Rittenhouse/Kenosha Shooting Split

[ZiprHead]

That scans.

I thought it was weird that he said he was going to ASU when he had also said he graduated from an online high school. I looked up the school and it charges about $900 for a diploma.

So a diploma mill?

 

[Metaphor]

It's obviously a defense tactic to make him more sympathetic to the jury.

We've already established that employing trial tactics does not change whether he is innocent or guilty.

What we haven't established is whether, on this particular question, Rittenhouse has somehow been dishonest or deceptive. But the pearl-clutching hysteria continues.

The timing makes it fairly self evident.

Makes what self evident? That it's a trial tactic? I disagree.

Previously, Rittenhouse expressed strong admiration for abs aspirations to become a police officer. That’s a pretty big career switch with interesting timing.

When I was 17, I was seriously deciding between information technology, psychology, and law degrees. I sought advice from people I knew who were already in one of those courses. One of the responses I got was "those three things are very different". True though that was, I was interested in all three.

In any case, so what? Let's say he started an online course with the sole purpose of garnering jury sympathy. I would do the same if I were innocent and thought it would help.

 

[none]

yes,

Did George Zimmerman cry in public? Donald Trump? Do many other hate-filled murderous sociopaths cry?

I didn't mention Kyle's crying in support of him. I still think he was a sociopathic brat that epitomizes the absurdity of America's gun culture. I just think he showed cowardice; and perhaps killing isn't as fun as he thought it would be.

Therefore he might not follow in Zimmerman's foot-steps and continue to operate as a vigilante. I've not even clicked the videos; did he cry in remorse or something else? It just strikes me as incongruous that this punk, faced with glaring proof of his own cowardice and inhumanity, would continue on a vigilante path.

short answer yes, 1 tears, 2 moans, and 3 murder. but those are the murderous sociopaths.
most of them lost it all in the end, they couldn't take it with them 'cept the forgiveness of those they killed for. the ones they hurt are not the ones they care about.
some just keep "truckin' along".. undetected... unconsidered until that moment of death.

 

[Metaphor]

It's obviously a defense tactic to make him more sympathetic to the jury.

We've already established that employing trial tactics does not change whether he is innocent or guilty.

What we haven't established is whether, on this particular question, Rittenhouse has somehow been dishonest or deceptive. But the pearl-clutching hysteria continues.

Yes, I'm three weeks away from the trial for of life and I'm going to apply to school.

IT IS A FUCKING EMPIRICAL QUESTION. Is Rittenhouse enrolled in a nursing-related course offered by ASU or not?

 

[none]

It's obviously a defense tactic to make him more sympathetic to the jury.

We've already established that employing trial tactics does not change whether he is innocent or guilty.

What we haven't established is whether, on this particular question, Rittenhouse has somehow been dishonest or deceptive. But the pearl-clutching hysteria continues.

Yes, I'm three weeks away from the trial for of life and I'm going to apply to school.

IT IS A FUCKING EMPIRICAL QUESTION. Is Rittenhouse enrolled in a nursing-related course offered by ASU or not?

hey now, I am guilty of throwing the f-bomb... but nuance? are you serious? aren't you forgetting the whole of humanity when you argue law?

 

[Metaphor]

It's obviously a defense tactic to make him more sympathetic to the jury.

We've already established that employing trial tactics does not change whether he is innocent or guilty.

What we haven't established is whether, on this particular question, Rittenhouse has somehow been dishonest or deceptive. But the pearl-clutching hysteria continues.

Yes, I'm three weeks away from the trial for of life and I'm going to apply to school.

IT IS A FUCKING EMPIRICAL QUESTION. Is Rittenhouse enrolled in a nursing-related course offered by ASU or not?

hey now, I am guilty of throwing the f-bomb... but nuance? are you serious? aren't you forgetting the whole of humanity when you argue law?

I guess nobody wants to answer the fucking plain question I plainly fucking asked.

 

[none]

It's obviously a defense tactic to make him more sympathetic to the jury.

We've already established that employing trial tactics does not change whether he is innocent or guilty.

What we haven't established is whether, on this particular question, Rittenhouse has somehow been dishonest or deceptive. But the pearl-clutching hysteria continues.

Yes, I'm three weeks away from the trial for of life and I'm going to apply to school.

IT IS A FUCKING EMPIRICAL QUESTION. Is Rittenhouse enrolled in a nursing-related course offered by ASU or not?

hey now, I am guilty of throwing the f-bomb... but nuance? are you serious? aren't you forgetting the whole of humanity when you argue law?

I guess nobody wants to answer the fucking plain question I plainly fucking asked.

"you're out of order" shut the whole court system down @Metaphor
what have I got to lose?

 

[ZiprHead]

It's obviously a defense tactic to make him more sympathetic to the jury.

We've already established that employing trial tactics does not change whether he is innocent or guilty.

