Carol Kelly

His gun and the carrying of it was legal. If you’d been watching the trial you’d know the judge threw out that charge.

hbmac10

RICO - Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act.
Rittenhouse was alone and not part of an organization. How do you come up with that.

son of witless

You should be more accurate with your remarks. According to a jury Mr. Rittenhouse did not commit murder or any other crimes. This is not the Ahmaud Arbery case. Facts matter. Maybe you might consider facts and not wishes when you opine.

Carol Kelly

Loved that one.

American Vet

You are asking for something that seems to be far beyond it's capabilities.....

son of witless

Me and my crickets breathlessly wait for his reply.

moldyoldy

Juries have a habit of being wrong.

moldyoldy

I said it reminds me of Rico, crossing state lines to commit a crime.

moldyoldy

The judge did a lot of questionable things to help the defense.

son of witless

Do you mean like the OJ Simpson Jury ? I always h**ed how he got off because a false r****m narrative was allowed into the trial. As if whether Mark Furman ever using the N-Word was relevant. Then again, if I am ever on trial for my life, I hope my lawyers are as brilliant.

To get back to Rittenhouse, I imagine that you absolutely did not follow the facts of the case at all, and instead relied on news from the usual suspects in the propaganda news industry. Or perhaps you never did care about the facts and this is just your side verses my side, and the t***h be damned.

Perhaps you wanted an innocent man sacrificed at your altar. There are folks out there who couldn't care less about the evidence and just want to lynch the suspect.

Maybe the next jury will say not guilty to that guy who just ran his vehicle into that crowd, after he was let out on $ 1,000 bail for running over his girl friend and has a 50 page rap sheet. Now there is the poster boy for left wing justice being bat crap crazy ass nuts.

Even you must be disgusted by our justice system on that one ? Even you.

moldyoldy

Listening to the closing arguments, the prosecutor made a better case but the judge had already put his thumb on the scale.

son of witless

What in the closing arguments are you referring to ?

moldyoldy

I guess those claiming that they watched the whole thing didn’t.
The closing arguments laid out the facts of the case, and explained the laws for each count.

son of witless

I saw the video clips and heard the testimony of the Prosecutor's own witness saying that Mr. Rittenhouse was under attack when he defended himself. I keep asking you for the relevant part of the prosecutor's closing arguments where it proves Kyle Rittenhouse's guilt and you keep referring me back to the whole closing argument. I have tried to watch it.

It is long and BORING. Why can't you just distill out the important parts ??????????????????????????????????

I guess because there are no important or relevant parts. From what I have watched, your point and the point of the prosecutor is that Rittenhouse shouldn't have been there and that makes him guilty. That ain't proof. That ain't evidence. That is nothing.

First of all it was not illegal for Rittenhouse to be there or to have a gun, PERIOD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Second of all YOU and the prosecutor refuse to address the attack on Rittenhouse by those who were shot. Case closed, you lose.

moldyoldy

The whole premise of self defense is a lie. The one guy threw a plastic bag that soared threw the air. The others were trying to make a citizens arrest of a fleeing felon.