- Apr 19, 2010
- Reaction score
It was made by his defense attorney, who is an actual lawyer.
Yes, I realize that.
I didn’t present it as unbiased or present it as anything. It’s a narrative about the situation. Whether it is accurate will be decided by a jury, but don’t be surprised if you narrative turns out to be totally wrong.
Seems to me it will be easier to prove him guilty of killing them vs. self-defense, especially a they have clear vided of one of the killings.
These three facts are undisputed -
- He was 17 carrying a firearm in WI; unless they can somehow sell the exemption that he was going hunting - that is a Class A misdemeanor in WI. Obviously the hunting exemption is just a loophole the lawyers are looking to exploit _ i doubt hunting is legal within the city limits (never has been anywhere I lived) and also would like to know what hunting season was open at that point as well.
- He wasn't employed to protect any of those businesses - being a former lifeguard in the city of Kenosha provides him with no standing and is simply irrelevant.
- He is not a resident of Kenosha - doesn't matter if "it is a suburb." It is not where he resides and is also in a different state.
And regarding my monicker, do you know what Jerry Kill’s nickname was?
Sorry Country Jer aka Couldn't Recruit a Brian Cupiro level QB to save his life.