The moment Rittenhouse cracked.

[Baitball Blogger]

"I brought the gun for my protection, but I didn't think I would need it for my protection."

I think he knew he was stuck in a contradiction and his eyes teared. Even the judge's attempt to speed up the prosecution's cross-examination didn't help. The boy is tired and he's making mistakes.

[lapfog_1]

1. The "boy" should be tried and fried.

or at least locked up for the rest of his life with no parole.

[Baitball Blogger]

3. He is getting an incredible amount of help.

The defense tried to force a break by asking for a sidebar without the jury, and the judge gives everyone a break.

[Alexander Of Assyria]

74. How does that help the defendant?

[Baitball Blogger]

109. He was cracking. He misspoke and it

Looked like he was in distress. Prosecutors looked for a reason to break the momentum and the judge gave it to them over the zoom issue which is a none issue.

[whathehell]

41. I don't know that he should be "fried"

He was a minor at the time and few people actually get the death penalty these days.. That said, I don't like the way this judge is handling this trial.

[xmas74]

49. Wisconsin hasn't had a death penalty

Since before the Civil War.

[LakeArenal]

57. Yes. I'm from WI. We used to be the liberal progressive state.

Unions
Good Democrats. Republicans proud of Abe.
Fightin’ Bob LaFollette
Proxmire
Earthday
Tailgating
Brats
Cranberries
Ginseng
Now New York and California make more cheese.

[xmas74]

61. Born and raised

Now in Missouri.

We're watching my hometown on trial right now.

[xmas74]

71. You might also want to share this with others.

I get the feeling some posters think we're just a bunch of ignorant hicks.

[LakeArenal]

77. Haha. Not the worst I've been called.

I don’t care what some anonymous commenter says about me or WI.

I love football Aaron Rodgers too. Tho now he’s quite the stupid dumbass antivaxer.

[xmas74]

81. I always liked him

He played with a chip on his shoulder between his draft number and benchwarming for Farve. It made him a great QB. HIS being an ass now doesn't diminish his accomplishments.

As to all these people attacking Jordan Love they seem to forget that Rodgers rode the bench for 3 seasons. His first season starting wasn't so hot either. I'd like Love to have that same opportunity to learn before I pass judgment.

[paleotn]

93. Upstate NY ....

has always made a shit ton of cheese. Same for VT. But, CA? Now that's just wrong.

I get your point. I remember a time when Wisconsin was as much a part of the Midwest "blue wall" as Illinois.

[2naSalit]

100. I lived there...

Back in the first half of the 80s. It was a great place and very progressive, miss those days.

[NullTuples]

113. Don't forget Milwaukee's Socialist Mayors!

1910 to 1912 - Emil Seidil

1916 to 1940 - Daniel Hoan

1948 to 1960 - Frank Zeidler

[wnylib]

126. Don't forget Laverne and Shirley

[KS Toronado]

139. Have a Shotz's beer on me.

[whathehell]

59. That's good to know.

[xmas74]

62. We were once very civilized

And very progressive.

[whathehell]

64. Whatever.

[xmas74]

69. Way to dismiss the past

Tones a bit snotty, don't you think?

Wisconsin was once one of the most progressive states. Gerrymandering really changed things.

[whathehell]

82. I apologize..I don't want to do that..

Just in a crappy mood today, I guess. I did know that Wisconsin had a progressive past. That included lots of union activity, I'd guess.. Do you still have Fighting Bob day?

[xmas74]

86. I'm no longer in WI

I wish I was still there, especially back in my hometown. Instead I'm in Missouri where all my locals hate unions and applaud KR.

Btw-I was a steward for my old local. I'm proud of that accomplishment. I was the steward everyone requested.

[Rebl2]

96. I live in Misery-Missouri

too. And yes they do hate unions here. Even some postal employees hate unions here, but have no problem running to them when they have an issue with management.

[xmas74]

103. Exactly

My old members would scream about dues and do absolutely nothing to support the union until the shit hit the fan and they needed a steward. I'd then get calls at all hours and claims of how they were union proud. Of course they would vote against their own next election cycle.

