I will give you a present for when the racism card is played. You call them back pedophiles.
2 Likes
That would do no good. The Left has cared about pedophilia exactly one time: When it wanted to claim Roy Moore was one.
IMO, the cops didn’t give Rittenhouse the benefit of the doubt that night in Kenosha cause he was white. They let him walk on by rifle out with people yelling he just shot and killed folks because he looked like gravy seal MAGA type that cops trust more than antifa and BLM types doing the yelling. I have no doubt that if everything was the same except the color of Rittenhouse’s skin was brown, the cops still would have let him run by.
On magnitude, the Rittenhouse case will be much more volatile. I don’t know much about the Arberry trial, I haven’t followed it so I cannot comment. The out lying factors that 2 guys killed a black guy in the Arberry case is much more along the lines of potential racism as racial disparity is involved, but Rittenhouse just sucked up all the oxygen.
They aren’t pedophiles, they are people with child-like predilections toward sex. I will call them pedo-lovers though, if they are predicting the poor innocent Rosenbaum. That piece of shit can’t be dead enough.
The 2 types of criminals I hate the most are rapists and child rapists. To me, there is no hell hot enough, no grave deep enough, no pain extreme enough, no amount of suffering that is enough for these type of people. You can chop’em up with a bologna slicer and its too good for them.
What needs to happen next is those prosecutors need to be disciplined and perhaps brought up on charges for their misconduct in the case. I hope the judge does not forget to do that. We cannot have rouge prosecutors doing whatever they want with no answer to anybody. Just because this case turned out okay, doesn’t excuse it. And this cases was clear cut, so if you got prosecutorial misconduct in a less clear case, it can result in more innocent people going to prison. We cannot have that.
2 Likes
Rittenhouse tried to turn himself in and the shoo’d him away. He didn’t just walk by the cops.
And they let people of every color and shade burn half the fucking place to the ground, so there wasn’t much arresting going on that night.
2 Likes
I read some of the younger son’s testimony. It’s not convincing to me, and it certainly didn’t dissuade me from my opinion that he was in the wrong. However, there was enough in it that one or more jurors could be persuaded that he had at least an arguable self-defense claim. It only takes one juror to hang. This is how I could see the case going sideways for the prosecution, notwithstanding the unsympathetic defendants.
Nonsense… 2 violent predators are dead.
1 Like
The left are clinically insane. Delusional half baked rejects
3 Likes
So, maybe this would fit better in your “ask a cop anything” thread, but I think it’s equally pertinent here:
Using that simple metric, how do you feel when a gang-banger puts a cap in an even worse gang-banger? Does he get a pass? Or do we get a two-for-one solution for civilization when bad guy #1 gets his?
-
really thought this was going to be hung jury/mistrial/shenanigans(dragged all way to Supreme Court even)
-
FUCKIN’ A
…that is all.
3 Likes
Love it.
Whole thing was textbook FUBAR, but as a bottom line type of guy, can’t argue with it.
You didn’t ask me, but yes.
3 Likes
Tangential to the Rittenhouse case…, as an ex NYer, man am I glad that clown Deblasio is gone and what appears to be a reasonable person is now the Mayor.
So just a quick catch up as this trial is in the USA. So not even news in the uk.
Kid (17) drives to a riot with a gun. To protect other people’s property. Gets into a shit situation. Feels threatened and kills some people.
No crime.
Because at the point of pulling the trigger he was defending himself.
I like Eric Adams overall and I’m glad he won the NYC mayoral election, but I think he’s off-base here. Chris Christie nailed it.
Off-base imo and your’s wrt the Rittenhouse case. But I like his overall rhetoric here.
I can’t even pretend to know what DeBlasio would’ve (or has already) said about this case, but I’m sure it would’ve bordered on the sublimely absurd.
That’s more or less accurate, but “feels threatened” is a bit of an understatement. The first guy (Joseph Rosenbaum) said he was going to kill him and then was chasing him through a parking lot. Rosenbaum threw objects at Rittenhouse and a gun went off at the time. Rittenhouse turns and shoots Rosenbaum as Rosenbaum is in the process of trying to take his rifle away (after, as I mentioned, Rosenbaum said he was going to kill Rittenhouse). Keep in mind that Rosenbaum was a convicted of anally raping a nine year old boy.
The second man shot was Anthony Huber. Huber had a record including domestic violence. He knocked Rittenhouse to the ground with a blow to the head using a skateboard. He was in the act of swinging his skateboard to hit Rittenhouse again when Rittenhouse shot him dead. People from the crowd can be heard yelling, “Cranium him!”
The third man shot (but not killed) was Gaige Grosskreutz. When he was shot, Grosskreutz was pointing a pistol at Rittenhouse. He also had a criminal record.
So, while it’s not false to say that he felt threatened, it’s also quite obvious that he was actually under imminent threat of grievous bodily harm and death. It wasn’t just a feeling.
In regards to the line that he drove to a riot, while also technically true, it’s ignoring the fact that his father lived nearby and he worked nearby. It was a 20 minute drive from his house. While it’s not entirely clear, it seems that the three men he shot had all traveled from farther away. All four were more or less local and even if they hadn’t been there is no law against travelling. But if you want to fault Rittenhouse for travelling to a riot, the same applies to the men who attacked and tried to kill him.
I think you can make the case that he shouldn’t have been there. He would probably agree that given the chance to redo it, he would stay home, even with the not guilty verdict. That’s different than saying he didn’t have the right to defend himself when three criminals came after him with obvious intent to gravely injure or kill him.
6 Likes
Have you seen the riots unfolding in Rotterdam right now over covid restrictions?
Police cars set on fire, buildings trashed, fireworks used as weapons, rocks, bricks and bottles thrown, police ended up opening fire using real ammunition on some of the protestors.
I don’t think any city will burn. There will be protests, some may turn violent as is characteristic of generalised protests (and I’d argue the same outcome would eventuate had Kyle been found guilty) but it’s not going to be a George Floyd protests scale riot.
Except this happens all the time, it’s not unique to this case.
Look at what politicians are doing in the courts of Australia. They’re twisting or outright altering the words of the law to suit whatever narrative they wish to push.
If we were to prosecute every prosecutor who tries to push the boundaries or circumvent tradition you’d have a tremendous backlog in the courts. It is the prosecutor’s job to prove guilt… let this tarnish the prosecutor’s careers, but prison time? Na