There should be a mechanism without going to a mistrial to provide the Jury this additional information as well as giving both prosecution and defence a round to speak to it if its deemed groundbreaking and in this case I think that its evident given the prosecution built their case around provocation.

Perhaps that sets bad precedent for the future.

sadly afaik there isn't. prosecution rests its case, defense takes over, then rests its case, both then make closing arguments directly to the jury. then they argue over fair instructions to the jury w/o them in court, then the instructions are given, then its closed. over. the jury can ask for things, but they're in a bubble.

boomer technology illiteracy is a felony offense. there definitely is prejudice.

So the jury is now going to watch the new Ghostbusters movie in the courtroom? Will popcorn be provided?

This post was edited by Grekko on Nov 17 2021 03:11pm

If Kyle doesn't walk, this is proof that the USA is now full blown communist. No fucking way.

the idea that you can prove provocation without a reasonable doubt based on a blob from drone footage a country mile away is insane.

I hope there are some decent people on the jury that will stick with their 'convictions' (or lack thereof)

Apparently they were ready last night to deliver but there's 2 holding it up.

The fact that the jury is even humoring this "evidence" this seriously shows that they weren't even paying attention throughout the entire trial. Am now extremely worried for Kyle - its looking like we're about to see a retard political verdict.

This post was edited by LoverManGenius on Nov 17 2021 03:20pm

yeah - almost certainly some super biased democrats on the jury.

at this point i dont think its likely they sway everyone else tho



I heard that but not sure how reliable it is.

i also heard there was a group of 4 or 5 suspected pro-state jurors that started sitting with each other

The idea that if you point a weapon at someone, they then chase u down, try and attack you, and you shoot them with the gun you pointed at them, after running away from the person you supposedly pointed a gun at for several hundred feet, you're then guilty of murder, was always a silly argument to make.

the issue is the defense cant walk out that hypothetical, because it puts in the jury's mind that Kyle did point a gun at people, which by all evidence except yellowpant's video testimony, he didn't.

if someone points a gun at me, i put my hands up, they turn to walk away, i chase them a football field or so distance, into a corner, and they shoot me. i deserved to die, and they deserve AT MOST to be charged with brandishing a weapon. which of course wasnt charged, because there's zero evidence it happened, and pedo is dead, OH YA and druggie #1 and #2 are not testifying, for "reasons". zisshitsky could have taken the stand and said under oath kyle pointed a gun at them. the guy closest to the shooting wont say shit, or wasnt asked to.