I've been watching snippets of the Kyle Rittenhouse trial, where the jury has now completed three days of deliberations. My prediction is that he will walk and be completely exonerated. Usually, the longer a jury is out, the more likely the defense will acquit. What's your take?
92 comments:
I concur. And the judge needs to have an evaluation.
Just by watching live videos of the incident, and dozens of replays with expert analysis, he SHOULD be fully cleared. But, who knows what a jury in today’s America will do. These are crazy times for the Rules of Law and justice.
Um, that’s why they have horse races and jury trials. I expect a complete acquittal, but you never know.
He is innocent and if people riot we should send in the Marines that will stop them
The burden of proof is on the state in a self defense of bodily harm in this venue. I would surmise, after watching the “rules” before this judge, the jury is having problems with about 32 pages of instructions. Question is, did this defendant in effect pick a fight and then claim self defense? And , the prosecutor apparently withheld a drone tape that defense didn’t know about at discovery! He also tied barrel length issue ,then demonstrates careless firearm exhibit in the courtroom. So , not being an “expert “ I’m going to say their going to have to start over , the protest out front of the court house will go nowhere, And new trial will start in the very cold weather , then protesters won’t be the only people with their hands in their own pockets . Good day.
Not sure what he would be found guilty of? Still waiting for the rioters to all be brought to justice.
1:33--yes and any other riot
Rittenhouse acted like a vigilante on behalf of the state, that’s why he’s being “babied”. The police were not there to serve and protect human beings, they’re there to protect order and property. The police are the foot soldiers and are there to crackdown on protesters who have anti-government sentiments. That’s why they have to call protesters “rioters” to manufacture your consent for a military response, and justify the existence of vigilantes like Rittenhouse who help them get the job done.
This deliberation should have been done in 3 hours. it appears that there is at least 1 juror who believes the prosecution or thinks because people died someone should be punished. I expect a hung jury. Ultimately Rittenhouse will go free, as he should.
There is no way that this kid is “innocent.” He went there to play policeman, he went there to get into a shuffle and he got into it deliberately. He is a good example of what are being called chaos-tourists. Much like those who damaged the US Capital building.
He -should- be acquitted. It was clear self defense, which I've known since the night it happened (I watched every second of the on-the-ground footage from the Kenosha riots/protests as they occurred). As to the question of "should he have been there?", Teddy Roosevelt's "Man in the Arena" comes to mind.
Hope you're well, Bernie. Happy Early Thanksgiving. I don't agree with all your writing/analysis, but I appreciate that you're still doing it after all these years.
Sad that he ever went there but he is innocent. If the cities would have protected the people and property with the national guard perhaps this would have never happened. Very sad. Pray the jury is strong enough to follow the evidence
He is going to likely walk and perhaps by the letter of the law he should. That doesn't make any of this any less of a tragedy - a child killed people protesting police violence to "defend" private property no one asked him to defend. Is he guilty of murder? Maybe not. Is he the hero that demagogues are trying to mold him into? Definitely not.
I worry about the precedent this will set. I think the reactionaries who like playing army guy are going to feel empowered to do violence.
What do u mean "send in the Marines"? Don't you realize Christmas is coming, need to get gifts for the family, so good time to break in stores and steal some electronics. Lets see, how many 50 inch TVs can I get in the car?
He is definitely innocent, 1:33 AM, but will he be convicted due to a jury that feels threatened by potential harm if he is cleared? That’s a strong possibility. There’s a mob outside just waiting for the ‘signal’ to do harm, burn and loot, etc. Then, just yesterday, MSNBC sent out a team to follow the jury bus and photograph people inside. Naturally, MSNBC denies any connection. I find it very possible some on that jury will convict this fellow out of fear, hoping to save themselves, their family, their neighborhood. THIS is the ‘today’s America’ I described earlier.
I am expecting a verdict sometime today or this evening. Big news always seems to happen on a Friday, and the Thanksgiving break is near.
