Started By
Message
re: Just want to say
Posted on 9/2/20 at 7:34 pm to Bobby OG Johnson
Posted on 9/2/20 at 7:34 pm to Bobby OG Johnson
quote:
Video breakdown Twitter thread.
Oof. Another video proving Rittenhouse acted in self-defense.
Santa's head is about to explode.
1
Posted on 9/2/20 at 7:37 pm to TideSaint
quote:
Welp. Be prepared to be called fricking white trash because Robot Santa can't handle the fricking truth when it's staring him right in the face.
I’m ready lol
Posted on 9/2/20 at 7:39 pm to TideSaint
1st shot came from this gun as they were chasing Kyle. Rosenbaum also threw what looked to be a molotov cocktail at him as he was chasing him.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 7:42 pm to Bobby OG Johnson
What's that?
More evidence pointing to self-defense?
That can't be right. Rittenhouse wasn't even an EMT!! Why was he out after curfew??
More evidence pointing to self-defense?
That can't be right. Rittenhouse wasn't even an EMT!! Why was he out after curfew??
This post was edited on 9/2/20 at 7:43 pm
Posted on 9/2/20 at 7:48 pm to TideWarrior
quote:
you are still innocent until proven guilty. Or have we swung so far to the left(communist) that it no longer applies?
That’s rich. Not a whole lot of the presumption of innocence for Blake in this thread for some reason.
Presumption of innocence doesn’t really extend to the court of public opinion anyway.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 7:49 pm to TideSaint
quote:
curfew??
The curfew bullshite is some of the weakest shite I've seen about this whole thing. EVERYBODY involved was violating it. Somehow, Rittenhouse is the only one being singled out for it.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 7:50 pm to TideSaint
Kyle putting out a fire.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 7:53 pm to The Spleen
quote:
. Not a whole lot of the presumption of innocence for Blake in this thread for some reason.
Do you not understand that there were active warrants against Blake that gave LEOs probable cause to not only detain him but also arrest him? He fought them, tasers were ineffective against him and he threatened deadly force to stop a lawful arrest?
Posted on 9/2/20 at 7:56 pm to The Spleen
If You Fight The Police You Are Subject To Get Shot.
Especially while armed.
I keep hearing all this talk about Police reform but I have yet to hear anyone talk about civilian reform.
Especially while armed.
I keep hearing all this talk about Police reform but I have yet to hear anyone talk about civilian reform.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 8:06 pm to TidenUP
quote:
Do you not understand that there were active warrants against Blake that gave LEOs probable cause to not only detain him but also arrest him?
Sure.
He’s still innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, just like this shooter is.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 8:10 pm to The Spleen
He chose to violently fight being arrested and threatened deadly violence against the arresting officers. Completely different scenarios.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 8:12 pm to TidenUP
Sure, again.
He’s still innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Why is it fine to apply that standard in the Rittenhouse case, but not this one? That’s the standard set by the Constitution, right?
He’s still innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Why is it fine to apply that standard in the Rittenhouse case, but not this one? That’s the standard set by the Constitution, right?
Posted on 9/2/20 at 8:17 pm to The Spleen
quote:
He’s still innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
They tried to take him to a court of law. He didn’t want to go and started fighting.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 8:20 pm to Cobrasize
Right.
Still innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
Still innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 8:21 pm to The Spleen
Not if you refuse to go to the court of law.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 8:21 pm to The Spleen
quote:
He’s still innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
He chose to fight and threaten deadly force instead of getting his day in court. The officers reacted to the situation as it unfolded. Rittenhouse reacted as the events unfolded and then gave himself up without the threat of deadly force to the officers responsible for his arrest. One lives to see his day in court. One doesn't get his day in court because of HIS decisions.
Whether you like it or not, law enforcement is allowed to protect themselves just like citizens. The officers recognized and reacted to the threat from Blake. Rittenhouse offered no such threat when he was arrested. Again, different scenarios.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 8:26 pm to TidenUP
Yeah, I’m not arguing the merits of the case. By the Constitutional standard cited several posts up, he’s still innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
Y’all are arguing on it in the court of public opinion. There’s no standard for presumption of innocence in the court of public opinion.
Y’all are arguing on it in the court of public opinion. There’s no standard for presumption of innocence in the court of public opinion.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 8:28 pm to The Spleen
quote:
Still innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
You keep saying that as if it carries any weight for this situation. The cops weren't determining his guilt or innocence in his case. He CHOSE to not only fight, he chose to fight AND threaten deadly force against the arresting officers. Guilt or innocence is not determined at that point. The officers simply reacted to not only his already violent response to them, he threatened to use deadly force against them.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 8:38 pm to TidenUP
quote:
You keep saying that as if it carries any weight for this situation
I keep saying it because it is the Constitutional standard someone else brought up several posts back. I was wondering why that standard applied for Rittenhouse when he was labeled a murderer, but not for Blake who has been labeled a criminal.
This post was edited on 9/2/20 at 8:39 pm
Posted on 9/2/20 at 8:40 pm to The Spleen
quote:
He’s still innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Why is it fine to apply that standard in the Rittenhouse case, but not this one? That’s the standard set by the Constitution, right?
Well, one is a convicted felon who was violating a restraining order by being near his victim.
That's undeniable. Therefore, he isn't innocent.
Is it really that hard for you to comprehend the difference?
Page 17 of 26
Latest Alabama News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News