Go back to previous topic
Forum nameGeneral Discussion
Topic subjectRE: If you don't think this judge exhibited clear bias, idk what to tell you
Topic URLhttp://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=13447543&mesg_id=13448446
13448446, RE: If you don't think this judge exhibited clear bias, idk what to tell you
Posted by Cenario, Fri Nov-19-21 07:13 PM
>Rittenhouse was charged with the minor possession offense, so
>the charge had already occurred. It wasn't until the defense
>objected on the technicality that the charge was thrown out -
>so the judge would've allowed the charge to go through w/ out
>that objection on technicality.

I'm not sure what your point is there...a defense attorney's job is to get their client off, through any means necessary....a judge rules on the motions and law....the prosecution basically conceded knowing the law didin't back them.

anyway, let'ss say he gets convicted on possession (carries a 9 months max) its very easy to see a connection to everything that transpired after rittenouse illegally possessed the weapon being rittenhouse's fault and convictions on the other charges.

The possession is an easy win on appeal, but then the defense argues that the other convictions stemmed from the original conviction (he had no legal right to be there, with the gun) and everything gets tossed.

>This occurred in Wisconsin, but yea, it's not the first time a
>law was poorly/vaguely written.

Ha i was just watching a replay of the Travis Mchmichael and Co. trial and got confused lol
>
>This case was always a very difficult case to prosecute given
>the facts and clear self-defense claims available to
>Rittenhouse in Wisconsin, but interpreting the statute to
>include the intent of the law (re: minor possession weapons
>charge) would've at least demonstrated that the vigilante
>lawless violence of Rittenhouse wasn't wholly excused by the
>justice system.
>
>I actually think the jury made the right call on the homicide
>charges, given the facts at hand. But ain't no way he
>should've walked scot free on the possession charge.

I said this before but open carry states are fucked up to me. I have a gun, you have a gun...we perceive each others as threats (bc motherfuckers with guns are dangerous) and we both have the right to defend ourselves. Its a setup for disasster to me. A lot of people out there are looking for reasons to be able to shoot someone and our fucked up laws allow it.