No, we haven't. it's a well known psychological tactic that sympathetic defendants can influence jurors.

What we haven't established is whether, on this particular question, Rittenhouse has somehow been dishonest or deceptive. But the pearl-clutching hysteria continues.

Psychology of Persuasion for Trial Lawyers a look at the Lecture of Dyke Huish given at NACDL

Huish asks lawyers to think of the symbols that will be used in the trial. What will the jury picture when they heard the words? Can you provide a picture that provides a more favorable symbols than what the jury is picturing.

Huish uses the example of a college football game; we would all picture a different game; I went to University of Connecticut Law School so unfortunately I would not picture my school but some big time game like Michigan vs. Ohio State.

People view the world through symbols and concepts. People collect information in symbolic fashion. We want to be conscious of what the symbols are like in our trials. For example, when the jury hears side of the road, do they picture it as we want them to. To make sure we are picking the correct symbols in the trial we may need to bring them to the scene with a picture to change the symbol.

Psychology plays a big part in the defense lawyer trade.

 

[Shadowy Man]

Turns out Metaphor will validate those who self-identify in a non-standard manner, sometimes.

I haven't said his answer isn't deceptive. I have said I don't see how it is deceptive, given the information offered.

If Rittenhouse was indeed enrolled in a nursing-related course, offered by ASU, then his answer was not deceptive, and the people calling it deceptive are clutching at straws.

If the course was not offered by ASU, or Rittenhouse was not enrolled in it, or the course was not nursing-related, then his answer would be deceptive.

I disagree. If those things were true then his statement would be a lie. As it was, it was merely deceptive, whether intentionally or not, because many people would interpret being “a student *at* a university” in quite a different way.

At least based on my understanding of the meaning of the word “deceptive”.

 

[ZiprHead]

It's obviously a defense tactic to make him more sympathetic to the jury.

We've already established that employing trial tactics does not change whether he is innocent or guilty.

What we haven't established is whether, on this particular question, Rittenhouse has somehow been dishonest or deceptive. But the pearl-clutching hysteria continues.

Yes, I'm three weeks away from the trial for of life and I'm going to apply to school.

IT IS A FUCKING EMPIRICAL QUESTION. Is Rittenhouse enrolled in a nursing-related course offered by ASU or not?

You really have a problem with nuance, don't you.

 

[Metaphor]

It's obviously a defense tactic to make him more sympathetic to the jury.

We've already established that employing trial tactics does not change whether he is innocent or guilty.

No, we haven't. it's a well known psychological tactic that sympathetic defendants can influence jurors.

You misunderstood what I wrote. I did not say it would not or could not influence jurors. I said it doesn't change whether he is innocent or guilty.

What we haven't established is whether, on this particular question, Rittenhouse has somehow been dishonest or deceptive. But the pearl-clutching hysteria continues.

Psychology of Persuasion for Trial Lawyers a look at the Lecture of Dyke Huish given at NACDL

You misunderstood what I wrote. I did not say it would not or could not influence jurors. I said it doesn't change whether he is innocent or guilty.

Huish asks lawyers to think of the symbols that will be used in the trial. What will the jury picture when they heard the words? Can you provide a picture that provides a more favorable symbols than what the jury is picturing.

Huish uses the example of a college football game; we would all picture a different game; I went to University of Connecticut Law School so unfortunately I would not picture my school but some big time game like Michigan vs. Ohio State.

People view the world through symbols and concepts. People collect information in symbolic fashion. We want to be conscious of what the symbols are like in our trials. For example, when the jury hears side of the road, do they picture it as we want them to. To make sure we are picking the correct symbols in the trial we may need to bring them to the scene with a picture to change the symbol.

Psychology plays a big part in the defense lawyer trade.

You misunderstood what I wrote. I did not say it would not or could not influence jurors. I said it doesn't change whether he is innocent or guilty.

There is an incredibly shit 'fact-check' on Rittenhouse's statement about his student status, that Jimmy Higgins decided revealed a Rittenhouse lie so outrageous he responded with 'are you fucking kidding me'?

Well, that incredibly shit 'fact-check' revealed nothing of the sort, and I have stated why.

 

[Metaphor]

It's obviously a defense tactic to make him more sympathetic to the jury.

We've already established that employing trial tactics does not change whether he is innocent or guilty.

What we haven't established is whether, on this particular question, Rittenhouse has somehow been dishonest or deceptive. But the pearl-clutching hysteria continues.

Yes, I'm three weeks away from the trial for of life and I'm going to apply to school.

IT IS A FUCKING EMPIRICAL QUESTION. Is Rittenhouse enrolled in a nursing-related course offered by ASU or not?

You really have a problem with nuance, don't you.

Is Rittenhouse enrolled in a nursing-related course offered by ASU or not?

