As the nation awaits a Kyle Rittenhouse verdict, some raise eyebrows at the judge

Let’s meet the judge over the Kyle Rittenhouse case.

https://www.npr.org/2021/11/16/1056181659/kyle-rittenhouse-trial-judge-bruce-schroeder-kenosha

It’s mostly those on the left complaining about a judge that was appointed by a democratic mayor. I’m not sure why he’s deemed evil being he just points out facts of the law. He apparently was appointed from an era when democrats used to care about the rule of law over mob rule. But I figured if you all want to discuss him so harshly then here is an article about him. Let’s see what everyone thinks.

 

1. Identity politics is identity politics.
2.The judge sang... to a murder suspect. He had the jury applaud for a witness for the defense. I don't think those are signs the judge is being very fair.

 

I’m not aware of an applause. Likewise I’m not aware of the judge singing.

 

"The judge intended the gesture to honor a veteran, but it had the effect of asking the jury to praise someone whose testimony they’ll be asked to weigh in a homicide trial"
https://www.rollingstone.com/cultur...ge-schroeder-applaud-defense-witness-1256574/


"Judge Bruce Schroeder sings to Kyle Rittenhouse during Kenosha shooting trial"
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/judge-bru...-FmO9a41Wsv7UF-9TY4pAlVrWS2NkmpukSQh41LMQ9wMq

 

Post #2 and you already forgot the judge is a democrat. Democrats do strange things like sniff little kids.

 

I don't care... because I'm not thinking in terms of identity politics. I am thinking as a security person thinking about how his dumb schtiks during the trial are taking away from the impartiality of the trial.

 

The judge is fine.

Leftists are just angry Kyle may be released without jail after righteously defending himself against terrorists they support.

 

I think it is less about his political leaning and more about the declaration he did not want the word “victim” used

 

They arent victims

 

It is a loaded term. It implies that the shooting wasn't in self-defense. But that's the very purpose of the trial.

 

You can be a victim and it NOT be a crime

classic “victim of circumstances”

 

But you’re not a victim of you were responsible. And that’s the very question to be decided here. If I come at someone with a baseball bat and they shoot me dead, I’m (probably) not a victim.

 

I would use the term victim but in that instance there would be more than one victim

 

If someone escapes a rape by shooting the would-be rapist, who is the 'victim', the shooter or the shot rapist?

 

According to WHO?

He was appointed by a Dem. Governor in 1983 (38 years ago), he may have changed his ideology in almost 4 decades.

Give me a break...

So, let me get this straight, I wouldn't want to miss anything:

You made an absurdly misguided claim that "the judge is a democrat" (based on something that happened almost 4 decades ago)--just to have a reason to take a sophomoric shot at Biden?
Got it...

 

The left, in this political trial, needs to find a bogeyman if Kyle walks.

 

As old as he is he may be a democrat, just not like the ones now pushing insanity.

 

It’s loaded language designed to paint people in a certain light. The judge caught it easily and anyone with a brain cell can see it.

Is a rapist shot by the woman he was raping a victim?

 

Yes he is a victim of gunshot - the fact it was a justified shooting is immaterial

 

Kyle certainly misjudged the situation. He would have had no idea how many career criminals were out rioting that night. Like the left he might have thought it was a mostly peaceful protest. Everyone that attacked him that night had criminal records. In the case of Rosenbaum the proverbial record an arm long.

He carried a rifle for self defense and that was all it was used for that night.

 

I think the best question that comes from this case is who/how a threat is determined and who has the right to act on that perceived threat. I think the prosecutions best argument, which really requires further legal discussion outside of this case, is that the other men felt threatened by Rittenhouse and acted accordingly.

 

You would be wrong. Again.

 

A rule the judge has followed this rule his entire career. You know who has benefited most from this? Black defendants who stood before the judge. Shocking isn't it? A judge who consistently gives the accused the benefit of the doubt. It must suck for leftists who must know the identity of the perp before deciding what the rules should be. For conservatives, it is a real damn easy. The rules should be the same no matter what the identity of the perp is.

Unfortunately the left is winning this war to undermine the rule of law. They are ruining this country one institution at a time.

 

Holy f***, you'd need to be obtuse to the nth degree to not understand why the judge would not allow the term.

 

You must only watch Fox News