Jump to content

George Floyd/Black Lives Matter Protests


Recommended Posts

Erm, not getting involved in this debate. My missus is a black American and I have no time for these right wing cosplayers, but from the reported facts and as a US qualified lawyer it does seem a pretty strong case for self-defence in respect of at least two of the shootings. I am not going to opine on who is right and who is wrong.

This courtroom debate is absolutely fascinating though. I don't give America much credit, but compared to the UK their criminal procedure laws are much tighter, their criminal defence industry attracts a higher quality of lawyer (both for prosecution and defence), and their judges have more personality:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Priti priti priti Patel said:

Erm, not getting involved in this debate. My missus is a black American and I have no time for these right wing cosplayers, but from the reported facts and as a US qualified lawyer it does seem a pretty strong case for self-defence in respect of at least two of the shootings. I am not going to opine on who is right and who is wrong.

This courtroom debate is absolutely fascinating though. I don't give America much credit, but compared to the UK their criminal procedure laws are much tighter, their criminal defence industry attracts a higher quality of lawyer (both for prosecution and defence), and their judges have more personality:

 

 

giphy.gif

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Genuine Hibs Fan said:

giphy.gif

 

 

Aye - seems a bit weird. But expert witnesses are to be treated as impartial and non-partisan, even if instructed by only one side,* so in a weird American way it makes sense to give him a wee clap if he used to shoot Arabs, as they would for any veteran. More curious is the fact the judge's ringtone is a patriotic song which Trump and his fans like to play at rallies.

*(of course, they are NOT impartial, and always side with those paying them)

Edited by Priti priti priti Patel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Priti priti priti Patel said:

 

 

Aye - seems a bit weird. But expert witnesses are to be treated as impartial and non-partisan, even if instructed by only one side,* so in a weird American way it makes sense to give him a wee clap if he used to shoot Arabs, as they would for any veteran. More curious is the fact the judge's ringtone is a patriotic song which Trump and his fans like to play at rallies.

*(of course, they are NOT impartial, and always side with those paying them)

Haha was more just in comparison with your comment about the quality of the court, just bad timing I saw the two straight one after the other 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rittenhouse abso-fuckinglutely went to those protests to shoot someone, you dont carry an assault weapon for any other reason than to assault. Hes clearly a wee fantasist who thought he could deal with those big bad liberals and show them how much of a big man he was. Hes a complete psychopathic little c**t and i hope he rots in jail. 
Staggering that the judge wont allow evidence whereby he mentions a desire to have a gun to shoot someone when it clearly provides a staggering insight into just how mad he was a short period before the incident, a great indicator of mens rea. Sadly I just dont think he’ll be convicted. 
Wee dobber had absolutely no grounds to be there other than to play at soldiers. Aye ok if his victims were rioting then its not on but its not his fucking place to go in and summarily execute people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:

Rittenhouse abso-fuckinglutely went to those protests to shoot someone, you dont carry an assault weapon for any other reason than to assault. Hes clearly a wee fantasist who thought he could deal with those big bad liberals and show them how much of a big man he was. Hes a complete psychopathic little c**t and i hope he rots in jail. 
Staggering that the judge wont allow evidence whereby he mentions a desire to have a gun to shoot someone when it clearly provides a staggering insight into just how mad he was a short period before the incident, a great indicator of mens rea. Sadly I just dont think he’ll be convicted. 
Wee dobber had absolutely no grounds to be there other than to play at soldiers. Aye ok if his victims were rioting then its not on but its not his fucking place to go in and summarily execute people. 

Summed it up perfectly. The little shit's going to walk but it has nothing to do with him being innocent. That judge is a fucking disgrace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Priti priti priti Patel said:

their criminal defence industry attracts a higher quality of lawyer (both for prosecution and defence)

Think well funded defence lawyers get paid multiples more than public prosecutors for those who can afford them. If you can't afford one the court appointed ones often have a pretty awful reputation.

Edited by welshbairn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he walks it's because the law in America is mental.

You can walk about with a gun then if someone attacks you or threatens your life it's legal to shoot them. The first guy threatened to kill him, chased him, grabbed the gun and then got shot by Rittenhouse. Second guy chased him then hit him on the head with a skateboard then got shot by Rittenhouse. Third guy pointed a gun at him then got shot by Rittenhouse.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The not guilty verdict is unsurprising really when you read into the facts of what happened.

Wee fanny clearly playing sodjurs, aye.

Meets the threshold for murder.... probably not.

The politicised justice system in America probably failed the victims by overcharging the perpetrator.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have posted it in here before and I am not trying to big myself up, just to add some context to this comment. I am qualified to practice law in America, and my sister and her family actually lived in Kenosha for five years, and I've visited the town. For those reasons, I took a particular interest in this case, and I have watched A LOT of the raw videos of the trial. I think that this was legally the correct result.

Once the defendant raised self-defence, the prosecution has d to disprove it beyond all reasonable doubt. The prosecution had to show that the Defendant did not have a reasonable belief his life was in danger beyond all reasonable doubt. In this case, there existed some form of uncontroverted evidence of danger in respect of each shooting:

  • For the first shooting, the deceased was chasing the accused having made threats to the accused's life earlier in the evening. 
  • The second count, which arises from the first shooting and covers the risk to bystanders of firing your weapon, didn't fall to be considered once self-defence was established for the first. 
  • The third to fifth shootings all happened while the accused was on the ground, with people around him attacking him and shouting "get him", and with members of the crowd having previously fired shots in the air.
  • For the third, the guy jump kicked the accused in the head. 
  • For the fourth, the guy was bashing the accused with a skateboard. 
  • For the fifth, the guy was stepping towards the accused and pointing his weapon at him.

In each of these instances, there is enough context that I would expect a jury to find him not guilty. There is enough to support the idea that he genuinely feared for his life, and that such fear was reasonable. It doesn't mean he definitely feared for his life, but there's enough there to require a jury to find self-defence. 

His moral culpability is a different matter. We know he travelled to a protest with a rifle. The prosecution and defence have different versions of why and what he's like as a person. It's a different country and culture. The truth about his moral culpability is hard to find. 

I also think the judge handled the case superbly. I don't think he was biased at all. A bit of a character, but impartial, and legally correct in every decision I saw him make based on the submissions made to him. 

Edited by Priti priti priti Patel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, discussing this with my sister now, it was incredibly emotional watching the boy as the verdicts were read out. I am happy for him. My happiness for him will last as long as he stays out the spotlight. I really, really hope he continues his nursing degree down in Arizona and has a quiet, peaceful life. If I see him on Fox News or becoming a Republican darling, I will greatly begrudge him his slice of luck. 

 

PPS. This is already inevitably being politicised. The correct political angle, I think, is that the verdict is correct, but if the defendant had been black, he would have been deprived of that justice.

Edited by Priti priti priti Patel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...