Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[nenjin]

I listened to about 20 minutes of his examination of Rittenhouse on the stand.

He doesn't sound incompetent. He doesn't look incompetent. And while the judge apparently has a record of "believing in the right to a solid defense trial" and "not liking being bossed around in his own court room", the way he interjected just in the 20 minutes I watched made it seem like he's crawling up the prosecutor's ass given very little pretext. You know the TV portrayal of judges giving the defense attorney a harder time of it than the prosecution? This seems like the opposite.

Then again I read what he said to the judge about evidence he didn't present at discovery (because it was new) or discuss with the judge before attempting to insert it. I was like "Uh, a murder trial the whole country is watching and you "just didn't think to bring it up before that session?"" Either he's trying to slip it in there, or he actually is incompetent, or both. But I guess its both teams' job to push the limits of the judge's lenience.

But yeah. When the judge tells you that you can't call a murdered person a victim but can call them a looter instead.....you basically have to assume you're dealing with a hostile judiciary.

[Starver]

[Arbitrary cut for 'context'...] Imagine how much data was lost in that procedure, [...]

But in Blade Runner (the original, any one of the fifteen different executive cuts!) they can get a standard photo and see round corners with enough voice-controlled zooming and panning...

(Then there's the RL tale of the photo-retouchers/preservers who were given a photo of a recently deceased uncle/whoever out fishing on his boat in the middle of a lake. The client wanted them to flip it so he was facing the camera instead of away...)

[delphonso]

But in Blade Runner (the original, any one of the fifteen different executive cuts!) they can get a standard photo and see round corners with enough voice-controlled zooming and panning...

(Then there's the RL tale of the photo-retouchers/preservers who were given a photo of a recently deceased uncle/whoever out fishing on his boat in the middle of a lake. The client wanted them to flip it so he was facing the camera instead of away...)

Meandering off topic, it's interesting to see how people who haven't grown up around a lot of tech don't have the same intuitions as (I assume) most of us on this forum.
My wife, for example, spent hours looking for an app that could photoshop hands out of a video - she always assumed that's how stop-motion videos were made, rather than individual photos taken then lined up into video.

[Frumple]

Which is, uh. Odd? Pretty sure I was aware of how stop motion (and claymation) was done when I was a preteen, so it wasn't really a "grow up around" thing. Flip books the movie, was pretty straightforward.

... i mean, lots of photos in sequence was just how movies used to be done at all, nevermind the stop motion stuff? This doesn't feel like a tech saturation thing so much as basic awareness of recording technology, or maybe (not?) having been old enough to actually see a film wheel or somethin'.

[delphonso]

Literal absence in her case - growing up in China in the 90's did have much by way of tech. Recording tech especially was outdated (I guess because most of it came from Japan). My wife's childhood photos look like they're from the 50's - but that was just the best cameras around at the time.

[Frumple]

I guess? Just feels like that would make it easier to understand than harder... the older stuff was pretty close to just all stop motion, all the time, y'know?

[LordBaal]

Third worlder here, learned how stop motion worked around 7 o 8 thanks to a discovery channel documentary... way back when they actually has documentaries instead of naked jerks on the jungle or fat guys shouting over bikes.

[Andux]

But yeah. When the judge tells you that you can't call a murdered person a victim but can call them a looter instead.....you basically have to assume you're dealing with a hostile judiciary.

That touches on something that's always annoyed me: The way the right keeps lumping together looters and protestors. I'd be willing to bet that most looters don't even give a damn who's protesting what; they just using the crowds as cover, swiping shit while the cops are busy doing crowd control. And then you've got people like the umbrella man, who I believe turned out to have ties to white nationalist groups, and was there acting as an agent provocateur. But Fox News, et al. would rather talk about how Democrats have turned cities across the country into lawless hellscapes full of illegal immigrants, and the city of Portland is being burned to the ground every night by BLM and antifa! Up next: Could THEY be putting COMMUNISM in your water supply? The answer might surprise you.

^{_{In this house, we obey Betteridge's law.}}

[JoshuaFH]

Wouldn't calling the victims "looters" be, in essence, convicting the deceased of a crime they were never tried for?

[Frumple]

Yup.

[Starver]

My wife, for example, spent hours looking for an app that could photoshop hands out of a video - she always assumed that's how stop-motion videos were made, rather than individual photos taken then lined up into video.

There's always morphsuit[1]/zentai puppetry, probably with chromakey (with the right app) or blacklight (with the right 'stage' setup).


[1] Or Morphsuit™, but it's well on the escalator towards being hoovered up as a generic tradename, and I don't think there's a legal band-aid that'll stop that.

[Micro102]

and the city of Portland is being burned to the ground every night

Recently had a guy tell me that BLM was burning cities down. I asked him to show me a burnt down city and he immediately shut up and walked away. It's so fucking bizarre.

Wouldn't calling the victims "looters" be, in essence, convicting the deceased of a crime they were never tried for?

That's a really good point.

[nenjin]

Wouldn't calling the victims "looters" be, in essence, convicting the deceased of a crime they were never tried for?

I brought this up about a week before the trial started. Plenty of people have noted how fucked up those jury instructions are, but it didn't seem to matter in the courtroom. I wonder what the procedure is when a judge hands out jury instructions that are divorced from due process. Like, who calls that shit out? Who has the power to say "those jury instructions are illegal." Or do we literally have to wait for this trial to be over and appeal it on the grounds the judge was biased?

[scriver]

That touches on something that's always annoyed me: The way the right keeps lumping together looters and protestors. I'd be willing to bet that most looters don't even give a damn who's protesting what; they just using the crowds as cover, swiping shit while the cops are busy doing crowd control.

The right? We have people here on the forums, supposedly "left", excusing looting as if it was a valid form of protesting.

Personally, I think the same as you. It's far more likely looters are just people who want to take advantage of the situation to steal things than protestors. Shit, knowing the kind of people white nationalists tend to be they're exactly the kind of low-lives I would envision as jumping to any chance break and steal at the slightest opportunity, even if they weren't organised provocateurs.

Wouldn't calling the victims "looters" be, in essence, convicting the deceased of a crime they were never tried for?

How would it be a conviction? It's slander, definitely, and a judgement, sure, and completely unethical and a clear show of bias from the judge, that's undeniable. Or am I laying too much into the word conviction here?

[LordBaal]

It is of bad taste because they are the victims of the accused. Now obviously they were not innocent pedestrians strolling and caught up on a bad moment and place. That being said, protesters, or armed protesters is more accurate and left the space of armed for self-protection protesters wiggle in there.

Assailants is the best I could think being the case determination of self defense or not.