apologies for beating the horse, but I am doing a deep burn right now.

Kyle Rittenhouse's life is on the line and the stupid judge talks like this is some academic exercise. He had the power to stop many of the dirty tricks the two prosecutors pulled. Instead he acted like this was a high school debate contest. He seriously sat there and listened to total nonsense from the prosecutors.

If Kyle is convicted, this judge has a lot to answer for.

Plus a number of online lawyers have been stunned how passive Kyle's lawyers were. They should have been objecting and challenging constantly.

The prosecutors pushed and pushed and the judge tended to roll over. It would have been different if the defense team had pushed and fought w the same intensity as the prosecutors so that the judge had to make decisions w two hard fought contrary positions presented to him.

The defense should have kept reminding what all this meant to Rittenhouse.

MHO

That was a pretty damning indictment of our Judicial System.
It would be a travesty if Kyle is not acquitted of ALL charges.

The one thing I have learned is that photos and videos need to be displayed in their native resolution.

quote:

Originally posted by 46and2:

quote:

Originally posted by Skull Leader:
Because Kyle Rittenhouse is allowing it. He was asked by the Judge if that is what he wanted and he said yes.

Bizarre and fascinating. Thanks, missed that.

Why in the hell would his lawyers even allow this?

Allow?
They most likely told Kyle this was his best option.
He surely did not make that decision without the advice of counsel.

From what I heard from the judge, the defense lawyers recommended allowing the lesser charges in.

The judge gave Kyle the opportunity to over rule his lawyers. He did not over rule them.

My guess he's going to prison. Unjustly but that how things are currently operating in this brave new world we live in. The mob rules everything either by action or threat of action.

Kyle will get railroaded much the same way Chauvin did. There is no truth in justice any longer just a political path that must be adhered to. Sadly this is the way it is for the time being.

OK what are the penalties if convicted on the lesser charges? I assume KR was given that information.

I am looking forward to the closing arguments on Monday.

OK, I'm just an old shit house lawyer. Why would they allow other charges to be considered, what's the benefit? If he is found not guilty they can bring up lesser charges later ? Is this normal?

I imagation they (prosecution) allowed the lesser included instructions to be included and the defense agreeing because the states entire case relies on admitted (manipulated) evidence to prove provacation which would negate self-defense. If provocation cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, self-defense stands and all charges are moot. The weapons charge will likely be dropped after evidence is reviewed confirming the barrel is at least 16" and oal is "26, duh.

Look forward to prosecution closing arguments with objections from the defense (hopefully).

PBS but good summary:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/w...rges-for-rittenhouse

Reckless endangerment was argued fairly successfully since since Kyle hit was he was "aiming" at and where he missed with dropkickman, it was more clearly self-defense since he had a boot in his face.

The defense has sucked but only they know the jury. Hopefully the bingo game gets rid of the lefty alternates.

quote:

Originally posted by lastmanstanding:
My guess he's going to prison.

That cherubic kid would last about 15 minutes in the grey bar hotel.

The jury will be presented w a range of charges.
Ranging from charges w longer sentences to ones w lesser sentences.

This gives people on the jury who are not fully decided on guilt but feel he should be convicted of "something" a way to convict on lesser charges.

The theoretical "advantage" to the defendant of having the lesser charges included is that there is lower probability of being convicted of the worst charges. Easier to get full jury to convict on lesser charges.

I am not a lawyer but have read this is a common tactic used by prosecutors to increase probability of getting "some" conviction rather than none.

To me it is absurd to not have the full set of charges established at the beginning of the trial so a proper defense can be conducted.

it is apparent our system of "justice" needs a lot of change to make it fair and just.

Theme: Rittenhouse

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
The jury will be presented w a range of charges.
Ranging from charges w longer sentences to ones w lesser sentences.

This gives people on the jury who are not fully decided on guilt but feel he should be convicted of "something" a way to convict on lesser charges.

The theoretical "advantage" to the defendant of having the lesser charges included is that there is lower probability of being convicted of the worst charges. Easier to get full jury to convict on lesser charges.

I am not a lawyer but have read this is a common tactic used by prosecutors to increase probability of getting "some" conviction rather than none.

To me it is absurd to not have the full set of charges established at the beginning of the trial so a proper defense can be conducted.

it is apparent our system of "justice" needs a lot of change to make it fair and just.

This makes no sense to me on two fronts. First their whole case was defending against murder charges, I assume the defense would have different strategy if it were lower charges. Second, the kid did nothing wrong, I'd be seriously temped to say 'prove your case or fuck off'. I have to assume his lawyers who are smarter than me told him it was the right course.

Not being knowledgeable in these things, what lesser charges would could he be found guilty of for which self-defense would not be a defense?

^ as stated before. Lesser charges give the jury an opportunity to agree where more punitive charges may be harder to have unanimous agreement and lead to a mistrial or hung jury if there are holdouts.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wire...nhouse-face-81141083

What charges does Kyle Rittenhouse face?

