Bootney Lee Farnsworth
Diamond Member
Assailants. Arsonists. Rioters.What else do you call people that were shot by a guy but victims?
Take your pick.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Assailants. Arsonists. Rioters.What else do you call people that were shot by a guy but victims?
Oops, wrong again. The judge absolutely is allowing that argument. And the jury is who matters.Right, and the judge isn't buying that argument. He's the only one who matters.
Of course you would. That's why you think all 12 jurors did. Your comments reflect on your own lack of morality and ethics.Nope, I wouldn't
They'll be cited for contempt if they do it more than once.Call 'em 'victims' anyway and make the judge object to it/find the lawyers in con-tempt................in front of the jury.
Or 12 jurors feared for their lives. It could be that too.Of course you would. That's why you think all 12 jurors did. Your comments reflect on your own lack of morality and ethics.
sounds good to me!!!!The judge will grant a mistrial and start all over again. Do it again and the judge will dismiss the case.
Oh, so you are a terrified sissy who would send innocent people to jail because you got a death threat. Not exactly a step up.Or 12 jurors feared for their lives. It could be that too.
If it is done more than once, I would not be surprised if the judge deems it a mistrial. Do it again in the second trial and I bet the judge dismisses the case with prejudice.They'll be cited for contempt if they do it more than once.
We don't think they did it. We know they did it. That still doesn't mean we would do it. I explicitly wouldn't do it. That's strictly a Dim thing.Of course you would. That's why you think all 12 jurors did. Your comments reflect on your own lack of morality and ethics.
and just as soon as you show you know what morality and ethics are, you'll stand a chance at statements like this having an impact.Of course you would. That's why you think all 12 jurors did. Your comments reflect on your own lack of morality and ethics.
Prove it, asshole.Oops, wrong again. The judge absolutely is allowing that argument. And the jury is who matters.
Because you are of such low moral and ethical character, you assume they were as well.don't think they did it. We know they did it
Prove what? It's literally part of the charges. Inform yourself, your mommy does not work here.Prove it, asshole.
Ah, the crybaby pokes the tip of his little turd head out of his hidey hole.and just as soon as you show you know what morality and ethics are, you'll stand a chance at statements like this having an impact.
Rosenblum was the attacker.Self defense is another word for victim.
I never said I would do that, douchebag. The jurors are the ones with no moral or ethical character. I wasn't a juror in that trialBecause you are of such low moral and ethical character, you assume they were as well.
That doesn't mean the judge is going to buy it as a reason for convicting Rittenhouse of murder, shit for brains.Prove what? It's literally part of the charges. Inform yourself, your mommy does not work here.
Yes, but two things:
1) the video does not encompassall of the events
2) that may be irrelevant anyway, as Kyle's mere presence that night may be an illegal act
Rosenblum, Huber and Grosskeutz all had criminal records. What was debunked?Um... you know that's a debunked lie, right? Seriously people... make at least a LITTLE effort to get informed on these topics before popping off.
Huber, Rosenblum, nor Grosskeutz we're cops and had no authority to enforce the law. Had the riot not taken place, a lot of bad things wouldn't have happened.If he had not been there illegally armed, no one would have died. His illegal actions led to two unnecessary killings because he couldn’t handle the situation.