I do think he will be (and should be) fully acquitted. However, I fear that there may be one or more jury members who are not being objective and are activist, resulting in a hung jury. We are in such a sorry state as a country.
The Prosecution has been incredibly slimy too, I have been shocked. The judge is totally in the right for repeatedly admonishing then. Personally, after this blurry-video hail mary BS they pulled in closing, it should be a mistrial with prejudice.
Obviously
I think he will be found not guilty even though he should have never been there and I do agree with a previous poster that a not guilty verdict will encourage vigilantes across the country. I am confused as to the legality of the judge dropping the one absolutely clear violation of crossing the state line illegally with the rifle even if it was a misdemeanor.
I think the judge is auditioning for a spot on Faux ‘news’ to replace Judge Napolitano.
Rotten house is guilty as sin. He crossed state lines with a gun to become some sort of hero to the gun establishment. If he wasn’t there there would have been no killings. This is fucked up and America needs to have stricter gun laws. You do a crime with a gun accidental or not, then you do the time 20 years. No Question Asked.
The judge is a democrat put in place by the D party. The judge is a no nonsense judge, that is his reputation. His conduct and demeanor is consistent with most judges. Attorneys who come before a judge know what boundaries the can and can’t cross. The prosecution decided to cross certain lines and was reprimanded as he should have been. Dude —-get over it. The judges responsibility is to give a fair trail by the law and statues that are in place.
The accused did not transport a gun /rifle across state borders. Fake news.
Anon , 8:37 Defendants attorney filed(I think) for Mistrial with Prejudice already , that based on held prosecution video evidence not declared at discovery. I think ?
". He crossed state lines with a gun to become some sort of hero to the gun establishment"
Untrue. The mainstream media got nearly everything wrong:
1) There is zero evidence he is a white supremacist. He is a kid who supports police.
2) He crossed state lines, but his home is only 20 miles from Kenosha and most of his family live there. He crossed state lines the night before the protests.
3) He did not bring the gun to Kenosha fromk Illinois. It was already there and was legal.
4) He was there to provide medical assistance. The testimony established that he was offering medical assistance to protestors and that he attempted to put out fires.
5) he shot in self-defense.
I personally think no minor should be allowed to parade around with a firearm, but it is legal in Wisconsin.
Did the kid exercise poor judgment? yes he did. Poor judgment aside, he was being threatened by others and reacted naturally with the fight/flight response. Trying to say he should have reacted differently in that moment is not an argument. What would you do?
It was a series of small poor decisions that had tragic consequences. There are many lessons in this story and I hope people don't lose sight of those due to emotions.
If he was on trial fir exercising poor judgment, I’d vote to convict. But he’s on trial for murder, and the facts adduced show that the mainstream got nearly everything wrong. What are you supposed to do when someone is pointing a gun at you? Let him shoot?
Bernie,
Not sure.
"Hope you're well, Bernie. Happy Early Thanksgiving. I don't agree with all your writing/analysis, but I appreciate that you're still doing it after all these years.
November 19, 2021 at 7:15 AM"
Ditto.
By the letter of the law, and well within reasonable doubt, he will/should be cleared. I do think a hung jury is still a possibility, just because of the moral slippery slope thats involved. No idea how/why this case wasn't moved to another county.
Completely agree that a 17 year old kid, no matter how enthusiastic and/or responsible he is should NOT have been in a city 20 miles from his home at night carrying an assault rifle in the streets no matter what the situation was and no matter what his intent and purpose for being there was. His parents should carry some of this blame.
100% the rioters/protestors shouldn't have been there either. Protest and dissent are ways and rights of every American, but the minute things turn violent and get out of hand, you're no longer protesting and dissenting, you're destroying property (or allowing/encouraging it to happen). Those rioters in Kenosha, just as those in DC that summer and ESPECIALLY on January 6th, deserve every measure of punishment the government can dish out.
"What are you supposed to do when someone is pointing a gun at you? Let him shoot?"
That was my point exactly, Bern. Didn't mean to get you all up in a lather.
The laws are intentionally vague because its impossible to predict how, when and where a situation might arise.
Rittenhouse will be found innocent.
What concerns me, and others above have expressed is this will be viewed as a green light by some of the more over exuberant elements of society to put on more forceful displays of arms.
Despite the media routinely highlighting the extremes, I still firmly believe that 90% of us are rational and reasonable people, with a few lost whackos on both sides of the spectrum. Unfortunately, I do think another 20% of us are too easily influenced by others and buy in or shrug off certain behaviors as longs as the individuals involved have a common background or similar views.
I can easily see another tragedy happening in the future, but on a much bigger scale with dipshits of all shapes and sizes parading around with their guns around large crowds of people... Again, most will likely be responsible, but odds are strong that some of them would be looking for any excuse, and this verdict will make that decision a bit easier to rationalize it in their heads.
No Excuses. This kid killed 2 people and injured one because of his lack of morality. Where is the training and respect of being an ex military officer or possibly a Boy Scout where some gun trading has been provided. No, Rittenhouse should have been home jerking off to “Bullets and Bergers” buy he was living out a sick fantasy of becoming a hero. Fuck him! I hope he rots in jail.
I find it difficult to believe that reasonable folks can go thru the complexes of the various degrees of Homicide
BREAKING: Kyle Rittenhouse Found NOT Guilty on All Charges
Absolutely Disgusting ! This is pure Bull Shit! The fix was set by the judge and just now I see that Judge f…………, has given Rittenhouse his gun to defend the courthouse.
Now you have a new American Hero.
Congratulations!!!
1:26 - So, it wasn't that he was found innocent by a jury of his peers? Had to be shenanigans involved because they didn't return the verdict of your liking.
There are no heroes in this story. Kyle will never be the same and will live with this his entire life. What 1:26 misses is that we live in a country where we get a fair trial by a jury of our peers. God bless America.
I believe that what swayed the jury is that Rittenhouse took the stand and was able to explain why he felt his life was in danger. Most lawyers these days keep their clients off the stand, but that is often a mistake. If a Defendant is likable and understands not to argue under cross, it's a good idea to have him or her testify.
Had the jury convicted, I would have had no problem with that verdict either. But since they failed to reach a verdict quickly, I knew the prosecution was in trouble.
He is certainly guilty of exercising poor judgment. Had he kept his rifle stashed away, he would not be in a position where he had to defend himself.
He's a kid who serves at his local volunteer fire company. He made clear at the trial that he was not defending property, but his own life.
Bernie,
You’re wrong. Kyle Rittenhouse is a white supremacist.
He took pictures using “white power” hand gestures and meeting members of the Proud Boys at a bar.
If that’s not enough proof, I don’t know what is.
12.46 the degrees of guilt with first degree murder, second degree murder and manslaughter are very simple. Wisconsin should simplify their instructions. In fact, these definitions are very clear in the old testament and have been the standard for the civilized world for thousands of years.
And yet two victims are dead--sorry white guy gets a different term thanks to the judge.
Clearly that means that protesters have to open carry at all protests--after all you have to be able to defend oneself from teenagers with poor judgement.
Wonder how the po-po will react to 500 protesters all carrying openly?
more people will be hurt but remember guns do not die --people do.
VERY disturbing to read the reactions published by New York’s high profile politicians. These are the kind of reactions that could motivate rioting, looting, etc. Let’s see how the news media utilizes such misguided and careless remarks.
Anon 12:16 said:
"What concerns me, and others above have expressed is this will be viewed as a green light by some of the more over exuberant elements of society to put on more forceful displays of arms"
Or maybe the benefit will be that those who want to riot and attack people will think twice before doing any harm.
I don't know what the hell the people who attacked Rittenhouse were thinking, since the firearm Rittenhouse was carrying was visible. Attacking someone carrying a rifle is a high level of stupid.
I can guarantee you there were many others who were (legally) concealed-carrying during the unrest, and who will be in the future. People aren't always sheep waiting for slaughter by the mob.
