judge may allow the men Kyle Rittenhouse shot to be called 'rioters' or 'looters'

"Let the evidence show what the evidence shows, that any or one of these people were engaged in arson, rioting or looting, then I'm not going to tell the defense they can't call them that," Kenosha County Circuit Judge Bruce Schroeder said during the pre-trial hearing.
Schroeder has had a longstanding rule of not allowing prosecutors to refer to people as "victims"
 
On Monday, a Wisconsin judge ruled that Kyle Rittenhouse's defense team will be allowed to refer to the teen's shooting victims as "rioters," "looters," or "arsonists" during the upcoming trial.
The lawyers will be allowed to use these terms so long as they provide evidence backing those claims,

The term "victim" is commonly banned during court trials across the country "because it implies that a crime was committed and could therefore prejudice a jury against a defendant."


Schroeder also noted that prosecutors are allowed to use equally as harsh language to refer to Rittenhouse, such as "cold-blooded killer," as they provide evidence to back up those terms.
 
guno said:
On Monday, a Wisconsin judge ruled that Kyle Rittenhouse's defense team will be allowed to refer to the teen's shooting victims as "rioters," "looters," or "arsonists" during the upcoming trial.
The lawyers will be allowed to use these terms so long as they provide evidence backing those claims,

The term "victim" is commonly banned during court trials across the country "because it implies that a crime was committed and could therefore prejudice a jury against a defendant."


Schroeder also noted that prosecutors are allowed to use equally as harsh language to refer to Rittenhouse, such as "cold-blooded killer," as they provide evidence to back up those terms.
Click to expand...

your quote mine is inaccurate - likely intentional

If prosecutors can try to portray Rittenhouse as “a cold-blooded killer,” then his defense should be free to “call someone a rioter,” the judge said

He did not say they can call him a "cold blooded killer", only portray him as such - which is what the charges claim
 
zymurgy said:
your quote mine is inaccurate - likely intentional

If prosecutors can try to portray Rittenhouse as “a cold-blooded killer,” then his defense should be free to “call someone a rioter,” the judge said

He did not say they can call him a "cold blooded killer", only portray him as such - which is what the charges claim
Click to expand...

And that will not work with the jury. It can be easily torn apart.
 
On Aug. 25, the third night of protests, Rittenhouse, then 17, made the short trip from his home in Illinois across the state line, armed with an AR-15-style rifle, in response to a call from a Kenosha-based militia group saying it hoped to protect businesses from protesters.

That night, in a set of chaotic confrontations with protesters, Rittenhouse shot several people, killing two, Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber, and wounding a third, Gaige Grosskreutz.

Binger asked the judge to disallow a video that was shared widely on social media showing police encountering Rittenhouse roughly 15 minutes before the shootings, tossing him a bottle of water and saying, "We appreciate you guys."

But Chirafisi convinced the judge that the video is relevant to understanding Rittenhouse's state of mind, which is relevant to several of the charges he faces.

First-degree reckless endangerment of safety, for instance, requires prosecutors to demonstrate that Rittenhouse acted with "utter disregard for human life."

"If ... police tell him, 'It's a good thing you people are here,' given the state of lawlessness that's existing, is that something that's influencing the defendant and emboldening him in his behavior?" the judge said. "[That] would seem to me to be an argument for relevance."

https://www.npr.org/2021/10/26/1049458617/kyle-rittenhouse-victims-arsonists-looters-judge-ruled
 
AProudLefty said:
Why would that matter? They are not supposed to sway the jury with emotions.
Click to expand...

because a good chance one of my peers agrees with me - pedophiles are not fixable - and should be put to death anyway - so this entire trial is a waste of my time and tax dollars
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top