JUDGE: Those Allegedly Shot By Rittenhouse Can’t Be Called ‘Victims’ During Trial, ‘Rioters’ And ‘Arsonists’ Both More Accurate

if people had not been rioting and looting...

we can back this up a lot. if he violated curfew, so did everyone else.

you attack 1 side with facts, yes. but you dismiss those facts for the other side.
And you attack me, without the facts, given I’ve repeatedly said EVERONE THERE WAS VIOLATING CURFEW SO WTF WERE THE POLICE DOING?

You totally ignore what. Is this a knee jerk reaction?

I blame the police first and foremost for allowing curfew to be violated, for inviting vigilantes in to do their job, and for allowing a 17 yr old illegally armed kid to be in that situation.
 
Obviously prejudiced. Time to recuse. And even if he doesn't he just guaranteed a retrial because either side can use that as grounds to void the verdict.
How are facts "prejudicial?"
 
And the judge has already done so, in not dismissing the charges and in letting the trial proceed. The judge is already aware of exactly what the prosecution will argue. The defense, too.

You actually said who decides if he can be convicted based on the argument. And yes, that is now up to the jury. Not the judge.
No he hasn't, moron. He hasn't ruled on the issue yet.
 
No he hasn't, moron. He hasn't ruled on the issue yet.
On what issue? Be specific. This appears to be another one of your episodes, where you get so rabid that you don't remember what you were squealing about.
 
15th post

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom