Bad beat/Moaning/Venting thread - Wordle Gummidge

[Raoul Duke III]

There is no lunge for the gun, we can see that that was a lie.

Seems strange he would lie about this if there was actual video evidence?

[AndyFatBastard]

Stupidity right there . Imo

ok

[hotspur]

Seems strange he would lie about this if there was actual video evidence?

Well that seems to have become a thing, in that less clear footage was in the hands of the defence due to it being sent from Apple to Android or vice versa and it getting compressed. They are seeking a mistrial over it.

[Mellor]

Again there is a difference between correct and justifying

Honestly Solk, I think you are mistaking my post and other.
He is on trial for multiple serious crimes. All that matter in that position is the legal perspective. What we think the law should be is irrelevant. The justification is a legal justification only, not a moral one. When I said he has the right to be on the street with a rifle. The right to defend himself etc. The right to form a militia. That's a matter of fact. Those are rights that exist in law in that state. You might think they should be, but the fact is they exist. When we say he will get off on the murder charges, if is on the basis of those laws.

None of that suggest anyone thinks the situation is ok or morally justified. In my first post I said he shouldn't have been involved.
The dozens of people on both sides shouldn't have been armed. The protestors shouldn't have turned to rioting and burning property (the ones that did).
Rosenbaum shouldn't have came after the armed Rittenhouse. The guy who shot his gun while Rittenhouse fled shouldn't have. Rosenbaum shouldn't and tried to grab the gun. Grosskreutz shouldn't have been carrying a glock. He shouldn't have pointed it at Rittenhouse. The whole clusterfuck is a series of idiotic actions that could have been avoided.
Firearms don't make those situations safer or keep the peace. That add danger, risk, and increase tension.

[Solksjaer!]

[Raoul Duke III]

Mellor; any thoughts about what hotspur has posted?

i.e. if that is correct and there was no 'lunge' for the weapon, doesn't that change the entire scenario?

[Tar.Aldarion]

Well that seems to have become a thing, in that less clear footage was in the hands of the defence due to it being sent from Apple to Android or vice versa and it getting compressed. They are seeking a mistrial over it.

Is that a "we didn't know you'd be able to see it was a lie so we lied"? Oops there is better footage.

[Theresa]

Mellor; any thoughts about what hotspur has posted?

i.e. if that is correct and there was no 'lunge' for the weapon, doesn't that change the entire scenario?

Did you ever get round to answering the question Mellor asked you a few times but you dodged every time?

[Wombatman]

Has anyone watched the drone footage of the full incident with Rosenbaum?

The sequence of events as the prosecutor described it was that Rittenhouse illegally points his gun which instigates a response from Rosenbaum who chases him. Rittenhouse turns and points the gun at him when he is not too close to him, then runs again. As Rosenbaum gets close to him he shoots him multiple times. There is no lunge for the gun, we can see that that was a lie. How much that actually matters I don't know because if Rosenbaum got him it probably wouldn't have been his medical pack he was going to take.

I can't actually see the first part that the prosecutor points out about Rittenhouse pointing his gun.

So the jury requested to see this footage again during deliberation.

One question I have been thinking about is this. If Rittenhouse considered he would be in danger if Rosenbaum had the rifle then why would the reverse not also be the case given Rittenhouse had been pointing it at people. It is illegal to point a gun at someone in that jurisdiction, so will the jury decide that he instigated that specific incident with Rosenbaum? Or that it was caused by his illegal behaviour which prevents the argument ofself-defence?

Apologies if this has been poured over already, I haven't read all the posts fully.

What is clear from the drone footage is Rittenhouse was being perused with menace. He turned and pointed the gun making the statement "back off, I'm armed". If he wanted to fire with little reason he could have done so at this point. The pursuant did not back off and cornered Rittenhouse among the parked cars.

[Solksjaer!]

I am not talking about anyones perception of the law here. I’m talking about people who think he should walk . Do you think he should walk? (I accept you’ve made your peace he acted within the law etc)
If he doesn’t walk , then the law is broke ? Injustice? Where do you stand then? You people keep harping on about the law and yet if you are correct 100% why is there a trial? How did it even get this far? Is there no due process before a trial? After we all digest the facts (and I’ve read as much as anyone (Trumpism) and not disputed your understanding of the law) how do we feel about a GUILTY verdict for any of the charges? Outraged? Believe me , irrespective of this verdict the law has been proven to be an ass here. They need to implement immediate legislation that deadly force can not be used when that force is committed by person who are actively encouraging conflict. There has to be liability in a situation like this. It’s clear to me Rittenhouse is liable.

