SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  The Lounge    Good news for a change! Judge tells prosecutor to pound sand in Rittenhouse case
Page 1 ... 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 ... 93
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Good news for a change! Judge tells prosecutor to pound sand in Rittenhouse case Login/Join 
Member
Picture of lkdr1989
posted Hide Post




...let him who has no sword sell his robe and buy one. Luke 22:35-36 NAV

"Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves; so be shrewd as serpents and innocent as doves." Matthew 10:16 NASV
 
Posts: 4336 | Location: Valley, Oregon | Registered: June 03, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Yew got a spider
on yo head
Picture of DoctorSolo
posted Hide Post
We have a new litmus test guys!

So far, everyone I see pissed about this is a STUPID ASSHOLE.
 
Posts: 5153 | Location: Colorado Springs | Registered: April 12, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Membership has its privileges
Picture of P-220
posted Hide Post
God Bless you Kyle.

MSM go fuck yourself!


Niech Zyje P-220

Steve
 
Posts: 36843 | Location: 45174 | Registered: December 09, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Ammoholic
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by kkina:
quote:
Now that he's beaten the criminal charges does that give him immunity from civil charges?

It didn't protect O.J., so no.

Wouldn’t that be a state law thing. I believe there are some states (not Kommiefornia) where if you are found not guilty criminally you are shielded from civil liability. No idea what WI law is on this.
 
Posts: 6922 | Location: Lost, but making time. | Registered: February 23, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Lost
Picture of kkina
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by slosig:
quote:
Originally posted by kkina:
quote:
Now that he's beaten the criminal charges does that give him immunity from civil charges?

It didn't protect O.J., so no.

Wouldn’t that be a state law thing. I believe there are some states (not Kommiefornia) where if you are found not guilty criminally you are shielded from civil liability. No idea what WI law is on this.

That I don't know. I don't even play a lawyer on tv.



ACCU-STRUT FOR MINI-14
"First, Eyes."
 
Posts: 16378 | Location: SF Bay Area | Registered: December 11, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Yew got a spider
on yo head
Picture of DoctorSolo
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by kkina:
quote:
Originally posted by slosig:
quote:
Originally posted by kkina:
quote:
Now that he's beaten the criminal charges does that give him immunity from civil charges?

It didn't protect O.J., so no.

Wouldn’t that be a state law thing. I believe there are some states (not Kommiefornia) where if you are found not guilty criminally you are shielded from civil liability. No idea what WI law is on this.

That I don't know. I don't even play a lawyer on tv.


That's actually true and many of these new CCW "attorneys" dont want you to know.

OJ murdered an unarmed woman and her boyfriend over marital strife.

Kyle defended businesses from career criminals who caused an obvious and immediate threat to his own life, and in the end they fucked with the wrong guy.

You ok? Do I need to draw a picture to clarify the self-defense, justified deadly-force distinction here?
 
Posts: 5153 | Location: Colorado Springs | Registered: April 12, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Baroque Bloke
Picture of Pipe Smoker
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by P-220:
God Bless you Kyle.

MSM go fuck yourself!

Yes indeed. It’s been a GOOD day!

President Trump liked it too. Buck Fiden gritted his teeth.



Serious about crackers
 
Posts: 8995 | Location: San Diego | Registered: July 26, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Oh stewardess,
I speak jive.
Picture of 46and2
posted Hide Post
 
Posts: 25613 | Registered: March 12, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Funny Man
Picture of TXJIM
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by P220 Smudge:
quote:
Originally posted by 2PAK:
The guy in biggest world of Sh*t, is the one who purchased the rifle for KR. That's a big federal charge especially if they want to make an example of you, which they will want to do.


I think you think it's a straw purchase. That's not what happened here. If there's a riot in my town and it's bad enough I'm arming the neighbors who don't have a rifle or shotguns, that's a whole other scenario.


On the stand, under oath, Kyle stated that he gave another person money to buy the gun for him to use and they could do a private transfer after he turned 18. This was after going shooting with the friend and him wanting a gun of his own. It happed well before the riots. So, the gun was actually Kyle’s gun in his mind at least. He bought it through a straw purchase. It was a cringe moment in the testimony, I commented on it when it happened earlier in this thread at the top of page 16.


______________________________
“I'd like to know why well-educated idiots keep apologizing for lazy and complaining people who think the world owes them a living.”
― John Wayne
 
Posts: 7093 | Location: Austin, TX | Registered: June 29, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Funny Man
Picture of TXJIM
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by parabellum:
quote:
Originally posted by 2PAK:
The guy in biggest world of Sh*t, is the one who purchased the rifle for KR. That's a big federal charge especially if they want to make an example of you, which they will want to do.
What are you talking about?


