The Kyle Rittenhouse trial in Kenosha
-
@doctor-phibes said in The Kyle Rittenhouse trial in Kenosha:
@george-k said in The Kyle Rittenhouse trial in Kenosha:
How is that not libel?
With a good lawyer, I think it is.
@jolly said in The Kyle Rittenhouse trial in Kenosha:
With a good lawyer, I think it is.
In the UK, I'm pretty sure they'd be done for contempt of court if they wrote that, as would much of the US media for all the bullshit they're writing.
-
Read literally, it implies the Mr Rhittenhause used the word murder. Maybe he did? If not then yes of course just more leftist outrage messaging from journalists who probably lack self awareness of why the choose their words as the do. These are, after all, merely humans.
-
Read literally, it implies the Mr Rhittenhause used the word murder. Maybe he did? If not then yes of course just more leftist outrage messaging from journalists who probably lack self awareness of why the choose their words as the do. These are, after all, merely humans.
@horace said in The Kyle Rittenhouse trial in Kenosha:
Read literally, it implies the Mr Rhittenhause used the word murder. Maybe he did? If not then yes of course just more leftist outrage messaging from journalists who probably lack self awareness of why the choose their words as the do. These are, after all, merely humans.
It strikes me that you need better laws covering the reporting of court cases, and, I would humbly suggest, a better understanding by the general public and media at large that murder trials aren't conducted primarily for their entertainment.
I appreciate that daytime TV is a bit shit, but there's got to be some kind of alternative.
It might also help if you deported Nancy Grace to Australia.
-
@horace said in The Kyle Rittenhouse trial in Kenosha:
Read literally, it implies the Mr Rhittenhause used the word murder. Maybe he did? If not then yes of course just more leftist outrage messaging from journalists who probably lack self awareness of why the choose their words as the do. These are, after all, merely humans.
It strikes me that you need better laws covering the reporting of court cases, and, I would humbly suggest, a better understanding by the general public and media at large that murder trials aren't conducted primarily for their entertainment.
I appreciate that daytime TV is a bit shit, but there's got to be some kind of alternative.
It might also help if you deported Nancy Grace to Australia.
From the liveblog:
LOL of the Day for #KyleRittenhouse trial:
ADA Binger telling a witness that he's not a real journalist because real journalists don't put their opinions into their news stories.
Hahahahahahahahaha! This, in one of the most news-propagandized trials I've ever seen.
-
This is why we can't have nice things...
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/11/bruce-schroeder-kyle-rittenhouse-kenosha-trialThere are hundreds of stories out there like this. Stay safe, George!
-
This is why we can't have nice things...
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/11/bruce-schroeder-kyle-rittenhouse-kenosha-trialThere are hundreds of stories out there like this. Stay safe, George!
@lufins-dad said in The Kyle Rittenhouse trial in Kenosha:
This is why we can't have nice things...
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/11/bruce-schroeder-kyle-rittenhouse-kenosha-trialThere are hundreds of stories out there like this. Stay safe, George!
They didn't bother to point out he is the longest sitting judge in the state and has a reputation as a fair judge. He's never allowed attorneys to use the word "victim", as he feels it influences juries.
On that, I would have to agree.
Overall, the piece is just red meat for the Leftist dogs...
-
This is why Illinois and Wisconsin will burn this weekend
-
-
No, here’s the racist.
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/politics-policy/sobbing-kyle-rittenhouse-won-before-ruling-rcna5114
Seriously? Stay safe George, Kluurs, and any other forum member in the general area.
The Brad
-
Rittenhouse defense incorrectly claims iPad pinch-to-zoom modifies footage
A lack of technical knowledge may have just influenced an important court case. The New York Times reports the defense for shooter Kyle Rittenhouse incorrectly claimed that an iPad's pinch-to-zoom function could modify footage of the incident, "creating what it thinks is there, not what necessarily is there." That sparked a debate between lawyers and Judge Schroeder, who maintained the burden was on the prosecution to show the imagery remained in its "virginal state," not on the defense to prove manipulation.
The judge may have accepted the argument. He denied the prosecution's request for an adjournment and instead called for a 15-minute recess, suggesting the team could find an expert to support their claim in that space of time. They didn't, and The Verge noted that the trial resumed with the jury watching video on a Windows PC connected to the courtroom TV.
As you might imagine, the defense's claim played fast and loose with the truth. Pinch-to-zoom on all devices may use algorithms, but only to scale the image — it doesn't change the content itself. This was an attempt to prevent the jury from getting a clearer view of the action, not a genuine challenge to the integrity of the video.
I watched this exchange yesterday.
My thoughts? "Pinch to Zoom" is perfectly fine.
But...
If the prosecution enters evidence using the technology, and the defense objects, the burden is on the prosecution to prove that it's not altered.
It's a fine legal point, and I disagree with the judge's ruling, but, when you want to "enhance" evidence, it's up to YOU to prove that it's valid.
