Absolutely. I agree. However, the law in WI doesn't. My opinion doesn't matter. Your opinion doesn't matter. What matters is the law. Just as I said he wasn't on trial for being racist, he was on trial for what the PA charged him with. Opinion doesn't matter. The LAW matters. Talk to the law makers in WI.
Dear god man, what part of "our opinions aren't about the trial or what the law is" can't you comprehend? And even after we both agreed that the entire "racist thing" was something we mutually agreed to drop, you still can't let it go. Okay, as you wish.....
The motivation and mind set of why he went there in the first place does matter. The intent as to why he was there matters. Racism, if it is part of the cause of going there does matter. And the best BS people can come up with is, "yeah, but he didn't shoot any black people". Those Einsteins can't seem to figure out was the reason he was there was because it was a BLM protest. Duh!
And just think, we had this entire back and forth settled as to "we just agree to disagree" until you just couldn't stop yourself. Now go ahead and blame me for that.
I know its late but I'll address your confusion.
-The gun charge was dismissed because he wasn't in violation of the statute. Yes, the TITLE of the Statute says "under 18"... but the title is just that, it is NOT part of the actual language or element of the law. The Judge didn't drop that charge out of hand. The defense filed a pre-trial motion to have it dismissed along with the curfew charge. The judge did not rule on the gun charge until the very morning of the day the jury was given jury instructions which was a Monday. The previous Friday the defense again tried to get the charge dropped, pointing out why the charge was not applicable in this case. The ONLY thing that statute could get Kyle hung up on was the barrel length. Anything under 16" would have been bad. The judge gave the prosecution the ENTIRE weekend to measure the barrel and present their argument to him. Come Monday morning they still hadn't and even though they were given the opportunity to do it that morning they did not because they already knew the length was fine.
Now as far as travelling the 20min across state lines to turn himself in... the prosecution never argued or tried to show that he was the actual person who possessed it in transit.
As for the other charges and some comments about not being able to infer based on the amount of time it took to get a verdict...
When the jury came to a consensus verdict on each charge, they filled out a form for that charge with the verdict AND the date in which they reached that verdict. Everything was then turned in to the Court collectively once a verdict was reached on all charges.
On Day 2, the jury found him not guilty on the counts involving "jump kick man" and Anthony Huber, the skateboard guy.
On Day 3, the jury found him not guilty on the count involving Gage Kreuzquitz (Sp?), the guy who rolled up on him with the Glock
On Day 4 is when they found him not guilty for killing the pedophile and the reckless endangerment charge for a shot allegedly going it he direction of a report, Richie Mcginnest (sp?)
Odd thing is, many people including myself thought that the killing of the pedo would have been the lynch pin, how they decided on that would determine how they decided about everything after. This was the opposite. It could mean that the jury bought very little of what they prosecutors were saying. Maybe they didn't by the story that they were being heroes?
This thread is actually a really good example of the problem with "social justice". A lot of information and facts came out in this trial. About 90% of what the prosecution presented in terms of evidence and witnesses actually favored the defense. In fact, many who followed the trial were critical of how much the defense dropped the ball and it was the evidence that cleared Kyle more than anything his lawyers did. What I've seen rampant through this thread is posters wanting him convicted based not on facts, but on a narrative. It doesn't matter to them that the facts don't line up with the narrative. It doesn't matter that the actual laws and legal standards don't line up with the narrative. It doesn't even mater that the jury who had more information than they did and arrived at the verdict they did because again, it doesn't line up with their narrative. There is ZERO evidence he was there in opposition to BLM. As if that were a crime even if true. The prosecutors dumped his entire phone and still found ZERO evidence to being part of a militia or white supremacy groups. That's what lynch mobs were: 'prosecutions' based on a narrative, with no regard for facts, evidence or law, justified by their own view of "social justice".
BTW, look up Andrew Coffee's case... he's a black dude that won his self defense claim the same day Kyle was acquitted after shooting at a bunch of cops.
