• GarbageShoot [he/him]
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Intent: The presumption of his intent as "acting belligerent" is an assumption. Kyle's stated intent was to protect property and provide medical aid. It's vital to separate one's interpretation of his actions from the actual intent.

    Was I imagining him, just like a day or two before the incident, being beat up by a bunch of black kids for assaulting a woman? It sure looked like him on that video, and now he's a Fox News darling. I sure wonder what his intentions were if his stated concern was "protecting property".

    Law Self-Defense: The trial's core issue was whether Rittenhouse acted in self-defense. The jury found him not guilty on all counts, implying that, legally speaking, his actions were in line with self-defense statutes in Wisconsin.

    That's not what a jury is or does, moron. They are under no legal obligation to uphold the law and merely rule as they personally see being right or vote with the majority to get out of jury duty quickly.

    • JuryNullification [he/him]
      ·
      1 year ago

      That's not what a jury is or does, moron. They are under no legal obligation to uphold the law and merely rule as they personally see being right or vote with the majority to get out of jury duty quickly.

      That’s right.