[whathehell]

98. Thats too bad..

especially since it sounds like you're now around a bunch of Rednecks..I have lived in Illinois for over 20 years now, and my only experience with Missouri was visiting my niece when she went to college there..That said, it DOES seem like a frighteningly red state.

You're a former union steward?..Great -- You should be proud!..My dad was a union steward for almost all of his working life.. What field/industry were you in?

[xmas74]

104. State government

I was with AFSCME

[whathehell]

105. Cool!

My husband was a union steward in the FDA, and I was proud of him..He did say it was tough being a steward in government since they can't strike.

[LakeArenal]

50. Yeah but it's always the little guys that pay the biggest price.

Life is good enough tho.

[whathehell]

60. Huh?

Not sure what you're point is, at least in relation to my post.

[BlackSkimmer]

66. I don't think the poster meant that offensively toward you. nt

[whathehell]

83. Maybe he didn't

I just asked him what he meant.

[xmas74]

52. Not fried.

Wisconsin stopped the death penalty in 1853.

[consider_this]

2. oh, and now judge conveniently calls for a break...

Argh. or talk me off the ledge, what that just standard to do? - seems like perfect timing for lil K's benefit.

[Baitball Blogger]

4. Yep.

And now the defense is complaining about using current technology to create a 3D interpretation of what happened.

[consider_this]

9. sounds like they are complaining about using pinch and zoom

to view a video. as if it is some kinds of fake video - BS

[consider_this]

5. oh, maybe defense called for it...based on what they are saying now

[Baitball Blogger]

10. He really is stretching his protest.

All the prosecution is going to do is zoom into the screen. Defense thinks it means altering the image to create 3D pictures. I think he's going out on a limb.

[lapfog_1]

7. apple ipad has"logarithms"

and AI... so can't be trusted

Just now from the defense lawyer... what a maroon.

[Baitball Blogger]

11. I know. Afraid of a basic zoom, without altering the image.

Hell! Even the judge gets it!

[Sympthsical]

16. Basic zoom doesn't work that way

The program alters things to "clarify" the image. Basically, the program is making judgements of what it's seeing.

They should leave this and bring in an expert. It's a murder trial.

[lapfog_1]

20. none of the software available in the Ipad

today... creates pixels out of whole cloth (invented).

Digital Zoom has been used for ages.

[Sympthsical]

40. They're arguing about the display

When you zoom in, the display fills things in. Your phone does this.

Given the area they're targeting is small, they're arguing about it.

They should just let the expert sort it out.

[lapfog_1]

129. having been in computers for all my life

I know exactly what is going on... and unlike the movies where they "clean up a zoomed image and all of a sudden see details not in the original image" I know what digital zoom is capable of and what it is NOT (at least right now) capable of.

It is NOT capable of inventing details that are not in the photo. Period. If the megapixel CCDs in the camera didn't record the interpretation of the light entering the lens of the camera the display device won't invent different pixels.

There are no "logarithms" (perhaps the moron was thinking algorithms) available on standard apps (yet) that will alter a zoomed image... or at least not change the pixels...

In the future there may well be AI enhanced photos (they exists now, but they are not common and the Ipad isn't going to create them).

[Sympthsical]

131. Yeah, I wasn't entirely following it

I think I know what they were trying to say (I even got out my ipad and started playing with pictures), but at that point I was like, "Jesus, just get the expert."

I didn't hear what eventually came from it all. Were they showing the video eventually? I looked up and saw a video where they were saying something about his right shoulder being up. I ended up on a work call, so I didn't see if an expert eventually came in or if they left it alone, or if they did show the video they were arguing about.

[Baitball Blogger]

21. I own security cameras and my zooms don't alter anything.

The most it will do is take advantage of stronger lens.

[Sympthsical]

36. Lenses have nothing to do with an existing video

It's how the software processes things.

They should bring in the expert. That way, no one can argue if the image has been altered in any way.

The reason this is all getting argued out is because what they're about to zoom in on is really, really small.

