Justice

Not guilty on all counts!

I’m crying into my soup in the office. (It’s lunchtime).

What a great day.

14 thoughts on “Justice

  1. …and now on to the years of therapy that kid’s gonna need. I’m glad the jury decided to go with the law, and not sacrifice the kid to current politics. God help them against media and the crazies (but I repeat myself), though. I wouldn’t want to be in their shoes. What are the odds MSNBC or some other stalker doesn’t leak their identities?

    I think I’d be willing to contribute to a “Rittenhouse Jury Personal Security fund” that would pay for them to get out of Dodge for a while if they need to.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Why did BLM and its supporters so badly want a conviction here?

    Am I wrong to think that it is because they do not want to let the idea become established that they could face legally-sanctioned resistance in kind to their use of street violence?

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Curiously, all three men shot by Rittenhouse turned out to have criminal records for very violent crime. It’s either a massive coincidence or violent criminals were sicced on a population of defenseless civilians while the authorities retreated and let the civilians get hurt.

      Like

      1. Mainstream media schmucks keep calling Kyle a white supremacist, but if he was, he was the worst white supremacist ever, since he only shot white guys. You know there had to have been some nonwhite people in that crowd — why didn’t the mean nasty white supremacist pick on them?

        Like

        1. Because that would be rational, and lefties are all about THA FEELZ. And since Rittenhouse’s actions make rioters feel uncomfortable, perhaps even afraid, when they go out at night to loot, burn, and assault, that makes him a raaaacist. Because that’s the only word they have in their stunted vocabularies to describe people who make them feel anything other than completely affirmed and actualized.

          Liked by 1 person

      1. (I don’t follow U.S. politics all that closely so please excuse me if I’m making a commonplace observation that many others have already made.)

        In modern states, the state typically holds a monopoly on force.

        In authoritarian/totalitarian states, the governing clique often licenses its power to non-state actors such as party militants and private militias to act on its behalf in an ex officio manner in order to preserve the regime’s fiction of constitutional legality.

        It seems to me BLM has to this point been licensed to employ street violence on behalf of the Democratic Party. They can intimidate, apply beatings, loot, destroy public and private property without fear of much in the way of legal sanction, if any at all. The police have been withdrawn from the theatre by administrative order so it is unsafe for citizens to defend either their own property, in particular, or public order, in general.

        So, it seems to me that for the “left” this trial was all about trying to preserve BLM/Antifa’s exclusive licence to street violence on their behalf. And so, they won’t at all be pleased to let the result stand.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Seems plausible.

          From the more rightward end of things, it looks like violent criminals have been bused around to various cities for nightly looting-and-mayhem parties while police are told to stand down and residents cower in their homes with the doors locked and the curtains drawn, hoping they won’t be targeted. Given that police were told not to interfere and criminals were not being prosecuted… it was an open question whether residents would be allowed to resist in any way. This seems to be a qualified “yes”. But you’d better make sure there’s enough video to exonerate you.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. “you’d better make sure there’s enough video to exonerate you”

            A point well taken.

            And, whether this actually changes anything on the ground is an open question. But it is the fear of such change that I think might be behind the “left’s” virulent reaction against Rittenhouse.

            Liked by 1 person

        2. “And so, they won’t at all be pleased to let the result stand.”

          Developed within English common law, enshrined in the Magna Carta, trial by jury rather than judgement by the Crown’s officers has up to now been a unchallengeable pillar of democratic life.

          Trial by a jury of peers was purpose-built in the 12th/13th centuries to constrain the state’s arbitrary powers in relation to individuals.

          What we have seen in the past 24 hours are calls from many Democratic Party leaders and their media chatterati to abolish the jury system as we know it because… racism/white supremacy.

          Juries are guilty of wrong-think, it is being said, because of immutable characteristics of jurors such as their skin colour or their attachment to “white” values.

          The two wicked totalitarianisms of the 20th Century reasoned in exactly the same way.

          Democratic institutions were irredeemably contaminated by the bourgeoise and bourgeois thought or, alternatively untermenschen and “Jew-thinking,” and so had to be abolished in favour of establishing a “true democracy” which “protected” the proletariat or Ayrans.

          We are now well into some very, very scary stuff.

          Like

  3. Not so fast!

    Prosecutors Find Mail-In Jury Votes At 3AM, Rittenhouse Now Guilty

    KENOSHA, WI—In a stunning reversal, Kyle Rittenhouse awoke this morning to discover that he had been found guilty after all.

    Prosecutors explained that during the night, they had found dozens of mail-in jury votes declaring the defendant guilty on all counts. Apparently, boxes of these mail-in votes arrived in a truck at the courthouse around 3:00 am.

    Attorneys for Mr. Rittenhouse were dumbfounded as to how such a thing could have happened, raising questions as to the validity of mail-in jury voting. They stated: “We’ve never heard of this. This isn’t part of the legal system. Where did these votes even come from?”

    “How DARE you question the sanctity of our criminal justice system!” cried the prosecuting attorneys. “There is no justice until EVERY vote is counted!”

    Prosecutors then explained that it was a new COVID measure they had just instituted. “But given how well it’s worked out,” they said, “we’re planning on making it permanent.”

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.