FBI Opens Investigation into Shooting of Michael Brown

[GrantDawg]

They just announced a shelter in place for that town. They definitely don't have the suspect in custody.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[RainMaker]

The Hatewatch article gave Balch's background that he was a white supremacist/neo-Nazi. It did not know their relationship at that time.

Balch testified under oath just a couple weeks ago. Are you saying he perjured himself or just playing dumb?

[GrantDawg]

This is the best of info straight from the police chief. No one in custody but they have a person they suspect. The vehicle has been recovered. The shots fired were police not from the vehicle.
https://twitter.com/AdamRifeReports/...MLW4NtKwA&s=09

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

The Hatewatch article gave Balch's background that he was a white supremacist/neo-Nazi. It did not know their relationship at that time.

Balch testified under oath just a couple weeks ago. Are you saying he perjured himself or just playing dumb?

Quite possibly. You obviously don't trust white supremacists. Why trust what he is saying? A reasonable motive (but not proven of course) is to get his 15 min of fame to say he was associated with the kid.

If Rittenhouse is truly a white supremacist, there should be a wealth of evidence out there.

But if you want to take a white supremacist at his word, I guess okay. We just have different levels of rigor in reaching conclusions.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

They just announced a shelter in place for that town. They definitely don't have the suspect in custody.

Seen the top down video which does sort of show the driver trying to evade the first people I think (or maybe swerving to hit someone specific?). This looks bad but there have been situations like this where they later say it was a driver who panicked. With that said, I would think someone panicking and hitting the gas by mistake would have maybe stopped somewhere and waited for police.

Instead, it seems like the driver got away and was able to park somewhere. Even backed into the spot.

Photos appear to show the red SUV involved in the Waukesha Holiday Parade incident. Follow updates here: https://t.co/sjcTvuk2Du pic.twitter.com/hfN0avE9Hp

— CBS 58 News (@CBS58) November 22, 2021

[GrantDawg]

Yeah, it almost seems he was trying to run through the parade as an escape route, and only hit people when he couldn't go forward without doing it.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Quite possibly. You obviously don't trust white supremacists. Why trust what he is saying? A reasonable motive (but not proven of course) is to get his 15 min of fame to say he was associated with the kid.

If Rittenhouse is truly a white supremacist, there should be a wealth of evidence out there.

But if you want to take a white supremacist at his word, I guess okay. We just have different levels of rigor in reaching conclusions.

Again, it's literally the first photo that comes up in an image search.



Lets be honest, there is no amount of evidence from sworn testimony to photographic evidence that will get you to admit they knew each other. The weird thing is none of these guys are asking you to stan for them. They are not trying to hide who they are and who they affiliate with.

Say what you want about them, but they're transparent about who they are and what they believe. They aren't gutless coward hiding behind the "just asking questions" and concern trolling.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Yeah, it almost seems he was trying to run through the parade as an escape route, and only hit people when he couldn't go forward without doing it.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

Here is the aerial view of it. It feels like if your goal was to inflict damage, you wouldn't have swerved early on (and slowed down). The street view made it seem intentional but this one makes it seem like someone who made a wrong turn and really panicked.

TRIGGER WARNING: 🚨DISTURBING VIDEO🚨A viewer sent in horrifying video the moment a red SUV plowed through a crowd during the #Waukesha Holiday Parade. Its currently unclear how many people have been injured. Updates to come on @tmj4 pic.twitter.com/u6q10VgTJ1

— Taylor Lumpkin (@TaylorLumpkinTV) November 22, 2021

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Lets be honest, there is no amount of evidence from sworn testimony to photographic evidence that will get you to admit they knew each other. The weird thing is none of these guys are asking you to stan for them. They are not trying to hide who they are and who they affiliate with.

Say what you want about them, but they're transparent about who they are and what they believe. They aren't gutless coward hiding behind the "just asking questions" and concern trolling.

Zing, oweee. Yup conversation degrading again with personal attacks. Are you a really successful attorney? I wouldn't think so with such sloppy research and quick butt hurt reactions.

I'll go back to my original post as often times it gets lost with tangents, insinuations, reading comprehension, and (of course) personal insults.

