Black man shot in Kenosha, riots starting all over again...

[jamil]

It ain’t lost yet. They still have jury tampering.

 

[Cameramonkey]

Fortunately the law isn't based on this moronic idea of "yOu DiDn'T nEed tO bE tHeRe!" and it seems the judge in the Rittenhouse trial knows the law pretty darn well. Hopefully that translates over to instructions to the jury.

I heard a good analogy the other day to combat this silly argument: Imagine you're sitting at home late one night and realize you're out of milk. You like eating cereal for breakfast, so you decide to venture out at 2 a.m. to the Kwik-i-Mart for a half gallon of milk. On the way, a drunk runs a red light and t-bones your car.

The drunk doesn't get to argue away culpability by claiming, "you shouldn't have been out so late. You could have waited until morning to get the milk. You didn't need to be there."

No, but your car insurance can and probably will. You are always assigned partial fault. "It wouldnt have happened if you werent there." Granted you may only be 10% at fault, but they will never say you are totally not at fault.

 

[terrehautian]

I had an insurance company from someone who hit me try to do that. Went through my insurance company who assigned no fault to me. Got my deductible back a while later.

 

[Cameramonkey]

I had an insurance company from someone who hit me try to do that. Went through my insurance company who assigned no fault to me. Got my deductible back a while later.

I didnt mean to imply it meant that sliver of fault would impact things financially. They just seem to usually assign at least some blame to the victim without causing them any loss. "yeah, it wouldnt have happened if you hadnt decided to drive down THAT road at THAT speed at THAT exact time. But its still not enough fault to make you culpable in any significant way. The guy that ran the red light and put you in the hospital is still fully responsible. "

But there HAVE been times where they try to split fault. Like if you got nailed by a speeder when you thought you could make the turn and would have if they werent doing double the speed limit. (a left turn with a blind hill/curve ahead where without him speeding you could have made it)

 

[1DOWN4UP]

 

[1DOWN4UP]

 

[1DOWN4UP]

 

[1DOWN4UP]

 

[1DOWN4UP]

 

[1DOWN4UP]

The Hat Trick...a rapist,a burgler, a wife beater all in one night.

 

[KellyinAvon]

Two Kenosha threads going, they are the same but different.

This thread is discussion of past and future riots, KR memes, etc.

Trial discussion here:

Rittenhouse pleads 'Not Guilty'

It's amazing that they say 'he was the only person to kill anyone' and yet he was being pursued, attacked, beaten, and had a gun pointed at his head at the moment that he shot one of the aggressors, and yet they have charged him with murder when he was the one defending himself...and it's caught...

www.indianagunowners.com

 

[AtTheMurph]

No, but your car insurance can and probably will. You are always assigned partial fault. "It wouldnt have happened if you werent there." Granted you may only be 10% at fault, but they will never say you are totally not at fault.

That's a claim adjusting procedure not an actual legal issue.

I think the insurance companies just agree to do that as a form of reinsurance where risks are spread across carriers.

 

[Cameramonkey]

That's a claim adjusting procedure not an actual legal issue.

I think the insurance companies just agree to do that as a form of reinsurance where risks are spread across carriers.

I think I've seen it jotted down by the officer on the report. But wouldnt swear to it. But once again, it typically has no bearing on the outcome of who pays.

 

[BigRed]

 

[1DOWN4UP]

 

[ghuns]

The judge in Kyle Rittenhouse's trial is considering lesser charges. Here's what that means | CNN

The judge in the homicide trial of Kyle Rittenhouse met with attorneys Friday morning for a conference on jury instructions, telling Rittenhouse that presenting lesser offenses to the jury lowers the possibility of a second trial but increases the risk of a conviction.

www.cnn.com

Prosecution knows they lost, now they are in damage control. They should not be allowed to do lesser charges unless the defense gets time to defend those charges. No new, lesser charges should be allowed at all, IMO, since the case has been rested on both sides. Especially if the Jury can decide on their own. I honestly have no idea how this works.

The defense has to agree to allow the jury to consider lesser charges.

The attorneys said which ones they agreed to, the judge then asked the kid, are you OK with this? Do you understand all of this? Have you been coerced to agree to this, etc, etc.

He 100% had the chance to say no and only allow the original charges to go to the jury.

 

[KLB]

The defense has to agree to allow the jury to consider lesser charges.

The attorneys said which ones they agreed to, the judge then asked the kid, are you OK with this? Do you understand all of this? Have you been coerced to agree to this, etc, etc.

He 100% had the chance to say no and only allow the original charges to go to the jury.

That is all on his lawyers though.

 

[ditcherman]

That is all on his lawyers though.

His lawyers probably got dumber having to sit through this trial with that prosecution.

 

[KLB]

His lawyers probably got dumber having to sit through this trial with that prosecution.

I'm not convinced they were that smart to begin with.

 

[AtTheMurph]