It completely contradicted what you said about Rittenhouse not having is back to Rosenbaum, but now it is just as you suspected. Ok. Not that it matters, but just funny.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Kyle Rittenhouse Trial: Defense Rests. Resisting the urge to go full HT and just purge this crapshow of a thread. (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter The Commish
- Start date
- Status
It completely contradicted what you said about Rittenhouse not having is back to Rosenbaum, but now it is just as you suspected. Ok. Not that it matters, but just funny.
squistion
Footballguy
Dude, that happened before. I was talking about what happened afterwards, which hopefully will be confirmed by the FBI tape.
Before what? The chain of events was as follows
1. Rosenbaum was pushing the flaming dumpster.
2. Rittenhouse helped put out the fire
3. There was some sort of confrontation at the scene of the dumpster. (Alledged FBI surveillence footage of Rittenhouse pointing fire extinguisher at Rosenbaum)
4. Rittenhouse on video running from scene still holding fire extinguisher.
5. Rosenbaum filmed leaving scene with a large chain in his hand.
6. Rosenbaum filmed spotting Rittenhouse (no longer holding fire extinguisher) and jogging to catch up with him.
7. McGinness testifies Rittenhouse juked to avoid Rosenbaum's approach from behind.
8. The filmed chase and shooting immediately followed.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
I hope that there is such video that confirms what happened. I don't really want it to show that Rittenhouse started the whole mess for a bunch of reasons. Starting with enough lives were lost already. Ending with if he ultimately prevails on the self defense defense then I would like to believe when all is said and done that this was appropriate justice.
The Commish
Footballguy
Battersbox
Footballguy
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
The video will be anti-climatic. It was about 10 to 15 minutes before the final confrontation which video and testimony show was all Rosenbaum initiated. The video could be a huge boost for the defense on a couple grounds"
1. if it was the action of Kyle with the fire extinguisher that is what the prosecution is arguing provoked the confrontation, it destroys the argument that the fight was started because of Kyle's illegal activity, the underage possession of a fire arm. Which illiminates the provision Bigbottom suggested will be the prosecution's approach.
2. It may show Rosenbaum with the chain still in his hand. If that is the case, and Rittenhouse saw that, it would make this case laughable, as any human on the planet would be scared for their life if someone who was chasing you, and you reasonably believed was carrying a deadly object.
Last edited by a moderator:
squistion
Footballguy
Which is why the prosecution will be introducing it into evidence? Yeah that makes a lot of sense.
The Commish
Footballguy
The good ole "anti-climatically huge boost" trick....seen it a million times 
The prosecution has yet to submit it despite being past when evidence was supposed to have been submitted. The defense has no reason to fear what it shows. It is really no where near as significant as you think considering the time frame which it alleged to have occurred.
squistion
Footballguy
The good ole "anti-climatically huge boost" trick....seen it a million times
Lol...you think there is a case? There is zero chance this case succeeds. And that is saying something considering you never really know who will make up a jury and how they think and that the prosecution wins a large majority of the cases which go to trial. This case may be weaker than the Zimmerman case, which was also a politically motivated case that had no business being prosecuted. The person who should be on trial for murder is the DC cop who shot Ashli Babbit. Unlike these, that shooting was unjustified, although there really not enough evidence to convict him because police are more difficult to convict.
They can submit, but it was suppose to have been provided before the last hearing. It is just late. The impact could be the defense could ask for additional time. But I doubt it.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Commish
Footballguy
I have no idea. Depends on how law gets interpreted. None of that changes the fact that something can't be a huge boost and anti-climatic all at the same time though. That was the funny part.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
If it hasn't been produced at all, how do you or the defense knows what it shows? And if you say they have a bunch of other evidence like witness testimony that would need to be contradicted for this video to show something damaging then I don't think that is much of a hurdle. And I say that assuming every single one of those witnesses being contradicted in this hypothetical are being 100% honest. Memory and perspectives can just work this way sometimes.