As Clint sez , hell of a thing killing a man.

[hotspur]

As someone who only has a Netflix subscription and has pretty much stopped pirating I find it a problematic situation that it is random which streaming service might have a film or show. You would have to have subscriptions to Netflix, Prime, HBO Max, Disney, Apple to cover the bases. It is the randomness of checking whether Netflix has a film that bothers me. Not greatly mind you, but it is a barrier to not watching an illegal stream, given that I am not going to subscribe to all of them given how infrequently I watch something.

The point of these things were they were not just on-demand streams but aggregators and now they are getting increasingly segregated. Waiting now for a meta-streaming aggregator to subscribe to.

[Mellor]

Well that seems to have become a thing, in that less clear footage was in the hands of the defense due to it being sent from Apple to Android or vice versa and it getting compressed. They are seeking a mistrial over it.

I'm on a small screen here, and can barely make anything out. That seems like awfully bad footage from a drone (any I have seen have been HD quality). I can't even make out when the shooting happens. Surely the original exists somewhere.

The lunging part came from a witness testimony who was stand a few feet away. The medical examiner testified that he was about 4 feet away for the first shot, and the second was closer and went through an outstretched hand. "Close to or touching the barrel"

If Rittenhouse considered he would be in danger if Rosenbaum had the rifle then why would the reverse not also be the case given Rittenhouse had been pointing it at people. It is illegal to point a gun at someone in that jurisdiction, so will the jury decide that he instigated that specific incident with Rosenbaum? Or that it was caused by his illegal behaviour which prevents the argument ofself-defence?

I think it would apply both ways. If Rosenbaum felt in danger while Rittenhouse had his gun raised then at that moment he's have the right to defend himself. But immediately after RH is running away, so RB could have ran away instead of running towards danger. If you notice tat the crown start to run before RB is shot. I presume that was the first shot from the other guy - hard to tell without sound.
I mentioned the pointing gun/feeling threatened in relation to the 3rd guy. He pointed his gun at RH, and RH shot him. Had he shot first he likely would have the same self defense card.

[RichieM]

My last rittenhouse post


For the record I’ve not once said Mellors understanding of the US law was incorrect. I’ve been giving my reasons why he SHOULD and COULD go down for his actions and why WE should think that he should. (I’m still stunned some of you think he deserves to walk) Those with the opposing viewpoint have gone beyond what is said in the trail and giving points of view on the situation and somehow justifying Rittenhouses actions on the night . Not just ‘legally justifying them’ but otherwise. This is where I have contention. There is no justification for his actions . If you find yourself trying to justify them. EG , The right to defend some strangers property, the right to shoot someone dead who hits you with a skateboard, the right to basically act as a vigilante, I think you are wrong. Be honest with yourself. Do you really think this guy set himself up to help quell the protest by peaceful means? Now according to US LAW this case has gone to trail and according to US LAW his fate hangs on the jurors selected to deliberate . (despite what you open/shut case folk think)
If he is convicted of any of the charges is the verdict then unlawful (jury decision) Now how can that be?

Just to be clear I don’t think anyone condones what he did or thinks that he shouldn’t be locked up - I certainly don’t anyway. I also don’t think there are any justification for his actions not just at the time but in the hours beforehand.

I do think that under the state laws he did it in that they might let him go tho.

[Raoul Duke III]

Well that seems to have become a thing, in that less clear footage was in the hands of the defence due to it being sent from Apple to Android or vice versa and it getting compressed. They are seeking a mistrial over it.

"if you fuckers had given us the crystal clear images, then we wouldn't have encouraged our client to lie about the central plank of his defence"

not sure that works as a basis for a mistrial

[ComradeCollie]

As someone who only has a Netflix subscription and has pretty much stopped pirating I find it a problematic situation that it is random which streaming service might have a film or show. You would have to have subscriptions to Netflix, Prime, HBO Max, Disney, Apple to cover the bases. It is the randomness of checking whether Netflix has a film that bothers me. Not greatly mind you, but it is a barrier to not watching an illegal stream, given that I am not going to subscribe to all of them given how infrequently I watch something.