COUNT 1: FIRST-DEGREE RECKLESS HOMICIDE, USE OF A DANGEROUS WEAPON
COUNT 2: FIRST-DEGREE RECKLESSLY ENDANGERING SAFETY, USE OF A DANGEROUS WEAPON
COUNT 3: FIRST-DEGREE RECKLESSLY ENDANGERING SAFETY, USE OF A DANGEROUS WEAPON
COUNT 4: FIRST-DEGREE INTENTIONAL HOMICIDE, USE OF A DANGEROUS WEAPON
COUNT 5: ATTEMPTED FIRST-DEGREE INTENTIONAL HOMICIDE, USE OF A DANGEROUS WEAPON
COUNT 6: POSSESSION OF A DANGEROUS WEAPON BY A PERSON UNDER 18
COUNT 7: FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH AN EMERGENCY ORDER FROM STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT

COUNT 1: FIRST-DEGREE RECKLESS HOMICIDE, USE OF A DANGEROUS WEAPON

This felony charge is connected to the death of Joseph Rosenbaum
Reckless homicide differs from intentional homicide in that prosecutors aren't alleging Rittenhouse intended to murder Rosenbaum. Instead, they're alleging Rittenhouse caused Rosenbaum's death in circumstances showing an utter disregard for human life.
The charge is punishable by up to 60 years in prison. The dangerous weapon modifier carries an additional five years.

COUNT 2: FIRST-DEGREE RECKLESSLY ENDANGERING SAFETY, USE OF A DANGEROUS WEAPON

This felony charge is connected to the Rosenbaum shooting. McGinniss told investigators he was in the line of fire when Rittenhouse shot Rosenbaum. The charge is punishable by 12 1/2 years in prison. The weapons modifier carries an additional five years.

Prosecutors asked Schroeder to let the jury consider a second-degree version of this charge. The difference is that the second-degree version doesn't require a finding that Rittenhouse acted with utter disregard for human life. Schroeder said he was inclined to allow that instruction, though he didn't make a final ruling. The charge is punishable by up to 10 years in prison.

this is why prosecutors talked about FMJ versus hollowpoints

COUNT 3: FIRST-DEGREE RECKLESSLY ENDANGERING SAFETY, USE OF A DANGEROUS WEAPON

Video shows an unknown man leaping at Rittenhouse and trying to kick him seconds before Huber moves his skateboard toward him. Rittenhouse appears to fire two rounds at the man but apparently misses as the man runs away.

This charge is a felony punishable by 12 1/2 years in prison. The weapons modifier again would add up to five more years.

COUNT 4: FIRST-DEGREE INTENTIONAL HOMICIDE, USE OF A DANGEROUS WEAPON

This charge is connected to Anthony Huber's death

Intentional homicide means just that — a person killed someone and meant to do it.

The count carries a mandatory life sentence. The weapons modifier would add up to five years.

Prosecutors asked Schroeder to give the jury the option of second-degree intentional homicide, first-degree reckless homicide and second-degree reckless homicide in Huber's death. The defense objected only to the second-degree reckless homicide charge, and Schroeder said he “embraced” that argument.

Second-degree intentional homicide is a fallback charge when a defendant believed he was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that it was necessary to use force — but either belief was unreasonable. It's punishable by up to 60 years in prison.

The first-degree reckless homicide charge sought in Huber's death matches an original charge in Rosenbaum's death — it would require jurors to decide that Rittenhouse caused Huber's death with an utter disregard for human life — and is punishable by up to 60 years in prison.



COUNT 5: ATTEMPTED FIRST-DEGREE INTENTIONAL HOMICIDE, USE OF A DANGEROUS WEAPON

This is the charge for Rittenhouse shooting Gaige Grosskreutz in the arm
The charge carries a maximum sentence of 60 years. The weapons modifier would add up to five more years.

Prosecutors asked that the jury be allowed to consider lesser counts in the Grosskreutz shooting: second-degree attempted intentional homicide, first-degree reckless endangerment and second-degree reckless endangerment. Defense attorneys didn't oppose the first, but did oppose adding the reckless endangerment counts. Schroeder didn't rule but said he was inclined to side with prosecutors.

The possible punishment for attempted second-degree intentional homicide is 30 years.



COUNT 6: POSSESSION OF A DANGEROUS WEAPON BY A PERSON UNDER 18

Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-style semi-automatic rifle. He was 17 years old on the night of the shootings. Wisconsin law prohibits minors from possessing firearms except for hunting. It was not clear on Friday what Schroeder intends to tell jurors about that charge.

The charge is a misdemeanor punishable by up to nine months behind bars.

COUNT 7: FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH AN EMERGENCY ORDER FROM STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Rittenhouse was charged with being out on the streets after an 8 p.m. curfew imposed by the city, a minor offense that carries a fine of up to $200. Judge Bruce Schroeder dismissed the charge during the second week of trial after the defense argued that prosecutors hadn't offered enough evidence to prove it.

quote:

Originally posted by lastmanstanding:
My guess he's going to prison.

On which charge? There's a gun charge, right? That's the only possibility in a rational world. What's the max sentence on the gun charge?

ETA: Dang, never mind. Thanks SDY!

quote:

Originally posted by SigSentry:
^ as stated before. Lesser charges give the jury an opportunity to agree where more punitive charges may be harder to have unanimous agreement and lead to a mistrial or hung jury if there are holdouts.

Not an attorney and did not stay at a Holiday Inn last night, 'but', this is horse shit. Send the jury off to deliberate the murder charges. End of discussion. Sending them off with a GD cop out is massively stupid. If the jury comes back with a guilty verdict on the murder charges, the defense always has the option to appeal. Giving the jury a way to simply cop out to some BS lesser charge is criminal stupidity. KR's attorneys need to grow a sack and stand on their defense.