These aren't defense lawyers though, and the evidence is cut and clear that Kyle committed no crime. These are state prosecutors and they aren't actually prosecuting ANY of the real crimes committed through these riots but yet are trying hang Kyle.
This is state sanctioned persecution and it's disgusting.
So after hearing your explanation, I agree that no matter the crime everyone deserves representation to defend themselves but I'm not on the same page this is part of the job. They have obviously discarded any objectivity to abuse their power here, not even remotely similar to a defense attorney representing a defendant.
Again, everything you said there is emotion and not law.
You said, "These are state prosecutors and they aren't actually prosecuting ANY of the real crimes committed through these riots but yet are trying hang Kyle."
That's like taking your car to a mechanic and some guy standing there says, "Why are you fixing your car, there are potholes in all the roads!!!"
It doesn't matter what you think about it being, "state sanctioned persecution," because it's how the law works. Trials are for one crime/case at a time and everything outside of the courtroom doesn't matter - that includes your opinions.
That being said, I totally agree with you and all of your points, it's just not how law works. The Rittenhouse case is an interesting one because there is some crimes there to debate and look at. People are dead and it's important to figure out how they got there. One of the guys who was shot was legally armed while the minor was not. There's a bunch of facts to sort out and show to a jury and see what happens.
We are obviously biased because we side with Rittenhouse and we are smarter and know what the case is really about. But from the other side, I can see how someone hears shooting and looks over and sees a teenager with an AR-15 and thinks an active shooter situation is happening.
It's a case worth trying for sure, and I guarantee Kyle will come out on top in the end after looking through the evidence and hearing the testimonies.
I respectfully disagree with you. The evidence shows these people were not intervening in an active shooter case but rather targeting Kyle.
The selective prosecution from the state to pursue convicting Kyle but none of the other dangerous criminals this night shows a gross abuse of power and I still think these prosecutors should not be practicing in the future.
These aren't defense lawyers though, and the evidence is cut and clear that Kyle committed no crime. These are state prosecutors and they aren't actually prosecuting ANY of the real crimes committed through these riots but yet are trying hang Kyle.
This is state sanctioned persecution and it's disgusting.
So after hearing your explanation, I agree that no matter the crime everyone deserves representation to defend themselves but I'm not on the same page this is part of the job. They have obviously discarded any objectivity to abuse their power here, not even remotely similar to a defense attorney representing a defendant.
Again, everything you said there is emotion and not law.
You said, "These are state prosecutors and they aren't actually prosecuting ANY of the real crimes committed through these riots but yet are trying hang Kyle."
That's like taking your car to a mechanic and some guy standing there says, "Why are you fixing your car, there are potholes in all the roads!!!"
It doesn't matter what you think about it being, "state sanctioned persecution," because it's how the law works. Trials are for one crime/case at a time and everything outside of the courtroom doesn't matter - that includes your opinions.
That being said, I totally agree with you and all of your points, it's just not how law works. The Rittenhouse case is an interesting one because there is some crimes there to debate and look at. People are dead and it's important to figure out how they got there. One of the guys who was shot was legally armed while the minor was not. There's a bunch of facts to sort out and show to a jury and see what happens.
We are obviously biased because we side with Rittenhouse and we are smarter and know what the case is really about. But from the other side, I can see how someone hears shooting and looks over and sees a teenager with an AR-15 and thinks an active shooter situation is happening.
It's a case worth trying for sure, and I guarantee Kyle will come out on top in the end after looking through the evidence and hearing the testimonies.
I respectfully disagree with you. The evidence shows these people were not intervening in an active shooter case but rather targeting Kyle.
The selective prosecution from the state to pursue convicting Kyle but none of the other dangerous criminals this night shows a gross abuse of power and I still think these prosecutors should not be practicing in the future.
I totally get where you're coming from, and I do actually agree with you. But, I'm stating how the law works, not how we want things to work.
For sure, appreciate your insight.