[Torchlight]

34. Does this alteration you assert apply specifically to the Apple iPad as well?

And if so, is there company documentation verifying it as such?

[Sympthsical]

38. That's what the expert is for

I have an ipad, but I'm not in any sense an expert. The defense is arguing the zoom is small, and the program processing the image may alter things.

I mean, they're arguing pixels.

Just bring the expert in and put it to rest.

[Torchlight]

43. Of course.

My mistake. I presupposed that labeling additional precision as a de-facto alteration implied some kind of appurtenant knowledge instead of just a guess.

[Sympthsical]

44. It seems like the judge is inclined to allow the video

But it's more a, "Let's get an expert in here and make sure before a jury sees it."

Just my impression.

[Logiciann]

45. Stupid shit

Just bring in a huge fucking screen and be done with it.

[Logiciann]

46. Called

it

[erronis]

95. BINGO! That makes too much sense. But don't forget that the judge's and jury's eyesight

might compensate for that huge screen.

The retina and the neuro-optical system is constantly trying to read the signal through the noise. That also qualifies as potentially distorting the actual image.

And BTW - glad to have your inputs here at DU.

[LiberalFighter]

28. Later he wasn't getting it. Thinks there is software that changes the image.

[Baitball Blogger]

117. Isn't that convenient?

This is turning into a kangaroo court, with the judge and defense determined to get Rittenhouse off.

[MOMFUDSKI]

114. It was the logarithms

that slayed me. What a doof. The judge is so slanted it is disgusting. The kid was playing video games IN REAL LIFE that nite. He is just another loser. Put me on that jury.

[Sympthsical]

12. He called for a break, because the defense made a motion

The prosecution wants to use a zoom in on an iPad. Defense is arguing this is unreliable and inappropriate for trial.

The break came there, because the prosecutor was about to introduce the ipad video.

[Runningdawg]

6. He's going to walk. The only positive being plenty of evidence for a retrial (in a different place)

[lapfog_1]

8. can't be tried for murder again.

double jeopardy.

[Runningdawg]

26. I am certainly no lawyer but if there is new evidence

or the judge or jurors were found to have taken a bribe, or in any another way obstructed justice, I'm pretty sure there can be a retrial. Baring that, he WILL kill again.

[Celerity]

33. atm it's somewhat likely that there may be a mistrial declared 'with prejudice' due to prosecutorial

misconduct. IF that happens, there cannot be a new trial either. as a mistral declared with prejudice means that the double jeopardy rules kick in.

The prosecutor has fucked up multiple times (violated evidence pre trial rulings, and twice done things in violation of the 5th Amendment defendant's rights against self-incrimination) and really close to going over the line.

[BlackSkimmer]

48. Sure hope the families can get this asshole civilly.

Let his paycheck be garnished forever.

[Celerity]

55. +10000000000000000

[sarisataka]

35. Nope.

You can punish the person who took the bribe but cannot retry the case.

New evidence? Too bad- you should have found it sooner.

[Runningdawg]

54. I guess the best we can hope for is that one juror has a soul.

But in the larger picture and with Trump packing the lower courts - we're screwed. He may yet complete his coup.

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

136. More likely one juror (or more) has an agenda.

Despite a judge's admonition, "Are you willing to set aside your preconceived notions and evaluate this case on only the evidence presented?" Yes. "Do you understand that according to the Constitution the defendant is innocent until proven guilty?" Yes. "Do you accept that as he sits there the defendant is innocent?" Yes.

Then the defense attorney asks his question: "But he really is guilty, isn't he? Otherwise he wouldn't be on trial." Yes.

When I worked for a trial judge I saw that scenario played out several times.

All it takes is one racist juror to prevent a unanimous verdict. "Damned n-----s got what they deserved!" is a pretty high wall for the prosecutor to climb over.

[Baitball Blogger]

13. This is going to turn into another example of white entitlement.

Now, protesters know what to do the next time they see an active shooter among their midst.

