Probably time for a Kyle Rittenhouse thread.

[Botten]

Originally Posted by Elizondo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Yea dude because if the prosecutors didn't provide that evidence to the defense and that's a big no no

Sorry the HD vid didn't prove your feelings are real

The clearer video was shown by the prosecution during the closing argument promoting the defense to literally say "no fair, no fair" and that if they had known the video was clearer they would have changed "their whole defense strategy." (literally their words) Because.... now it can be seen much much much clearer that Kyle was provoking.

With this even if the jury doesn't find Kyle guilty after being spoon fed this.

It has already been emphasized to the population watching the trial outside.

Karma

Get it yet Elizondo?

[Elizondo]

Originally Posted by Botten [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The clearer video was shown by the prosecution during the closing argument promoting the defense to literally say "no fair, no fair" and that if they had known the video was clearer they would have changed "their whole defense strategy." (literally their words) Because.... now it can be seen much much much clearer that Kyle was provoking.

With this even if the jury doesn't find Kyle guilty after being spoon fed this.

It has already been emphasized to the population watching the trial outside.

Karma

Get it yet Elizondo?

Dude you just real low iq

no other explanation possible. im not tryin to be harsh, most peepz that post here are cool, but you just either really stupid or purposely dishonest

a defendant is entitled to have access to all the evidence. that includes the same resolution of video evidence that the prosecution has. not compressed grainy crap. this is the law man to ensure a fair trial. it's like rudimentary shit that a 5 old could understand

it don't even matter what the vid shows or doesn't show. do you get this or are you just like the dumbest dude ever on the interwebz?

[Homesteaded]

Originally Posted by Botten [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The clearer video was shown by the prosecution during the closing argument promoting the defense to literally say "no fair, no fair" and that if they had known the video was clearer they would have changed "their whole defense strategy." (literally their words) Because.... now it can be seen much much much clearer that Kyle was provoking.

With this even if the jury doesn't find Kyle guilty after being spoon fed this.

It has already been emphasized to the population watching the trial outside.

Karma

Get it yet Elizondo?

Anyone who thinks that video shows Sir Kyle provoking the rabid dog that is Rosenbum is a partisan loser. You're ignoring all other evidence to come up with the theme. Rosenbaum literally on video telling people to shoot him, starting fights, getting in peoples faces, starting fires. You have to suspend belief that a 17 year old kid is the one who started shit with that guy. The video shows nothing of the sort.

You can ignore all of that though since the defense received severely degraded evidence. The key piece of evidence that the entire prosecution is relying on. Also, ignore that this provocation theme is the latest of their moves as all others have crumbled under the heavy burden of reality. Now they are distorting reality to come up with a theme to bury a kid for life. Evil exists people and this is it.

[Elizondo]

Originally Posted by Homesteaded [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Anyone who thinks that video shows Sir Kyle provoking the rabid dog that is Rosenbum is a partisan loser. You're ignoring all other evidence to come up with the theme. Rosenbaum literally on video telling people to shoot him, starting fights, getting in peoples faces, starting fires. You have to suspend belief that a 17 year old kid is the one who started shit with that guy. The video shows nothing of the sort.

You can ignore all of that though since the defense received severely degraded evidence. The key piece of evidence that the entire prosecution is relying on. Also, ignore that this provocation theme is the latest of their moves as all others have crumbled under the heavy burden of reality. Now they are distorting reality to come up with a theme to bury a kid for life. Evil exists people and this is it.

it's not like bot can argue it's the same file, mb size or quality. it's not the same evidence. that's the point. a defendant, by law, is supposed to have access to all the exact same evidence the prosecution has. this is taught in like 1st grade.

bot just emotionally postin about stuff he doesn't understand

[Botten]

Originally Posted by Elizondo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

it's not like bot can argue it's the same file, mb size or quality. it's not the same evidence. that's the point. a defendant, by law, is supposed to have access to all the exact same evidence the prosecution has. this is taught in like 1st grade.

bot just emotionally postin about stuff he doesn't understand

Wow you still don’t get it, Elizondo. Oh and Homestead …You can’t provoke an unarmed man with a gun who is charging you. Shoot him 4 times, killing him. All while the shooter is not protecting property and by law not supposed to be there.
Stand your ground rules don’t even allow that!!