Ultimately, none of this happens if politicians would have done their jobs and protected the public and property. They should have been the ones on trial.
So a white teenager inserted himself in a Black Lives Matter protest, with a rifle, lied about his medical expertise, agitated the crowd, shoots and kills two protesters. He was put in jail, and miraculously gets granted bail that was paid for by a white super-conservative celebrity. He visits a bar illegally, drinks an alcoholic beverage while being underage and under probation supervision, takes a picture with the proud boys, which are a known white supremacist organization, and flashes a white power gesture with his hands. Gets a trial with primarily white jurors and gets acquitted of all charges.
But yeah, there’s no such thing as white privilege.
FUCK OFF
Let the civil law suits begin.
Anyone who thinks you have to sit back and watch the neighborhood burn a few nights in a row isn't an American. We implicitly have the right to arm ourselves in groups to defend the village , especially when the usual authorities can't or won't .
I hope that the victims sue the fuck out of that little shit...
The fact that he was a volunteer firefighter is meaningless. One of the most racist assholes I’ve ever personally met was a volunteer firefighter in bucks county. I’m not shocked by the verdict. And like you, Bernie, I could’ve seen it going either way. It was probably hard to convict based on the evidence and chaos of that situation. But let’s be clear…he wasn’t on trial for being a racist asshole. He was on trial for murder and related crimes. Acquittal doesn’t mean he’s not a racist asshole or a dipshit in general. Personally, I believe he’s both of those things.
Let me ask this question: After he killed the first person. What would your thought be if the person who hit him with the skateboard would have hit him in the throat with the side of the skate board and and killed ritten? Would the person with the skate board been in their right assuming that Ritten was active shooter an thereby protecting himself?
My personal opinion is that the person with the skateboard would have been justified and could have claimed self-defense?
Gaetz said he wanted to hire him. But then Gaetz realized he turned 18 and said the deal was off. I can't tell a joke in person and suck at it even more in blog)
The men that were shot were white
Would you have kept that same energy when the January 6 insurrectionist stormed the Capitol and called for Vice President Pence’s head? Would you have implicitly shot them all dead because they were trying to over-throw the government? Exactly, shut the fuck up
Lots of emotion speaking out tonight. We need to look at the facts and only the facts. As some have mentioned, not winning hearts and minds with his actions but his personal life wasn't on trial. We need to remember that else we slip into mob rule.
HOW IRONIC, the spineless legislators push a permitless carry law in PA yet they govern in a bubble. That's right, they place our families at risk making anyone pretend police in order to create a boogieman issue. Just in time to book those conceal carry seminars pandering for votes while they buck election finance reform and sit on their tailbones the rest of the year collecting corporate gifts under the green dome. They are not problem solvers.
The dead are white pedos. This is a very good thing. They died as they lived: trying to touch a minor against his will.
And now the kid is about to get paid by all the media morons who were still spoiling for riots last night. Cha ching. The system DOES work.
Nice call, Bernie. You nailed it when everyone else was guaranteeing a hung jury.
@ 9:03 this is off topic. But I say that as they stormed the capital once they crossed the threshold the gun emplacements on the roof of the capital should have opened up. Just like when protestors turn into rioters. When the protestors on January 6th crossed the threshold and started causing damage they should have received exactly the same that many of them had called the BLM protestors turned rioters received. Equality is equality so harsh quick responses make sense. The right to protest is something that is important to the fabric of this country. Protests turned rioting has turned into a profit and power center for many and a way many times for those on the opposite site to insight people in favor of their cause. Do some investigating but it has become a way of the culture going back to Vanderbilt, Morgan, Carnegies and others. Infiltrate the other side and make them look bad then profit from their disaster. If you do not think it is going on today then you need to open your eyes.
