Rittenhouse Civil Action Thread

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/01/21/rittenhouse-huber-lawsuit/

According to Ayesha Bell Hardaway, a law professor at Case Western Reserve University School of Law in Cleveland, the self-defense argument made by Rittenhouse’s lawyers during the criminal trial “won’t absolve him” in a civil trial because the threshold for liability is much lower.

A civil trial could replay evidence against the 18-year-old before a jury, in addition to statements he has made in right-wing media since going free.

“In broad strokes they are saying [Huber’s] constitutional rights to be free of excessive force were violated because law enforcement worked in concert with Kyle Rittenhouse to intimidate and ultimately to kill peaceful protesters who were there to exercise their rights,” she said.

Huber? Is that the violent nonce or the other loon?

The other. The one with the skateboard.

ah the old "The victims were no angels, believe me" defense. good luck with that

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
ah the old "The victims were no angels, believe me" defense. good luck with that

Works for cops.

I brought a gun to a protest with white supremacists, my constitutional right.

I waved my gun around, my constitutional right.

He hit me with a skateboard, so I shot him and his friends in self defence. They could have had a gun or be a part of some terrorist organisation, after all.

This really is the stupidest argument I've heard. 😂

Originally posted by Blakemore
I brought a gun to a protest with white supremacists, my constitutional right.

I waved my gun around, my constitutional right.

He hit me with a skateboard, so I shot him and his friends in self defence. They could have had a gun or be a part of some terrorist organisation, after all.

This really is the stupidest argument I've heard. 😂

Originally posted by Blakemore
I brought a gun to a protest with white supremacists, my constitutional right.

I waved my gun around, my constitutional right.

He hit me with a skateboard, so I shot him and his friends in self defence. They could have had a gun or be a part of some terrorist organisation, after all.

This really is the stupidest argument I've heard. 😂

Originally posted by Blakemore
I brought a gun to a protest with white supremacists, my constitutional right.

I waved my gun around, my constitutional right.

He hit me with a skateboard, so I shot him and his friends in self defence. They could have had a gun or be a part of some terrorist organisation, after all.

This really is the stupidest argument I've heard. 😂

Rittenhouse never "waved it around".

Even if he had, Rittenhouse was fleeing. They chased after him. It was all caught on camera.

A civil case won't happen, because no jury on earth would convict him now.

And I mean, lets say they had a slam dunk case.

Sue him for what, exactly? His Xbox?

Kid has no money worth sueing for, genius's. 😂

Originally posted by cdtm
And I mean, lets say they had a slam dunk case.

Sue him for what, exactly? His Xbox?

Kid has no money worth sueing for, genius's. 😂

Huber’s parents filed the original lawsuit against the city of Kenosha and the Kenosha Police Department last August. The updated motion adds Rittenhouse and seven law enforcement agencies and counties from the area as defendants.
.

The Hubers’ lawyers will need “clear and convincing evidence” that there was collusion between law enforcement and local gunmen, because otherwise a conspiracy “is hard to prove,” he said. A more winning strategy will be if they can show that law enforcement “was simply negligent in their ability to protect the deceased,” Aidala added.

In an interview with The Washington Post, John Huber accused law enforcement of purposely antagonized protesters by forcing them away from the courthouse square and toward “the vigilantes so they could deal with them.”

“They handled it badly. Plain and simple. And their policies of how to handle the situation were all bad. All the way to the top,” he said.

For proper context (Ommited from Whirly and the headline)

So essentially they're sueing everyone. Rittenhouse wasn't even the first on the list, probably because he has no money, they likely just think he'll make a stronger case against the PD's and town.

Good luck with proving Rittenhouse and the law infringed on a guy using a skateboard as a club.

It's about the thread 🧬 which adorable

In the hedonist genepool

Originally posted by cdtm
[B]Huber’s parents filed the original lawsuit against the city of Kenosha and the Kenosha Police Department last August. The updated motion adds Rittenhouse and seven law enforcement agencies and counties from the area as defendants.
.

The Hubers’ lawyers will need “clear and convincing evidence” that there was collusion between law enforcement and local gunmen, because otherwise a conspiracy “is hard to prove,” he said. A more winning strategy will be if they can show that law enforcement “was simply negligent in their ability to protect the deceased,” Aidala added.

In an interview with The Washington Post, John Huber accused law enforcement of purposely antagonized protesters by forcing them away from the courthouse square and toward “the vigilantes so they could deal with them.”

“They handled it badly. Plain and simple. And their policies of how to handle the situation were all bad. All the way to the top,” he said.

For proper context (Ommited from Whirly and the headline)

So essentially they're sueing everyone. Rittenhouse wasn't even the first on the list, probably because he has no money, they likely just think he'll make a stronger case against the PD's and town.

Good luck with proving Rittenhouse and the law infringed on a guy using a skateboard as a club. [/B]

Originally posted by cdtm
[B]Huber’s parents filed the original lawsuit against the city of Kenosha and the Kenosha Police Department last August. The updated motion adds Rittenhouse and seven law enforcement agencies and counties from the area as defendants.
.

The Hubers’ lawyers will need “clear and convincing evidence” that there was collusion between law enforcement and local gunmen, because otherwise a conspiracy “is hard to prove,” he said. A more winning strategy will be if they can show that law enforcement “was simply negligent in their ability to protect the deceased,” Aidala added.

In an interview with The Washington Post, John Huber accused law enforcement of purposely antagonized protesters by forcing them away from the courthouse square and toward “the vigilantes so they could deal with them.”

“They handled it badly. Plain and simple. And their policies of how to handle the situation were all bad. All the way to the top,” he said.

For proper context (Ommited from Whirly and the headline)

So essentially they're sueing everyone. Rittenhouse wasn't even the first on the list, probably because he has no money, they likely just think he'll make a stronger case against the PD's and town.

Good luck with proving Rittenhouse and the law infringed on a guy using a skateboard as a club. [/B]

YouTube video

Ughjb all you jizzers owe me

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
durpalm still thinks it's about money dur

If it was about anything else they'd name Rittenhouse right out of the gate, and bring in everyone else later.

You don't name 7 police departments and governments if it isn't about money.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
durpalm Thinks it's about money.

It's about money.