Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Summer of 2020---The Civil Unrest Thread--Read OP Before Posting (in memory of George Floyd)

Jumbo

By Jumbo
in The Tailgate

 Share

Recommended Posts

Llevron

Llevron

Posted
Posted (edited)
58 minutes ago, CjSuAvE22 said:

Sorry that im a second year law student writing a 70 page thesis on self defense cases and have been watching this case and testimony with a close eye. But its ok I ask for some logical explanations and all I get is shade thrown my way, anyways im out enjoy your thread. 

 

You come off as rooting for the bad guy so you really shouldn't be surprised at the shade you are getting. Just to be as upfront as possible, I want to argue your points because **** this guy Rittenhouse in particular, but some of them are not arguable, so I cant. That a bad guy is getting away with this **** and so many people are cheering for it really really upsets me. That I feel like the law is being bent in his favor (even if its by the idiocy of the prosecution) seems very unfair to me. And you happen to be arguing that everything is working as intended. So OF COURSE my gut feeling is **** you too. I try to work around that and have a discussion im uncomfortable with, with a person who I disagree with, so i can at least learn something from it and so my views are seen on the subject. 

 

But ultimately my view is **** Rittenhouse, and **** whoever thinks he was right to do what he did. And your view of 'he was within his legal rights' and the idea that 'he was right to do what he did' come close enough that sometimes the **** YOU bleeds through. I think as a second year law student, you will need to come to terms with this. As it is human nature, and I pride myself on being able to somewhat show some restraint and know when I'm beat. Most humans will not. 

 

(FYI the **** you part is not directed at you, its directed at an idea that I dont like. You happen to come close to that idea. But I feel like you have been fair, despite me really not liking your opinion) 

 

Edit: The background of you being a law student does make me feel better about your opinion though. And yes I know how that sounds. I feel better about your opinion like i my feelings on your opinion should matter. I was trying really hard not to paint you as a supporter of his but I kept getting that feeling. Now i re-read things without that opinion and it makes me feel less like poking you in the eye 

Edited by Llevron
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted
39 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Dude went looking for trouble, found it, and is now claiming self-defense?  This is horse**** of the highest level.

 

20 minutes ago, Ball Security said:

It’s just like George Zimmerman.

 

Rittenhouse’s lawyers have the judge in the bag.  I don’t have a good feeling about this.
 

 

Yea and I believe it’s flordia’s stand your ground law that allowed him to get off?

 

(I personally thought Zimmerman was guilty because of the “went looking for trouble” aspect. That aspect has always been drilled into my head as a huge issue if you’re gonna try to claim self defense, and that you don’t want that problem)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NoCalMike

NoCalMike

Posted
Posted (edited)

The more details of the situation come out the more aggravating it is that Rittenhouse was allowed and even seemingly encouraged to get involved in this in the first place by his parents and others.

 

Legally speaking, what carries more weight, all the wrong steps taken leading up to the shooting or does all that matter in this case is that when he fired his gun he was under a reasonable position of thinking his own life was in danger?

 

For me that is the dangerous gray area of this.  Is it possible Rittenhouse should/could be charged with lesser charges because he indeed did a lot of wrong things to get himself into the position he was in, but ultimately with facing fears for his own life the shooting itself was justified?

 

 

Edited by NoCalMike
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

I find that an odd move from the Defense, if the prosecution really made as bad of a bad case as some would have you believe. 

 

Why open him for cross from the prosecution?

I wonder if that’s because they’re like Virginia where if you claim self defense the burden of proof becomes yours (as opposed to the burden being the state to prove it wasn’t self defense). I would think that could change that calculus very easily. 
 

could also just be seeing a kill shot and taking it. I haven’t read any opinion of the prosecutions case so far that was anything other than scathing. 
 

It’s my understanding that the biggest mistake you can make is calling a witness when you don’t know what they will say (or asking them a question you don’t already know the answer to). And seemingly that’s what he did 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

Legally speaking, what carries more weight, all the wrong steps taken leading up to the shooting or does all that matter in this case is that when he fired his gun he was under a reasonable position of thinking his own life was in danger?

I’ve always thought it all matters. Theres rules here about all that with guns. But there’s also tons of other aspects of law that reflect it. Both civil and criminal trials. 
 

but it’s the jury that matters. And, this looks bad to me from the prosecutors perspective. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted
17 hours ago, Simmsy said:

What are the odds of the DOJ getting involved? Violating another person's civil rights, perhaps?

I think this is a bad idea. 
 

That’s way too much to lose and not enough to gain. I think you need to be careful with how you exercise that ability. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Destino

Destino

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, NoCalMike said:

Legally speaking, what carries more weight, all the wrong steps taken leading up to the shooting or does all that matter in this case is that when he fired his gun he was under a reasonable position of thinking his own life was in danger?

 

the entire “he shouldn’t have been there” argument seems meaningless to me.  None of the people involved in this had any more right to be there than anyone else.  Not in any way that matters regarding murder charges.  If this had been private property where one person had a right to be there and the other trespassed, then that would matter more.

 

if Kyle goes down it’s because his first victim was unarmed and he could have feasibly kept running.  No telling what the jury will do.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ball Security

Ball Security

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Destino said:

the entire “he shouldn’t have been there” argument seems meaningless to me.  None of the people involved in this had any more right to be there than anyone else.  Not in any way that matters regarding murder charges.  If this had been private property where one person had a right to be there and the other trespassed, then that would matter more.

 

if Kyle goes down it’s because his first victim was unarmed and he could have feasibly kept running.  No telling what the jury will do.

Hey now, can’t call that guy a “victim”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...