Sadly, it isn’t over. Rittenhouse will become the puppet of the crazy conservatives crowd. Gaetz has already publicly praised him. He’ll be hailed as a hero. And he’s not really very bright, so he’ll think that he deserves it because he’s the new Rambo, a junior fire-fighter with an assault rifle. The word “patriot “ will be used to describe his act of bravery. He and his family will have lots of conservative donors throwing money at them. Who knows, maybe even Trump will have him at one of his freak rallies. He’ll be on the conservative radio shows by next week and when things cool-down a bit he’ll be on someone’s Fox show. He’s set for the next ten years at least. Maybe he’ll run for office, just to keep the ball rolling.
Stop the nonsense! The videos clearly show Rittenhouse was simply walking down the street alone. Rittenhouse was making NO offensive move against anyone else on that street. Rittenhouse had a legal right to be there that night. He had a legal right to carry a weapon. His weapon was purchased and legally registered in that same state.
Kyle Rittenhouse was victim of an unprovoked ATTACK by people who walked over TOWARD him. He was kicked, knocked to the ground, and beaten by 3 persons he did not know. He rightfully feared for his safety and under the conditions of the night, probably feared for his life.
Kyle Rittenhouse DEFENDED himself legally. Two of his attackers died, another seriously wounded. Think about it, his attackers WILLINGLY engaged and injured a clearly armed individual. How’s that for judgement?
Finally, everyone involved was of the same skin color. Liberal politicians and pundits should stop trying to further divide us by making this out to be some sort of racial injustice. News media outlets that are attempting to foment this incident further are, in my mind, disgusting people who are doing harm.
IT HAS BEGUN!
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-ingraham-rittenhouse-saved-kenosha-1260655/
Trump praised the jury’s not guilty verdicts and said he believed that the prosecutors engaged in misconduct, somehow, by prosecuting Rittenhouse: “I think that it was a great decision. I was surprised it had to go this far. Somebody should have ended it earlier. Frankly, the case should have never been brought. It was prosecutorial misconduct, in my opinion, and is plenty of it going on in this country right now? That was disgraceful.”
"The prosecutors, what they did in order to try to win, instead of looking for justice they were just looking for a win. It was probably a political case to a large extent," he said.
"This is a young man who should not have been prosecuted, based on every ounce of evidence that you look at.
Trump went on to paint Rittenhouse as a hero, calling him a “poster boy” for killing people in self-defense. “If you’re talking about innocence based on self-defense, this was the poster boy,” Trump told Ingraham. “I think he would have been dead if he had waited a quarter of a second when that gun was pointed at his head. That guy was going to pull that trigger.”
"I think that it was a great decision," Trump told host Laura Ingraham, praising the jury for not cowing to outside pressures and delivering a just verdict.
Worrisome to see lunatics like Steve Lynch celebrating this verdict. Afraid that goons like him will take this as a license to kill.
Hey folks, you are complaining about keeping this story going, as you keep the story going. While many want to make this a national issue, it was a simple case of self defense and the jury obeyed the law. Read the law, forget about all the distractions, the question was what happened in the several minutes of concern. It was clear, he did what he had to, it is not complicated.
White guy shot whites why do the blacks care?
Good, not a smart move to be attacking or chasing someone who is carrying a gun.
Ok Bernie your not going to publish the Felons ,that were shot by a 17 year old. .How about Atlanta gun issue. I say it s not accidental. It’s an unintentional discharge by a foul of subject,man or woman. This was caused because someone had a round in the chamber of an autoloader. I going to surmise ,it was in their carry on. The interesting issue to me was the panic. A veteran of the Vietnam, Afghanistan or Iraqi wars wouldn’t have flinched . Are the American pubic becoming woosees ,pussy characters.I sign my name - notice?
IT boils down to this now. I feel like you are threatening me so I have the right to shoot you no matter who you are where we are and what I di before hand. And if you happen to die so sorry oh well not my fault I was defending myself from what I perceived as a threat.
What is the theory now if some who is carrying a gun gets shot by someone carrying a gun. Is it self defense. If they are locked and loaded with their finger on the trigger. That sure seems like an intent to do something and a threat!
