Another "I can't breath" death: Police Reform & Protests in the USA

[postman1782]

Is it inherently dangerous to chase a guy who is holding a gun during a protest/riot? lol...

After he just murdered someone? Fuck no, do anything you can to stop an active shooter.

[Edge-]

It's far worse than that the judge is a white supremacist

Whoa now...what? According to what? What has he done that makes you think this?

Because like, is he blatantly conservative as hell and overtly sympathetic towards the defense? Absolutely. Is he repeatedly acting unprofessionally and intentionally obtuse to benefit the defense? Absolutely. Deeply unfunny? For fucking sure.

But where does the white supremacist shit come from?

[Egomaniac]

That's...an absolutely horrid analogy.

That's behavior which is inherently dangerous, while putting others in danger.

Walking down the street in a super sexy getup is not inherently dangerous, nor does it put anyone in danger.

This is still just your rationalizing victim blaming.

Obviously, all women should be wearing Burkas in public if they don't want to be raped. Should probably make that a law like the Taliban do...

[unfilteredJW]

That is why I said a 'hot zone'. If you are walking in the middle of the day in the street and you get mugged or worse, no victim blaming here obviously.

It’s amazing just how oblivious you are to just how fucking awful this makes you.

[Coniferous]

After he just murdered someone? Fuck no, do anything you can to stop an active shooter.

I'm talking about the first shooting, which is what the whole case hinges on.

[Edge-]

That is why I said a 'hot zone'. If you are walking in the middle of the day in the street and you get mugged or worse, no victim blaming here obviously.

Except that's not an analogue at all, and it's still victim blaming.

Your example would indicate an accident for the biker, not an intentional act of malice to run into him while he was engaged in lane splitting. If there was an intentional and malicious attempt to sideswipe him, he is absolutely, 100% the victim and is at no fault since it was only the actions of another that caused the incident.

The rape example only world with the intentional and malicious act of raping the individual. There is no "I'm sorry officer, I didn't see them their and my rape was completely accidental!" argument, which would be required for your comparison to make a lick of sense.

It's just, again, rationalizing victim blaming.

[Egomaniac]

Is it inherently dangerous to chase a guy who is holding a gun during a protest/riot? lol...

So, no one should ever try and stop an active shooter? Just hope that he doesn't kill you or anyone you love?

So much for "it takes a good guy with a gun..."

[postman1782]

I'm talking about the first shooting, which is what the whole case hinges on.

Since Rittenhouse was the aggressor, thanks to the FBI infrared video, it should be an open an shut case, but with this fucking shitty judge, he will likely walk.

[Specialka]

It’s amazing just how oblivious you are to just how fucking awful this makes you.

I do not really care about opinions from randoms on internet.

[unfilteredJW]

I do not really care about opinions from randoms on internet.

No need to point out your lacking of self awareness.

It’s well documented.

[Specialka]

No need to point out your lacking of self awareness.

It’s well documented.

Again, lecture from randoms is funny

[Coniferous]

Since Rittenhouse was the aggressor, thanks to the FBI infrared video, it should be an open an shut case, but with this fucking shitty judge, he will likely walk.

Where is the FBI infrared video that shows Rittenhouse is the aggressor? I just saw a brief clip of Rittenhouse running away, the guy chasing him, and Rittenhouse turning and shooting him.

[Egomaniac]

Again, lecture from randoms is funny

Isn't that exactly what you're doing with the victim blaming?

[postman1782]

Where is the FBI infrared video that shows Rittenhouse is the aggressor? I just saw a brief clip of Rittenhouse running away, the guy chasing him, and Rittenhouse turning and shooting him.

Then you didn't watch the very beginning of it. And since Kyle knew that he was unarmed, and still shot and killed him, it should be murder. But most likely the racist dipshit of a judge will set him free.

[uuuhname]

Again, lecture from randoms is funny

dude you are only making their point stand out more here...

[Coniferous]

Then you didn't watch the very beginning of it. And since Kyle knew that he was unarmed, and still shot and killed him, it should be murder. But most likely the racist dipshit of a judge will set him free.

I found a description of the infrared video but I haven't been able to watch it. Here's what cnn says:

"In the video, Rittenhouse is moving rapidly along a sidewalk by himself. The sidewalk leads to a parking lot, where Rosenbaum is positioned next to a cluster of parked cars..."

"Rittenhouse slows down in the video, and there appears to be some kind of exchange, but there is no audio of the moment.
Other videos from witnesses on the ground show that Rittenhouse could be heard yelling "friendly, friendly, friendly" at this point."

"Rittenhouse continued to move in the same direction he was moving previously, and Rosenbaum starts to chase Rittenhouse. Videos taken of the scene from other witnesses show Rosenbaum threw a plastic bag at Rittenhouse but he was otherwise unarmed."

So where is this video that shows he's an aggressor? If it exists, then yes, he's guilty. But no news sources seem to be talking about it, so where are you getting this from?

[Xyonai]

And moving away from the Rittenhouse case for a moment: The Defense attorney in the Ahmaud Arbery case says he doesn't want any more "Black pastors" like Al Sharpton to sit with Arbery's family because it could influence the jury.

Video in Link.

[cubby]

Why the fuck is this murder trial turning into a deep dive into video interpolation algorithms. They don't even have any particular fact they're trying to dispute.

The defense is using it as a distraction. From my very limited court experience, it's a common tactic. The jury is thinking about video interpolation algorithms instead of Rittenhouse murdering someone he knew was unarmed.

[Edge-]

And moving away from the Rittenhouse case for a moment: The Defense attorney in the Ahmaud Arbery case says he doesn't want any more "Black pastors" like Al Sharpton to sit with Arbery's family because it could influence the jury.

Video in Link.

Man, the judge really needs to call these fucks out on the blatant racism and tell them if they keep it up that their client is going to find new representation that's not so overtly fuckin racist.

[Aurrora]

Why the fuck is this murder trial turning into a deep dive into video interpolation algorithms. They don't even have any particular fact they're trying to dispute.

Because the prosecution is trying to introduce into evidence an altered image from the furthest camera available with the claim that it shows Kyle pointing his weapon as Joshua Ziminski. No one has testified that this happened. The state could have called either Kelly Ziminski or Joshua Ziminski to testify on whether or not this happened but they didn't.