Prosecutors want to show Rittenhouse video at trial
apnews.com
MILWAUKEE (AP) — Prosecutors want a video of Kyle Rittenhouse accepted into evidence that they say shows him talking about wanting to shoot people, footage taken about two weeks before Rittenhouse fatally shot two protesters in Wisconsin and wounded a third.

Prosecutors want a video of Kyle Rittenhouse accepted into evidence that they say shows him talking about wanting to shoot people, footage taken about two weeks before Rittenhouse fatally shot two protesters in Wisconsin and wounded a third.

  • structuralize_this [none/use name]
    ·
    2 years ago

    948.60 is the "ambiguous" law, but it's absolutely not ambiguous. I looked into the legislative history on this a while back:

    • Current: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/948/60/2/a
    • 2005: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2005/related/acts/163
    • 1991: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/1991/related/acts/18

    The historical intent was to allow people under 18 to possess a firearm if they were hunting. I don't remember what the weasel word nuance was and don't care. The prosecutor didn't even argue that it applied, just declined to even try.

    There are a non-zero number of people from this exact situation currently in Wisconsin prison.

    https://www.google.com/search?q=948.60+site%3Awicourts.gov

    Here's a quote from one such individuals appeal:

    After independently reviewing the records and the no-merit report, we conclude there are no issues of arguable merit that could be raised on appeal and summarily affirm the judgments of conviction. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21. https://www.wicourts.gov/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=108193

    The court assigned lawyer argued that another court assigned lawyer did nothing wrong during the initial trial/plea agreement by having his assigned "criminal" plea to a law that doesn't apply to white fascists. :lenin-rage:

    It's selective enforcement by design.