TBF there was some additional evidence presented by a white supremacist. But yeah, give me some facebook posts, twitter feeds etc.

On the point of white supremacist. Its pretty obvious there are differing levels of rigor needed for some here. Show me more evidence of this other than a bar where he was befriended by Proud Boys and gave an ok sign. Present evidence where he was a white supremacist before that fateful day vs after where he was looking for any and would welcome any support he could get.

If he has a history of rants (e.g. FB, twitter ... I googled but didn't find anything else other than opinions), I'll concede this point. But right now, one incident (added: or a second suspect one) does not make him a white supremacist.

[GrantDawg]

Press conference said 11 adults 12 kids transported. Multiple deaths but they are not giving a number. They have avperson of interest in custody, but wouldn't confirm the number of people in the vehicle. The shots fired was from one officer trying to stop the vehicle. Probably won't have anything more till tomorrow.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[RainMaker]

Saw an early mention it was a school marching band that got hit and my heart sank. What a tragedy.

[NobodyHere]

Ugh, what is wrong with people?

If this is some idiot with a manifesto then that manifesto needs to be burned/deleted before it can be read and given publicity.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Ugh, what is wrong with people?

If this is some idiot with a manifesto then that manifesto needs to be burned/deleted before it can be read and given publicity.

It is very sad.

Options are: crazy person railing against the system blaming it for his/her own life failures; domestic/int terrorism; really drunk/(un)medicated person; or old person that shouldn't be driving anymore.

Have to believe the cops have gone through the house of person of interest and prob have a good idea of which one by now.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Ugh, what is wrong with people?

If this is some idiot with a manifesto then that manifesto needs to be burned/deleted before it can be read and given publicity.

It doesn't look like it. Early reports are that he was fleeing the scene of another crime. They do not expect a terrorism motive.

[Edward64]

It is good to see an armed black man (and armed daughter) walk around Kenosha to protect anti-Rittenhouse protestors. I guess it is possible for minorities to walk around Kenosha openly with weapons.

Good trigger finger discipline (unlike that horrendous St. Louis woman waving a gun with finger on the trigger). Daughter's AR seems to be an extra capacity magazine, and dad has a scope that is better suited for hunting.

Armed father-daughter duo seek to protect anti-Rittenhouse protesters

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

It doesn't look like it. Early reports are that he was fleeing the scene of another crime. They do not expect a terrorism motive.

I don't know what crime he committed but if true then "out of the frying pan into the fire".

[JonInMiddleGA]

I'm not exactly known for ... let's go with "needing a long time to draw reasonable conclusions" ... so when I'm the comparative voice of reason versus the Twitterverse in thinking "hey, could we at least take a few hours to figure out what the hell was going on instead of racing for Likes on your hot take", you KNOW stuff is pretty fucked.

I promise, a take will still be valid even if it's not the very first one offered, they don't have expiration dates.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I don't know what crime he committed but if true then "out of the frying pan into the fire".

Yeah. I don't know what he had done before, but it wasn't on the scale of this.

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I'm not exactly known for ... let's go with "needing a long time to draw reasonable conclusions" ... so when I'm the comparative voice of reason versus the Twitterverse in thinking "hey, could we at least take a few hours to figure out what the hell was going on instead of racing for Likes on your hot take", you KNOW stuff is pretty fucked.

I promise, a take will still be valid even if it's not the very first one offered, they don't have expiration dates.

No kidding. People just spouting crap off like it was fact without any information.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Zing, oweee. Yup conversation degrading again with personal attacks. Are you a really successful attorney? I wouldn't think so with such sloppy research and quick butt hurt reactions.

I'll go back to my original post as often times it gets lost with tangents, insinuations, reading comprehension, and (of course) personal insults.

TBF there was some additional evidence presented by a white supremacist. But yeah, give me some facebook posts, twitter feeds etc.

He was hanging out at a bar with white supremacists wearing a Free as Fuck tee shirt and flashing white supremacy signs, but I'm sure he is just misunderstood.

If it walks like a duck and all that...

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Lathum

He was hanging out at a bar with white supremacists wearing a Free as Fuck tee shirt and flashing white supremacy signs, but I'm sure he is just misunderstood.