That's nonsense from someone who failed to watch any part of the trial and only listened to talking heads who told him what he wanted to hear. The standard of deadly force in self defense is unchanged. If someone reasonably believes his life or that of another is in danger, he is authorized to use deadly force. That is the law in all 50 states and should be the law on all 50 states. It makes no difference whether the person exercising self-defense is a Trump supporter. Now I've heard some people say that if Rittenhouse were black, he'd be in jail. Does that mean Rittenhouse should be in jail bc he is white? If you want more social justice, you should applaud the verdict, and express a desire to see the same for everyone.
Bernie,
There was an interesting interview that I watched from one of the self appointed security team leaders in Kenosha that night. It actually surprised me as I thought he would have backed Rotten. He was one of the guys with a group where Rotten was when it all started. He said he felt like the kid was in well over his head before anything ever went down and that he thought rotten was looking to pull the trigger. Then there was also Rotten in a video from a few weeks earlier telling people he wished he had his AR to put a couple of slugs in someone. Both things if they would have been allowed to be admitted would have painted a different picture. Also the question around the AR would have opened to how he knew he had one, who bought it for him, why he had one etc. But the judge did not allow either as admissible. His prerogative as a judge.
Me personally I would have given the kid the pass on the first one he shot after watching what video feeds I could find. The others though I question because it seemed like he did not try to extricate himself from the situation instead he seemed to go back into the fray.
But as you said the accept the verdict, expect and hope it to be applied equally across all, and move on. I fully you don not have to agree with everything. You just have to hope that it gets applied relatively uniformly
7.40, obviously you never watched all the video's. he never did anything but attempt to put distance between himself and his assailants. It is all very clear.
Watching the news and seeing how the news the president and the vice president are reacting to the trial which is the backbone of our democracy is disheartening. If they think they are helping to unite this country they are not. Explain how the Democratic party is trying to unite by going out and speaking against this verdict. I'm so disgusted with our alleged leaders
We may need to do more work to achieve social justice, but that has nothing to do with the Rittenhouse verdict. Neither Biden nor Harris should be commenting on a verdict on a case about which they know so little. Biden acknowledged he saw none of the trial, and I doubt Harris did. Neither of them was well-served by numerous mainstream media accounts, which got nearly every detail wrong.
Thank you. I totally agree and appreciate that comment
The narrative eon this case is so stupid. It has nothing to do with BLM or social injustce. It was one impressionable not to bright white guy going to a protest. He ran in to other dumb not bright white guys who were there. Neither Rittenhouse or his victim's had any interest in social justice. The guys he shot were trouble makers with rap sheets. They were there for their own purposes not for BLM. They were troubled makers who were looking for trouble and they found it. That does not mean Rittenhouse is a good guy it only means that stupid people going where they have no reason to be in a volatile situation got killed and hurt.
Whether people like it or not it happened and was self-defense. Not a trial about social justice.
People need to stop undermining basic American institutions to further their own personal agendas'
The President's first reaction was that he believed in the Jury system and that they had made their decision. Then within a few hours his advisers had convinced him he needed to pander to his revolutionary base. Then put out a statement about being disappointed in the verdic. another example of weak ineffective leadership.
"achieve social justice, but that has nothing to do with the Rittenhouse"
Rittenhouse was a good example of white privilege .
The kid was given every benefit of doubt as to his actions.
something anyone not white would get.
Would the police allow a black guy wander around a protest with an AR without question?
Cheer him on?
not a chance.
The judge jumped in when the kid was on cross every time the kid started to crack under that cross.
the jury has spoken and that is the end of it.
no matter what two people died.
White privilege was on full display in this trial and if you don’t think it’s about race, then you’re not paying attention to the bigger picture.
