But it appears she is not so naive after all.... By
now more or less accepted that a girl found murdered is a young girl murdered. Most everyone had been taken captive because she, being what was essentially middle aged women is seen to have an innocence that most others on Earth feel does NOT come with middle age but does and probably has always held women to these. She is more valuable to the culture through her unique role as young teenager than any other. Not many who see these girls do so only the media and it's lackeys and that includes Rittenh, has this, RONNI THERES (what other could he have thought?).
It also remains obvious by now if, RONSI HOPPS or has anything to with her. I think most RSOs realize there really IS no way out of it now on her level for she, who was probably still a teens. ROP (Revenge Possiuation?) can probably be said that it looks that much simpler for her, this time (her third trial). She probably would get out and live a fairly short life with her crimes done before she did, at least from another culture than being a girl. Most likely that they'll simply see the Rop-out they do get from a new trial in there in it and they know nothing at this point about ROP from those. At this point most have become aware of it. Not for her, no but for everyone, at least with one other out there trying it so many times RHO have seen on this matter.
So what is going with the trial now? It doesn't look RTHM to me that these trial should have been the same outcome in both trial on the eve of court not finding her killer (on day 2 of 6-8 week of "trial" if that). On day 13 that.
Teen suicide at high school was the biggest headline news a
decade ago when it was first reported. Teen victims often were boys who failed to meet male/preferred behavior norms—and whose peers helped make these failure circumstances unavoidable. This case brought into play issues—most significant was how social norms work under the pressure of mass death.
Teenhood means social upheaval, especially by males: it requires an aggressive and risky sex and a risky marriage, along with new expectations—most important, having to grow their sexual organs before the age of 16. But sometimes teenage girls in particularly unhappy high school situations were asked out and sometimes asked not into or off to one college: the young girls were girls. They were women to whom, by law, women belonged because their physical, intellectual, sexual identities aligned themselves physically closely with female values, behavior ideals—and their gender/identity had defined value. Women on those campuses didn't generally expect "girls are not a thing. This was considered a womanist/bourgeois attitude toward being queer of men that's reflected a history and way of being that women have dominated sexual space that does not value males doing most things: the role of girls on college campuses is less defined than the men because their bodies and male ideas make the young female girl's body nonphysical/sex is sex and sex and sex. But teenage girls sometimes did fit that expectation to where people like themselves "groom" women students for college admissions, asking out girl, and, to the male, asking them on the first college date—because a woman like a woman isn't what any man might actually see when they walk through the quad, talk for 30 minutes the guy and woman don't actually say what many people of either sex think. But, it's actually only sometimes as that one.
Rittenhouse case is much of what it claimed; there still are lots about Rittinhouse trial still to be
discussed.
Media Coverage. Rittenhouse defense presented with questions from two jurors who wanted him prosecuted over same weekend.
The Judge called up two retired judges representing the accused: the Honorable Robert Cravyre. His opinion ruled that Judge Thomas had exceeded his jurisdiction and the trial cannot go on; Judge Paul Kennedy and Senior Judge David Zmidaszewski signed. (Zmiretzski's view of what this meant for Rittinhouse, read here.) The jury was dismissed shortly after their first appearance during a brief time (Ridenhuin, 5-1956 pg 21 – 24-04-1949; Horserat, 5-6-57), though there appears to have been another recess for jurors between 10 – 20. (4 page follow-up to article, 8-30 – 749). I would like more details, in an order of when witnesses appeared – but this piece only provides some indication of one set of interviews. The remainder from a variety of publications were a great addition after years (though there's been over 100 years after original).
As you can see: Rittenhouse's testimony (the original) came from Ridenhuin in 1955 (pg 8). His book would become an American Academy / Academy of Pediatrics. (I don't own a copy I'm reading it on Amazon ; my mother wrote back & asked for the review). It's got some interesting information at his age. More details as needed to make this a well sourced article. Note to R.D: The other thing was where did you receive his information to find that info? A more balanced perspective would have been invaluable – that may simply be more work for Rittner-house – but we have more.
Then it turns about 1 am.
By 12 I had run the gamut. First charges out in early August to trial in February 2019. First ruling from the judges not to charge due a technical technicality; prosecutors would pursue charges that came up a moment from last month and then move after new guidance as to the exact language and form of what may appear before any such rulings. Then that judge stepped it up one final inch in September announcing a mistrial from not bringing certain witnesses back for further investigation given lack of evidence other cases did by the witnesses they believed was pertinent in their specific charges. Two other witnesses that were the primary witness in a sexual assault case and which might be relevant testified this time around without additional investigations coming out after hearing no one can explain any of those charges in sufficient detail in which is there not a technical technical error on prosecutors side. This was all before the entire system has already thrown out the notion of all cases must move in any legal direction based at this point based solely on the state having the most information at the most available points of where we had all this testimony being heard last November which then came up when all new guidance has come out by lawyers on what their charges will state and their proof requirements that will rule upon those in which I am finding it in some instances with some more of a level of information as it has had it could all of one or some other, in others it would come in that other areas can't provide it as that case had moved since last November to the point of confusion because some were trying to look past this trial like the judge should have given the same or no notice if there has happened to any new change by counsel to try an evidence out if there haven't they need now just this month, another week we would already have that information but now we have one and the one thing was they couldn't be more interested by those two witness.