If it walks like a duck and all that...

I'll go back to my original post below. If there is more evidence, let me know.

Otherwise, offer to let this be an agree to disagree as there's been enough personal attacks (and a response in kind) already.

On the point of white supremacist. Its pretty obvious there are differing levels of rigor needed for some here. Show me more evidence of this other than a bar where he was befriended by Proud Boys and gave an ok sign. Present evidence where he was a white supremacist before that fateful day vs after where he was looking for any and would welcome any support he could get.

If he has a history of rants (e.g. FB, twitter ... I googled but didn't find anything else other than opinions), I'll concede this point. But right now, one incident (added: or a second suspect one) does not make him a white supremacist.

[NobodyHere]

Kyle Rittenhouse says he supports BLM

FWIW

[GrantDawg]

That admission might cost him some appearance money.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[Castlerock]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I'm not exactly known for ... let's go with "needing a long time to draw reasonable conclusions" ... so when I'm the comparative voice of reason versus the Twitterverse in thinking "hey, could we at least take a few hours to figure out what the hell was going on instead of racing for Likes on your hot take", you KNOW stuff is pretty fucked.

I promise, a take will still be valid even if it's not the very first one offered, they don't have expiration dates.

But that is exactly how social media is designed. The most emotional stuff gets amplified. Reasonable conclusions do not. In a few hours (minutes) the emotional stuff is spread far and wide and there is no putting that back in the can even if it is demonstratively false.

Yes, stuff is pretty fucked. But it is it is working exactly as intended.

[Lathum]

It's a shame the Rittenhouse documentary will be rendered unwatchable by all the FOX News propaganda that will saturate it. Would otherwise be pretty interesting.

[albionmoonlight]

I was 100% convinced that the parade killer was either right wing terrorism or left wing terrorism. I was/am legit shocked to see that it is probably a "normal" criminal act.

I don't know if that means that my brain is fucked up, or the world is fucked up, or maybe both. But something is pretty fucked up that I'm almost expecting domestic terrorism now.

[spleen1015]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

I was 100% convinced that the parade killer was either right wing terrorism or left wing terrorism. I was/am legit shocked to see that it is probably a "normal" criminal act.

I don't know if that means that my brain is fucked up, or the world is fucked up, or maybe both. But something is pretty fucked up that I'm almost expecting domestic terrorism now.

You're not the only one who felt this way. It is a product of the world we live in.

[RainMaker]

I really had no idea what to expect. Everyone seemed on edge in Wisconsin but Waukesha is not exactly close to Kenosha. To put it in perspective, Kenosh is about the same distance to Chicago.

What is not surprising is this person has a history of domestic violence. Rarely do you find a mass murderer these days that doesn't. Feels like those people should be getting much more scrutiny from the legal system.

[Lathum]

Watching the defense closing arguments in the Arbery case. Man, some first class character assassination going on. She just said no one but Arbery made the decision not to stop when they pulled up next to him. Fucking bonkers. Also said he was "plundering" the neighborhood.

[Lathum]

One of the attorneys is asking for a mistrial because there are black men outside the courthouse with weapons. Oh my, it sure is an interesting reaction when the tables are turned.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

I was 100% convinced that the parade killer was either right wing terrorism or left wing terrorism. I was/am legit shocked to see that it is probably a "normal" criminal act.

I don't know if that means that my brain is fucked up, or the world is fucked up, or maybe both. But something is pretty fucked up that I'm almost expecting domestic terrorism now.

Not sure if I would call this a "normal" criminal act. I thought this had to be intentional just by looking at the casualty figures. There's no way you can look at that and think it was just an accident. Heck, I still think there's more to the story than some meatbag was fleeing another crime.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Lathum

One of the attorneys is asking for a mistrial because there are black men outside the courthouse with weapons. Oh my, it sure is an interesting reaction when the tables are turned.

It was how they got Reagan and the NRA to do a 180 on gun rights back in the 60's.

The NRA Supported Gun Control When the Black Panthers Had the Weapons - HISTORY

Heck, the little space Rittenhouse fell into to avoid a gun charge was carved out for racial reasons as well.