The privilege you saw on display was the privilege that should be afforded to every defendant, no matter the race or class. It is based on a presumption of innocence and the strong burden placed on prosecutors. So don't complain bc Rittenhouse got treated like we all should be treated. The argument that Rittenhouse would be in jail if he were black rings hollow to me, from what I've seen of the back end of crime. Many social justice warriors, if not most, have absolutely no understanding of how people are treated once they've been formally accused. I do. In fact, I look at the annual statistics on sentencing in this state and there is no evidence of racism in the way people are sentenced. There just isn't. I'veve posted blogs on this topic. I do agree that, had Rittenhouse been black, he would not have lasted long on the streets when he was walking around with a rifle. I also agree that his interactions with police after the killings might have been different. I am not as familiar with what happens on the police level. But don't complain when someone is treated the way we all should be treated.
Whatever your personal opinions are about how defendants “should” be treated in inconsequential because thats not the reality Bernie. Studies continuously show that black male offenders receive longer sentences than similarly situated White male offenders. That’s a FACT. So I’m not sure what kind of bias statistics you’re looking at but racism is alive and well in the justice system. You live in a bubble here in the Lehigh Valley, and this place is certainly not an accurate microcosm of America. But even a left-leaning moderate like yourself can be guilty of white privilege.
Actually, it is a myth, not a fact. As I told you, I check this out every year. The Pa. Sentencing Comm'n reports on this every year. I last wrote about it in 2019, in an analysis of its 2017 report. Here are the actual facts:
"Contrary to what most of us are conditioned to think, the majority of offenders (73%) are white, not black or brown. In Northampton County, 77% of those sentenced were white. In Lehigh County, which has a larger minority population, 72% of those sentenced were white.
"Most offenders (76%) are male.
"Of 16,360 misdemeanor drug offenses like possession of a small amount of marijuana, the most common disposition is probation (71%). Statewide, only 1,227 people were sentenced in 2017 for possession of a small amount of marijuana. Instead of "thousands" of black and brown men languishing in jail, the actual figure is a little over 100 mostly white men."
https://lehighvalleyramblings.blogspot.com/2019/03/pasentencing-commn-majority-of.html
There may very well be systemic racism at the front end of crime. There is little doubt in my mind that blacks are subjected to more traffic stops proportionately than whites or that they tend to draw more suspicion than whites simply bc of their color. But on the back end of crime, which I see routinely, there is far less systemic racism. What I do think is that there is systemic classism. I think those without means tend to do more poorly than those able to afford a good lawyer. Even that is debatable. Most public defenders work out the best deals possible, and the stats bear this out.
It’s literally in the governments website.
https://www.ussc.gov/research/research-reports/demographic-differences-sentencing
“Black male offenders continued to receive longer sentences than similarly situated White male offenders…”
It’s NOT a myth.
You cite a 2017 report of the US Sentencing Commission, which analyzes only federal crime. The facts are what they are. I will note that federal crime is completely different from what we see more locally. If those numbers are accurate, I will agree there is systemic racism in federal sentencing. My point is that it is a MYTH on a state level here in Pa. I have looked at several reports over the years, and see no statistical difference in sentences imposed on blacks v. sentences imposed on whites on either a state or county level. I believe we have systemic classism, not systemic racism. In other words, whites who come from more impoverished backgrounds probably receive the same shitty treatment as blacks. I also note a more recent report indicating blacks are incarcerated at about 2% more than similarly situated whites. That's statistically insignificant. One thing I will notes is that all these reports are relying on data that is at least five or more years old. What I can say is that your assertion about white privilege for the back end of crime is a myth on a Pa. state level.
I wouldn't have suspected the similarities on the back end, given popular opinion/coverage. I wonder on the front end, however, if the same is true or if we've gone too far with bail reform, per some media tribes. This, especially in light of Waukesha, where the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is reporting the suspect with a long rap sheet was free on light bail for allegedly attempting to run over a woman with his vehicle earlier this month. The county DA has announced an investigation into the bail amount.
https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/crime/2021/11/22/suspect-waukesha-parade-incident-identified-darrell-brooks-jr/8717524002/
Haven’t done the research, but seems to me, the frequency of prison sentencing and the length of time are determined by a defendant’s prior criminal record more so than skin pigment. How can we overlook this factor?
