Do Prosecuting Attorneys Have Morals?

[BFritz21]

By this point, it's pretty obvious that Kyle Rittenhouse acted in self-defense and will be found innocent. If not by the jury, he will likely be found innocent on appeal.

My question is, with him obviously being innocent, do the prosecuting attorneys have no morals?

Doing their best to put a teenager away for 60 years for obviously acting in self-defense?

Are all prosecutors like that? They have no hesitations about putting a teenager away for a long time because he was defending himself from serious injury or possible death?

Do they have morals that they just ignore during trial?

Do ethics not matter when you're a lawyer?

[BigPapaKain]

Holy ****. I've never seen anyone question a prosecutor like this.

I wonder if the defendant's well established political leanings are causing this kind of thing.

Meanwhile defense attorneys are getting people off for pedophilia and murder, and nobody around here says a ***** word.

Strange times.

Edit: I should probably add that the prosecutor in the Rittenhouse trial is a total jackass.

[BFritz21]

(11-18-2021, 10:26 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: Holy ****. I've never seen anyone question a prosecutor like this.

I wonder if the defendant's well established political leanings are causing this kind of thing.

Meanwhile defense attorneys are getting people off for pedophilia and murder, and nobody around here says a ***** word.

Strange times.

Edit: I should probably add that the prosecutor in the Rittenhouse trial is a total jackass.

This has nothing to do with that. I agree that those kind of people are scum.

I, however, was asking about the prosecuting attorney in this case specifically.

Care to answer the question?

[*rfaulk34*]

(11-18-2021, 09:52 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: By this point, it's pretty obvious that Kyle Rittenhouse acted in self-defense and will be found innocent. If not by the jury, he will likely be found innocent on appeal.

My question is, with him obviously being innocent, do the prosecuting attorneys have no morals?  

Doing their best to put a teenager away for 60 years for obviously acting in self-defense?

Are all prosecutors like that? They have no hesitations about putting a teenager away for a long time because he was defending himself from serious injury or possible death?

Do they have morals that they just ignore during trial?

Do ethics not matter when you're a lawyer?

If you build a fire, sit too close to it and get burnt, do you blame the fire?

[BFritz21]

(11-19-2021, 01:36 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: If you build a fire, sit too close to it and get burnt, do you blame the fire?

You blame yourself.

I'm not seeing your point...........

[BigPapaKain]

(11-18-2021, 10:43 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: This has nothing to do with that. I agree that those kind of people are scum.

I, however, was asking about the prosecuting attorney in this case specifically.

Care to answer the question?

I did answer the question as it relates to the case in question.

[Sled21]

No, all Prosecutors are not like that. I have worked with some very fine prosecutors. This Binger, or whatever his name is, is obviously trying to make a name for himself so he can run for higher office, like Governor, on the back of locking a 17 year old up for life with no parole. He has overcharged, criticized the defendant to the jury for exercising his right to have an attorney before making a statement (the smartest thing that kid did that night), he has tampered with witnesses and tried to get them to change their stories, and withheld best evidence from the defense, among other things. Rittenhouse is guaranteed at the very least an appeal due to all of this, and will likely get a mistrial declared if the jury finds him guilty of anything.(which is why the judge is waiting on the verdict before ruling on the mistrial motions.) These two prosecutors are at high risk of being sanctioned by the courts and could very well lose their law licenses before this is all said and done.

[jj22]

Only politics would have people turn on Prosecutors given what all Defense attorney's defend and how hard Prosecutors have to work to prove unreasonable doubt....

[jj22]

(11-19-2021, 02:09 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: You blame yourself.

I'm not seeing your point..........

Kyle wanted to be grown, and now faces grown consequences rather he's found guilty or not. He has no one to blame for his situation but himself. He had a choice. Stay home, or play hero. That's on him and only him.
Acting big and bad then taking the stand and "crying" like a kid that got caught with his hands in the cookie jar proves he still doesn't understand that actions have consequences. 
Which is why none of us regardless of political party should condone 17 year old "vigilantes". But we are going to see plenty of them if he's found not guilty. And that, a country being run by 17 year old vigilante's is something we should never have had to witness. 