Kyle testified that he wanted a gun after going shooting with a friend at some time prior to the riots. He later asked the friend to buy him a gun and keep it for him to use with the plan to transfer it privately after Kyle turned 18. He said he gave the friend the money to buy the AR he eventually used that night.


______________________________
“I'd like to know why well-educated idiots keep apologizing for lazy and complaining people who think the world owes them a living.”
― John Wayne
 
Posts: 7093 | Location: Austin, TX | Registered: June 29, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by kkina:
quote:
Now that he's beaten the criminal charges does that give him immunity from civil charges?

It didn't protect O.J., so no.



Some states with stand your ground laws exempt the shooter from civil lawsuits if the shooting was justified and no conviction of any criminal charges.
 
Posts: 829 | Location: Southern NH | Registered: October 11, 2020Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of mcrimm
posted Hide Post
“Nothing wrong with shooting...as long as the right people get shot.”
― Clint Eastwood



I'm sorry if I hurt you feelings when I called you stupid - I thought you already knew - Unknown
...................................
When you have no future, you live in the past. " Sycamore Row" by John Grisham
 
Posts: 4238 | Location: Saddlebrooke, Arizona | Registered: December 24, 2013Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Be not wise in
thine own eyes
Picture of kimber1911
posted Hide Post



“We’re in a situation where we have put together, and you guys did it for our administration…President Obama’s administration before this. We have put together, I think, the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics,”
Pres. Select, Joe Biden

“Let’s go, Brandon” Kelli Stavast, 2 Oct. 2021
 
Posts: 5267 | Location: USA | Registered: December 05, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Muzzle flash
aficionado
Picture of flashguy
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by P220 Smudge:
quote:
Originally posted by 2PAK:
The guy in biggest world of Sh*t, is the one who purchased the rifle for KR. That's a big federal charge especially if they want to make an example of you, which they will want to do.


I think you think it's a straw purchase. That's not what happened here. If there's a riot in my town and it's bad enough I'm arming the neighbors who don't have a rifle or shotguns, that's a whole other scenario.
I'm with you! I have sufficient arms that I can easily equip a number of neighbors, should the need arise. However, since this is Texas, I doubt that it would be necessary--most of them probably already have firearms in their homes.

flashguy




Texan by choice, not accident of birth
 
Posts: 27902 | Location: Dallas, TX | Registered: May 08, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
A Grateful American
Picture of sigmonkey
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by TXJIM:...Kyle testified that he wanted a gun after going shooting with a friend at some time prior to the riots. He later asked the friend to buy him a gun and keep it for him to use with the plan to transfer it privately after Kyle turned 18. He said he gave the friend the money to buy the AR he eventually used that night.


Kyle was not the "ultimate possessor".

As I understand the testimony and other facts, the "person" (Dominique Black) purchased the firearm, and maintained lawful possession of the firearm, in Wisconsin. Kyle and he agreed that the gun would be transferred to Kyle upon his 18th birthday.

Kyle travelled from Illinois to Wisconsin and picked up the rifle, and had it in his immediate possession the night of the Riots/shooting.

That does not mean he was in "absolute" possession" as it was at that time a "borrowed" firearm that was owned/possessed in the state of Wisconsin by Dominique Black.

I do not see a "straw purchase", but I do understand how someone might make the wrong assumption that it was.

If Kyle gave Dominique the money and Dominique made the purchase and then handed the firearm over to Kyle and Kyle maintained "absolute" possession, it would then be both a "straw purchase" and a violation of transporting a weapon across state line from Wisconsin to Illinois as a permanent possession by Kyle. (which did not happen)




"the meaning of life, is to give life meaning" Ani Yehudi אני יהודי Le'olam lo shuv לעולם לא שוב!
 
Posts: 43916 | Location: ...... I am thrice divorced, and I live in a van DOWN BY THE RIVER!!! (in Arkansas) | Registered: December 20, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Lost
Picture of kkina
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Hildur:
quote:
Originally posted by kkina:
quote:
Now that he's beaten the criminal charges does that give him immunity from civil charges?

It didn't protect O.J., so no.



Some states with stand your ground laws exempt the shooter from civil lawsuits if the shooting was justified and no conviction of any criminal charges.

Ah, thank you for the info. That's exactly why I didn't want to pose as a lawyer. Wink



ACCU-STRUT FOR MINI-14
"First, Eyes."
 
Posts: 16378 | Location: SF Bay Area | Registered: December 11, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Lost
Picture of kkina
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by DoctorSolo:
quote:
Originally posted by kkina:
quote:
Originally posted by slosig:
quote:
Originally posted by kkina:
quote:
Now that he's beaten the criminal charges does that give him immunity from civil charges?

