2020 Dumpster Fire (Enter at your own risk)

[UNDlaw80]

18 minutes ago, SIOUXFAN97 said:

hence the running away....and contrary to popular belief midgets can really move especially when chasing underage kids with a medic bag and a ar15 on them...

 

You need to use every option available to run away.  Initially doing as such, then turning to your attacker and saying "game on!" and killing them will get you put away faster than flies on ****.   Did he do this?  I'm not sure.   Video isn't the clearest.  I'm just stating this is where it gets tricky for him.   

 

[SIOUXFAN97]

1 minute ago, UNDlaw80 said:

 

You need to use every option available to run away.  Initially doing as such, then turning to your attacker and saying "game on!" and killing them will get you put away faster than flies on ****.  Is this what he did, I'm not sure.  I'm just stating this is where it gets tricky for him.   

 

once again...those little guys with little mans syndrome can move fast...surprisingly fast...rittenhouse's gap quickly went from 20 feet to zero feet...now it's on and little man brought a gas bomb to a  gun party and he won the grand prize.

[Walsh Hall]

10 minutes ago, Hayduke1 said:

Ok.  

Then why did they charge him with 1st degree murder?

Why?

 

Why didn't they ask you first?

Hmmmmmmmmm?

Tell us, counselor.

ROTFLMFAO

Listen to law80 on this one.  He’s on your side and indicates that the second half of the incident was likely self defense from a legal perspective, and there isn’t enough info to make a judgment on the first.

I assume (could be wrong as I’m not familiar with Wis law) that the shooter would get the self defense jury instruction meaning the State would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the shooting was NOT self defense. The shooter doesn’t need to show that it was.  That’s an incredibly high burden for the State to meet, and when the self defense instruction is given the chance of conviction is next to zero.

[SIOUXFAN97]

13 minutes ago, Hayduke1 said:

So, Mr. Internet Lawyer.

Would that be your opening statement?

(And I always thought those that represent themselves had a fool for a lawyer.  I guess that can include having a cultist as a lawyer.)

i rest my case.

[JohnboyND7]

21 minutes ago, UNDlaw80 said:

 

Per Wisconsin law (unless its the Castle Doctrine) if someone is trying to kill you, you need to exercise every avenue of possible escape before using deadly force.  You need to reasonably believe you're in imminent danger with no escape.   2nd shooting, he's all good.  First shooting is where it gets a little more tricky.      

This area of criminal law was a bit confusing in school. If I recall, it generally came down to reasonable escape, having an objectively safe way out of the situation. 95% of my classmates are bleeding hearts who seemed to think escape is ALWAYS possible so our discussions were generally unproductive.

So I suppose if a guy charges you, are you under an obligation to run? I dont know. In my mind (never been in that situation or practicing law or anything) I would think you aren't obligated to run, particularly if the guy is close because you don't know if you'll outrun him. 

Whole thing is a mess lol.

[SIOUXFAN97]

1 minute ago, JohnboyND7 said:

This area of criminal law was a bit confusing in school. If I recall, it generally came down to reasonable escape, having an objectively safe way out of the situation. 95% of my classmates are bleeding hearts who seemed to think escape is ALWAYS possible so our discussions were generally unproductive.

So I suppose if a guy charges you, are you under an obligation to run? I dont know. In my mind (never been in that situation or practicing law or anything) I would think you aren't obligated to run, particularly if the guy is close because you don't know if you'll outrun him. 

Whole thing is a mess lol.

and he the midget already threw a molotov cocktail at him and when your running with the back to the midget you don't know if he has another one and if that hits that kid he's more than likely a dead kid.

[UNDlaw80]

23 minutes ago, TheFlop said:

You truly are delusional.  Police haven't been allowed to do their job throughout 90% of these riots because of where they have occured (liberal Democrat cities). If I continually got thrown under the bus like they have I also wouldn't go out of my way to kick out people that share the same goal of stopping the destruction.  Stay in la la land.

 

I'm talking about this specific incident.  In this case, the Kenosha PDs hands were not tied to the extent it prevented them from policing the militia at that particular point.  The police had a job to do.  They ***ed up.  End of story.   No excuses.  

 

Seriously, I hate PC culture as much as anybody.  I thought the right-wing would be there with me on this, but this isn't always so.  You guys have your own PC culture in which any criticism of police, military, country is generally met with utter disdain.  

 

[Hayduke1]

4 minutes ago, SIOUXFAN97 said:

and he the midget already threw a molotov cocktail at him and when your running with the back to the midget you don't know if he has another one and if that hits that kid he's more than likely a dead kid.

Counselor, is this the midget in question?

 

[JohnboyND7]

1 minute ago, Hayduke1 said:

Counselor, is this the midget in question?

 

Lmaooo OK thats funny

 

[Walsh Hall]

5 minutes ago, JohnboyND7 said:

This area of criminal law was a bit confusing in school. If I recall, it generally came down to reasonable escape, having an objectively safe way out of the situation. 95% of my classmates are bleeding hearts who seemed to think escape is ALWAYS possible so our discussions were generally unproductive.

So I suppose if a guy charges you, are you under an obligation to run? I dont know. In my mind (never been in that situation or practicing law or anything) I would think you aren't obligated to run, particularly if the guy is close because you don't know if you'll outrun him. 

Whole thing is a mess lol.