[Runningdawg]

22. What the good guy with a gun should have done while he had the chance and before he was shot

[Hoyt]

24. Makes no sense to let anyone walk around with a rifle dangling from their neck at a protest.

Officials that passed that law are also to blame.

[ShazzieB]

90. Absolutely. 😡

What kind of idiots would pass such a ridiculous law?

Rhetorical question, but yeesh!

[Baitball Blogger]

118. +1

[ananda]

89. We have known this since the arrest.

It's ugly and so so wrong, but we have police
and judges in place who are very strong in
their white sympathies.

[whathehell]

110. Less a matter of being "white" than being Right Wing

At least two of the victims in this case were also white.

[uponit7771]

29. Unnnnn, looks like this video the DA has is about to bust KRs words wide open and the fuckin

... judge agrees that "zooming" might alter images.

[Baitball Blogger]

53. I think the judge and defense felt the prosecutor was getting traction,

and derailed everything to break the momentum.

[uponit7771]

58. right, I don't believe for a second the judge believes zooming in on a picture alters it. He's ...

... literally taking the defenses word for technology he claims he knows nothing about.

I wonder if the DA can do similar

[Beachnutt]

14. The rethug poster boy is getting caught

in his lies..

[Deuxcents]

15. This judge is a mess

[Alexander Of Assyria]

75. How is the judge a mess?

[whathehell]

111. For one thing, he refused to allow those dead at the hands of Rittenhouse

to be called "victims", saying the word was "very loaded".

[Baitball Blogger]

120. His phone rang during the trial. It was God bless the usa

A favorite of the Trumpers.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/judge-schroeders-god-bless-the-usa-ringtone-blares-during-rittenhouse-trial

[Alexander Of Assyria]

134. Thin.

[consider_this]

17. wow, now judge is proclaiming as if you can't quite trust the technology

he is kinda hinting at that - gimme a break, cuz they are adding pixels to alter images, and someone has to testify on the technology - what 'if you insert more items into an area of space it will distort what is depicted'

[FakeNoose]

42. So ... the judge is now on the side of defense counsel?

It sounds like he's arguing the case.

[Baitball Blogger]

121. It's deevolving into nonsense.

[marble falls]

18. I knew he couldn't take it.

[marble falls]

19. That idiot judge has left room for appeals no matter what the jury returns with.

[Runningdawg]

27. THIS 100%

[uponit7771]

30. THIS !!!! ☝🏾☝🏾☝🏾

[Mr.Bill]

56. I don't think you can appeal a

not guilty verdict.

[marble falls]

65. Sure you can: bad bench rulings, defective jury instructions: all sorts of reasons.

[Mr.Bill]

78. Can you cite an example of

when someone was found not guilty by a jury then tried again?

[marble falls]

80. Can you use a search engine? Can you cite a source that contradicts my claim?

[Mr.Bill]

85. Sure.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/double_jeopardy

He can be tried in civil court, though which he probably will be. He could also be tried on federal charges.

[ShazzieB]

88. In the case of a Not Guilty verdict, there is nothing to appeal.

Yes, there are many reasons (and excuses) to appeal a Guilty verdict. But if the defendant is found Not Guilty, that means he won the case and has nothing to appeal. The prosecution can't appeal, because that would be double jeopardy.

Once someone is acquitted, it's all over, no matter how jacked up the trial may have been. Case in point: O.J. Simpson.

[Zeitghost]

119. That's called Double Jeopardy

That's called Double Jeopardy and it's not allowed. It's kind of a founding principle of our legal system and it's not allowed for any reason. If the jury finds you not guilty, you can't be retried, at all, ever, like even if you admit to it on camera and brag about how you got off.

[Alexander Of Assyria]

76. How?

[Sucha NastyWoman]

79. A not guilty has no appeals

[marble falls]

84. Oh yeah? ....

[Search domain cld.irmct.org] https://cld.irmct.org › notions › show › 1031 › prosecutions-appeal-against-acquittal
Prosecution's appeal against acquittal. Appeal Judgement - 27.09.2007. LIMAJ et al. (IT-03-66-A) 13. The ICTR Appeals Chamber in Rutaganda and Bagilishema held that the same standard of reasonableness and the same deference to factual findings of the Trial Chamber apply when the Prosecution appeals against an acquittal.

