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

[DelusionTree]

This is for mistrial, and especially for mistrial with prejudice, the defense needs to show evidence of prosecution misconduct.

Mistrials have been granted for less when it comes to insinuating about a defendant's 5th, or at least that's what a number of lawyers claim.

 

[W00K #17]

Can someone post the pic of binger and his boyfriend again? I can't find it now

 

[Lodoss Warrior]

View attachment 2731065

Odd choice. Could mean three things, from my perspective:

1) They’re confident it’ll go their way.

2) They don’t like the idea of having to retry the case.

3). They’re so egomaniacal that admitting to errors of conscience is out of the question for them.

We’ll see... rationally, if I were going-ho in convicting Kyle, I’d probably agree and wait for the MSM to fan the flames a bit. Then I’d be a question of finding which charge to throw at him.

 

[namelesstacotruck]

So is there like, a set amount of time you need to go before being able to declare a hung jury?

If I was stuck in a room with some liberal 40 year old white woman with one of those lame choppy haircuts and a pussy that smells like wet bread barking at me about how Kyle deserves to fry for being a white supremacist, I'd just tell her "okay, I'm never changing my mind on this and clearly you aren't, go declare a hung jury." Like, that seems like a pretty obvious way to cut that Gordian knot and get back to my life.

What's stopping the others from doing this? Do they just want an acquittal and not a mistrial? Do they want to keep getting free food? Or is there some rule I don't know about?

If its the opposite and its a kyle ng holdout they will be super careful to not get rotated. Pointing out that yes its you is what is causing the hang means they might figure out a way to swap you with an alternate.

Karen wont ever admit she wont ever change her mind. Shes the reasonable one.

 

[Particle Bored]

The non-commented streams are perhaps the ideal... but without someone to give legal context, the claptrap spouted by the prosecution and the ineptitude of the defense would be lost to the populace.

Yesterday I wanted to see the Pakman v Destiny argument, but the only one I found at the time was some sped Pakman fan that clipped it and was doing commentary.

This guy claimed to have watched the whole trial, I'm guessing on Pakman's channel (which from the bit FudgePak's trial coverage I saw was him staring silently for five minutes at a time before dropping some irrelevant NPC cold take).

This guy: "Zooming isn't manipulating the image. If the defense says zooming manipulates the picture, the burden of proof is on them to prove that it does, because innocent until proven guilty."

 

[Bumbling Fat Moron]

Richards: Tommy Lee Jones -

View attachment 2731047

Fatboy: Orrin Bach -

View attachment 2731045

Agent 47: Sir Ben (Sexy Beast) Kingsley -

View attachment 2731050

Binger: Christian Bale -

View attachment 2731055

Rosenbong: Michael Chiklis -

View attachment 2731059

Judge Cookie: Richard Dreyfuss -

View attachment 2731062

Great Cross: Jared Leto -

View attachment 2731063

Huber: Simon Helberg -

View attachment 2731064

Kenosha Kid: Clint Eastwood -

View attachment 2731069

>Bale as fluffy boy
Could he pull off the faggotry? I think he's too much of a man to do it, but he's a real good actor.
@Glowie Hunter Art Bell, Other than more of the Peanut Gallery going insane with boredom and resorting to tarot card reading? Nothing, really.

 

[Kermit Jizz]

The defense has to prove the elements of prosecutorial misconduct are there, the state saying "no u" basically means it has to be properly ajourned.

Just off the top of my head we know they fucked up with the evidence and that shit Binger pulled regarding the 5th amendment. Is that not poof enough or are they just being clowns?

 

[Ralph Barnhardt]

Busy day guys, what have i missed?

Nothing.

 

[Gehenna]

He’s also cited

Odd choice. Could mean three things, from my perspective:

1) They’re confident it’ll go their way.

2) They don’t like the idea of having to retry the case.

3). They’re so egomaniacal that admitting to errors of conscience is out of the question for them.

We’ll see... rationally, if I were going-ho in convicting Kyle, I’d probably agree and wait for the MSM to fan the flames a bit. Then I’d be a question of finding which charge to throw at him.

This motion would be with prejudice.

 

[aussiejinjo]

why does everyone care so much about the opinions of youtube lawyer 'experts' who clearly just wildly speculate/make shit up for clicks

 

[kūhaku]

Richards: Tommy Lee Jones -

View attachment 2731047

Fatboy: Orrin Bach -

View attachment 2731045

Agent 47: Sir Ben (Sexy Beast) Kingsley -

View attachment 2731050

Binger: Christian Bale -

View attachment 2731055

Rosenbong: Michael Chiklis -

View attachment 2731059

Judge Cookie: Richard Dreyfuss -

View attachment 2731062

Great Cross: Jared Leto -

View attachment 2731063

Huber: Simon Helberg -

View attachment 2731064

Kenosha Kid: Clint Eastwood -

View attachment 2731069

I know bale really looks the part, but poor bale. I wouldn’t want such a great actor to be disgraced by playing the role of Binger

 

[unfer]

View attachment 2731051
Tweet
View attachment 2731053

This madman

Holy shit, it's Sargon's dad! He black y'all

 

[Karl der Grosse]

Radical chic - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Technically an essay, not a book. But I am not the one citing it.

I always loved Mau-Mauing The Flak Catchers, myself. That one scene he describes where the Samoans roll into the city functionary's office and start intimidating him is one of the funniest scenes ever set down in English.

 

[murdered meat bag]

Yes, I'm the whackiest; there's no question I can dance

Dance in my pants and in your face!

im sure both sides can enjoy cb4

 

[Lobo]

 

[LieutenantRasczak]

Lol if you saw my print handwriting y'all would probably assume I was a man.

Lol faggot

 

[Lodoss Warrior]

This motion would be with prejudice.

Ah, right. Skimmed over the written motion part.

I’d probably argue for the without prejudice motion from yesterday.

 

[Bumbling Fat Moron]

why does everyone care so much about the opinions of youtube lawyer 'experts' who clearly just wildly speculate/make shit up for clicks

Umm, Cause they're EXPERTS??? Don't be like that sweaty.

 

[Gehenna]

There is an admission! Lets hope the woman is whoever is holding things up, and this gets to the judge.

 

[aussiejinjo]

that is super ambiguous though

she could just be saying its INSANE bc of how much there is and how much media is swarming around