[GMDino]

(11-18-2021, 09:52 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: By this point, it's pretty obvious that Kyle Rittenhouse acted in self-defense and will be found innocent. If not by the jury, he will likely be found innocent on appeal.

My question is, with him obviously being innocent, do the prosecuting attorneys have no morals?  

Doing their best to put a teenager away for 60 years for obviously acting in self-defense?

Are all prosecutors like that? They have no hesitations about putting a teenager away for a long time because he was defending himself from serious injury or possible death?

Do they have morals that they just ignore during trial?

Do ethics not matter when you're a lawyer?

Some do.  Some defense attorneys do.

Some don't.

[*rfaulk34*]

(11-19-2021, 02:09 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: You blame yourself.

I'm not seeing your point...........

You used the word "obvious" a lot in your OP. 

If you create the situation that causes you to have to use self-defense, doesn't that have to be discussed?

[Dill]

(11-19-2021, 01:36 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: If you build a fire, sit too close to it and get burnt, do you blame the fire?

Is it a Democratic fire or a Republican fire?

[jj22]

(11-19-2021, 12:46 PM)Dill Wrote: Is it a Democratic fire or a Republican fire?

Self accountability is no longer a thing for Republicans we are seeing. 

[BigPapaKain]

(11-19-2021, 12:46 PM)Dill Wrote: Is it a Democratic fire or a Republican fire?

The Republicans built it but are blaming the Democrats for it being hot. They don't think people can create heat in any impact full way.

[Benton]

Do defense attorneys defending obviously guilty parties have no morals?

[Sled21]

(11-19-2021, 11:32 AM)jj22 Wrote: Only politics would have people turn on Prosecutors given what all Defense attorney's defend and how hard Prosecutors have to work to prove unreasonable doubt....

Actually, when a prosecutor ignores and violates well established laws depriving a defendant of his rights, he deserves to be turned on.

[Belsnickel]

This is just further evidence of the need for the 5th Amendment to be fully invested under the 14th Amendment. I am not saying for certain whether or not Rittenhouse should have been charged, but I am saying that any felony charge should be submitted to a Grand Jury. That's the Constitution, the law of the land, but for some reason it isn't required of the states even though the 14th says it should be.

[Belsnickel]

(11-19-2021, 11:32 AM)jj22 Wrote: Only politics would have people turn on Prosecutors given what all Defense attorney's defend and how hard Prosecutors have to work to prove unreasonable doubt....

Honestly, I'm a leftist and think most prosecutors are ***** scum because our criminal justice system is rife with corruption and jackassery.

[GMDino]

(11-19-2021, 04:06 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Honestly, I'm a leftist and think most prosecutors are ***** scum because our criminal justice system is rife with corruption and jackassery.

From the laws to the police to the prosecutors to the judges.

All I'll add is that sometimes a defense attorney has to take a case even if they don't want to so I'm going to assume a prosecutor does too.

Rare to see one step back and say the case should not go forward.

[BFritz21]

(11-19-2021, 11:37 AM)jj22 Wrote: Kyle wanted to be grown, and now faces grown consequences rather he's found guilty or not. He has no one to blame for his situation but himself. He had a choice. Stay home, or play hero. That's on him and only him.
Acting big and bad then taking the stand and "crying" like a kid that got caught with his hands in the cookie jar proves he still doesn't understand that actions have consequences. 
Which is why none of us regardless of political party should condone 17 year old "vigilantes". But we are going to see plenty of them if he's found not guilty. And that, a country being run by 17 year old vigilante's is something we should never have had to witness. 

He defended others and himself.

That sounds like something a very grown person would do and it should be applauded.

He got emotional because he killed people, but you're calling him juvenile because of it?

The people he shot were attacking like a bunch of children.

I think you have the roles reversed here..............