As for Elizondo I don’t know how much more simple I can make it for you to finally understand?

The closing argument was *** with *** the clearer video to the jury. The defense said literally “not fair” and “we would have changed our whole defense.” The clearer video spoon feeds the fact Kyle did in fact cause provocation by aiming the gun at the unarmed victim TO THE JURY (in closing). This points to murder.

The defense asked for a mistrial and the Judge realizing (perhaps feeling he should stop all his idiocy during the trail ; finally seeing the media) didn’t immediately grant it.

Now regardless of ‘your feelings’ and ‘emotions’ of ‘fairness’ the truth of the matter has been emphasized outside the court (and don’t discredit the power of the people to do ‘right’ regardless of so called crying from the defense or ‘**you**’ saying Waaaaah not fair he should get way with his now clearly murder act).

And hey the jury did see the clearer video in fact multiple times due to their request. I wonder if they match your pure blood ignorant wit and still vote not guilty. Elizondo why don’t you make a pizza joke to calm your nerves LOL.

[Elizondo]

Originally Posted by Botten [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The closing argument was *** with *** the clearer video to the jury. .

damn dude you can't stop diggin yerself out of a hole and you projectin like you workin at a movie theater

was the clearer video the same file? Same size MB? same quality?

Yes or no works

Thanks!

[Botten]

Originally Posted by Elizondo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

damn dude you can't stop diggin yerself out of a hole and you projectin like you workin at a movie theater

was the clearer video the same file? Same size MB? same quality?

Yes or no works

Thanks!

How about completely irrelevant because the judge did not immediately grant the mistrial after you and the defense said ‘no fair.’ The clear video evidence of provocation was already given to the jury in closing argument. Sorry this very simple statement perplexes you.

Oh and now it looks like FoxNews is reporting:

Judge Schroeder today granted the 36 page explanation of the law to the jury to take home, instructions, which describe the relevant legal points…

…Defense attorney Mark Richards appeared hesitant about the request…

…Jurors must consider "whether the defendant had the opportunity to retreat with safety" and "whether the defendant provoked the attack."

Jurors are more closely looking at what I said, whether Kyle provoked. Good.

[Elizondo]

Originally Posted by Botten [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

How about completely irrelevant because the judge did not immediately grant the mistrial after you and the defense said ‘no fair.’ The clear video evidence of provocation was already given to the jury in closing argument. Sorry this very simple statement perplexes you.

Oh and now it looks like FoxNews is reporting:

Judge Schroeder today granted the 36 page explanation of the law to the jury to take home, instructions, which describe the relevant legal points…

…Defense attorney Mark Richards appeared hesitant about the request…

…Jurors must consider "whether the defendant had the opportunity to retreat with safety" and "whether the defendant provoked the attack."

Jurors are more closely looking at what I said, whether Kyle provoked. Good.

lol dude

you're hopeless

[Whale biologist]

Originally Posted by Elizondo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

damn dude you can't stop diggin yerself out of a hole and you projectin like you workin at a movie theater

was the clearer video the same file? Same size MB? same quality?

Yes or no works

Thanks!

The defense fully admits they had the identical copy of the HD video of Kyle pointing gun at Rosenbaum, just in a different exhibit.

This isn't grounds for a mistrial to any sane mind.

[Homesteaded]

Originally Posted by Whale biologist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The defense fully admits they had the identical copy of the HD video of Kyle pointing gun at Rosenbaum, just in a different exhibit.

This isn't grounds for a mistrial to any sane mind.

You're wrong and you should feel bad for misleading people. If you're not knowingly doing that, you're just a moron who is ignorant of available facts.

If you are against Kyle Rittenhouse on this you are not for the Constitution.