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

  • 🔧 At about Midnight EST I am going to completely fuck up the site trying to fix something.

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.
moonman1488 said:
Classic MSM playbook, blatantly and knowingly lie about shit and if someone calls you out just issue muh corrections (that nobody who saw the original lie will see) and everything is fine.
Click to expand...

There really needs to be a law addressing this.

A paper can wholesale fabricate something, put it on the front page, and ruin lives. Three or four days later, issue a correction smaller than a postage stamp and bury it in the obits or stock numbers section.

No, bitch. They should be mandated by law to issue a correction with mandated parameters. Size of correction, placed PROMINENTLY on the front page, or prominently on the front page of their website. Mandated size, mandated standards for what should go into the lead. Maybe even mandate a side-by-side including the original story.

Imagine if Rolling Stone was made to do that with their rape thing, or Gawker with Hulk Hogan...
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: Divine right to rule, spiritofamermaid, Isaac Clarke and 18 others
RomanesEuntDomus said:
Yeah right. The armchair attorneys on the cheap ranks gave their 2 cents how they'd tackle this trial of nationwide attention. How could I ever disregard the input of random Kiwis and doubt their juristic expertise, when they shout HURR WHY NO OBJECT :story:


I don't think that's how that works tbh. When you tell someone "the even took place within less than a second", they don't go "Oh, what is this 'second' he speaks of, that is a concept entirely alien to me and therefore I assume it's a reasonable amount of time to make various life-and-death decisions."
As I said: I doubt it adds much merit to a point already well established. It's exactly what Binger did, reiterating a point until it became a dead horse asking to be processed into glue.
Click to expand...
You asked for examples and got them, but you can go on a tangent if you wish.

Let me explain the concept of an exclamation point. The exact amount of time is not felt when you break something down in detail. Yes, it has a ton of benefits and should be done first. Because it lets the jury know even more. You then play it at full speed, showing how fast it was to the jury. You then harken back to it briefly, going "everything i explained, all the time it took to explain, happened that fast".

And it is viscerally felt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spiritofamermaid, Yamma Damma, IAmNotAlpharius and 1 other person
IamnottheNSA said:
Top 10 Best Anime Crossovers
Click to expand...
6AFFD521-F5F9-4C59-9B02-3440FA2D4A5D.jpeg
 
  • Like
  • Feels
  • Agree
Reactions: spiritofamermaid, LurkNoMore, The Elusive Earl and 57 others
Gehenna said:
You asked for examples and got them, but you can go on a tangent if you wish.

Let me explain the concept of an exclamation point. The exact amount of time is not felt when you break something down in detail. Yes, it has a ton of benefits and should be done first. Because it lets the jury know even more. You then play it at full speed, showing how fast it was to the jury. You then harken back to it briefly, going "everything i explained, all the time it took to explain, happened that fast".

And it is viscerally felt.
Click to expand...
Well, I disagree. So?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back