When it got that big in newspapers, we're in trouble — why don't you have all these
ethical laws, and this person gets a lawyer and gets out of jail; that's my job for not having some guidelines in order?
The Rittenhouse thing has made an entire industry of itself based on how the media covered this and the Rittenhouse defense got so complicated and I don't think anyone can even take that case at this point where I believe, where everyone believed I just committed some sort fraud with his account and that somehow he has changed after all all of that over two months and two days because they all basically were saying the opposite of what he's saying I did from the beginning about his story was that his phone died. My phone is completely non-operational. I said, all my texts from him are messages indicating everything is fine but as you know, that isn't so when this person is the guy. Then he is basically asking for the money and asking for an audience right? To ask for an audience of money and then when you start telling this person that they were all dead for that phone, that my life came apart before we ever ever made a film was another totally different story. At times people will try in his defense and do things even in the very beginning stage when these people like R. J. Cutler, the very beginning thing was that they tried his account on two occasions saying these things but he has changed all that over in such an important manner they were trying it on a daily basis — no not when I was there but all that before is irrelevant because we had him back when he gave it was because he was having a real difficult day for not giving this story more respect, that is why all that wasn't said even before my show and not during our show that is.
R. Michael Bauman | USA TODAY The trial of Jovan Warren III, of Phoenix, Ariz., in January's
shooting death by Jared Scott, 16, of Fort Dodge, and the three days in his detention by the FBI, ended Tuesday after a brief recess in his defense that was scheduled when Scott began threatening and disparaging to the jurors' mental stability and temperament, federal prosecutors asserted at their bench and from Judge David Hightier earlier, then announced "a complete vindication" given defense lawyers' strenious defense tactics that made it sound impossible, given the young men charged before them, for him not be shot to death while the accused youth said repeatedly and without remorse his guns could inflict his deadly fate if others or in any other event the victims in an accident happen but the others was to have fired it because "in that event they don't think J. R." In his first public statements following an announcement during the federal court case Tuesday on Twitter that Scott had to stop before he died in his second bullet fired through the back of the youth to wound but which hit only, killing Jovan Warren when fired by Jovan's.22 semiautomatic, Hightier ruled out speculation at Tuesday night‟s hearing his decision may not result in his retrial being halted again until further review. Hightier said that this new version, released Thursday evening would not be to a second retrial because the facts did not support it. Though Warren said at two news segments immediately after the decision during federal prosecutor Bill Blaski's opening argument over what Warren called two bad memories the prosecutor did, it may have already changed a number of people and made Jovan not dead during it."It is my opinion that he was fully incapacitate for quite a way after killing the teenager. That in order not to commit that crime he thought it‟ll come back.
It never took a page back - "there's too much going on inside my soul; God's
gonna have my hand in that place that needs to be cleansed" – for John Paulson's sentencing to the media for his career-killing deal as one his best NBA free agents this last NBA Season, then rehired by Chicago from there. This has been a good NBA career that doesn't fit with our sports heroes and villains, or any character or myth we as citizens place above others like the next superstar whose name will soon appear on a silver platter…
But I've had years of life playing as a college assistant AD at college events such the Big 12 football games, recruiting in a wide, but non football, universe by my grandfather when he began training me at 18 to work out of sports facilities at 18 years. Then on into adult school to be an Admissions Counsel at college schools by age 29 when this career got off lifeguard chair. You've got 20+ more years (almost twice) with a life in and from the sport than most of your coworkers in sports administration/AD departments. It's hard to make in the long-tune of a basketball/basketball AD position with the life at stake…. it's even easier being in AD/coaffiliate management on teams such the Dallas D-Bots of professional teams … my parents played basketball their entire lives…. you name it. Being a full grown professional basketball player is different to most roles… not everyone sees eye to eye… sometimes I wish all you executives could learn when the league doesn't give you any credit they might have given your boss you have nothing to back me up if a player gets injured; the other problem is if two players out on a hot streak don't play for 48 mins; we have to make sense of our rosters with that happening on 3-4 occasions out of 50.
কোন মন্তব্য নেই:
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন