U.S. Riots of May 2020 over George Floyd and others - ITT: a bunch of faggots butthurt about worthless internet stickers

Status
Not open for further replies.
I may have missed this, but what was the legality of his possession of a firearm?

From the charging document:

Screenshot 2020-08-27 at 11.56.14 PM.png


The statute in question:

(2)
(a) Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.

(b) Except as provided in par. (c), any person who intentionally sells, loans or gives a dangerous weapon to a person under 18 years of age is guilty of a Class I felony.

(c) Whoever violates par. (b) is guilty of a Class H felony if the person under 18 years of age under par. (b) discharges the firearm and the discharge causes death to himself, herself or another.

(d) A person under 17 years of age who has violated this subsection is subject to the provisions of ch. 938 unless jurisdiction is waived under s. 938.18 or the person is subject to the jurisdiction of a court of criminal jurisdiction under s. 938.183.

(3)
(a) This section does not apply to a person under 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a dangerous weapon when the dangerous weapon is being used in target practice under the supervision of an adult or in a course of instruction in the traditional and proper use of the dangerous weapon under the supervision of an adult. This section does not apply to an adult who transfers a dangerous weapon to a person under 18 years of age for use only in target practice under the adult's supervision or in a course of instruction in the traditional and proper use of the dangerous weapon under the adult's supervision.

(b) This section does not apply to a person under 18 years of age who is a member of the armed forces or national guard and who possesses or is armed with a dangerous weapon in the line of duty. This section does not apply to an adult who is a member of the armed forces or national guard and who transfers a dangerous weapon to a person under 18 years of age in the line of duty.

(c) This section applies only to a person under 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the person is in violation of s. 941.28 or is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593. This section applies only to an adult who transfers a firearm to a person under 18 years of age if the person under 18 years of age is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593 or to an adult who is in violation of s. 941.28.

Included the other parts for completeness, but I think it's just 2.a and it looks cut and dry. Maybe there's an exception somewhere else. Nick Rekieta is covering the charging doc tonight, maybe he'll have an insight on it.

If Kyle gets off with just a misdemeanor and a $10k fine, I will laugh for days on end. I will become the most insufferable, taunting prick on social media the world has ever seen.
 
eh, I'm fine with all those 'appears'. A lot of it is speculation and should be determined in court if necessary.
Normally I'd say yes, as it's an adversarial system, but given their obviously deliberate failure to mention exculpatory evidence in their criminal complaint, it seems to add weight to the argument that they'll do whatever they can to get a conviction even if it bends or breaks the law. For someone arguing in favor of the defense, it certainly makes it easier to attack the prosecution's credibility.
I'm kind of confused where the other dead guy is in this clip. Clearly one of them is shot and then staggers a couple feet before dropping dead and the other one directly other looks like Lefty but where is the second dead guy in the clip?
Skateboard dude died in this clip. The crome dome was in an earlier clip.
 
I'm a little light on my lawsplaining but this seems like a massive overcharge. First degree must be proven with a motive and premeditated in a court of law, and the video clearly shows it was self defense, despite the narrative going around saying he showed up to "murder random protestors". What is the DA getting at here?
The DA is getting at a not guilty verdict, is what the DA is getting at here. The writeup of the charges even basically says, 'Welllll he was absolutely defending himself from retards but here's a first-degree murder charge anyways'. There's no way the DA wouldn't be aware that they set up a charge that can't possibly stand up in court. But if they didn't push for anything there'd be more riots.
 
From the charging document:

View attachment 1553261

The statute in question:



Included the other parts for completeness, but I think it's just 2.a and it looks cut and dry. Maybe there's an exception somewhere else. Nick Rekieta is covering the charging doc tonight, maybe he'll have an insight on it.

If Kyle gets off with just a misdemeanor and a $10k fine, I will laugh for days on end. I will become the most insufferable, taunting prick on social media the world has ever seen.
Be touched on it last night. 1:40:40 roughly.

 
  • Informative
Reactions: Harvey Danger
Old. Whatever. I finally caught up with the thread.
So what's the big deal for people about that? I live in a place where I used to travel 30 minutes for school every day. That's nothing. States each have their own jurisdictions and laws, sure, but state borders aren't some impermeable barrier like traveling to another country.
It's because they are big city people and think going more than a couple blocks from your home is a commute you only do for like work and shit. They have zero clue how things work in small town and rural America.

If the next town over is flooding. You grab your shovel and go over to fill sandbags. If there is a big windstrom you grab your chainsaw and clear the streets. Snow, shovel. And if they need to evacuate from some other disaster, you open your home. It's just what you do. Be neighborly and treat their community as your own. 20 miles and a state line isn't an excuse.

This kind of midwest eagle scout thinking is completely alien to them in their highly divided and stratified concrete hellscape.
 
I'm kinda wondering if there will be a mention of the fact that his attempt to surrender to the police is entirely absent from the criminal complaint. The video they cite shows this happening, but they don't mention it in the document. I could be dead wrong, but from what I've found, it seems like a failure to disclose exculpatory evidence in a criminal complaint constitutes a Brady Violation.

The complaint seems to indicate that this one of the videos that the DA's office is referencing which means they absolutely saw his attempt to surrender to law enforcement.

View attachment 1553186

Edit:
pages 4-5 seem to reference this video.
Brady has to do withholding exculpatory information from the defense, does it not? It is silent as to charging documents.
 
The charges against Kyle reek of pandering and desperation. The first degree murder with intent is flat out fucking retarded on a level that almost makes the McCloskey bullshit in St. Louis look competent by comparison. Personally, I think they drafted and filed this shit before realizing that the media had completely lost control of the narrative. We'll know just how shady these motherfuckers are if the arm guy walks away without being charged for being a felon in possession of an illegal firearm. I would also be curious if they actually recovered the hand gun, and if so, whether they bothered trying to match it with any bullets recovered near the car lot where the dickless diddler got domed.
The reaction in the last 24 hours feels like the state started the mobilization to crush the kid, got a call from people higher up demanding they immediately stop because they realized this could cause an actual death spiral into chaos, and now you're left with these charges and rioters still primed to pop off any second.

It slightly reminds me of the problem Germany had in WW1 where once they started mobilizing the generals told the Kasier that they couldn't stop because it would their military plans. In this case they are stopping and you are starting to see the logistical chaos of it.
 
Reminds me of learning how to sword fight and how newbies always aim to hit the sword instead of the actual person holding it. It’s a more immediate threat to our minds. But as the cliche goes. Guns don’t kill people, people do.


Guns don't kill people?

I don't fucking think so!


Guns don't kill people, rappers do!



 
Imagine unironically mourning over a pedophile and a woman beater.
That's the one thing that baffles me most. You'd think killing a racist pedophile and a guy who kept women falsely imprisoned would be the most progressive thing ever. If these people believed half the shit they claim, they'd be carrying this kid on their shoulders.
 
I can say I feel similarly. I don’t like either, but the lesser of two evils is still better right? I’m wondering if I should stock up on popcorn for after he election. IF the democrats lose and Trump is confirmed for a 2nd term, how bad is it going to be? What kind of tantrum will the left throw? I’m wondering if they will step it up from the riots this summer. Or maybe (I doubt it) they will actually realize why they lost and have a good hard think. But probably not.


I really do wonder at times. What people are thinking. So you hate Trump. Hate because he's refusing illegals the ability to cross the border and vote in the election, and claim healthcare? Hate him because he's not interested in foreign wars? Hate him because he wants to tariff China so American jobs stay here instead of going to the cheaper China? I wonder what leftys who think, "Trump is bad" actually formulate their thoughts.... honestly,
 
Well frens, it seems I pissed off my cousin over the Rittenhouse shooting.

I made a very reasonable response to her twitter rant saying that while not wise to get involved, the shootings were overall justified and that the only thing the kid is guilty of is a Class A Misdemeanor. I even stated that Rittenhouse was most likely guilty of said crime and should be fined $10,000 per the punishment sanction by Wisconsin State law.

She fucking lost it, a half a dozen tweets about how he was not allowed to posses a gun and how that invalidated his self defense claims...well I just could not shut the fuck up.

I asked her if she thought Black people that were denied gun permits in the South deserved to be sentenced to prison for threatening or perhaps killing Klan members. She said it was different because...

She and her cuck*, later responded that Rittenhouse was the aggressor and rambled on about how Stand My Ground (SMG) did not apply. I linked the DA charging report to indicate that Rittenhouse attempted to retreat in both instances. She still came back with SMG does not apply and I need to learn my gun laws. My reply was that SMG is irrelevant as Rittenhouse retreated.

The last reply I received before I was blocked? Stop trolling my Twitter and stiring things up.

That bitch constantly tweets about BLM, Fascist USA, OrangeManBad and I just let most of it go. The few times I post about how per the Wisconsin DOJ Blake had a weapon or how it can be perceived as self defense she melts the fuck down and accuses me of trolling he Twitter.

Anyways, rant over. Therapy session done. I probably deserve some puzzle pieces.

*She had kids with a Black man that beat her and later left her. Now she is dating a fucking White cuck that raises the children as his own.
 
That's the one thing that baffles me most. You'd think killing a racist pedophile and a guy who kept women falsely imprisoned would be the most progressive thing ever. If these people believed half the shit they claim, they'd be carrying this kid on their shoulders.
It's about race above everything else. The only thing that matters to them is that he is a fellow black. Look at the ADL, it was formed for the explicit purpose of defending a convicted Jewish pedophile and murderer.

It's not a bad strategy, but shithead races take it to the logical extremes.
 
Brady has to do withholding exculpatory information from the defense, does it not? It is silent as to charging documents.
I know in some states, it is considered unlawful to hide exculpatory evidence in charging documents (Florida for instance). The issue I wonder about it is that Wisconsin is not a state which requires an indictment. This would make me wonder if whether or not they consider the concealment of exculpatory evidence (in a criminal complaint) a Brady violation since there wouldn't be a lot of way to detect prosecutor deception otherwise.

Edit: sorry was rushing to respond to the whole thing about crome dome's sex offender registry shit regarding the stream.
 
Just a head's up, Rekieta says he can't confirm Rosenbaum was a pedo, he can't find the conviction anywhere. Only screenshots. He's pulling up the records live.

Anyone have anything more than the screen cap? I know the registry had the entry removed, did we have anything other than that?

Edit: nevermind the damn boomer found it
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back