When Kyle's own life hangs on the line - again! Jury too scared to rule. An UPDATE on Deliberations

a reply to: SentientBunnySuit

CNN: Not Guilty
Fox News: Not Guilty
ABC: Not Guilty

YEEEEEEEEEEEEE-HA!

This is what was needed: a solid message to those who would riot and ruin thinking they are above the law. Yes, you can riot and scare people and hurt folks... but if you do, those folks can hurt you back. Go back to picketing with silly signs, because no one will care if you riot and wind up all dead and stuff.

TheRedneck

Good now hand him a gun and swear him in as a deputy marshal.

I thought about deleting my last post, im not trying to say look how tuff or crazy I am ... i was kinda hoping ..someone who's thinking about protesting will tell the next people that protest that could happen to us ...but after watching that guy on ( Signals live stream ) ... No amount of trying to relate to him What would happen ... if he was any where near the right guy tearing his sh*t # up and or trying to do them bodily Harm ...is going to change his mind,

I was bussed to an all black neighborhood in 5th and 6th grade ... one morning when I was in class I ask somebody where Paul ****** was today ... they said he was Killed last night when him a 13yr old and another 6th grader was trying to break in this old man's house that kept telling kids around his neighborhood if I ever catch someone do it I'm going to shoot them, I don't know if the old man saw him and knew if he was a little kid or not but he shot him in the face a killed him while the other 2 were lifting him up, all of those involved happened to be black ... that point doesn't really matter Paul getting killed did but that old man started staying home from work to try and catch who was taking his Sh*t ... any that was bussed there to that school know it happened ... different stories but same out come ... leave people's sh*t alone ... I should delete both of these now ... but maybe it'll help just 1 ....

This may have been mentioned, but I'm wondering if the Feds will take the case now??

Here in NY, you can beat a gun charge through a State trial, but when acquitted, you can then be arrested by the Feds on Federal weapons charges.

No one ever wins a Federal Trial.

a reply to: MrBuddy

There aren’t any grounds for that. Plus it would seem highly prejudicial if they tried to.

He didn’t cross state lines with a firearm nor did he violate any civil rights. What part of the USC can they charge him without also running into problems of double jeopardy?

originally posted by: Ahabstar
Good now hand him a gun and swear him in as a deputy marshal.

This was my thinking. Since so much was stolen from him, including career prospects in LE, it’s the least they could do

He could walk into any test in this area, and provided he did well, be assured a position

He is highly popular among LE in these parts (PA backwoods)

Gentle reminder that this trial wasn't only about defending the second amendment, the prosecution knowingly abused the fifth amendment and the media abused the first amendment. All freedoms are under constant attack from petty tyrants.

People who are mad at this just outcome are an embarassment to all mankind.

I will never feel sympathy for pedos and wife stranglers who not content with burning down a city decided to attack a 17-year old.

a reply to: SentientBunnySuit

That's the reason I have been Watching and listening, I need to know I'm not the only one WHO feels that way, there not close to my town today I'm not not anywhere close enough too Help ... for those where its happening this evening but I know there's way better at doing this than me, and sometimes I scare myself, they'll take it if we let them.

Breaking news: Rittenhouse verdict protests sensibly planned for cities where citizens are least likely to be armed.

mobile.twitter.com...

Angry people are suppose protest due process.

Brandon talking out of his arse again.

And that's what he calls standing by the jury verdict.

Very interesting the judge also ruled on the mistrial motion. Almost like he wanted to put an extra bullet in the case just to make sure it didn't get back up

a reply to: neo96

President "says he's angry and concerned with the Verdict " wtf no wonder that one stupid m* f* on the live feed ...



doesn't get it, he'll our own President Doesn't ... !

originally posted by: JBurns
Very interesting the judge also ruled on the mistrial motion. Almost like he wanted to put an extra bullet in the case just to make sure it didn't get back up

Ahh, that was the "with prejudice" ?

a reply to: MrBuddy

For the Feds to prosecute the case, there has to be a violation of Federal law which is substantially different from the charges he was just acquitted on. Otherwise, that would be double jeopardy.

I don't know of any such charges that could be leveled at Kyle, but then again I am not a lawyer... just an old redneck who had to learn the law young in self-defense.

The state is done. The judge dismissed the case with prejudice, meaning it cannot be re-opened without a hearing from a judge that he will look at new evidence... and after the shameful fiasco performed by the state in the courtroom, I doubt that will ever happen.

Civil trial for wrongful death? Maybe... but the evidence in this trial could be introduced by the defense, and I don't think that would be helpful. Additional criminal or civil charges against those involved with the prosecution and the media attempting to interfere with the jury? I doubt it just because of the political climate... but there is nothing legal preventing that.

TheRedneck

a reply to: JBurns

The judge IMO did exactly what a judge is supposed to do. The jury are the "finders of fact," not the judge. The judge can only overrule a jury verdict by declaring a mistrial on legal issues (and he had plenty of those to choose from), but even that can be troublesome and itself can force an appeal.

No, he allowed the jury to do what the jury is supposed to do, but kept his options open just in case. That is proper behavior for a judge.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

yes it wouldbe a
PITA BUT TAKING CERTAIN PARTIES TO THE CLEANERS IS WHAT SHOULD BE FIRST. ooops had caps lock on sorry.

Now we know what the meaning of looters will be shot.

When the police pull back and do nothing, it's time for the property owners and neighbors to stand up and take charge.
www.google.com...:1637367690938&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjViNb 81aX0AhUvlGoFHQXTCEkQ_AUoAXoECAEQAw&biw=1400&bih=692&dpr=1

This should be the law in all states with stand your ground laws. That would stop most looters and arsonist if people could take these scum. out.

a reply to: vonclod

Yep! You are spot on vonclod

I was shocked to hear it. Needless to say it is quite unprecedented. Usually reserved for egregious violations of law or someone's Constitutional rights, even more rare to see it after the verdict

To me, it shows the judge was keeping this up his sleeve all along. It is refreshing to see a pro-defendant Judge, instead of a rubber stamp for the government

A few hundred more like Judge Schroeder and we could actually make progress on criminal justice reform. Just need to modify the sentencing laws also! Way too much people behind bars in this country

a reply to: TheRedneck

Agree 100% TR

Somehow, despite the polarized pre-war climate in this country and abuse by the media/elected officials, this judge still managed to ensure KR got a fair trial

It is astonishing