The point of these things were they were not just on-demand streams but aggregators and now they are getting increasingly segregated. Waiting now for a meta-streaming aggregator to subscribe to.

I feel much the same about Newspapers. Am currently subscribed to 3, but I'd much rather be able to pay for the articles I actually read from a wider selection of publishers.

[DeadParrot]

"if you fuckers had given us the crystal clear images, then we wouldn't have encouraged our client to lie about the central plank of his defence"

not sure that works as a basis for a mistrial

There's been some high class fuckery on both sides of this.
With the judge seemingly unwilling to make a ruling on the video quality cause he doesnt seem to fully grasp the significance?
It's gonna be a fun documentary anyway about a US legal case where the prosecution and Judge aren't effectively in cahoots.

[Raoul Duke III]

There's been some high class fuckery on both sides of this.
With the judge seemingly unwilling to make a ruling on the video quality cause he doesnt seem to fully grasp the significance?
It's gonna be a fun documentary anyway about a US legal case where the prosecution and Judge aren't effectively in cahoots.

we need something poetic to summarise the whole thing, a version of 'if the glove don't fit, then you must acquit'.

How about:

'if the lunge didn't occur, send his ass to stir'

[Mellor]

Mellor; any thoughts about what hotspur has posted?

i.e. if that is correct and there was no 'lunge' for the weapon, doesn't that change the entire scenario?

I honestly can't really tell who is who on that clip. and when RB was shot.
But I don't think the scenerio hinges on whether he lunged or not, or how much of a lunge is required. The prosecution seem on it as a prerequisite.

The allegation is that RB make a aggressive remake towards Rittenhouse. And started to chase/run towards after him. Somebody fired a gun. RH turned and pointed his gun at RB. And he kept coming at him. RH shooting him when he got close. I honestly can't see that roved or disproved by the video above.

He he was aggressively and maliciously running towards him. That's the important part. Whether he was running and lunging or whether he was just going to run into him full clip doesn't feel a whole lot different.

You still haven't answered the question. What do you think he intended to do?

I think it's pretty clear. Even prosecution witness confirm he as belligerently and trying to get a reaction. He said to one marine (prosecution witness) to shoot him. He had been released from hospital that day after a suicide attempt. He was bipolar and not on his medication. I think his actions are the whole case really. Was the way he acted reasonable or not. Was it reasonable for Kyle to feel threatened by those actions.

You people keep harping on about the law and yet if you are correct 100% why is there a trial? How did it even get this far? Is there no due process before a trial?

There is a trial to determine if he acted within those laws or not. Can't really be determined before the trial unless it's absolutely clear and DA doesn't see any validity in charging him. When there is any sort of uncertainty, then it goes to court.

It's not a case of simply saying "you felt at risk" and getting a murder pass. It comes down to whether that belief is reasonable. The idea of the notional "reasonable person" is long established in law.

After we all digest the facts (and I’ve read as much as anyone (Trumpism) and not disputed your understanding of the law) how do we feel about a GUILTY verdict for any of the charges?

I felt he was guilty by default on the underage possession. But understood why it was excluded here.
I think he gets off on the attempted homicide, as the surviving guy had a gun pointed at him.

I'm not sure of the conditions for recklessly endangering safety. Could well be guilty on those counts.

[Opr]

The first three episodes of "The Wheel of Time" have dropped.

[Raoul Duke III]

I honestly can't really tell who is who on that clip. and when RB was shot.
But I don't think the scenerio hinges on whether he lunged or not, or how much of a lunge is required. The prosecution seem on it as a prerequisite.

The allegation is that RB make a aggressive remake towards Rittenhouse. And started to chase/run towards after him. Somebody fired a gun. RH turned and pointed his gun at RB. And he kept coming at him. RH shooting him when he got close. I honestly can't see that roved or disproved by the video above.

He he was aggressively and maliciously running towards him. That's the important part. Whether he was running and lunging or whether he was just going to run into him full clip doesn't feel a whole lot different.