[miked]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Watching the defense closing arguments in the Arbery case. Man, some first class character assassination going on. She just said no one but Arbery made the decision not to stop when they pulled up next to him. Fucking bonkers. Also said he was "plundering" the neighborhood.

I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but can a lawyer intentionally try and perform so ineptly in order to secure a retrial? Like some of the things that are being done and said seem like they are in order for the defendants to claim incompetent counsel. Commenting on the deceased victim having dirty toe nails? Asking for black pastors to be banned from the courtroom? Seems like an act to get the case retried or thrown out on appeal.

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by miked

I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but can a lawyer intentionally try and perform so ineptly in order to secure a retrial? Like some of the things that are being done and said seem like they are in order for the defendants to claim incompetent counsel. Commenting on the deceased victim having dirty toe nails? Asking for black pastors to be banned from the courtroom? Seems like an act to get the case retried or thrown out on appeal.

Also not a lawyer, but I'm 99.9999% sure the answer is no. Once a defendant is found not guilty, they can not be tried again for any reason because of double jeopardy. The best they can hope for with a strategy like that is to have the case declared a mistrial before the trial is over. But once it goes to the jury and they say "not guilty", that's the end. There are no do overs.

[miked]

No, I'm suggesting they will be found guilty and the defense lawyers are setting up for a grounds for a retrial.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by miked

I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but can a lawyer intentionally try and perform so ineptly in order to secure a retrial? Like some of the things that are being done and said seem like they are in order for the defendants to claim incompetent counsel. Commenting on the deceased victim having dirty toe nails? Asking for black pastors to be banned from the courtroom? Seems like an act to get the case retried or thrown out on appeal.

It's a pretty tough case to defend since it's on video and they have very incriminating statements by the defendants.

Not sure I want to necessarily go after the defense attorneys. Maybe they are scumbags deep down, but their job is to do whatever legally possible to get an acquittal for their client. Maybe they feel the evidence is so overwhelming that the best hope is to rile up a racist juror enough that they'll be a holdout on a conviction.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

Not sure if I would call this a "normal" criminal act. I thought this had to be intentional just by looking at the casualty figures. There's no way you can look at that and think it was just an accident. Heck, I still think there's more to the story than some meatbag was fleeing another crime.

Normal as in not terrorism. Not normal as in "happens every day." If he were trying to inflict as many casualties as he could, he could have easily killed 2-4 times as many people. He was dodging people till he got to a point where the road was completely covered. I am not saying the guy doesn't have a rage issue, that is very obvious with his background. Just he wasn't making some kind of political statement as far as I can tell.

[GrantDawg]

Fascist gonna Fascist:

If you're seeing some lunacy about a person of interest who was detained re: Waukesha, here's a brief window into how the right-wing disinfo machine works. It starts with Andy Ngo, of course. First, another reporter—not Andy—does the actual work of finding the POI's record. 1/x pic.twitter.com/0HbDCLbcFz

— Robert Silverman (@BobSaietta) November 22, 2021

[RainMaker]

Can we maybe take domestic violence more seriously? This is absolutely ridiculous. And as I mentioned, so many of these spree killers end up with lengthy domestic violence records.

#Waukesha. Take domestic violence seriously

"Mr. Brooks had been free on $1,000 bail in an earlier criminal case, in which he was accused of running over the mother of his child in the parking lot of a Milwaukee gas station with his maroon 2010 Ford Escape earlier this month."

— Shaindel Beers �� (@shaindelr) November 22, 2021

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by miked

No, I'm suggesting they will be found guilty and the defense lawyers are setting up for a grounds for a retrial.

Ah, thought you were talking about the prosecutors in the other case. It's getting hard to keep track of them all.

[molson]

Originally Posted by miked

I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but can a lawyer intentionally try and perform so ineptly in order to secure a retrial? Like some of the things that are being done and said seem like they are in order for the defendants to claim incompetent counsel. Commenting on the deceased victim having dirty toe nails? Asking for black pastors to be banned from the courtroom? Seems like an act to get the case retried or thrown out on appeal.

