I seriously doubt anyone will be held to account for the jury intimidation. It's not hard to find some of the intimidators - they could start with the prosecuting attorney for pointing a rifle at the jury with his finger on the trigger.
Rittenhouse does need to civilly sue a great number of very public people who also wouldn't be hard to find, for slander, libel, and defamation, because they very publicly made derogatory statements against him, statements that can be proven false, and which are demonstrably injurious. The standard in most of those cases would not need to rise to malicious speech - it would only need to be reckless disregard for his person and reputation.
The media talking heads were the worst offenders in that regard, and should be held to account - libelous and slanderous speech are not covered by the First Amendment, any more than the Second Amendment is a right to indiscriminately shoot any one for any reason or no reason. There are limits - people just usually try to capriciously set those limits in their own favor... but that is neither objective nor responsible.
There are protests right now across the nation regarding this decision, but so far all of them that I am aware of are peaceful. Most of them are generic, and have nothing to do with the actual trial. People are protesting on the "what if..." basis discussed above. They are marching on "what if Rittenhouse had been black?" Well what if he had been? He wasn't, so we will never know, and the protests are on a flawed premise. Many of the protesters are disregarding ALL aspects of the case. I saw one sign on TV in New York that simply said "You Can't Have Capitalism Without Racism" - nothing to do with the case at all, just a generic Communist protesting generic Capitalism. Any excuse will do, I reckon.
I don't know if the protests are peaceful so far because it's cold, or because protesters have been put on notice that if they turn rioter, and endanger folks, folks are legally allowed to endanger them right back. That seems to be a strange new alien concept to most of them.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Ahmad Arberry case in Georgia is wrapping up, and may present them another chance to protest. Those two shooters were pretty clearly in the wrong, and guilty of murder given the facts of that case. If they are found not guilty, that would present the protesters another opportunity to riot, and a more righteous one in my opinion. Maybe the protesters are just marshaling their resources and energies in case that happens...
.
Rittenhouse does need to civilly sue a great number of very public people who also wouldn't be hard to find, for slander, libel, and defamation, because they very publicly made derogatory statements against him, statements that can be proven false, and which are demonstrably injurious. The standard in most of those cases would not need to rise to malicious speech - it would only need to be reckless disregard for his person and reputation.
The media talking heads were the worst offenders in that regard, and should be held to account - libelous and slanderous speech are not covered by the First Amendment, any more than the Second Amendment is a right to indiscriminately shoot any one for any reason or no reason. There are limits - people just usually try to capriciously set those limits in their own favor... but that is neither objective nor responsible.
There are protests right now across the nation regarding this decision, but so far all of them that I am aware of are peaceful. Most of them are generic, and have nothing to do with the actual trial. People are protesting on the "what if..." basis discussed above. They are marching on "what if Rittenhouse had been black?" Well what if he had been? He wasn't, so we will never know, and the protests are on a flawed premise. Many of the protesters are disregarding ALL aspects of the case. I saw one sign on TV in New York that simply said "You Can't Have Capitalism Without Racism" - nothing to do with the case at all, just a generic Communist protesting generic Capitalism. Any excuse will do, I reckon.
I don't know if the protests are peaceful so far because it's cold, or because protesters have been put on notice that if they turn rioter, and endanger folks, folks are legally allowed to endanger them right back. That seems to be a strange new alien concept to most of them.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Ahmad Arberry case in Georgia is wrapping up, and may present them another chance to protest. Those two shooters were pretty clearly in the wrong, and guilty of murder given the facts of that case. If they are found not guilty, that would present the protesters another opportunity to riot, and a more righteous one in my opinion. Maybe the protesters are just marshaling their resources and energies in case that happens...
.
Diogenes was eating bread and lentils for supper. He was seen by the philosopher Aristippus, who lived comfortably by flattering the king.
Said Aristippus, ‘If you would learn to be subservient to the king you would not have to live on lentils.’ Said Diogenes, ‘Learn to live on lentils and you will not have to be subservient to the king.’
Said Aristippus, ‘If you would learn to be subservient to the king you would not have to live on lentils.’ Said Diogenes, ‘Learn to live on lentils and you will not have to be subservient to the king.’