Google it. There's a bunch.

Secondly, a person can be re-indicted on new evidence.

When the Feds reindicted the KKK members who bombed the Alabama Church after they were acquited for murder, for violations of civil rights and sentenced them to 20 years a piece - do you claim that was double jeopardy?

[Captain Stern]

138. Someone can be reindicted, but not on the same charge.

The feds indicted the kkk members who bombed the Alabama Church on civil rights charges....not the murder charges that they were already acquitted of.

Once someone in this country is found 'not guilty', they can't be retried for the same charge, regardless of the circumstances.

Emmett Till's murderers were acquitted. Then they admitted to the crime, and detailed how they did it, in a magazine interview. They could not be recharged for the murder that they confessed to.

[BlueIdaho]

23. The kid took a gun to a place where he knew he could murder people

End of story. What else do you need to prove intent? Convict the little shit and be done with it.

[uponit7771]

31. RIGHT !!! That's exactly what the DA was going with and the video I think would've shown KR point

... his gun first before shit got thick

[PTWB]

25. Nonsense.

I think Rittenhouse is guilty as sin, but that isn't a contradictory statement.

I wear my seatbelt every time I drive but I don't think I'll be in an accident.

[uponit7771]

67. Unnnnn, KR doesn't walk down streets all the time with a PGR slung on his shoulder though or the DA

... needs to ask that.

KR knew there was going to be some crap that night and it looks like he wanted to shoot some people like Zimmerman

[marble falls]

68. So a seatbelt is the same as a firearm. Do you ever drive over cliffs thinking it's ...

... OK, I got my seatbelt on, as opposed to a moron who takes an AR15 with him, thinking, I'm not going to need it, but who knows?

[Lovie777]

32. The judge is suppose to be neutral . ..

he is not and is blatantly partial. This could be grounds to a new trial.

[LiberatedUSA]

37. Is it not a solid argument?

I put on my second parachute, even though I did not think I would need it.

I decided to put up a fire alarm, even though I did not think I would need it.

Many cops have never fired their guns in the line of duty, all hoping they would not need them.

[Gore1FL]

87. Having an illegal firearm that he didn't think he would use diverges from those examples.

Parachutes, fire alarms, and armed police are all legal.

[LiberatedUSA]

92. So what you are saying...

…is self defense is never a legitimate argument, if it was employed using a gun the person was not allowed to have? Are you sure you want that to be the case, cause that could be used against armed protesters against the trumpers. Remember, he people he shot were armed as well. If he didn’t belong there with a gun, neither did they. Or are you saying they had more of a right to bring a gun than he….you know, cause you agree with them.

[Gore1FL]

94. I am pretty sure you can't claim self-defense while committing a crime.

I am not a lawyer, but I recollect reading an article a few months ago on the very subject. It helped form the opinion presented in my last post. Unfortunately, I cannot find the article or I would link it.

[LiberatedUSA]

101. I think that applies to...

…starting a situation that is violent, then trying to claim self defense if it doesn’t go your way.

However, ponder this hypothetical:

If a BLM protester wrongly came armed, and wasn’t legally allowed to be, but used it to defend their life against an obvious attempt on their life that they did not start beyond just being present, would you still stick to your stance that self defense is never legal if you employed it using a gun you were not supposed to have?

What about a felon that kills an intruder with a gun in their home? Self defense out the window, charge with murder?

[Gore1FL]

112. It's not my stance. It's my understanding it's the stance of most state laws.

That said, if anyone is committing a crime it's hard to have sympathy with them if bad things happen during the process.

[Calista241]

39. So did anyone catch the judge's ringtone?

Apparently someone called him while on the bench, and his ringtone is "Proud to be an American" by Lee Greenwood.