There's a lot of appellate caselaw about what lawyers are allowed to talk about at closing argument and what they're not. I think people would be surprised at the kind of stuff that is alleged to be prosecutorial misconduct on appeal. Basically any indirect reference to anything that isn't about the elements of the crime - the character of any of the witnesses, protecting the community, sending a message, any punishment the defendant might face, the lives of the victims, calling the victims "victims", the nature of the injuries (when that's not an element of the crime, like in a murder case), asking the jurors to deliver "justice", appealing to jurors' sense of duty and morality. A lot of one-off "errors" like that are deemed harmless by he appellate courts and the convictions stands, but there's some arbitrary level where they can up to a vacated conviction.

With the defense though, there's no check on it. It's certainly unethical. If the prosecutor objected, the judge should strike the comments and tell the jury not to consider it, but, they heard it anyway, and most attorneys don't like to object at closing argument because they think it makes them look too aggressive, and also only calls attention to the thing they want to object to. At some (again arbitrary) level something can be so bad that you ask for a mistrial, but, the standard for granting those is high, you don't want to clear the jury from the courtroom to make that argument and risk them holding that against you if you lose the motion, and, you don't want to start the whole trial proceeding over and push things down the road another year.

On the state side you always wonder about "poison pills" being left around the trial by defense counsel just in case of a conviction, but, it's really hard to win an ineffective assistance of trial counsel claim. You have to show prejudice, and a defendant really can't show that he would have been acquitted and not convicted if only his attorney didn't slander the victim during closing argument. IAC claims are good at tying up cases for years in state appeals and federal habeas, but they almost always lose in the end unless there's some specific objective measurable standard that's violated - like counsel didn't file a notice of appeal when the client asked them to, counsel gave objectively wrong information to the client about a possible sentence which led to them taking a plea deal or rejecting a plea deal, etc.

That stuff was pretty infuriating though. I think I read the people in the courtroom gasped at one of the comments. An objection by the prosecutor on top of that might of accentuated how inappropriate that was, and got that on the record, if just for historical context. I definitely believe attorneys should object more at closing argument. It just feels so rude to do in the moment. But on appeal, it's nice to have those court rulings on what was OK and what wasn't, and when its defense objecting at closing argument and preserving an alleged error, you can get more appellate rulings to give attorneys and trial judges guidance in the future, even if it doesn't result in a vacated conviction in that case.

[miked]

Cool answer, it just seemed so absurd (like saying he was likely committing crimes and would be alive if he just waited for police arrive, therefore hiding something because he would not wait). Plus the comments about his hygiene...I guess I believe the above, that they are hoping to play in to some race stereotypes in the hopes that one juror hangs or something.

[JPhillips]

Self defense I guess.

A pregnant librarian in Florida intentionally hit a motorcyclist during a road rage incident and fled the scene. The motorcyclist followed her home. She came outside with a handgun; the motorcyclist was armed, so he shot her several times and killed her. https://t.co/I1isaKfUUs

— Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) November 24, 2021

[NobodyHere]

Pregnant Librarians need to be banned.

[Lathum]

Verdict reached

[Lathum]

Basically all of them guilty on all charges.

[Ksyrup]

This was a much easier case. Thank God they didn't screw it up.

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

This was a much easier case. Thank God they didn't screw it up.

Huge +1 and these fuckers can rot

[RainMaker]

Reminder that the original DA covered up the murder. The only reason we found out about it was one of these morons thought putting out the video made him look good. A backfire for the ages.

Watching some of the trial, you could see how easy this was for a competent prosecutor.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Reminder that the original DA covered up the murder. The only reason we found out about it was one of these morons thought putting out the video made him look good. A backfire for the ages.

Watching some of the trial, you could see how easy this was for a competent prosecutor.

The first two DA's tried to cover it up. Only the first one was charged. But the second one, Barnhill, committed several ethical breaches by not disclosing several conflicts of interest he had in the case, while he was writing opinion memos as to why he thought it was justifiable homicide.

[GrantDawg]

This case is definitely an indictment of the prosecutor's in that county. It was the Cobb County DA (suburb of Atlanta) that act as prosecutor to get the conviction. The level of racist colored glasses you have to have to look at the video and say that was justified is pretty bad.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk