Incongruous media coverage of Rittenhouse vs actual testimony

[highfigh]

What's gobsmacking about any of this is the Rittenhouse will most likely be able to posses a firearm legally after all this. There isn't a law on the books preventing idiots from owning one.

Depends- if he's charged with a felony related to this case, he won't be eligible to posses firearms. I really hope this is the case because he clearly doesn't have the brains or maturity to handle himself outside of his house.

From what I have read, he quit school in 9th grade, wanted to be a cop and had recently been studying to be a nurse. Nothing was shown about how he could do that since there's no way they'll take someone without a high school diploma or GED and it didn't show that he had been going for his GED, especially since he turned 18 after this occurred.

 

[highfigh]

This.
Why is he not charged with these rather a focus on charges that likely can't stick.
The prosecution seemingly had stars in their eyes.

It's Wisconsin- lawyers like to be in front of the cameras and if that makes them famous, it's just gravy on the icing.

 

[jinjuku]

Depends- if he's charged with a felony related to this case, he won't be eligible to posses firearms.

I don't know if he's going to be found guilty of a felony.

I also wish people / media would point out that everyone involved was out past a curfew. And also that it really doesn't matter and isn't material.

Then there is 'went across state lines'. Dude I drive across state lines CONSTANTLY. It's like a normal thing.

 

[Danzilla31]

I don't know if he's going to be found guilty of a felony.

I also wish people / media would point out that everyone involved was out past a curfew. And also that it really doesn't matter and isn't material.

Then there is 'went across state lines'. Dude I drive across state lines CONSTANTLY. It's like a normal thing.

The thing that I'm curious about is the jury. Most make up there mind fairly quickly unless some bombshell gets dropped at the last minute.

But they are all having the same thoughts and inner dialogue we are having on this forum

As @RedCharles said this case is very important because of the message it may send to some people about what they can and can't do in a situation like this.

The jury may decide to support charges against Kyle they normally wouldn't as a deterrent against this type of vigilante type of behavior in the future. Make him a sacrificial lamb so to speak. I suspect that may be why the DA overcharged in this case.

Now if 12 people will do that with the evidence as it is presented I'm not sure.

But if he walks I'm really worried if more protests escalate into violence. What some people might decide to do.

I'm divided I posted this before a part of me a very pragmatic practical side of me would like to avoid the protests and possible bloodshed if more people aggressively assert themselves into those protests. But I also don't want to live in a world were people can just get the idea to destroy communities properties even cause injury and deaths every time they don't get there way.

Not to mention the first part is a selfish side of me and I see that. I'd love to just avoid conflict but what if I was being tried for something? Or my family member or child? Would I not want them to be given a trial that upholds the standards that we have set by the law? Which cannot be swayed by political or public opinion even outrage? Of course I would

Uggghhh just an ugly situation. I'm really not looking forward to public reaction if he walks with the state of our current media and political leadership instead of fanning the flames for the greatest public safety I'm concerned they will only further inflame it.

 

[Dude#1279435]

The thing that I'm curious about is the jury. Most make up there mind fairly quickly unless some bombshell gets dropped at the last minute.

But they are all having the same thoughts and inner dialogue we are having on this forum

As @RedCharles said this case is very important because of the message it may send to some people about what they can and can't do in a situation like this.

The jury may decide to support charges against Kyle they normally wouldn't as a deterrent against this type of vigilante type of behavior in the future. Make him a sacrificial lamb so to speak. I suspect that may be why the DA overcharged in this case.

Now if 12 people will do that with the evidence as it is presented I'm not sure.

But if he walks I'm really worried if more protests escalate into violence. What some people might decide to do.

I'm divided I posted this before a part of me a very pragmatic practical side of me would like to avoid the protests and possible bloodshed if more people aggressively assert themselves into those protests. But I also don't want to live in a world were people can just get the idea to destroy communities properties even cause injury and deaths every time they don't get there way.

Not to mention the first part is a selfish side of me and I see that. I'd love to just avoid conflict but what if I was being tried for something? Or my family member or child? Would I not want them to be given a trial that upholds the standards that we have set by the law? Which cannot be swayed by political or public opinion even outrage? Of course I would

Uggghhh just an ugly situation. I'm really not looking forward to public reaction if he walks with the state of our current media and political leadership instead of fanning the flames for the greatest public safety I'm concerned they will only further inflame it.

I tend to think individuals should be tried for the crimes they commit and not being set as an example at the expense of law. Crimes and fines should fit the sentence. Deterrents are a WONDERFUL idea (until it's one of your own).

 

[Dude#1279435]

There is also the following going on in that trial.

You shall not pinch to zoom: Rittenhouse trial judge disallows basic iPad feature

Judge: iPad pinch-to-zoom could “insert more items” into video of shootings.

arstechnica.com

This video goes into the judge's past. Your suppose to stay neutral, but he's kinda overs stepping his boundaries a bit. Rittenhouse at best looks odd crying.

 

[Danzilla31]

This video goes into the judge's past. Your suppose to stay neutral, but he's kinda overs stepping his boundaries a bit. Rittenhouse at best looks odd crying.

Working with our military I don't think he's crying he looks like he's having a panic attack. There are some physical things he is doing that make me suspect it. He probably does have some trauma from the incident. It's possible he got on the stand he's already amped up being up there nervous system is very hyper stimulated and when he goes to recall events he just regressed that's what happens in the brain.

When it recalls high intensity memories like that it remembers it at the intensity and chemical level of previous arousal. When it hits like this it's called flooding. The reddening of the face tensing of his body inability to speak or breath at times then gasping for hair. His body going very rigid its a big possibility when he went to remember those events he straight up overstimulated and had a panic attack.