For practical purposes, what matters is the instruction that is given to the jury.  The issues you bring up are questions of fact for the jury to sort out based on the rather generic, usually pattern, jury instruction.

If you haven’t seen the pattern ND instructions they are online at sband.org.  What a jury has to deal with is quite different than what most people think.

Thats why if you can get the self defense instruction it typically creates enough confusion/doubt for an acquittal.

[UNDlaw80]

15 minutes ago, JohnboyND7 said:

This area of criminal law was a bit confusing in school. If I recall, it generally came down to reasonable escape, having an objectively safe way out of the situation. 95% of my classmates are bleeding hearts who seemed to think escape is ALWAYS possible so our discussions were generally unproductive.

So I suppose if a guy charges you, are you under an obligation to run? I dont know. In my mind (never been in that situation or practicing law or anything) I would think you aren't obligated to run, particularly if the guy is close because you don't know if you'll outrun him. 

Whole thing is a mess lol.

 

Are you obligated to run?  Legally, that depends on the state.  In Wisconsin you have the duty to first retreat from a threatening situation if you can do so with complete safety.   But like previously mentioned,  there are so many other mitigating factors regarding what the jury hears.    

[UNDBIZ]

3 minutes ago, UNDlaw80 said:

 

Are you obligated to run?  That depends on the state.  In Wisconsin (and N. Dakota for that matter) you have the duty to first retreat from a threatening situation if you can do so with complete safety.    

I'm not an attorney, but doesn't this pretty clearly give him an out in this situation?  

[JohnboyND7]

2 minutes ago, UNDBIZ said:

I'm not an attorney, but doesn't this pretty clearly give him an out in this situation?  

As my legal writing teacher (and a million other lawyers will say) "if you feel the need to say its clear it probably isn't!"

[UNDBIZ]

3 minutes ago, JohnboyND7 said:

As my legal writing teacher (and a million other lawyers will say) "if you feel the need to say its clear it probably isn't!"

Attorneys can and will argue about anything as long as they're getting paid.

[FSSD]

20 hours ago, Hayduke1 said:

So. 

I can shoot into a crowd and as long as I don't hit anybody, it's all good. 

'Merica!!!!  

Actually, I live in the Twin Cities - we call it MSP on a Thursday night...   50 dead so far this year and many more shot.  So, sad.

[BarnWinterSportsEngelstad]

Is Ruddy going to stir the pot tonight?

[UNDlaw80]

46 minutes ago, UNDBIZ said:

I'm not an attorney, but doesn't this pretty clearly give him an out in this situation?  

He won't get off scot-free.  That's a given.  But murder charges?  Who knows.  Imo, it really depends on what they have on video; which i'm sure prosecutors have tons of.  It happened downtown; there's a hospital nearby and that gas station would also have cameras.      

6 charges brought against him now.

-2 charges of first degree reckless homicide
-attempted first degree intentional homicide
-2 charges of first degree recklessly endangering safety
-possession of a dangerous weapon

 

 

[Ranger]

4 minutes ago, UNDlaw80 said:

He won't get off scot-free.  That's a given.  But murder charges?  Who knows.  Imo, it really depends on what they have on video; which i'm sure prosecutors have tons of.  It happened downtown; there's a hospital nearby and that gas station would also have cameras.      

6 charges brought against him now.

-2 charges of first degree reckless homicide
-attempted first degree intentional homicide
-2 charges of first degree recklessly endangering safety
-possession of a dangerous weapon

 

 

He’s gonna get plenty of time to explore his feminine tendencies.  

[jdub27]

1 hour ago, SIOUXFAN97 said:

and he the midget already threw a molotov cocktail at him and when your running with the back to the midget you don't know if he has another one and if that hits that kid he's more than likely a dead kid.

Turns out a plastic bag is now the same as a molotov cocktail. But one makes for a better story. 

 

[Hayduke1]

Just now, jdub27 said:

Turns out a plastic bag is now the same as a molotov cocktail. But one makes for a better story. 

 

Color me surprised.

Not.

[jdub27]

Just now, Hayduke1 said:

Color me surprised.

Not.

There is a whole lot of narrative framing and wrongdoing by both sides, there is no moral high ground so not sure why you're trying to claim it here. 

[UNDBIZ]

14 minutes ago, UNDlaw80 said:

He won't get off scot-free. 

Agreed. 

[bison73]

8 hours ago, Redneksioux said:

I’ll admit, this is the first time I’ve ever witnessed (on video) someone shoot multiple people and be allowed to walk right by police still carrying the AR.

 

I don’t care how far from Illinois he is. Point is he was allowed to walk away openly carrying his weapon, right by the police, no questions asked.

If he was black you really think he’d still be alive?

Please tell me -us how the police were supposed to know he was the shooter?

[Hayduke1]

28 minutes ago, bison73 said:

Please tell me -us how the police were supposed to know he was the shooter?

Exactly.  After all, he wasn't a Black man...

[bison73]

14 hours ago, BarnWinterSportsEngelstad said:

Giuliani’s appearance Thursday, on the final night of the convention when the president himself is set to accept the GOP nomination, underscores the extent to which Trump has turned the GOP convention into a celebration of himself rather than his party.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/why-trump-is-giving-rudy-a-prime-slot-at-the-convention/ar-BB18q8Gu?ocid=msedgdhp

I was more interested in the in what he had to say.