I mean, sure, they can appeal the decision of the lower court to reject the mistrial motion, but I don't know if the appeals court can actually grant a mistrial or only a retrial, I suppose they probably can. Perhaps one of the lawyers here can weigh in on that one.

Okay, I just quick googled it. I didn't realize the mistrial was granted at the trial by the judge. thanks.

I never did any such thing so you can make stuff up if you want but no one should believe you.

I asked the same question I would ask should there be a popular anthem song for BLM protests that you would always hear and I would ask, if the judge had it on their phone if any one was concerned.

The question and curiosity in no way intonates my position. That is not how things work.

Too many Americans think its cool to buy AR-15s, have them strapped to their bodies and walk around to show it off because they have nothing else going on in their lives. Total stupidity.


I agree with Rosenbaum shooting as the only debatable self defence killing. But its probably too difficult to get a murder conviction on that point. It's hard to pin him for murder when Rosenbaum was running at him full speed and puts his hand on Kyle's gun.

And yet if a Trumper did something similar on this forum, I suspect (though can't prove beyond a shadow of a doubt) you would be the first to chastise.

No i would not. You are just purposely trying to be confrontational.

If anyone wanted my view on this I would say it was a nothing burger. That does not end my curiosity as to how others HERE see it as it is seems so conflicted on social media. I see people losing it about the ring tone and to me that seemed so over the top, i wanted to ask here.

i love that gun nuts and the NRA lobbyists have created this accepted narrative that disarming the person with the firearm is grounds for legalized murder while simultaneously lecturing us that it isn't the gun that is inherently dangerous... if i disarm you from waving your skateboard around (which could also be counted as a dangerous weapon), it's obvious that you dont get to murder me for it. hell you might not even be able to make the case if i take your knife. but when it's a gun it's so inherently dangerous on its own that you get to immediately kill the person that touches it..

All Kyle needs to do is show that he felt he was in danger to be let off.

The prosecution has not been able to advance a good enough argument so far to get him convicted for murder.

No I think the bigger problem is handguns. To many folks carrying concealed weapons

Also, as far as I can tell, the defence threatened to move for a mistrial; from what I've seen so far, they've not actually moved for a mistrial. Probably because they know they're winning.

I think the problem with the prosecution is they are trying to tie that the REASON kylie was running is because of the events beforehand right? You cant snapcshot this video and think its arguable as to what we are seeing, I think its more back and white

But the prosecution cant talk about the events prior because hes not being charged for shooting or whatever the **** he did prior to the running and falling on ground incident, and I believe nobody who was running with him was involved in his previous instances that night afaik.


I think the people wanting him guilty as **** are trying to tie up the WHOLE night into this case which isn't what is being tried. whether you agree or not. I always thought it should have been more defense slighted than prosecution slighted since what is only being into questions is the running and stumbling and aftermath video.

its still not over though, maybe prosecution can conjure up some different angles and ofc there is always the jury who can lean one way or another

problem is the prosecutor thought he could argue to a jury that if someone is pointing a pistol at you in one hand instead of two then you're not in danger

Thanks for taking the time off from your important work in NVG to come over and bless us with your pearls of wisdom.

yeah but to any reasonable person, no mater how left or right you are, the video in question is really really tough to just come out and say that smug **** was wanting to not only murder but planned to and wanted to, he was running away, got hit with a skateboard fell down and ofc was approached, not sure if he shot right away. he is not being put on trial for the previous incident because none of those guys were involved who were running

it should have always been tough for the prosecution. people are making fun of prosecution throwing out all these things and hoping they stick, I think they kind of HAVE to do that because like I said above, they cant really talk about the prior events as much as they'd like. which is why a few days ago that prosecution witness really tiltled the trial in favor of defense after his testimony .

it might be unfair to call the prosecution incompetent, for what it seems, they re doing the best at what they got and doing a decent job. not sure what else they can do diff, they dont seem incompetent.

if they could have tied up the whole night, then theymaybe have a much better chance

edit* i am not sure why prosecution ONLY wanted to press charges for murder? or are they pressing other charges to?

he is also charged with under age possession and reckless endangerment

That is irrelevant to the murder charge. Really the only thing that matters is Rittenhouse's frame of mind when he shot. Did he have a reasonable fear that he was in danger of either death or grievous bodily injury when he shot Rosenbaum, Huber, and Gaige?

this

This isn't exactly true. You can file a motion for new trial after a trial with the same arguments and effect as a mistrial.

The prosecutor perhaps did not care whether he was going to cause a mistrial yesterday morning, but at this point, since the judge made it clear to him that he did not believe he was acting in good faith, he is going to want to avoid that mistrial at all costs.

Right. I meant mistrial with prejudice, if that's the right term to prohibit a retrial.

Maybe don’t charge him with murder?

no reason to ever try at any right wing fascists really.

tbf, they dont try the leftists either. they just execute them. https://www.opb.org/article/2021/09/...ot-be-charged/

Well, that's a whole other issue.....

I know some lefties want to crucify KR but what bothers me much more is the culture that allowed a seemingly intelligent and articulate high school kid to think it was in any way normal to cross state lines to protect a business that was fully insured (or if not it would have been the owner's choice).

There seems to be a lack of basic parenting skills in that area.

And I'm happy to see a judge put the burden of proof on the prosecution. Even though we all know that's the exception it's still being done in a very public manner and could help the system as a whole (or I'm just too positive minded).

Some Americans still think its 1865 and haven't evolved past it.

The mom is dumber than rocks to drive her kid there pretty much knowing what he was going to do.

Yeah, I didn't want to throw stones at a single mom if that's the case but.....wtf ?

Also, maybe I'm just old and dumb but why are all these emt types walking around armed ?

I don't have any firearms for a reason. I'm not against them at all for hunting or sport shooting but I don't do those things and when it comes to home defense I think the chance of me getting into serious trouble is much greater than the chance of me saving my family.

Poker player looking at odds...lol. But I know a gun makes people braver then they should be at times when they should be cautious. Just human nature.