[Baitball Blogger]

122. Yup.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/judge-schroeders-god-bless-the-usa-ringtone-blares-during-rittenhouse-trial

[AngryOldDem]

47. Kid's gonna get off.

A choirboy carrying an assault weapon. He was there for one reason — he wanted to shoot somebody. Period. He was on a hunting expedition that night.

[Xolodno]

51. The minute they put him on the stand it was over.

Putting a defendant on the stand is a Hail Mary when you know there is no chance of winning. I wouldn't be surprised of a plea bargain soon.

[xmas74]

63. Supposedly his self defense plea

Meant he was required to take the stand in order to express his state of mind and why he felt his life was threatened at that moment.

[Orrex]

70. Imagine if he were a black man buying an Airsoft gun at walmart

He’d have been shot dead in the sporting goods aisle, no questions asked and no real accountability for his killers.

Or a child playing with a toy gun in a park.

Or a man holding a wallet. Or a video game controller. Or a can of energy drink.

What, I wonder, affords the deliberate killer Rittenhose such gentle deference?


I wonder...

[Baitball Blogger]

123. Outrage over his buying the gun seem non-existant.

It's like they're moving towards a self-defense verdict and that will forgive him for everything else.

[Orrex]

133. That's the mantra repeated ad infinitum on social media

When I see some Reichwing fuckhead deploy that tactic, I remind them that you can't claim self-defense against someone who's stopping you while you're committing a crime.

When the fuckheads press further, I point out that they are arguing, in essence, that if they interrupt a burglar who's robbing their home, the burglar can shoot them dead and claim self-defense, by their ignorant fuckhead logic.

But they don't see it that way because of reasons.

[AverageOldGuy]

72. He didn't crack

It was all an act to play on the jury's sympathy for this poor little kid who was minding his own business when suddenly he was set upon by a horde of heavily-armed anti-fa rioters.

[ashredux]

99. He has been coached well.... But he will slip up....judge is very prejudice

[Johnny2X2X]

73. The video of the shootings is being shown

And it's showing Rittenhouse lied under oath. It's pretty damning.

[Goodheart]

97. Please explain.

[Baitball Blogger]

124. Yes, please explain.

[Johnny2X2X]

125. Says people were yelling "get him"

The audio shows no such thing. Says he didn’t point the gun at the guy with the gun first, the video shows he did.

[Baitball Blogger]

127. That's why the defense and Judge tried to disallow the video.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

91. Rittenhouse belonged to a militia.

The 2 who were killed by him were concerned he'd shoot someone and tried to disarm him.

It's the perfect metaphor for our f'd up country's "conservatives".

RIP Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, and Anthony Huber, 26

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1238630

[Heartstrings]

116. [phone]

[MustLoveBeagles]

132. ...

[Evolve Dammit]

102. The "boy" and his buds wanted to take lives. And they did.

[onecaliberal]

106. "The boy" killed 2 people and nearly a third. He should be locked up for the safety of society.

He has zero business going there. He didn't live there. He was there to do exactly what he did.

[Efilroft Sul]

107. "Cracked."

I agree he knew he got caught in a contradiction, but he's trying to get out of it by acting. And the judge is not helping matters.

[BobTheSubgenius]

108. An object lesson in why lawyers typically hate putting clients on the stand.

[left-of-center2012]

115. Rittenhouse will walk

And this judge will hold the door open for him,
giving him a pat on the back

[MustLoveBeagles]

128. Sadly yes

I'd love to be proven wrong but I'm not hopeful.

[uncle ray]

130. as a minor, maybe he should have brought his mommy for protection.

or, you know, stayed the fuck at home like a "boy" should.

[LiberatedUSA]

137. If that was a real contradiction, self defense...

…with a gun in public would be illegal by default, as if you use the gun for self defense, then by default it wasn’t self defense and murder was the intention all along.

[Qutzupalotl]

140. colicky

[fescuerescue]

141. I guess it paid off though.

[Baitball Blogger]

142. Yup. The Rittenhouse case suggests one thing:

If you think one of these MAGA are active shooters, make sure he doesn't stop you from telling your side of the story.