I think it's pretty clear. Even prosecution witness confirm he as belligerently and trying to get a reaction. He said to one marine (prosecution witness) to shoot him. He had been released from hospital that day after a suicide attempt. He was bipolar and not on his medication. I think his actions are the whole case really. Was the way he acted reasonable or not. Was it reasonable for Kyle to feel threatened by those actions.

it feels like you're putting the first victim on trial here and your entire focus is on his motives.

Also what's with calling the defendant 'Kyle'? Weird

You still haven't answered the question. What do you think he intended to do?

I have no idea what he intended to do. Neither do you. Neither does anyone else.

He could have intended to give him a kick up the hole. He could have intended to roar abuse at him. He could have intended to, well pretty much anything really.

We'll never know what he intended to do because Rittenhouse shot him dead. And now he'll never do anything ever again.

[Goodluck2me]

In other news

That guy who stole my diary last month has passed away


My thoughts are with his family

The police caught the fellas who stole mine, they got 6 months each.

[Lao Lao]

Ha. That's a weirdly similar vibe! That spicy pork noodles dish is an absolute star. Is there anything else you would recommend in there?

I generally go with some sort of a combo of Dumplings, Sushi and Xi'An Burgers - I did see some people last time I was there eating what sounds like your noodle bowls and thinking, I need to get up on that!

[Mellor]

it feels like you're putting the first victim on trial here and your entire focus is on his motives.

Also what's with calling the defendant 'Kyle'? Weird

My focus is on Rosenbaum because that interaction is what caused the whole thing. Regardless of which of them it was, that’s was the first domino. If the first incident was justified self defence or a premeditated malicious attack. Then that’s affects of the next too also.

So on that basis RB’s motives are clearly very important. I feel you you are ignoring them because they are damaging.

Grosskreutz charge there is less to discuss. He pulled out a gun and pointed it at RH. Pretty clear that he was implying he would shoot him.

Kyle is his name.. Rittenhouse is a bit much to keep typing. Also why I was using RH/RB

I have no idea what he intended to do. Neither do you. Neither does anyone else.

So another dodge.

I asked what do you think he was going to? You don’t need a crystal ball to have an opinion.
I suspect you have a fair idea if what he was going to try to do. But voicing that is RHs favour.

[Wombatman]

[Raoul Duke III]

I asked what do you think he was going to? You don’t need a crystal ball to have an opinion.
I suspect you have a fair idea if what he was going to try to do. But voicing that is RHs favour.

No dodge, I genuinely don't know...and neither does anyone else.

As to Rittenhouse's, sorry Kyle's, state of mind and intentions though:

1. We know that he previously expressed a wish to shoot people weeks before the murders.
2. We know that he previously punched a girl from behind

This is a violent thug, who ultimately acted out on his worst instincts, with lethal results.

[Raoul Duke III]

The company he keeps is also somewhat revealing. Again suggestive as to motive and state of mind.

Seeing as we're in territory of joining dots.

[AndyFatBastard]

Had a cold last few days so ordered an antigen test, turned positive within a minute of dropping my snot into it. Should be grand, I'm double jabbed since end July.

[Wombatman]

Had a cold last few days so ordered an antigen test, turned positive within a minute of dropping my snot into it. Should be grand, I'm double jabbed since end July.

What the official play now re. PCR test and tracing \ informing close contacts?

[Lao Lao]

Hey Lao, how was Note Bar?

Did you like my blinds?

I hope you spent a few bob, fucker hasn't paid me yet and is crying poor mouth.

Sorry, I meant to reply to this and it completely slipped my mind, it's been a bit of a funky week.

Note was really good. The space, while fairly minimal, is nicely done. I couldn't see your blinds though as they were fully open on all the windows - Are they really sleek as they looked super slim at the top of the window.

When we arrived, we got the 2nd last table, every other table bar one was full. We were there for about two and a half hours and a few tables left while we were there and additional people (what appeared to be walk-ins) came in and took them. Now, it was a Saturday night so every night might not be like that but I'm not sure he should be crying poor mouth already.

There was a pretty good atmosphere in the place, as I said it was packed and they were playing decent tunes, 90's / 00's although a few times, the volume did shoot up really loud and they had to lower it.

The wine list is decent although it does seem to be mainly made up of natural/low intervention wines - I'm not against this style of wine but I'm also not the most knowledgeable about it and I do have a slight cynicism that it's a little bit of a PR stunt to play to the hipster crowd. The price point on the wines seemed to be decent with the majority of the wines in the €40 - €60 range although I did see one bottle for €100 which was the most expensive one there.

