floyd had many times the lethal dose of fentanyl in his system, he was out of the car because he said he couldn’t breathe in the car, much footage showing all this was kept from the public, one of the jurors admitted to being an activist, the list goes on. I hope we get a politician who will do something, I would rather live in a just society with riots than an unjust society to appease rioters.Show less

#liberal hivemind #Youtube

[captainmdhridoyhossain-blog]

[ad_1] KENOSHA, Wis. — Jurors within the Kyle Rittenhouse trial deliberated thru a 2nd complete day on Wednesday, a sign that they could be suffering with the complexities in their process to believe Mr. Rittenhouse’s culpability within the 5 legal counts he faces.Mr. Rittenhouse, 18, is on trial for first-degree intentional murder and different fees after fatally capturing two males and maiming every other right through civil unrest in Kenosha, Wis., in August 2020.The deliberations on Wednesday had been punctuated by way of a 2nd name for a mistrial by way of Mr. Rittenhouse’s legal professionals, who argued that prosecutors had sooner than the trial equipped them with a lower-quality model of a drone video that depicts the deadly capturing of Joseph Rosenbaum, the primary guy Mr. Rittenhouse shot. Throughout two weeks of testimony, jurors noticed the higher-quality model of the video.Pass judgement on Bruce Schroeder mentioned the trial would proceed however urged that he may just rule at the request for a mistrial at any time, together with after a verdict.“It needs to be addressed if there's a in charge verdict on any diploma on that rely,” Pass judgement on Schroeder mentioned of the movement.The jurors — seven girls and 5 males — introduced a couple of glimpses into how their deliberations, which began on Tuesday morning, had been continuing.At issues right through their deliberations, jurors requested the pass judgement on for permission to look at movies that have been performed right through the trial, together with pictures of all 3 shootings from the evening in query. Via midafternoon, the court docket used to be emptied for as regards to an hour so the jury may just input and watch movies with out the pass judgement on, legal professionals, reporters and the general public provide.Noise from demonstrators might be heard throughout the home windows of the ornate court docket, at the 3rd ground of the Kenosha County Courthouse. Right through the day, a number of dozen protesters lingered at the courthouse steps, arguing, on occasion shouting obscenities and chanting, “No mistrial, no mistrial.”A minimum of two other folks had been detained after a battle on Wednesday afternoon, and previous within the day, one guy who used to be sporting an AR-15-style rifle outdoor the courthouse used to be requested by way of a sheriff’s deputy to place it away, which he did.Pass judgement on Schroeder indicated that he used to be involved that prosecutors had now not grew to become over the right kind model of the video to the protection group sooner than the trial, however he didn't in an instant rule at the protection’s movement for a mistrial.James Kraus, an assistant district legal professional, mentioned certainly one of Mr. Rittenhouse’s earlier legal professionals have been in ownership of the top of the range video, and he argued that the problem used to be now not vital sufficient to benefit a mistrial.The Felony Fees Towards Kyle RittenhouseCard 1 of fourRely 1: First-degree reckless murder. Kyle Rittenhouse is accused of this crime in reference to the deadly capturing of Joseph D. Rosenbaum. Below Wisconsin regulation, the crime is outlined as recklessly inflicting demise beneath instances that display utter forget for human lifestyles.Counts 2 and three: First-degree recklessly endangering protection. Mr. Rittenhouse is charged with recklessly endangering two individuals who, in step with the legal grievance, had photographs fired towards them however weren't hit: Richard McGinnis and an unknown male noticed in video of the episode.Rely 4: First-degree intentional murder. Mr. Rittenhouse faces this price in reference to the deadly capturing of Anthony M. Huber. The crime, analogous to first-degree homicide in different states, is outlined as inflicting the demise of every other human being with intent to kill that individual or any person else.Rely 5: Tried first-degree intentional murder. Mr. Rittenhouse faces this price in reference to the capturing of Gaige P.

Grosskreutz, who used to be struck and wounded.An unintentional “technical incident,” he mentioned, “will have to now not lead to a mistrial.”Corey Chirafisi, certainly one of Mr. Rittenhouse’s legal professionals, mentioned that a prosecutor’s process used to be about “equity and being a reality seeker” and that the Kenosha County prosecutors had violated the ones ideas. He additionally mentioned he used to be keen to just accept a mistrial “with out prejudice,” that means that prosecutors may just take a look at the case once more.“It’s now not arguable that it’s now not truthful what took place,” Mr. Chirafisi mentioned. “We’re speaking a couple of attainable lifestyles sentence right here.”Closing week, Mr. Rittenhouse’s legal professionals made a movement for a mistrial over a unique factor.In that movement, they argued that every other prosecutor, Thomas Binger, had inappropriately wondered Mr. Rittenhouse sooner than the jury about why he had now not spoken in regards to the shootings of their aftermath. The protection legal professionals mentioned that the feedback had infringed on Mr. Rittenhouse’s proper to stay silent, and that Mr. Binger had additionally begun to say a work of proof the pass judgement on had urged will have to now not be introduced up at trial.Mr. Rittenhouse’s legal professionals argued at the moment that the pass judgement on will have to claim a mistrial with prejudice, which might quantity to an enduring dismissal of the costs. The pass judgement on has but to rule on both movement for a mistrial.One explanation why a pass judgement on would possibly wait till after a verdict to rule on mistrial motions, some criminal mavens mentioned, can be in order that the case reaches a transparent consequence. If the jury acquits, the mistrial motions would develop into moot. If the jury convicts after which the pass judgement on grants a mistrial and voids the decision, the prosecution would give you the chance to enchantment the discovering.Dan Hinkel and Sergio Olmos contributed reporting from Kenosha. [ad_2] #Verdict #Rittenhouse #Trial #Jurors #Go away #Evening

[photography-past-and-present]

Jesse Jackson marching with others in Chicago protesting the verdict in the Kyle Rittenhouse trial in 2021 / Scott Olson/Getty Images

#jesse jackson #2021 #Chicago

[tempus-fuckit]

The Rittenhouse verdict carries an enormous part of the blame for these recent 'wrong place wrong time' shootings. These trigger-happy assholes now know that if you feel threatened, or can prove later that you felt threatened, it's blastin' time.

#fuck the nra #what well-regulated militia?

[chrisabraham]

Self-defense as a Legal Defense in Virginia Understanding Virginia's Self-Defense Laws In Virginia, the laws regarding self-defense and the use of deadly (lethal) force are based primarily on the decisions from court cases and are, therefore, common law. In a self-defense situation, Virginia is a “stand-your-ground” state. Here are some of the ways you can defend yourself legally. It is legal to use force to defend yourself against another person in any location, including in your home, in your yard, at work, at a store, or in church. You may use deadly force if: Someone attacks you and… The attack is not the result of your misconduct and… You reasonably fear that you, or another innocent party, are in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm from the attacker. If an attack is a result of your own misconduct, you must retreat and let the attacker know that you do not want to fight. If the attacker continues anyway, you may then use force to stop them. You may use force against a trespasser if the trespasser refuses to leave after being ordered to go. However, the force involved may not endanger human life or cause great bodily harm. It is also illegal to brandish a deadly weapon to defend your personal property. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/chrisabraham/message