Kyle Rittenhouse packed up his gun to drive across state lines and cosplay as a police officer because he felt it was his duty, as a gun-toting Caucasian American, to go protect American Capitalism from any potential damage in the face of protesting for human rights. I don’t really care if the protesters were breaking windows, lighting a fire in a trashcan, or stealing all the gold in Gringotts, and you can read why I don’t care here. The point is, this young man — and I will call him a young man, because when our boys get shot at 14 they’re called young men, so I refuse to call a 17-year-old white murderer a child — killed two people and injured one because he created a situation where he felt like he was in danger.
That’s your recap, in case you forgot. Now, how about some very fresh hypocrisy on the part of the presiding judge? Bruce Schroeder has been a judge for over 40 years and this is his biggest case yet. Given his views on what language can be used in his courtroom, I can see that the prosecution has an uphill battle.
There are some things he won’t waiver on, such as using the word victim.
“This is a long-held opinion of mine, which very few judges, I guess, share with me. I think the word victim is a loaded, loaded word,” Schroeder said.
(cont. WISN)
And you know what? I’m not mad about it. Victim is a loaded word. It’s prejudicial and it puts the jury in a state of mind that the defendant has done something wrong. I know he has, and you know he has, but he is innocent until proven guilty. It’s the prosecution’s job to prove to the jury that Kyle is a murderer, but the deceased are not victims until Kyle has been found guilty of murder.
The judge does not keep that same energy for all loaded words though.
Schroeder said Mark Richards, one of Rittenhouse’s attorneys, could “demonize them if he wants, if he thinks it will win points with the jury,” according to the Chicago Tribune, the first to report the news.
“If more than one of them were engaged in arson, rioting, looting, I’m not going to tell the defense you can’t call them that,” the judge said.
(cont. WaPo)
If Kyle has the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, why don’t the people he shot have that same presumption? Two of them are dead and cannot defend themselves. The sole survivor has not been charged with any crimes. Kyle’s defense is that these three men were engaged in criminal activity that Kyle was trying to stop and they turned on him, so he had to kill them in self defense. Those three men have not done anything wrong in the eyes of the law, because they are still innocent American citizens!
If the prosecution can’t call them victims because Kyle is still innocent, then the defense can’t call them rioters, looters, and arsonists because they are still innocent as well.
Looks like Kyle has gotten himself a good ol’ boy up on the bench to hold his hand through his first murder trial. Emphasis on first.
Leave a Reply