 

[Danzilla31]

Working with our military I don't think he's crying he looks like he's having a panic attack. There are some physical things he is doing that make me suspect it. He probably does have some trauma from the incident. It's possible he got on the stand he's already amped up being up there nervous system is very hyper stimulated and when he goes to recall events he just regressed that's what happens in the brain.

When it recalls high intensity memories like that it remembers it at the intensity and chemical level of previous arousal. When it hits like this it's called flooding. The reddening of the face tensing of his body inability to speak or breath at times then gasping for hair. His body going very rigid its a big possibility when he went to remember those events he straight up overstimulated and had a panic attack.

But people would mistake it for insincerity because it doesn't come off as crying it doesn't match so it would come across as not sincere.

Where people see him clenching up squeezing his face and thinking he's trying to force out tears that's his body locking up and having am attack

 

[highfigh]

There is also the following going on in that trial.

You shall not pinch to zoom: Rittenhouse trial judge disallows basic iPad feature

Judge: iPad pinch-to-zoom could “insert more items” into video of shootings.

arstechnica.com

I thought that pinching reduced the size of the image.......

 

[highfigh]

I don't know if he's going to be found guilty of a felony.

I also wish people / media would point out that everyone involved was out past a curfew. And also that it really doesn't matter and isn't material.

Then there is 'went across state lines'. Dude I drive across state lines CONSTANTLY. It's like a normal thing.

Without being there, it's hard to say what charges the jury will convict on but nobody should see this as 'responsible gun use'.

The media aren't there to present the facts. Haven't been, for years.

You drive across state lines, but are you a minor, illegally in possession of an illegally purchased firearm? Crossing state lines isn't the problem- it's why and what he brought with him.

 

[highfigh]

But people would mistake it for insincerity because it doesn't come off as crying it doesn't match so it would come across as not sincere.

Where people see him clenching up squeezing his face and thinking he's trying to force out tears that's his body locking up and having am attack

He was coached. Little kids act like they're crying but there are no tears, so they can manipulate someone, right? I see it in adults, too- people who are interviewed after a crime often wail and moan as if it was the worst thing to happen to humanity, but there are no tears. Some people can cry on demand, real tears aren't controllable.

 

[Dude#1279435]

He was coached. Little kids act like they're crying but there are no tears, so they can manipulate someone, right? I see it in adults, too- people who are interviewed after a crime often wail and moan as if it was the worst thing to happen to humanity, but there are no tears. Some people can cry on demand, real tears aren't controllable.

His crying is at odds with his other behavior. First he comes across to me at times as having a smug, arrogant expression. Then after the crying he looks over to the judge without any tears showing.

 

[highfigh]

I tend to think individuals should be tried for the crimes they commit and not being set as an example at the expense of law. Crimes and fines should fit the sentence. Deterrents are a WONDERFUL idea (until it's one of your own).

Look at the crimes that are being committed and then, look at the offender's previous crimes and sentences. It's becoming rare that someone has served much or any of the sentence and many violent felons are released without much more than time served after the trial, if there is a trial.

In MKE, an illegal threw a screwdriver at another car and killed a young woman in that car, fifteen years ago. The killer was recently found and was going to be brought to trial but the only witness, who was a passenger in the killer's car, was deported ten years ago and can't testify. The killer is going to be set free because of this. The witness made a statement about this at the time and it's the reason the trial might have happened, but the turd is going to walk.

People who are accused of crimes are often set free because witnesses fail to appear far too many times.

However, if someone is tried for what they did and the defense is able to persuade the jury that there's some reason to doubt it, they're not going to prison and they can't be retried for those specific offenses because it would be 'double jeopardy' and that's part of the 5th Amendment.

I find it odd that Grosskreutz shytecanned the prosecution's case against someone who shot him, but I also think he's in deep for his own actions. I guess we'll see.

 

[highfigh]

His crying is at odds with his other behavior. First he comes across to me at times as having a smug, arrogant expression. Then after the crying he looks over to the judge without any tears showing.

Exactly. And watch him, to see how many times he directs his comments and actions toward the jury.

 

[Dude#1279435]

Exactly. And watch him, to see how many times he directs his comments and actions toward the jury.

I call it going into convulsions but whatever. Immediately after the crying he looks directly at the judge tearless.

 

[highfigh]

I call it going into convulsions but whatever. Immediately after the crying he looks directly at the judge tearless.

Looking for approval?

 

[Dude#1279435]

Looking for approval?

That's what it looked like to me.

 

[highfigh]

That's what it looked like to me.

Maybe he's looking for a father figure in his life.

His mother said "I have $1.20 in my checking account in an interview a couple of weeks ago, now they have a legal defense fund with about $250K- I see a book deal in their future, too. Financially, the best thing that has ever happened to them.

If I sound jaded, it's because I have seen this kind of thing far too many times. It's all about the Benjamins, right?

 

[Dude#1279435]

Maybe he's looking for a father figure in his life.

His mother said "I have $1.20 in my checking account in an interview a couple of weeks ago, now they have a legal defense fund with about $250K- I see a book deal in their future, too. Financially, the best thing that has ever happened to them.

If I sound jaded, it's because I have seen this kind of thing far too many times. It's all about the Benjamins, right?

I thought Mike Lindell (the pillow guy) donated some. About the only thing I agree with on him. Can't stand the guy otherwise.

 

[highfigh]

I thought Mike Lindell (the pillow guy) donated some. About the only thing I agree with on him. Can't stand the guy otherwise.

I think he and that pillow need to get a room.