11-03-2021, 07:08 PM
(11-03-2021, 06:37 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Sounds like good questions to ask in a trial.
Oh, absolutely. An even better time to ask them, as I previously stated, is before you even file charges. It's very much worth remembering that charges should not be filed by the DA unless they believe they can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. I've said this before but if you put this concept in percentage terms it would be around 90-95% likely the person committed the alleged offense. A trial exists to provide evidence and argument to either support or deny this standard of proof. If you already have reams of evidence that leans heavily toward self defense then filing charges would not be appropriate, unless your goal is something other than actually proving a case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Can you honestly say, given the video evidence available about this case (and I've said this before, but it's very uncommon to have so many comprehensive pieces of video evidence in such a case) that you could state that Rittenhouse did not act in self defense with 90-95% certainty? Again, I'm open to a different interpretation if previously unseen evidence is brought to life, but seeing as how discovery is a thing the prosecution would have already had to present that evidence in court. I haven't heard of it, have you? The prosecutor certainly didn't reference any such evidence in their opening statement.
Look, I get why the incident leaves a bad taste in people's mouths. I get why we constantly hear legally irrelevant things like "he shouldn't have been there". But when you look at this case through a dispassionate legal lens there's literally only one logical conclusion. I'll close with this, my uncle is a judge, was a prosecutor for many years and worked with a DA task force to prosecute cartel smuggles. He's also gay and hardly a Republican. He flat out stated that the fact that charges were filed in this case with the evidence available is a flat out disgrace and abuse of the office. This man is razor sharp and has decades of experience. If I hadn't already been of the same opinion his position would absolutely make me pause and reexamine the evidence. It's honestly that cut and dry.