The staff were really good, friendly and attentive and they knew their stuff. We settled on a bottle of Sancerre and the waitress mentioned this style of Sancerre was a bit more "pungent" than Sancerre's normally are and asked if we were OK with it. We were and right enough, the wine was a lot darker in colour than a normal Sancerre but the whiff off it wasn't too bad at all, it went down well.

We also had some bits to eat, foie gras parfait with some toasted bread and lavender almonds. The foie gras was good and the almonds were OK. There wasn't really a taste of lavender off them, until you got down to the bottom third and then they started to taste a bit soapy - I'm not sure it's a great combination.

After we finished the wine, we decided to have one for the road. Mrs Lao Lao opted for a gin martini which she said was rocket fuel and I had a glass of red wine, which for the life of me, I can't remember the name of - Again, it was perfectly drinkable.

Overall, the bill came to €96 or in Lazare's language, four mounting brackets, three tassels, two cord joiners and a tilt wand.

They plan to open a bistro but I'm not sure how it will work as it may take away from the wine bar element of it. I asked this and they are not too sure either. They seem to think that long term, they will need the extra revenue from the bistro but they want to still have the option to have a wine bar where people can just walk in and have a few drinks, they apparently block book out a good few of their tables for walk-ins. I'm guessing when things get back to normal, the bar, which is long enough will become the wine bar element of it plus a few tables and the balance of the tables will be held for the bistro.

I think as a customer, I would prefer if the whole place was left as a wine bar and they just did more small plates, tapa style, rather than a full bistro but either way, I think it could do very well - I'd definitively go back.

[AndyFatBastard]

What the official play now re. PCR test and tracing \ informing close contacts?

Antigen positive is 99.6% accurate so I got the rona. It's the negatives that are ~80%ish iirc. Left a voicemail with the doctorb and will follow whatever advice they give, but I don't think a PCR is necessary. Have told everyone I was with since Friday.

Just gonna isolate and watch The Wheel of Time. Pharmacy are delivering us more tests and some new asthma inhalers as mine were a bit low. More worried about one of my cats who is definitely a bit off.

[AndyFatBastard]

Rittenhouse not guilty

[Lazare]

Good stuff Lao, sounds nice, would love to eek out an opportunity to go in.

Guy paid me on Mon morn, so thanks for contributing.

[Strewelpeter]

As someone who only has a Netflix subscription and has pretty much stopped pirating I find it a problematic situation that it is random which streaming service might have a film or show. You would have to have subscriptions to Netflix, Prime, HBO Max, Disney, Apple to cover the bases. It is the randomness of checking whether Netflix has a film that bothers me. Not greatly mind you, but it is a barrier to not watching an illegal stream, given that I am not going to subscribe to all of them given how infrequently I watch something.

The point of these things were they were not just on-demand streams but aggregators and now they are getting increasingly segregated. Waiting now for a meta-streaming aggregator to subscribe to.

Even a site or plug in to Rotten Tomatoes or imdb that that that told you where to watch stuff based on your location and subs would be great.
Being far less scrupulous than you I'll regularly download stuff and watch it on plex that I have paid for on some sub because its easier to find .

Similar for books which I'm much more enthusiastic about paying the creators for but I'm fckd if I'm paying more than the price of the paperback for an e copy, for instance of the new Frazen I'm reading at the moment, that I can't even share in family library, so I pirate a copy and buy a hard copy to give to someone who'll use it.

[Lazare]

[Raoul Duke III]

Rittenhouse not guilty

And you get covid.

Clearly some higher power fucking around.

[Tar.Aldarion]

Antigen positive is 99.6% accurate so I got the rona. It's the negatives that are ~80%ish iirc. Left a voicemail with the doctorb and will follow whatever advice they give, but I don't think a PCR is necessary. Have told everyone I was with since Friday.

Just gonna isolate and watch The Wheel of Time. Pharmacy are delivering us more tests and some new asthma inhalers as mine were a bit low. More worried about one of my cats who is definitely a bit off.

Hope you and kitties are ok, doing your part to keep official numbers down and keep my brunch open too.

[RichieM]

The company he keeps is also somewhat revealing. Again suggestive as to motive and state of mind.