 

[Rhea]

My question for Rittenhouse is, if you’re there to “give people medical attention,” as you said, what were you planning to do with your AR15 while you administered first aid? Ask Rosenbam to hold it for you? Put it on the pavement during a protest while you performed compressions?

How could anyone who was seriously there to provide medical aid have any expectation of keeping their rather large gun in control while they did anything at all of any assistance to anyone?

 

[none]

It's obviously a defense tactic to make him more sympathetic to the jury.

We've already established that employing trial tactics does not change whether he is innocent or guilty.

No, we haven't. it's a well known psychological tactic that sympathetic defendants can influence jurors.

You misunderstood what I wrote. I did not say it would not or could not influence jurors. I said it doesn't change whether he is innocent or guilty.

What we haven't established is whether, on this particular question, Rittenhouse has somehow been dishonest or deceptive. But the pearl-clutching hysteria continues.

Psychology of Persuasion for Trial Lawyers a look at the Lecture of Dyke Huish given at NACDL

You misunderstood what I wrote. I did not say it would not or could not influence jurors. I said it doesn't change whether he is innocent or guilty.

Huish asks lawyers to think of the symbols that will be used in the trial. What will the jury picture when they heard the words? Can you provide a picture that provides a more favorable symbols than what the jury is picturing.

Huish uses the example of a college football game; we would all picture a different game; I went to University of Connecticut Law School so unfortunately I would not picture my school but some big time game like Michigan vs. Ohio State.

People view the world through symbols and concepts. People collect information in symbolic fashion. We want to be conscious of what the symbols are like in our trials. For example, when the jury hears side of the road, do they picture it as we want them to. To make sure we are picking the correct symbols in the trial we may need to bring them to the scene with a picture to change the symbol.

Psychology plays a big part in the defense lawyer trade.

You misunderstood what I wrote. I did not say it would not or could not influence jurors. I said it doesn't change whether he is innocent or guilty.

There is an incredibly shit 'fact-check' on Rittenhouse's statement about his student status, that Jimmy Higgins decided revealed a Rittenhouse lie so outrageous he responded with 'are you fucking kidding me'?

Well, that incredibly shit 'fact-check' revealed nothing of the sort, and I have stated why.

yeah, @Metaphor , deception is a lie. it may achieve an objective... still a lie.

 

[Metaphor]

I disagree. If those things were true then his statement would be a lie. As it was, it was merely deceptive, whether intentionally or not, because many people would interpret being “a student *at* a university” in quite a different way.

At least based on my understanding of the meaning of the word “deceptive”.

His statement might have misled, but whether it was a lie or not depends on his intention.

Nevertheless, nobody has answered my question. Is he enrolled in a nursing-related course, offered by ASU?

 

[none]

I disagree. If those things were true then his statement would be a lie. As it was, it was merely deceptive, whether intentionally or not, because many people would interpret being “a student *at* a university” in quite a different way.

At least based on my understanding of the meaning of the word “deceptive”.

His statement might have misled, but whether it was a lie or not depends on his intention.

Nevertheless, nobody has answered my question. Is he enrolled in a nursing-related course, offered by ASU?

arizona state is for college beer and divorce attorneys, that's why criminal prosecutions matter so much.

 

[Rhea]

Metaphor - you cannot be a college student at a college in the US unless you are enrolled at the college. Did you not know that?

You can’t just take a continuing ed night class and call yourself a “college student.”

The college says he is not enrolled. Period.

You seem very confused by this.

 

[Rhea]

Nevertheless, nobody has answered my question. Is he enrolled in a nursing-related course, offered by ASU?

No, Metaphor. He is not enrolled. That was stated in the post right at the top. The college said he had not even begun the enrollment process.

An ASU spokesman, however, said Rittenhouse “has not gone through the admissions process with Arizona State University and is not enrolled in the Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation.”

 

[Metaphor]

Metaphor - you cannot be a college student at a college in the US unless you are enrolled at the college. Did you not know that?

You can’t just take a continuing ed night class and call yourself a “college student.”

The college says he is not enrolled. Period.

You seem very confused by this.

I'm confused as to why nobody can answer my question. Is he taking a nursing-related course offered by ASU, or not?

Now I'll admit there is probably a language difference here. But if I took a course offered by an Australian university online, I would say it is fair to say I'm a student at that university (in a non-award course).

 

[Metaphor]

Nevertheless, nobody has answered my question. Is he enrolled in a nursing-related course, offered by ASU?

No, Metaphor. He is not enrolled. That was stated in the post right at the top. The college said he had not even begun the enrollment process.

An ASU spokesman, however, said Rittenhouse “has not gone through the admissions process with Arizona State University and is not enrolled in the Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation.”

No, that does not answer my question. Is he taking a nursing-related course, offered by ASU?

Whether ASU calls the people taking that course 'enrolled' or 'registered' or whatever is not the information I am after.