It didn't protect O.J., so no.

Wouldn’t that be a state law thing. I believe there are some states (not Kommiefornia) where if you are found not guilty criminally you are shielded from civil liability. No idea what WI law is on this.

That I don't know. I don't even play a lawyer on tv.


That's actually true and many of these new CCW "attorneys" dont want you to know.

OJ murdered an unarmed woman and her boyfriend over marital strife.

Kyle defended businesses from career criminals who caused an obvious and immediate threat to his own life, and in the end they fucked with the wrong guy.

You ok? Do I need to draw a picture to clarify the self-defense, justified deadly-force distinction here?

Well, I understand the difference in those cases, but my only original point was that winning a criminal case does not necessarily protect you from civil proceedings. And as Hildur pointed out, the situation varies on a state basis.



ACCU-STRUT FOR MINI-14
"First, Eyes."
 
Posts: 16378 | Location: SF Bay Area | Registered: December 11, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Funny Man
Picture of TXJIM
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by sigmonkey:
quote:
Originally posted by TXJIM:...Kyle testified that he wanted a gun after going shooting with a friend at some time prior to the riots. He later asked the friend to buy him a gun and keep it for him to use with the plan to transfer it privately after Kyle turned 18. He said he gave the friend the money to buy the AR he eventually used that night.


Kyle was not the "ultimate possessor".

As I understand the testimony and other facts, the "person" (Dominique Black) purchased the firearm, and maintained lawful possession of the firearm, in Wisconsin. Kyle and he agreed that the gun would be transferred to Kyle upon his 18th birthday.

Kyle travelled from Illinois to Wisconsin and picked up the rifle, and had it in his immediate possession the night of the Riots/shooting.

That does not mean he was in "absolute" possession" as it was at that time a "borrowed" firearm that was owned/possessed in the state of Wisconsin by Dominique Black.

I do not see a "straw purchase", but I do understand how someone might make the wrong assumption that it was.

If Kyle gave Dominique the money and Dominique made the purchase and then handed the firearm over to Kyle and Kyle maintained "absolute" possession, it would then be both a "straw purchase" and a violation of transporting a weapon across state line from Wisconsin to Illinois as a permanent possession by Kyle. (which did not happen)


I have no problem admitting that I have no depth in this area. I can say for sure that I would not want to be in a position to defend making that purchase. If an underage friend approached me to buy a firearm on their behalf and hold it until they were old enough to buy it themselves I would decline.

It seems like a lie on question 11 if the purchaser was buying on Kyles behalf even if he was going to maintain possession in the short term. Maybe not technically a straw purchase but it waddles and quacks from where I sit…


______________________________
“I'd like to know why well-educated idiots keep apologizing for lazy and complaining people who think the world owes them a living.”
― John Wayne
 
Posts: 7093 | Location: Austin, TX | Registered: June 29, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Rumors of my death
are greatly exaggerated
Picture of coloradohunter44
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by RichardC:
'Colin Kaepernick says Rittenhouse verdict 'validates the need to abolish our current system'

Colin Kaepernick responded to the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict in a tweet on Friday, stating that "this only further validates the need to abolish our current system."
Colin Kaepernick responded to the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict on Friday night, stating that the decision validated "the terroristic acts of a white supremacist."

"This only further validates the need to abolish our current system. White supremacy cannot be reformed," he tweeted
_____________________________________________



'New York City Mayor-Elect Eric Adams on Kyle Rittenhouse verdict: 'We should not be shocked'

New York City Mayor-Elect Eric Adams released a statement Friday night responding to the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict, which determined Rittenhouse is not guilty on all charges.

Eric Adams tweeted "We should not be shocked. We should be focused on swift and righteous action."'

Maybe the EFF Bee Eye should be investigating these domestic terrorist threats.

https://www.foxnews.com/live-n...ttenhouse-trial-jury


Congrats to Kyle and those who defended him. To the the rest of the lame street fuckers etc. No ones cares about anything you soy faced bitches have to say. Go drop dead.



"Someday I hope to be half the man my bird-dog thinks I am."

FBLM LGB!
 
Posts: 10911 | Location: Commirado | Registered: July 23, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Told cops where to go for over 29 years…
Picture of 911Boss
posted Hide Post
Toasting Justice tonight, this one is for you Kyle!







What part of "...Shall not be infringed" don't you understand???


 
Posts: 10948 | Location: Western WA state for just a few more years... | Registered: February 17, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 ... 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 ... 93 
 

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  The Lounge    Good news for a change! Judge tells prosecutor to pound sand in Rittenhouse case

© SIGforum 2024