And now we are hearing more from the lunatic left.
Civil rights attorney David Henderson said the Kyle Rittenhouse trial may have had a “very different outcome” if it had a “different jury.”
If they had a jury did ignored the law and went by activist feelings, then of course EVERYONE would be guilty.
“There’s an inherent conflict when you have ‘stand your ground’ laws in open carry states where you’ve got political division,” Henderson said.
By allowing rioters, looters, and criminals having a PURGE type of night while the police are being prevented to protect people and property from such CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES.
Individuals like this person WANTS anarchy.
Then we have this in the US systeem:
As an 18-year-old online college student, Kyle Rittenhouse wouldn’t appear to have deep pockets to pay for any award should he face —and lose — a civil trial in the shooting deaths of the two men he was acquitted of killing on Friday.
That is something I don’t understand with the US judicial system.
You can be innocent yet still get sued for revenge/damages.
If Rittenhouse were taken to civil trial for wrongful death, the teen could claim self-defense, as he did during the criminal case. He has said that he went to Kenosha to protect property from rioters but that he came under attack and feared for his life when he shot three people, two of them fatally.
But the burden of proof civil plaintiffs need to make, by a preponderance of evidence rather than beyond a reasonable doubt, is much lower than what Kenosha prosecutors faced during the criminal trial, legal experts say.
He DID come under attack. That is a PROVEN FACT.
And all three he shot WERE ACCTACKING him. That too is a PROVEN FACT.
“In a civil case you just have to prove negligence,” said Rory Little, a professor at the University of California Hastings College of Law. “Did his conduct fall below the standard of care that the average person would have?”
Once again, I would say NO.
He was actively trying to fell the violence and was being chased down by those WANT to commit violence.
If anyone was being chased, and then being knocked down and attacked with WEAPONS (kicks, skateboard to the head, and a pointed gun), the average person would have felt their life was in serious threat of being KILLED, and to preserve one’s life (when escape was no longer an option) he did what he had to. He defended himself by the means he had left when running away was no longer an option.
I see no failure in due negligence.
But then, with an activist jury that this Civil rights attorney wants, you and indeed GUILTY without the need for evidence.
.
