Yes 100%. The prosecutor is hoping to take advantage of ignorance in the jury and paint Kyle in a cloak of malice. Nothing more that a scumball tactic.Originally Posted by Ed L
Too bad he didn't use environmentally friendly lead free ammo.
Yes 100%. The prosecutor is hoping to take advantage of ignorance in the jury and paint Kyle in a cloak of malice. Nothing more that a scumball tactic.
Too bad he didn't use environmentally friendly lead free ammo.
Anything can be brought up in court, not everything is as equally answerable to the satisfaction of 12 people who couldnt' get out of jury duty. Handloads also can cause issues with Crime Lab results, as there's no known exemplar to compare to. Things like estimated distances calculated by powder in the clothing, etc. could be affected. In most cases that'll never be an issue. It's on video, there are witnesses, the distance doesn't matter, etc. It could become an issue with something like a suspect with a knife where distance is a factor in ability to cause harm and there's a question as to how close the suspect was when you fired.
I've mentioned before the only time I've seen a prosecutor locally get worked up over ammunition was when it was green tip because "military".
Sorta around sometimes for some of your shitty mod needs.
I have no idea if the prosecutor is an a** in general, and have not watched any of the trial, but politically charged cases like this one tend to bring out the worst in all of the participants.
Beyond that, many prosecutors know nothing about firearms, but have easy access to information if they care. I, of course, have no idea why the defendant chose the ammo he did. Maybe that was his motivation, although I would think his choice was more likely based on cost or ignorance or availability and not malice.
On a somewhat related note, I saw a news report somewhere in the past couple of days that CPD was cancelling days off in anticipation of riots in the event of a NG verdict. I found myself wondering if the jury is sequestered and if not, what an inappropriate thing to appear in the media a couple days before the jury is to deliberate. Not that we have not seen that tactic used before.
When I was watching I just wanted Kyle to say "It was the cheapest stuff I could buy."
Our old gun prosecutor (with a federal grant) knew diddly/squat about firearms. I offered to help him and he absolutely wasn't interested. He had no concept of the distinction between semi and full automatic. Complete toolbag.
I've heard the same online, from a number of sources. Rittenhouse's legal fund was up around $600k, so they certainly could have afforded a ballistic expert and a Use of Force expert. I'm thinking this whole episode is an example of "How Not to Lawyer" on both sides. Quite frankly, I'm shocked by the antics of both defense and prosecution.
A significant portion of that talk is from a scammer who was originally in charge of his defense, trying desperately to undermine the current team. Most of the tv criticism of the team is Monday morning quarterbacking. The only big mistake they could do much about was not having a better direct with the videographer. They made the better arguments on provocation and on the enhanced video but the judge lost his nerve. What most people don’t realize is the state almost always gets their way. Judges are almost exclusively ex prosecutors themselves (including this judge). I was surprised the defense got as much as they did. I still think this is more than likely just a hung jury. Kenosha is basically 50/50 republican and Democrat and Kyle’s testimony probably saved him from conviction since the state got in their provocation evidence without a witness.
That does seem to be the elephant in the room with respect to the defense, at least to my mind. Having taken MAG-40, I've been yearning to see @Mas on the stand walking the jury through each frame of each video, and schooling ADAs Dumb and Dumber during cross.
Who among our prosecutors and defense lawyers here agrees or disagrees?
"Someone should write a terminal ballistics primer for lawyers."
We have--most simply don't care.
See comments above; for many it is about winning the case, irrespective of fact, truth, or justice.
A few years ago I was asked to speak at a Federal Bar Council Program--the facts of terminal ballistics and firearms effects were not well received by most of the attorneys or judges, as the truth did not match their preconceived feelings and erroneous opinions about the subject....
Facts matter...Feelings Can Lie
Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I have read that the firearm was loaded with Agulia 223 55gr FMJ.
Empty cases at the site were headstamped Agulia REM 223.
I watched that portion of the trial... and the Prosecutor was trying to "entrap" Kyle R.
Kyle R. basically said he didn't know anything about bullets.
Thankfully the Judge did.. and proved it with the HP comment the Prosecutor made, something about how HP's are explosive bullets.
The Judge corrected the "explosive" term promptly.
There's a reason I went to medical school and not law school
Reply With Quote