Kyle Rittenhouse - The Truth in 11 Minutes

#5,201
#5,201
ClearwaterVol said:
I have explained it.

The prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that KR was unreasonable in his belief the men he shot were imminently going to cause him great bodily harm or death.

Nothing regarding the access, intent or ability to kill KR was proven. It was all about his reasonable belief and the state's failure to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that his belief was unreasonable.

Your focus is wrong. Nothing was proven about the three shot guys. Nothing was proven regarding KR.

There was simply a failure of proof by the prosecution.
Click to expand...
The case is really simple. The prosecution charged Rittenhouse with murder. The justification for use of deadly force was reasonable doubt those that were shot and killed had access, intent, and ability to kill Rittenhouse. They failed to prove without reasonable doubt that those that were shot and killed, didn't have access, intent, and ability to kill Rittenhouse. Argue how you like, not guilty of murder equal innocent of murder charges.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davethevol, Rickyvol77 and SpaceCoastVol
#5,202
#5,202
ClearwaterVol said:
Good grief, you have no idea what you're responding about. You just wanted to make it seem political. It is obnoxious.
Click to expand...
That's fine that you feel that way. The whole farce of te trial was political and you know it. It wasn't about KR; it was about the 2A. I responded to what you said, and it was complete ********. Words have meaning
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider
#5,203
#5,203
tnmarktx said:
The case is really simple. The prosecution charged Rittenhouse with murder. The justification for use of deadly force was reasonable doubt those that were shot and killed had access, intent, and ability to kill Rittenhouse. They failed to prove without reasonable doubt that those that were shot and killed, didn't have access, intent, and ability to kill Rittenhouse. Argue how you like, not guilty of murder equal innocent of murder charges.
Click to expand...

I gave you the standard in Wisconsin almost verbatim with the statute and still you argue?

Again, they failed prove beyond a reasonable doubt that KR's beliefs regarding the people shot were unreasonable.

You are approaching the problem from the wrong side.

As for your final statement, it is completely untrue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol423
#5,204
#5,204
SpaceCoastVol said:
That's fine that you feel that way. The whole farce of te trial was political and you know it. It wasn't about KR; it was about the 2A. I responded to what you said, and it was complete ********. Words have meaning
Click to expand...

You entered a discussion regarding proof required to prove guilt in a criminal trial and made some political statement. GTFOH with that dumb sh!t. You are out of your depth Donnie.
 
#5,206
#5,206
ClearwaterVol said:
You entered a discussion regarding proof required to prove guilt in a criminal trial and made some political statement. GTFOH with that dumb sh!t. You are out of your depth Donnie.
Click to expand...
Ok explain to me what you are implying by "proven innocent". And as i said before, the whole ****ing trial was political
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#5,207
#5,207
#5,208
#5,208
tnmarktx said:
Is he doing time for any of the charges? All you're proving is that someone can occupy a position in a profession and know very little about it.
Click to expand...

Really? You fail to grasp the most basic of legal principles when I have tried repeatedly to walk you through them. You have shown yourself to be ignorant and unreceptive to changing that fact. Toodles and enjoy Thanksgiving.

SpaceCoastVol said:
Ok explain to me what you are implying by "proven innocent". And as i said before, the whole ****ing trial was political
Click to expand...

I wasn't discussing the whole f#cking trial. I was what is actually "proven" in a court of law. You are not proven innocent there is simply a failure to prove guilt.

You have a presumption of innocence, but you are never required to prove your innocence.

He still has a presumption of innocence, but that presumption was not proven.

By way of example, the jury could believe that it is more likely than not that he shot those people without justification, but that is not enough prove his guilt in a criminal court. It would be enough in a civil trial. Remember OJ.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tntar heel and Vol423
#5,210
#5,210
ClearwaterVol said:
Really? You fail to grasp the most basic of legal principles when I have tried repeatedly to walk you through them. You have shown yourself to be ignorant and unreceptive to changing that fact. Toodles and enjoy Thanksgiving.
Click to expand...
I suppose in your expert legal opinion, since nobody is ever pronounced innocent, that everyone is guilty?
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#5,211
#5,211
ClearwaterVol said:
Really? You fail to grasp the most basic of legal principles when I have tried repeatedly to walk you through them. You have shown yourself to be ignorant and unreceptive to changing that fact. Toodles and enjoy Thanksgiving.



I wasn't discussing the whole f#cking trial. I was what is actually "proven" in a court of law. You are not proven innocent there is simply a failure to prove guilt.

You have a presumption of innocence, but you are never required to prove your innocence.

He still has a presumption of innocence, but that presumption was not proven.

By way of example, the jury could believe that it is more likely than not that he shot those people without justification, but that is not enough prove his guilt in a criminal court. It would be enough in a civil trial. Remember OJ.
Click to expand...
Is that presumption of innocemce required to be proven? What you are saying sounds like wordsmithing to me.
 
#5,219
#5,219
ClearwaterVol said:
It is not the same. Your link said it was not the same.
Click to expand...
WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN "INNOCENT" AND "NOT GUILTY"?
In short, "not guilty" is not the same as "innocent."
Click to expand...
From the link....
WHAT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN "INNOCENT" AND "NOT GUILTY" MEANS
In conclusion, no one needs to prove that you are innocent in order to avoid conviction for the crime.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
#5,222
#5,222
The Charges:

The Information contains six counts of charged unlawful behavior against the defendant and to each, he has entered a plea of “Not Guilty,” which is a demand that the state prove every element of each charge beyond a reasonable doubt.

PRIVILEGE SELF-DEFENSE
The State's Burden of Proof

Self defense is an issue in this case. As to each of counts 1 through 5, the State must prove by evidence which satisfies you beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not act lawfully in self defense.
 
#5,223
#5,223
tnmarktx said:
I suppose in your expert legal opinion, since nobody is ever pronounced innocent, that everyone is guilty?
Click to expand...
Why is this so hard for you to grasp? A not guilty verdict does not mean that he is proven innocent. There is no legal concept of “proven innocent” in the U.S. because you have a presumption of innocence. The prosecution has to prove that you are guilty.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#5,224
#5,224
tnmarktx said:
If the legal position is that no one is ever innocent only not guilty is just more confirmation the legal system is broken.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure when the phrase most commonly used is "Innocent until proven guilty" there is literally no need to be "proven" innocent. If you start out presumed innocent from a defense perspective what is there to prove...extra double special innocent? A finding of "not guilty" is basically having the charges leveled by the prosecution found insufficient for guilty verdict.

I know it can turn into a bit of a word salad but do you get how the above works? The onus isn't on the defense to prove innocence (and that's a damn good thing, with the presumed innocence and all) but rather on the prosecution to sufficiently override that presumption.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol and hog88
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top