" In Northampton County, 77% of those sentenced were white.
OK
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northampton_County,_Pennsylvania
" the county was 81.0% White Non-Hispanic,"
So 19 percent non white population account for 23 percent of the crime?
Why would the non-white folks sentences be greater than their percentage of the population?
non-white folks are no more predisposed to crime as whites so why the discrepancy?
perhaps non-whites are viewed differently, poverty--well there are plenty of poor white folks.
Perhaps police treat non-whies harsher and inflate the severity of the charges whereas a white guy gets a break?
Judges perhaps view non-whites with a jaundiced eye?
try
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20211107/12113547892/data-shows-la-sheriffs-department-is-stopping-tons-latino-bicyclists-rarely-finding-anything-illegal.shtml
"A Los Angeles Times investigation found deputies search 85% of bike riders they stop even though they often have no reason to suspect they’ll find something illegal. Most bicyclists were held in the backseat of patrol cars while deputies rummaged through their belongings or checked for arrest warrants.
The Times' analysis of more than 44,000 bike stops logged by the Sheriff’s Department since 2017 found that 7 of every 10 stops involve Latino cyclists, and bike riders in poorer communities with large nonwhite populations are stopped and searched far more often than those in more affluent, whiter parts of the county.
1:39, this seems like less of a bail reform issue than a justice-system-not-taking-domestic-violence-seriously issue. That being said the problem with cash bail is that it implicitly treats poor people as a greater threat than wealthy people. Consider that even if a more appropriate bail had been set for this man he would still have been able to make bail if he were wealthy.
If a person really is a threat, no amount of money paid to the state is going to change that. Either let them go until they can be tried, or hold them, expedite the trial, and compensate them for the time they were held if found not guilty.
"try
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20211107/12113547892/data-shows-la-sheriffs-department-is-stopping-tons-latino-bicyclists-rarely-finding-anything-illegal.shtml"
yes, that's the front end of crime, where I agree there is both systemic racism and classism. My point is that at the back end of crime, i.e. the courts, there is less systemic racism. I agree there still is systemic classism.
Bernie, because you apparently didn't absorb it when I originally posted this on the post you referenced in 11:38. You are misinforming your readers because you don't understand how statistics work.
"Bernie, regarding your 11:48 comment [that you see no evidence in PA that sentenced black offenders are disproportionate to their overall population], your post is not accurate. Proportionate rates would mean that the proportion of black and brown people found guilty is the same as their proportion of the population, which it is not. Conversely, the proportion of white people found guilty is lower than their proportion of the population. This means the likelihood of being found guilty is much larger if you are black than if you are white. In your original post you do not even provide enough information to determine whether rates are proportionate because it does not provide the percentage of each ethnicity in the population of PA. The data that you presented, combined with the racial breakdown of PA leads to the opposite conclusion than the one you are asserting."
Put more straightforwardly, nobody in their right mind would expect whites and blacks to commit the same proportion of crimes because they don't make up the same proportions of the population. What you are trying to do is present the numerator of a ratio as useful information, when you actually need both the numerator and the denominator (which in this instance is proportion of the population).
Also, in 1:15, you use the phrase "statistically significant". That phrase has a very specific meaning, and you actually have not established whether the 2% difference is statistically significant or not. Seemingly unimportant differences can be statistically significant. If you would like to try to establish significance, I suggest looking up what a p-value is and running a Chi-squared test on this data.
"try
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20211107/12113547892/data-shows-la-sheriffs-department-is-stopping-tons-latino-bicyclists-rarely-finding-anything-illegal.shtml"
yes, that's the front end of crime, where I agree there is both systemic racism and classism. My point is that at the back end of crime, i.e. the courts, there is less systemic racism. I agree there still is systemic classism.
Bernie you liberal suck and must be destroyed.
Sounds like a threat to me. You do know that just because you posts anonymously in here, doesn’t mean you can’t be doxxed for violent threats.
Bernie, I would find out who this user is and report them to the FBI.
Post a Comment