That said, if I were the defense, I would not have raised an objection to the tech.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
Social media platforms rendered a verdict on Kyle Rittenhouse long before he went to trial, suppressing claims that he was innocent and blocking users from searching for details of the case.
Immediately after the anti-police riots that thrust Rittenhouse into the national spotlight, social media companies began to block users who expressed support for the Illinois teen. Twitter suspended the accounts of users who called Rittenhouse innocent, including the defendant's own lawyer. Facebook said it "designated this shooting as a mass murder and … removed the shooter’s accounts from Facebook and Instagram." The platform also blocked searches for "Kyle Rittenhouse."
Social media platforms often intervene to suppress posts expressing a particular stance on controversial issues. Both platforms censored news stories about Hunter Biden’s laptop in the month before the 2020 election. Facebook blocked a Gold Star mother’s criticism of President Joe Biden and suppressed a song that criticized the president. Twitter and Facebook also suspended users who oppose vaccine mandates.
The fundraising platform GoFundMe also removed a page set up to support Rittenhouse, which the company said violated its ban on fundraisers involving "the legal defense of alleged crimes associated with hate, violence, harassment, bullying, discrimination, terrorism, or intolerance." GoFundMe supported fundraising for the family of one of Rittenhouse’s assailants, Anthony Huber. The site regularly hosts fundraisers for individuals associated with Black Lives Matter.
When smaller platforms began raising funds for Rittenhouse, hackers breached the donation lists. News outlets doxxed paramedics and police officers who gave small donations to Rittenhouse’s defense.
Twitter is still banning or suspending users for supporting Rittenhouse, even as the trial proceeds. Facebook searches for Rittenhouse’s name turn up no results. Neither platform responded to requests for comment.
Rittenhouse faces six charges, including two counts of homicide, after shooting three men who attacked him during last August’s anti-police riots in Kenosha, Wis. His murder trial began on Nov. 1. His defense hopes that videos that show rioters assaulting Rittenhouse will bolster his self-defense claim.
-
Rittenhouse defense incorrectly claims iPad pinch-to-zoom modifies footage
A lack of technical knowledge may have just influenced an important court case. The New York Times reports the defense for shooter Kyle Rittenhouse incorrectly claimed that an iPad's pinch-to-zoom function could modify footage of the incident, "creating what it thinks is there, not what necessarily is there." That sparked a debate between lawyers and Judge Schroeder, who maintained the burden was on the prosecution to show the imagery remained in its "virginal state," not on the defense to prove manipulation.
The judge may have accepted the argument. He denied the prosecution's request for an adjournment and instead called for a 15-minute recess, suggesting the team could find an expert to support their claim in that space of time. They didn't, and The Verge noted that the trial resumed with the jury watching video on a Windows PC connected to the courtroom TV.
As you might imagine, the defense's claim played fast and loose with the truth. Pinch-to-zoom on all devices may use algorithms, but only to scale the image — it doesn't change the content itself. This was an attempt to prevent the jury from getting a clearer view of the action, not a genuine challenge to the integrity of the video.
I watched this exchange yesterday.
My thoughts? "Pinch to Zoom" is perfectly fine.
But...
If the prosecution enters evidence using the technology, and the defense objects, the burden is on the prosecution to prove that it's not altered.
It's a fine legal point, and I disagree with the judge's ruling, but, when you want to "enhance" evidence, it's up to YOU to prove that it's valid.
That said, if I were the defense, I would not have raised an objection to the tech.
@george-k said in The Kyle Rittenhouse trial in Kenosha:
and instead called for a 15-minute recess, suggesting the team could find an expert to support their claim in that space of time. They didn't, and The Verge noted that the trial resumed with the jury watching video on a Windows PC connected to the courtroom TV.
As you might imagine, the defense's claim played fast and loose with the truth. Pinch-to-zoom on all devices may use algorithms, but only to scale the image — itMr. Fingas is wrong. The pinch motion is a command, plain and simple. That command can be to zoom, but it can also be to play a completely different video. Typically, the original video would have been cleared as evidence AND an enhanced zoom video would have been cleared well in advance.
-
Yeah but what about all those kangaroo court indictments and trials of left-leaning people who run afoul of right-leaning pop cultural outrage, but who wouldn't have been indicted on weight of evidence alone?
Both sides are equal, I read it here, so there must be examples.
-
No, here’s the racist.
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/politics-policy/sobbing-kyle-rittenhouse-won-before-ruling-rcna5114
Seriously? Stay safe George, Kluurs, and any other forum member in the general area.
@lufins-dad said in The Kyle Rittenhouse trial in Kenosha:
No, here’s the racist.
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/politics-policy/sobbing-kyle-rittenhouse-won-before-ruling-rcna5114
Seriously? Stay safe George, Kluurs, and any other forum member in the general area.
