3475: Kyle Rittenhouse and Princess Diana Spencer

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by Liquid

Hahaha... Wow!

waaaaah, did i not keep sweet enough for you?

[nordcharonmir]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

ugh. bullshit. this smacks of ‘let’s consider the /other/ side of the Holocaust.’

what exactly do you want them to say? that guns are awesome? all lives matter?

fuck off.

hahaha, look at the evidence now is equivalent with holocaust denial. The amount of mental gymnastics and intentional self delusion....wow. Paradigm paralysis is strong in this one.

[Sparrow]

i wasn’t talking to you or about the Rittenhouse evidence, Owl. eat a bag of dicks

[nordcharonmir]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

i wasn’t talking to you or about the Rittenhouse evidence, Owl. eat a bag of dicks

HAHAHA i wasn't talking to you or about Rittenhouse, Arrow. Eat a sack of cunts.

[Keith]

Your character laughs a lot

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by nordcharonmir

HAHAHA i wasn't talking to you or about Rittenhouse, Arrow. Eat a sack of cunts.

you quoted my post, weirdo.

[rodimusprime]

Originally Posted by Liquid

@Rod
Do you mean to say after watching the video evidence from multiple cameras you wouldn't deem it self-defence? He is literally running away / being hit / gun pointed at him while on the ground.

Not saying he is a complete POS and should have never been there. It was a horrible situation. But there was no "rigging" or "bribery" involved. He was acquitted as per the law.

Being supported by white supremacists doesn't change that in those moments it was self-defence. And as per the law he was not guilty. Sure find some other charges to throw at him.

When you start saying the trial was rigged it, at least for me it creates this anger in me. But that anger is for the wrong reasons. I should be angry that this dumbshit is even allowed to have a gun and to be able to walk around with one. But instead it makes me angry that there is some white supremacist lobby affecting the outcome of the case.

When Keith and Chemda's conclusions come from the mainstream narrative it just feeds into the mainstream agenda of keeping us divided. Blue vs. Red. I assume that the listeners to KATG are already far left. I would love for KATG to make it's audience push back against the blue vs. red bullshit. Somehow be the bridge to a better world

Rigged: As in the judge dismissing the gun charge without giving the defense a chance to challenge it. He picked a time to dismiss it that left them with no recourse. And it was the main / only charge I thought they could even convict Rittenhouse on.

The judge and his weird rules about who could be called victims / rioters / looters stood out to everyone with common sense IMO. His weird Trump campaign ring tone. The thing about not letting the jury see pics because HE couldn't make them look right on HIS phone?

Keith brought all these things up not just because the main stream media... that shit was weird and felt like a judge rigging a certain outcome.

I didn't say anything about self defense or the videos.

It doesn't sounds like you want to "push back against blue vs red" as much as you want them to act like justice was done in the Rittenhouse case. Not everything is middle of the road.

[nordcharonmir]

Originally Posted by rodimusprime

Rigged: As in the judge dismissing the gun charge without giving the defense a chance to challenge it. He picked a time to dismiss it that left them with no recourse. And it was the main / only charge I thought they could even convict Rittenhouse on.

The judge and his weird rules about who could be called victims / rioters / looters stood out to everyone with common sense IMO. His weird Trump campaign ring tone. The thing about not letting the jury see pics because HE couldn't make them look right on HIS phone?

Keith brought all these things up not just because the main stream media... that shit was weird and felt like a judge rigging a certain outcome.

I didn't say anything about self defense or the videos.

It doesn't sounds like you want to "push back against blue vs red" as much as you want them to act like justice was done in the Rittenhouse case. Not everything is middle of the road.

To The On High and Holiest of Dunce Cap Wearing Inanimate Rods,
The judge was legally obligated to dismiss the gun charge since there was no evidence produced to charge against an existing law. The law in the charging documents is for short barrel rifles and shotys open carried by persons under the calendar years aged equal to or in excess of 18. Thus a rifle with a barrel equal to or greater than the dimensions specified carried in public (which was to evidence produced by the prosecution) cannot be charged under this law.

Furthermore, the practice of not denoting the deceased in a self defense trial as "victims" is common legal practice as this is what is commonly in law referred to as a "contested fact". One side sees them as victims and one side sees them as attackers. The use of the denotation of the deceased as "the deceased" or as "rioters" is not a contested fact as both sides pre-trial agreed on these facts. As you will remember (except given your position I very much doubt you did any research) from the trial the prosecution presented the deceased as [paraphrased] '{NAME} was out demonstrating, engaged in some rioting, a little arson but that doesn't justifying the actions of the defendant' Thus, reiterating the concession in court at trial of the denotation of looter, rioter and even arsonist which I don't think was even proposed pre-trial.

[nordcharonmir]

Originally Posted by Keith

Your character laughs a lot

LMFAO

[nordcharonmir]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

you quoted my post, weirdo.

Talking about you, not to you. Now I'm talking to you; Hey there