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

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.

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.
this is the most unlikely outcome of them all.

if the jury says guilty then there is no way the judge throws out their verdict, ESPECIALLY not with prejudice. at best he will point out that there was prosecutorial misconduct which can be challenged on appeal, and that's the end of his involvement in the case.
100% this. Schroeder was a judge in my case. He's a PUSSY.
 
1637320462689.png

Some Huber mugshots.
 
I'm not sure why some of you are going to the mat that this isn't a Karen. We know the foreman is a woman. We know the person who asked to take the instructions home was a woman (probably her). We saw the note she wrote to the judge and the imperious tone. We heard a tip that there's one or two holdouts against acquittal. And we also know this should have been a few hours deliberation at most.

If they're speculating it's based on some solid assumptions. I will accept it because it's entertaining but also probabable.
That "imperious tone" is being read into it, but I could just as easily argue it was very polite and friendly.
 
Courtesy of @zachs fair , we have the notes https://kiwifarms.net/threads/kyle-rittenhouse-legal-proceedings.103034/post-10502555

Now, basic thing for any evidence, the more interpretations and further apart said interpretations are, the less reliable something is. So if I can get two separate interpretations of a piece of evidence with diametrically opposed readings... its useless by itself. So, can we do that with this? Yes!

Starting on the first note: "Can we have..." this indicates passiveness, a desire to please. It's also worded politely, not as a demand but as a request. The lack of punctuation would indicate hesitancy, insecurity of how to phrase something,

Second note: Already had one request, now for the others. Still no punctuation but more forceful. The writer feels they are more used to their role, they have grown into it.

Third note: Two writes, but the main one remains consistent. Continues to be questions, finally has punctuation showing an increased familiarity with the role but questions continue to be polite, and even supremely differential with caring about what the judge needs to know. This shows a lack of self-centeredness.

Fourth note: Second one is still questioning, no demands, no imperiousness. First is a clear issue, but notably, it is the clearest example of grammatical incorrectness. This shows a lack of college education as the writing level is around middle-high school. We can deduce the writer has not been to college.

Fifth note: "Please prepare" Pleading, quiet, gentle. They want it but want to make sure that its clearly a request not a demand. This person is overly polite, if anything. it even makes sure the judge knows he will be forwarned to avoid imposition.


From this, I conclude this person is most likely a mid-western mother, likely married, and who has never been to college. She probably has a working-class background given the strong deference to authority and therefore is likely a gun owner.

The most ideal group for Rittenhouse.



And just like that the idea this proves it's a Karen just dies. We now have two equally legitimate conclusions from it, with diametrically opposed conclusions. This is why handwriting analysis is bullshit.
 
Last edited:
Unless there's like 4k video of the defendant raping a baby and you can see the persons face clearly and they shout out "My name is John Smith and I'm raping a toddler!" I pretty much agree. This shitshow has somehow made prosecutors jump above politicians, glowies, and pedos in my "groups that should be fed into a woodchipper feet first" list.
Please don't leave out lying MSM journalists in that lineup. Without them Clown World is impossible.
That "imperious tone" is being read into it, but I could just as easily argue it was very polite and friendly.
I agree. To me it simply reads as formal, polite and direct. The classic corporate request to a colleague you don't have an already jovial relationship with or your communication will be observed. The number of people jumping to conclusions over it is wild, but it's just something to discuss in the lull.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back