Lead Prosecutor in Rittenhouse Political Prosecution Says Rittenhouse Chased His Antifa Attackers. Then He Shows Video Of Antifa Chasing Rittenhouse.

Weatherman2020

Diamond Member
Mar 3, 2013
91,930
62,837
2,605
Right coast, classified
This should have never gone to trial.


Apparently the prosecution's completely dishonest claim is this: At one point in the video, both men are walking, neither chasing each other, and Rittenhouse is behind Rosenbaum at some distance. They're both walking the same way. No one is chasing anyone.

But because Rittenhouse is behind Rosenbaum, the prosecution wants to claim this constitutes Rittenhouse "chasing Rosenbaum first." Even though the actual video shows only one chase, one sequence where people are rushing and running, and in that sequence, Rosenbaum (the antifa terrorist) is clearly chasing Rittenhouse.

 
This should have never gone to trial.


Apparently the prosecution's completely dishonest claim is this: At one point in the video, both men are walking, neither chasing each other, and Rittenhouse is behind Rosenbaum at some distance. They're both walking the same way. No one is chasing anyone.

But because Rittenhouse is behind Rosenbaum, the prosecution wants to claim this constitutes Rittenhouse "chasing Rosenbaum first." Even though the actual video shows only one chase, one sequence where people are rushing and running, and in that sequence, Rosenbaum (the antifa terrorist) is clearly chasing Rittenhouse.

The fix may be in on this young man...

 
This should have never gone to trial.


Apparently the prosecution's completely dishonest claim is this: At one point in the video, both men are walking, neither chasing each other, and Rittenhouse is behind Rosenbaum at some distance. They're both walking the same way. No one is chasing anyone.

But because Rittenhouse is behind Rosenbaum, the prosecution wants to claim this constitutes Rittenhouse "chasing Rosenbaum first." Even though the actual video shows only one chase, one sequence where people are rushing and running, and in that sequence, Rosenbaum (the antifa terrorist) is clearly chasing Rittenhouse.


The only big problem is in most jurisdictions self defense is an affirmative defense.
 
ADA Binger(D) reportedly pressured a witness to lie.

Now in his opening statement Binger(D) flat out lied to the jury by claiming that Rittenhouse chased down Rosenbaum. He's a crooked piece of shit.

This is why I think prosecutors should have to be sworn in. And if they lie to the jury they should be charged with perjury and receive a mandatory sentence equal to the maximum possible sentence the defendant in the case was facing.

Same thing with cops who commit perjury. For instance, instead of a small fine, Mark Fuhrman should have been punished with life in prison without parole for committing perjury in the O.J. Simpson trial.

We should have zero tolerance for this kind of bullshit.
 
This should have never gone to trial.


Apparently the prosecution's completely dishonest claim is this: At one point in the video, both men are walking, neither chasing each other, and Rittenhouse is behind Rosenbaum at some distance. They're both walking the same way. No one is chasing anyone.

But because Rittenhouse is behind Rosenbaum, the prosecution wants to claim this constitutes Rittenhouse "chasing Rosenbaum first." Even though the actual video shows only one chase, one sequence where people are rushing and running, and in that sequence, Rosenbaum (the antifa terrorist) is clearly chasing Rittenhouse.


Rittenhouse should be freed immediately...the prosecution has been corrupt from the start....

Also on Tuesday, news broke that the FBI had failed to share evidence with the defense and then “lost” some of that same evidence. Although the testimony wasn’t televised, Branca writes,

----

Wednesday’s most interesting story also involved mishandled evidence. Rittenhouse made available to the prosecution the contents of his cell phone. He had nothing to hide.

Things were different went it came to Gaige Grosskreutz’s phone. Grosskreutz was the man who simultaneously stuck a gun and his phone, with the camera working, into Kyle’s face when Kyle shot his arm.

Police investigators obtained a search warrant for Grosskreutz’s phone, which would certainly have contained material evidence. Bizarrely, though, the police did not serve the warrant, did not seize his phone, and never tried to gain access to the contents.


The very young detective in charge of the case conceded that this was the only time in his experience at the Kenosha PD that the police did not serve a search warrant for a phone download. The reason given was “Marcy’s Law,” which protects victims of crimes from invasive investigations. So Grosskreutz, who stuck a gun in Kyle’s face, was framed as a “victim,” from day one.

However, the detective admitted that, in his experience, the police had never before used Marcy’s Law to prevent a search warrant for cell phone evidence. The police also didn’t record their interview with Grosskreutz, another anomaly in a department that recorded everyone’s interviews.




It turns out that Deputy District Attorney Thomas Binger decided to keep Grosskreutz’s phone contents from that night a secret because of his status as a victim under Marcy’s Law.

The issue caused a hubbub in the courtroom, and due to the time, testimony was suspended until Thursday morning.

On Thursday morning, defense attorney Richards elicited in testimony from the detective that police had received a search warrant for Grosskreutz’s phone but never served it. When Richards asked why, the detective said it was because he wasn’t “comfortable with Marcy’s Law.”


It was at this point that Richards pointed at the prosecutor and demanded of the detective, “He’s nodding at you now, isn’t he?”

That made everyone sit straight up in their seats.


The point he was making was that the detective who was only a year on the job as a detective, and ten as a street officer, and was appointed to head the biggest case in Kenosha, was taking his investigative cues from the deputy DA, keeping evidence out of the trial that might be exculpatory.

 
A very wise man once said...

The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.


Did that wise man say anything about what it means when you threaten to kill someone if you catch them alone, and then when you catch them alone, you say, "fuck you" and reach for their weapon?
 
Did that wise man say anything about what it means when you threaten to kill someone if you catch them alone, and then when you catch them alone, you say, "fuck you" and reach for their weapon?

Nope, but a different wise man did once say...nor cast your pearls before swine.
 
LOL, this case is imploding for the prosecution:

“If I catch any one of you guys alone tonight, I’m going to fucking kill you”.
It's strange that the same clip presented by court TV has it where it's Kyle making those threats. Looks to me like there is a bit of post editing done.
 
Nope, but a different wise man did once say...nor cast your pearls before swine.


You know, I am pretty wise. Let me give it a go.


" When a man threatens to kill you, if he gets you alone, and then finds you alone, and says "Fuck you" and reaches for you weapon,


it is him trying to kill you and you are legally and morally justified in defending yourself, and anyone that says differently, is a fucking asshole"
 

Forum List

Back
Top