@tinkercreek

Thank you, dear.

@Redheadedgammy

Thank you, dear. Your kind words warm my heart.

@bobwjr

Thank you, Bob. You helped me feel better.

@Paddypereira

Thank you. You helped me feel better.

No problem.

@Buck

I knew Kyle Rittenhouse would be acquitted when the judge ruled people he shot and murdered cannot be called "victims." Instead they had to be called "looters" and "rioters." It was an almost an all-white jury, too.

They failed to present a case, regardless of wether or not the prosecution could use the word “victims” or not....

Hell I would convict the little prick just for looking like an arrogant jerk!? But that’s now how the system is supposed to work. The prosecution is supposed to present a case for guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, which they did not....

@LiterateHiker I also knew that same very thing. The courtroom could not have been much different Kyle and the judge were father and son.

I do believe the judge helped poison the case from the beginning when he told prosecutors they couldn’t use the word “victim”, but the defense could certainly use the words “rioter,” etc. The prosecutor wasn’t good at presenting his case, but he was also hamstrung by the judge.

@Redheadedgammy Not being able to call them victims hardly hamstrung the prosecution, fact!

@Buck Words matter, and I believe we all know how Innuendo works. The Fact remains, had that punk not been there trying to be a Vigilante two people would not have been murdered!

@Redheadedgammy I agree he’s a punk, and I also agree if he wasn’t trying to be a vigilante that people wouldn’t have been “shot”.
Unfortunately that doesn’t change the fact that the prosecution failed to make their case!

@Redheadedgammy As far as your statement that words matter, they aren’t “victims” until it’s proven in court to be the case.

@Buck The victims were murdered by being shot, why is that hard to say?

@Redheadedgammy They are only “victims” if it was cold blooded murder. Why is that so hard for you to accept?

Like it or not, they aren’t victims unless they were murdered, which the court failed to prove!

If the prosecution had a case, they would have won with or without using the word victim, true story.

@Buck Looked pretty “cold blooded “ to me. I call it as I see it.

@Redheadedgammy Looked cold blooded? The prosecutions OWN witnesses testified that the initial shots were fired as individuals were trying to take his gun from him. You clearly didn’t follow the trial, or only see what you want to see....

@Redheadedgammy You can blame it on the prosecution not being able to use certain language during the trial if you wish. But they lost because their witnesses bolstered the defenses claims, and they failed to make their case, no other reason is needed.

@Buck I watched the whole trial, I am retired so have the time, and saw everything that was presented. What I saw was people trying to disarm someone who was escalating the tension and fear already present in the situation. The kid put himself where he should not have been. Let’s agree we disagree and leave it at that.

@Redheadedgammy He clearly wasn’t the only person who put himself somewhere he shouldn’t have been. And if you watched the whole trial, then you are aware the prosecution made a shitty case for the charges. Hell I wanted the kid to fry as much as anybody. But there’s not a chance in hell I would have convicted him after hearing all the witnesses and testimony....
If you could put your emotions aside for a spell, you will agree the prosecution failed to make their case.....

@Redheadedgammy All the defense has to show in a criminal case to win is “reasonable doubt”. There was all kinds of reasonable doubt in this case, and that’s a fact!

@Buck I understand. Just to bad the prosecutor was so bad at presenting his case.

@Buck your comment about “emotions” was not needed here. That was sexist. The rest of your comments I agree with.

@Redheadedgammy I thought their case sucked quite honestly. But all they had to go on is the witnesses and one shitty video. They rolled the dice with their witnesses and took the good with the bad. I’m not sure they had the bullets they needed to win the case from the start. That statement isn’t meant to imply wether or not Rittenhouse is guilty or not, just saying the prosecution had a tough case to argue.

@Redheadedgammy My comment about “emotions” was far from sexist, although your reply to it certainly was....

@Buck Gaslighting me now eh? I know what I read and it was sexist to tell me my to “put my emotions aside for a spell”. You know nothing of me as a person nor about my emotions.

@Redheadedgammy Hardly gaslighting?! Seems to me men and women alike on both sides are emotional about this verdict!? Explain to me how stating that emotions are involved is sexist? I’ve got all day.....

@Redheadedgammy Never mind, don’t bother, I’m done trying to be logical and sensible to an emotional woman!! There, now I’m being sexist, now fuck off already....

@Buck Truly what I expected of you. Let’s Go Brandon to you as well!

@KKGator

Thank you, dear. I feel better.