• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Rittenhouse verdict poll

What is most severe charge you believe Rittenhouse will be convicted of?

  • Intentional Homicide

    Votes: 1 1.2%

  • Reckless Homicide

    Votes: 13 16.0%

  • Reckless Endangerment

    Votes: 11 13.6%

  • Illegal Weapon possession

    Votes: 10 12.3%

  • No verdict - hung jury or mistrial

    Votes: 24 29.6%

  • Not Guilty on all charges

    Votes: 22 27.2%
  • Total voters
    81
  • Poll closed .
Dave_5k said:
Closing arguments and jury instructions expected on Monday. What do you believe the jury will find?
Click to expand...

What he should be convicted on, and what he will be convicted on, are two different things... given the judge's obvious bias, I'll be surprised if Rittenhouse gets more than the weapons charge. And I suspect that judge would find Rittenhouse not guilty on even that charge if at all possible.
 
With this judge and I’m guessing the jury is just as ‘trumpy’ , Kyle will get off. If the judge doesn’t like the jury’s decision, he could declare a mis trial with prejudice. The fix is in.
 
What should happen based on what I've seen

First murder - Intentional homicide
Second murder - reckless homicide

What will likely happen because of judges bias which was obvious

Reckless endangerment
weapons charge

Also - If the jury comes back with the most serious conviction the judge will declare a mistrial. I agree with @soundforbjt the fix is in.
 
Side note, the judge apparently sided with prosecution in including instructions on provocation to the jury (which would negate self defense), and allowed some but not all lesser (e.g. 2nd degree vs 1st degree) charges the prosecution wanted to add on at last minute, which may increase probability of some form of conviction, but likely lowers chance of conviction on the most serious charges.
 
I dont know…Dont they chance it that it wont set off another Floyd moment and turn the streets into ashes? this time with armed protesters? A mistrail sounds like a declaration of… something
 
Dave_5k said:
Side note, the judge apparently sided with prosecution in including instructions on provocation to the jury (which would negate self defense), and allowed some but not all lesser (e.g. 2nd degree vs 1st degree) charges the prosecution wanted to add on at last minute, which may increase probability of some form of conviction, but likely lowers chance of conviction on the most serious charges.
Click to expand...
Because not allowing that would have gotten him in trouble. That judge may be a biased ignoramus but he's not completely stupid when it comes to his own interests.
 
cytg111 said:
I dont know…Dont they chance it that it wont set off another Floyd moment and turn the streets into ashes? this time with armed protesters? A mistrail sounds like a declaration of… something
Click to expand...

Not sure the judge is thinking that far. He appears convinced Rittenhouse is a hero and will do everything he can to prop up that image, consequences be damned.
 
I voted Reckless Homicide...although it isn't necessarily what I think he WILL be convicted of...just that it's the worst charge in the list of possibilities.

Honestly (and sadly), I think he'll likely get no worse than the weapons charge and reckless endangerment. I can hope for otherwise, but I'm definitely not holding my breath for it.

I concur with @soundforbjt in that if the jury of peers finds him guilty of Intentional Homicide, it'll end up declared a mistrial by the judge.
 
I'd like to know why his Mom who 100% enabled this little twat is not in trouble, no 17yr old should ever be roaming around a political protest with an assault rifle.
 
BUTCH1 said:
I'd like to know why his Mom who 100% enabled this little twat is not in trouble, no 17yr old should ever be roaming around a political protest with an assault rifle.
Click to expand...
Did his mother drive him there? If so she should have been put on the stand.

She should have been questioned anyway on what she may have known about that night.
 
BUTCH1 said:
I'd like to know why his Mom who 100% enabled this little twat is not in trouble, no 17yr old should ever be roaming around a political protest with an assault rifle.
Click to expand...
Yep, it was illegal for Kyle to be crossing state lines without being accompanied by her. Kyle was driving across state lines with no drivers license as well (and I assume no insurance)..
 
BUTCH1 said:
I'd like to know why his Mom who 100% enabled this little twat is not in trouble, no 17yr old should ever be roaming around a political protest with an assault rifle.
Click to expand...
Wisconsin is one of just three states in which 17-year-olds are automatically considered adults in the criminal justice system.

So his Mom has nothing to do with this unless, as HomerJS said, she was involved in the actual act or assisted in some way. Obviously a shitty parent, but you can't play both sides and treat him as an adult and a juvenile.
 
zinfamous said:
The Jury will declare a mistrial because the judge is a fascist prick.

lol, that won't happen, but it's what everyone sees and knows to be true.
Click to expand...
So looks like if this occurs, the prosecuter would go higher-up the court system, and ask a higher judge for a case claiming the "mistrial verdict itself being a mistrial".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top