Absolutely it can. It won't be the silver bullet the anti-Rittenhouse crowd is hoping for. It potentially could shut the door on any slight glimmer of hope the prosecution has if it shows Rosenbaum holding a deadly object and Rittenhouse has knowledge of it. It would slam the door on any belief that Rittenhouse's fear was unreasonable.
Given when this video had to be shot, at least 10 minutes prior to the shooting. The two disengaged completely, rendering any provocation at that time meaningless. We know this because there is video of Rosenbaum a good 100 feet or more behind Rittehouse and jogging to catch up which is just seconds before the last video starts. The most important video is well known as is the most important eye-witness testimony. The prosecution will try to dilute and distract with a mountain of other stuff, but the evidence we have seen shows enough to conclusively conclude it was self-defense. No eyewitness had 1/10th of the view that McGinniss had. And no other video erases what the video we have seen clearly shows.
-fish-
Footballguy
as usual, jon has no clue and is just relying on video edited and released by the defense, as well as witness statements released by the defense.
nobody has seen the surveillance footage outside of the judge, the prosecutors and the defense. he's just wishcasting based on his love of Murderboy.
nobody has seen the surveillance footage outside of the judge, the prosecutors and the defense. he's just wishcasting based on his love of Murderboy.
-fish-
Footballguy
-fish-
Footballguy
legal genius.The good ole "anti-climatically huge boost" trick....seen it a million times
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
-fish-
Footballguy
More confident than Rittenhouse, who told a friend he thought he'd get life in prison.
Black, by the way, was his friend that illegally purchased the murder weapon for him. He was charged with two felony counts of illegally supplying the rifle to Rittenhouse. He tried to get the charges dismissed and failed, but they agreed to delay his trial until after Rittenhouse's. He's facing up to three years on each count. Would be interesting if he goes to prison for six years and his buddy gets off.
Black, by the way, was his friend that illegally purchased the murder weapon for him. He was charged with two felony counts of illegally supplying the rifle to Rittenhouse. He tried to get the charges dismissed and failed, but they agreed to delay his trial until after Rittenhouse's. He's facing up to three years on each count. Would be interesting if he goes to prison for six years and his buddy gets off.
The Z Machine
Footballguy
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Not that the situations nor the technology are at all equivalent, but I lived way too close to Baltimore in May 1980 to ever find this a compelling argument.
General Malaise
Footballguy
There are two murder charges against Rittenhouse so am trying to see where the chain of events started and it is not the act of killing Rosenbaum but what transpired to precipitate that event, so why did Rosenbaum and Rittonhouse meet behind the cars?
General Malaise
Footballguy
Rosenbaum can't tell us the reason because Kyle murdered him. Maybe Kyle will tell us why he murdered people but I doubt it.
Because Kyle pissed off a 36-year old psychopath who has spent nearly his entire life behind bars for numerous felonies including multiple counts of child-molestaton and woman beating by helping prevent said psychopath from pushing a flaming dumpster into a gas station where dozens of people were hanging out. Because Kyle was armed and around other armed people, the psychopath did not attack. But several minutes later, psychopath saw Kyle in the distance walking alone and psychopath started to run so he could sneak up and ambush Kyle. Kyle heard the footsteps and was able to juke away from the initial attack and the chase into the parking lot began.
To many eyes on the left, Kyle provoked the attack because Kyle is a rightwinger which makes him some kind of subhuman armed terrorist who lacks any right to defend himself against such an attack from a peaceful protestor. So they label Kyle as a mass-shooter, terrorist, and murderer, putting websites like this at risk of large lawsuits once Kyle is acquiitted on all murder charges, which he undoubtedly will be. Kyle has outstanding legal representation and will make a ton of money off these lawsuits.
Last edited by a moderator:
Not that the situations nor the technology are at all equivalent, but I lived way too close to Baltimore in May 1980 to ever find this a compelling argument.
