Kyle Rittenhouse - guilty or not guilty?

[Mordyk]

Prosecutor is scheduled to rebut after the defense finishes

Why is that allowed?  These arguments can go on for days...  isn't it time for jury?

[drosenberg88429]

This prosecutor is making me sick.

A defense attorneys job is to secure an acquittal for the client, guilty or not. The prosecutions job is to successfully obtain a conviction against the defendant, innocent or not? Is it an ethical line of work? Maybe, maybe not. It puts bread on the table. The average case that results in a plea before ever making it to trial probably has a lot more unethical activity utilized by law enforcement.

[YitzyS]

Why is that allowed?  These arguments can go on for days...  isn't it time for jury?

The prosecutor is only officially allowed to address points raised by the defense. The justification is that the defendant is innocent until proven guilty, and the burden is on the prosecutor, so he gets the last word.

Doesn't make sense to me, but that's what the law is.

[CountValentine]

Prosecutor is scheduled to rebut after the defense finishes

I thought they get the last shot (no pun).

[YitzyS]

I thought they get the last shot (no pun).

From Wikipedia: "In the United States, the plaintiff is generally entitled to open the argument. The defendant usually goes second. The plaintiff or prosecution is usually then permitted a final rebuttal argument."

IIRC, the reason I wrote in my previous post was the reason explained by the judge this morning.

[zh cohen]

The prosecutions job is to successfully obtain a conviction against the defendant, innocent or not? Is it an ethical line of work? Maybe, maybe not. It puts bread on the table.

Wrong. The prosecutor is supposed to use discretion in only prosecuting cases that he reasonably believes that the defendant is guilty (based on the evidencehe will submit) and that it "serves the interest of justice" to prosecute.

[CountValentine]

Wrong. The prosecutor is supposed to use discretion in only prosecuting cases that he reasonably believes that the defendant is guilty (based on the evidencehe will submit) and that it "serves the interest of justice" to prosecute.

You don't think the prosecutor believes he is guilty?

[CountValentine]

Finally they brought up what I have been screaming about. The first shot shattered his pelvis when he was upright. This stuff he shot him because he grabbed the gun is pure BS!!!

[YitzyS]

Finally they brought up what I have been screaming about. The first shot shattered his pelvis when he was upright. This stuff he shot him because he grabbed the gun is pure BS!!!

But he grabbed the gun first.

TROLL ALERT

[zh cohen]

You don't think the prosecutor believes he is guilty?

I'm commenting on his post where he wrote that it's a prosecutor's job to get a conviction whether the person is guilty or innocent.

As for this case, I can't know what he believes. My guess is that he knows he doesn't have the evidence to convict (which is the standard he should have used when deciding to go ahead with the charges) which is why he's going for a "backdoor conviction" as you described.

[CountValentine]

I'm commenting on his post where he wrote that it's a prosecutor's job to get a conviction whether the person is guilty or innocent.

Wasn't it a question and not a statement?

[zh cohen]

Finally they brought up what I have been screaming about. The first shot shattered his pelvis when he was upright. This stuff he shot him because he grabbed the gun is pure BS!!!

It's BS because you are the only one making that claim. The defense said he was reaching for the gun when he was first shot, as evidenced by the fact that his momentum carried him forward enough to actually grab it before the second shot.

[CountValentine]

It's BS because you are the only one making that claim. The defense said he was reaching for the gun when he was first shot, as evidenced by the fact that his momentum carried him forward enough to actually grab it before the second shot.

The Dr said he was upright when first shot and shattered his pelvis. Then we get the diving BS about why he was shot in the back.

Prosecution just laid out what happened.

[Yehuda57]

I'm commenting on his post where he wrote that it's a prosecutor's job to get a conviction whether the person is guilty or innocent.

As for this case, I can't know what he believes. My guess is that he knows he doesn't have the evidence to convict (which is the standard he should have used when deciding to go ahead with the charges) which is why he's going for a "backdoor conviction" as you described.

Lesser included is SOP.

[zh cohen]

Lesser included is SOP.

I'm using "backdoor conviction" in the way CM defined it, not in the way you did.

[aygart]

Lesser included is SOP.

I don't think that is what he is referring to by "backdoor".

IMHO opinion he is trying for a backdoor conviction.

what is a backdoor conviction?

That they will find him guilty of lesser charges than the original ones he was charged with

Two people died when it wasn't necessary.
He should have never been there.
He was the only one that killed anyone.
Someone needs to pay for their deaths.

I seen this first hand when serving on a medical malpractice case.

[Yehuda57]

I don't think that is what he is referring to by "backdoor".

Ah, my mistake. I actually Googled backdoor conviction before posting to make sure I was getting it right.

[CountValentine]

Ah, my mistake. I actually Googled backdoor conviction before posting to make sure I was getting it right.

There is a Google definition for it? 

[Yehuda57]

There is a Google definition for it? 

Kinda, but not really.

[CountValentine]

Kinda, but not really.

I just used a term I thought was appropriate.