You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
0
they-see-me-trollin on scored.co
27 days ago0 points(+0/-0)1 child
nah, cameras are default banned in courtrooms because of the huge amount of historical abuse.
in this case, minors were testifying, which means it's virtually impossible to get a camera in the courtroom.
and it'll only get worse. especially nowadays with the prevalence of easy facial recognition, pan the jury once and you can blackmail/extort enough of them to get any verdict you want.
27 days ago1 point(+0/-0/+1Score on mirror)1 child
The Rittenhouse trial was livestreamed on multiple mainstream television networks and multiple mainstream newspaper websites and openly mocked even though it was plainly obvious from the livestreamed video witnessed in realtime that Rittenhouse was not just completely innocent but in fact the victim from the very beginning.
also, the judge in that case later said it was a mistake and he'd never do it again. the left wildly mischaracterized everything he said and did.
for example, leftists claimed he yelled at the prosecutor repeatedly. that was false. video shows he admonished the prosecutor for trying to bait a mistrial, unlawfully prodded rittenhouse's right to remain silent. the second time, the prosecutor intentionally tried to unlawfully show evidence directly to the jury which the judge had already ruled was inadmissible.
another example... typically a jury trial has one or more alternate jurors. that way if someone on the jury gets sick or has an issue, they don't have to retry the whole case. depending on the court, how the court dismisses the alternate(s) can vary widely. for this court, judges get wide leeway, so long as it favors neither side. this particular judge has the defendant pick random cards from a hat, guaranteeing before everyone in the court that absent some malicious sleight of hand, the persons designated as true alternates were not selected to favor either party. yet this was somehow considered illicit behavior by the left.
in this case, minors were testifying, which means it's virtually impossible to get a camera in the courtroom.
and it'll only get worse. especially nowadays with the prevalence of easy facial recognition, pan the jury once and you can blackmail/extort enough of them to get any verdict you want.
also, the judge in that case later said it was a mistake and he'd never do it again. the left wildly mischaracterized everything he said and did.
for example, leftists claimed he yelled at the prosecutor repeatedly. that was false. video shows he admonished the prosecutor for trying to bait a mistrial, unlawfully prodded rittenhouse's right to remain silent. the second time, the prosecutor intentionally tried to unlawfully show evidence directly to the jury which the judge had already ruled was inadmissible.
another example... typically a jury trial has one or more alternate jurors. that way if someone on the jury gets sick or has an issue, they don't have to retry the whole case. depending on the court, how the court dismisses the alternate(s) can vary widely. for this court, judges get wide leeway, so long as it favors neither side. this particular judge has the defendant pick random cards from a hat, guaranteeing before everyone in the court that absent some malicious sleight of hand, the persons designated as true alternates were not selected to favor either party. yet this was somehow considered illicit behavior by the left.
Which is why they should all be recorded, like body cams.