Kyle Rittenhouse trial- judge goes OFF on scumbag prosecution team
(files.catbox.moe)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (165)
sorted by:
"Commenting on the defendant's post-arrest silence." He started with that when he spoke to the jury?
That is NOT allowed in a US court. 5th Amendment is a RIGHT, not something to be implied as any sort of guilt.
Should be immediate mistrial WITH PREJUDICE (meaning they can't prosecute again), and prosecutor should be charged with felony violation of rights.
Courts are corrupt and look the other way on this sort of thing. Good that the judge brought it up, but ... DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
Defense has asked for a mistrial with prejudice to be declared. The judge has only taken that motion under advisement.
Watch again. Defense attorney says, "Next time it happens ..."
Tricky. And weak.
Judges are just referees, he can't direct the case just preside over it. For him to put himself into the parties place would be practicing law from the bench. Same issue with Sullivan playing prosecutor over Flynn's trial, when he was the presiding Judge. The defense has to make the plays and the Judge makes decisions based on Court Procedure and Law. I love all you Anons but the lack of understanding surrounding our own God Given structures for civil and criminal Justice pains me, I blame our overlords who wish to rule us instead of educate us.
Bottom line: The defense has to request to Judge to direct the case some way or the other, then things play out. The defense likely (IMHO) isn't pushing the issues other than to call them out, because they simply want to get a not guilty verdict instead of dragging Kyle through this shit any longer with motions and bullshit side quests. Plus the State Prosecutors are only making asses out of themselves to the jury.
PSS: Not everyone here is one of us, hopefully anons are seeing the narrative network at work, they really do float down here :).
That's the way it's supposed to work, but they often take sides.
That's not the same. Sullivan flat out ignored the law (and he was clearly taking sides).
Right, but taking something "under advisement" is the opposite of making decisions. The defense attorney should file for hearing for a Motion to Dismiss or whatever they think the motion should be. Not doing so is malpractice.
Defense attorney says, "The next time it happens ..." and that means he is a pussy. He is not putting up the best defense possible.
I didn't even hear, "Objection!" Maybe he said it, but is this even something appealable? Defense attorney seems like he's dancing around the subject.
I only heard this clip, though. Maybe there's more to it.
Risky.
Kyle has been through massive psychological harm at this point. A few more hours to resolve the issue of reversible error and violation of the defendant's constitutional rights is worth a couple hours for a hearing on this specific issue, which also better preserves his rights on appeal, if necessary.
The judge is a pussy and doesn't want to make that decision. Too bad. Defense attorney should do it, anyway.
While they are doing that, they are also trying to cheat. That needs to be dealt with head-on.
Don't be so cryptic. You sound like the defense attorney.
If you are so knowledgeable, then it is up to you to educate.
Right. The judge can stop this farce... yet he's playing the exasperated not-in-control part very well. Why? My guess is he's dirty
Why was this person's post deleted? It made a lot of sense
fixed.