You’ve argued in favor of rittenhouse for a few pages here (if not in favor of rittenhouse in defense of the legal maneuvering of the defense and judge in his favor). It’s a simple and relevant question. I don’t think anyone is arguing against the protections for defendants in our legal system, it’s more about the unequal application of those protections. So, do you believe that a “black” rittenhouse would have gotten the same defense and the same outcome from this judge? Would he have even had the option of bail? Would the cops have even arrested him or just shot him right then and there?
I have
not argued in favor of Rittenhouse, I don't care at all what the jury finds for him. I
have argued in favor of the rights of defendants. I have argued that the judge has acted properly in his rulings protecting a defendant, against the proposition that he's a senile racist trying to "steal" a trial, because he has.
Tons of people are arguing against legal protections for defendants in this case. ResetERA.com members. Prominent media members. Legal figures. Twitter is covered in blue checks and large accounts demanding this and it trickles down to morons like ResetERA.com. They want rid of double jeopardy, they want rid of (and prosecution for) a judge who has upheld a defendants rights against an incompetent prosecution, they want rid of due process, they think the prosecution should be allowed to misstate the law in pursuit of guilt, etc. They desire Rittenhouse in prison for life and how he gets there doesn't matter to them.
It's a completely irrelevant and nonsense question to wonder what would happen to a Black Rittenhouse. It doesn't apply to the actual real world case before us and is an impossible thing to know. I don't see the point in the slightest.
The calls I am talking about
are not about unequal application (something which obviously wouldn't be fixed by Rittenhouse going to prison for life as a murderer), these are calls to fundamentally destroy the rule of law in the pursuit of specific racial ends. It's not new, it's just that this case has pushed them to the forefront of the conversation.