Because sometimes the angle of a video can be deceptive, we should discount everything we see on video? And you find that argument compelling?
The Commish
Footballguy
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
I missed that little gem of hypocrisy...HFS
I did not call him armed. You guys are desperate and dense.
timschochet
Footballguy
But if he’s not armed, how can he threaten Rittenhouse’s life? Isn’t that the defense you made on behalf of Ashley Babbitt?
The Commish
Footballguy
There's no point...in a world where the person won't identify carrying around "deadly objects" as "being armed" there is no point in trying to exact a distinction. The only guaranteed outcome is a moving of the already arbitrary line.
Ashli Babbitt did not have a heavy chain. A chain is an object which can be used as a deadly weapon. Ashli had nothing like thar. When you say someone committed an armed robbery, it means they had a gun. Not a flagpole.
Yenrub
Footballguy
A heavy chain can be used as a deadly weapon but a flagpole cannot be used as a deadly weapon?
Black psychopaths use one while right wing patriotic tourists use the other which explains the differing view.
CletiusMaximus
Footballguy
There is one more motion hearing - this coming Monday afternoon. Its hard to follow a state court case online as the docket provides very slim info and documents are not available to download and review (unlike in federal court.) Both parties have filed their witness lists and the state submitted its expert - Mr. James T. Armstrong (no idea).
It appears highly likely this trial is going to go forward as scheduled, with jury selection starting on Nov. 1. I'm not an expert on this stuff, but would expect it will take at least a full day if not two days to pick a jury. The entire thing will be broadcast on Court TV. I need some commitments from you ######s with boring day jobs to watch this thing and provide live commentary, hopefully somewhat unbiased if possible. I'm going to try to monitor and watch the opening statements and key witnesses, but it looks like my schedule won't allow as much leisure time as I'd like.
May justice prevail!
It appears highly likely this trial is going to go forward as scheduled, with jury selection starting on Nov. 1. I'm not an expert on this stuff, but would expect it will take at least a full day if not two days to pick a jury. The entire thing will be broadcast on Court TV. I need some commitments from you ######s with boring day jobs to watch this thing and provide live commentary, hopefully somewhat unbiased if possible. I'm going to try to monitor and watch the opening statements and key witnesses, but it looks like my schedule won't allow as much leisure time as I'd like.
May justice prevail!
Zow
Footballguy
I will say that if they are in possession of such a video, it's odd to me that they haven't yet disclosed it. Generally, prosecutors want to disclose their evidence right away for a number of reasons with two of the big ones being as follows: 1) disclosure of all the evidence and letting the defense see what they're up against could spark plea negotiations; and 2) they don't risk preclusion of the evidence if it's not timely disclosed (in my state there is a rule giving the state x number of days to disclose - not sure if Wisconsin has a similar rule).
To add to this, the only times I can recall where the state was in possession of evidence and didn't timely disclose the evidence is because there was questionable actions by law enforcement officers contained therein.
The Z Machine
Footballguy
The law in the state of MD states otherwise:
There is no reference to a firearm or gun or anything other than a "dangerous weapon". So, no, when we talk about "armed robbery" we don't necessarily mean that person has a firearm.
Zow
Footballguy
STEADYMOBBIN 22
Footballguy
It really is a shame that the felonious child molester isn’t around to give us his side of the story. I’d be interested to hear his side of the story when he was molesting minors.
I’m sure he would be perfectly honest with us.
Some of you are criminally naive.
Zow
Footballguy
Honestly, unless the poster is a licensed WI attorney who regularly practices serious criminal defense and, ideally, has experience with this particular trial judge, "I have no clue" is the only correct answer any of us should be giving.
Zow
Footballguy
In fairness to Jon, this is probably the most likely remedy should the defense decide to push the issue.*
*Again, though, none of us probably really have any significant clue on this issue.
the moops
Footballguy
General Malaise
Footballguy
- Status
Similar threads