Seeing as we're in territory of joining dots.

Hardly a surprise, was never in doubt that he was white power maga trash.

Must rewatch American history x at some stage, I imagine it’s even more poignant in today’s times

[Solksjaer!]

God help America. Darker times ahead .

[ComradeCollie]

God help America. Darker times ahead .

Ah, he's such a cutie. Will get to play himself in something .

[Solksjaer!]

Ah, he's such a cutie. Will get to play himself in something .

He'll be murdered or be President. 'Merica

[Raoul Duke III]

Ah, he's such a cutie. Will get to play himself in something .

Double act with OJ in Vegas.

[ComradeCollie]

Double act with OJ in Vegas.

[premierstone]

No dodge, I genuinely don't know...and neither does anyone else.

As to Rittenhouse's, sorry Kyle's, state of mind and intentions though:

1. We know that he previously expressed a wish to shoot people weeks before the murders.
2. We know that he previously punched a girl from behind

This is a violent thug, who ultimately acted out on his worst instincts, with lethal results.

Did the fact that Rosenbaum was a convicted paedophile and wife beater escape your attention?

fucked up country, fucked up gun laws and a really messed up DA/Judge appointment sytem but at least in this particualr case the right result.

[ComradeCollie]

Jebus. This reminds me of the time you guys were more concerned about the Norte Dame Cathedral being destroyed by fire, than you were about about the possible deaths of the firefighters. Think that was the moment when I lost interest in most peoples opinions. #JBravodo

[MysteryGuest]

Now for an evening CNN being outraged while simultaneously creaming themselves at the ratings for the riots

[ComradeCollie]

Now for an evening CNN being outraged while simultaneously creaming themselves at the ratings for the riots

Have you creamed yourself over this yet? https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rug...igot-1.4732721

[Lazare]

This is a brilliant summary of the whole thing,

[MysteryGuest]

This is a brilliant summary of the whole thing,

But if a stretch to call that a summary

[RichieM]

Double act with OJ in Vegas.

Will have to go down in civil court first - be interesting to see if the victims family’s go down that route.

[MysteryGuest]

Lotto would want to rig a win soon- people are almost figuring it out….. nice few weeks for Canadian boomer teachers though

[Raoul Duke III]

Will have to go down in civil court first - be interesting to see if the victims family’s go down that route.

Kinda why I mentioned OJ. What did he get done for in the civil suit, $30m or something huge?

[premierstone]

But if a stretch to call that a summary

Click on the tweet, there are 27 further tweets in the post.

[Lazare]

Click on the tweet, there are 27 further tweets in the post.

I think that's what he meant. That 28 tweets is hardly a summary.

[premierstone]

I think that's what he meant. That 28 tweets is hardly a summary.

lol blonde moment!

It is quite a good balanced account though, removes the hysteria and deals with the facts.

[Lazare]

lol blonde moment!

It is quite a good balanced account though, removes the hysteria and deals with the facts.

Yes, in particular the explainer for the judge not allowing the term 'victims'.

Although I agree that the verdict seems correct, anger is still justifiable. A black man is not walking there. Although, a black man would have been shot dead that night.

[RichieM]

Kinda why I mentioned OJ. What did he get done for in the civil suit, $30m or something huge?

As a grandstand legal case which would essentially be against open carry/ownership of assault rifles/the rights of militias to assemble it could be a huge first step - huge media circus, donors on both sides pouring cash in and no real fence to sit on.

Serious wishful thinking tho.

[Lazare]

This is also a really good analysis.

[MysteryGuest]

Click on the tweet, there are 27 further tweets in the post.

Run mcbaindatsdejoke.gif

[Solksjaer!]

Some of the memes coming out are appaling. The Yahoos are living it up. There is not enough popcorn.

[Keane]

Even a site or plug in to Rotten Tomatoes or imdb that that that told you where to watch stuff based on your location and subs would be great.
Being far less scrupulous than you I'll regularly download stuff and watch it on plex that I have paid for on some sub because its easier to find .

Similar for books which I'm much more enthusiastic about paying the creators for but I'm fckd if I'm paying more than the price of the paperback for an e copy, for instance of the new Frazen I'm reading at the moment, that I can't even share in family library, so I pirate a copy and buy a hard copy to give to someone who'll use it.

Justwatch website of any use?