Kyle Rittenhouse Legal Proceedings - Come for the trial, stay for….

What do you think will happen?

  • Guilty on all charges

    Votes: 282 8.8%
  • Full Acquittal

    Votes: 1,077 33.7%
  • Mistral

    Votes: 264 8.3%
  • Mixture of verdicts

    Votes: 479 15.0%
  • Minecraft

    Votes: 213 6.7%
  • Roblox

    Votes: 132 4.1%
  • Runescape

    Votes: 203 6.3%
  • Somehow Guilty Of Two Mutually Exclusive Actions

    Votes: 514 16.1%
  • KYLE WILL SUBMIT TO BBC

    Votes: 35 1.1%

  • Total voters
    3,199
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm going to make a prediction. They're going to use this lady to say Rosenbaum's DNA wasn't on Kyle's rifle.
And it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. From my understanding so far, the defense never said Rosenbaum managed to grab the gun; a witness from the other day said Rosenbaum lunged for the gun, but Kyle maneuvered the gun away and then shot him. The prosecution is attempting to deflect by attacking a strawman.
 
Wait a minute now she's never said if they've tested it to see if there was a mixture of Kyle Rittenhouse and those other two people's DNA's
 
I don't see what value that adds. If someone swings at me with a punch and misses, it's still grounds for retaliation.

Also, this bitch is saying this shit in the most annoying way
Rosey grabbing the gun is the most nebulous part of the prosecution, it's the one thing that doesn't really have any definitive video evidence one way or the other and forms the lynchpin of the entire prosecution since if Kyle kills Rosey unlawfully everything else becomes a mob of people trying to apprehend a dangerous and unhinged murderer rather than further self-defense.

EDIT: Nebulous isn't quite the right word, it's more open to interpretation.
 
Why do they have DNA analysis ?

Even though it's not really in dispute, the prosecution still has the burden of proof on all aspects of the crime charged. So they want to put into evidence the fact that Kyle was in possession of the rifle (remember, he's charged for unlawful possession of the rifle as well). The video is enough, in my opinion, but if they want to waste the jury's time with the DNA evidence, sure, go ahead.

As others have speculated, they will probably argue that Rosenbaum's DNA wasn't on the gun, which is dumb because no one has testified that he actually grabbed it (never mind that it's possible for someone to touch a gun barrel and leave no DNA behind).
 
Why the fuck is fatty even up there? We have fucking videos, and her testimony is basically just saying "our soyience sucks and we're only _____% sure where the videos are 100% sure."

Edit:
If anything this opens up the defense to attacking on why they took so long to search for brass.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wopirish and waffle
At least some people on the jury are not going to understand the weird abstract probability language that she's using. It's very obtuse to people who don't have a background in science or mathematics. The DA isn't doing a very good job of clearing it up either, seems like he's going into minutiae instead of boiling it down in a way that normal people can quickly understand.

Probably just doing a scumbag move to muddy the water.
 
At least some people one the jury are not going to understand the weird abstract probability language that she's using. It's very obtuse to people who don't have a background in science or mathematics. The DA isn't doing a very good job of clearing it up either, seems like he's going into minutiae instead of boiling it down in a way that normal people can quickly understand.

Probably just doing a scumbag move to muddy the water.
If the judge was annoyed from boredom yesterday, I can only imagine how he feels right now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back