Joyce Vance (an MSNBC legal analyst and former Obama appointee for the US Attorney position) was undoubtedly upset by Kyle Rittenhouse’s acquittal. You can comment here MTP Daily Vance gave us an absurd analogy.
This strikes me as “stunning” A strange scenario for self-defense. The idea is something like saying that self-defense can be claimed if someone tries to arrest you and you go into a bank to steal it. Kyle Rittenhouse was a part of that. He invented this problemHe then threatened to kill people if they didn’t get out. It is not unusual for them to do this. In situations where the victim has provoked it, self-defense is not possible.
Vance clearly bought the provocation argument of the prosecution.However, the prosecution presented only sketchy evidence to support this claim. Danny Cevallos (another MSNBC legal analyst) pointed out that this was not the only evidence. provocation was such an afterthought that the prosecution mentioned provocation “exactly 0.0 times” in their opening statement.
Cevallos claimed that this was not a case where there were poor prosecutions. Cevallos stated that the prosecution had poor facts.Evidently, the jury agreed!
Cevallos is not alone in demonstrating admirable independence against MSNBC’s liberal political party line. In 2019, Cevallos stated that Roev. Wade needed to be repealed because, “even if your pro-choice views are skewed towards privacy,” [upon which Roe was based]It does not appear in either the Constitution’s history or its text.” Cevallos said Roe also “stands on an inadequate foundational base.”
The transcript is here.
1.25 PM ET
JOYCE VANCE : We think the defense was strong enough. Self-defense was the main point of defense. This struck me as an interesting fact, even though I was a prosecutor in the past. This is a strange situation for self-defense.
It’s not just something. This is similar to saying you could shoot yourself out of a bank if it was robbed and you are being apprehended. This is a bit of what Kyle Rittenhouse did. This is what he createdHe threatened people with death to make them flee. It is not unusual for him to do this. In situations where the victim has provoked it, self-defense is not possible.
CHUCK TODD – Danny, the same question. Is this an easy defense? A poor prosecution? Friendly judge? Tough? Is this your sense?
DANNY CEVALLOS You can also find these: It’s not that the prosecution was poor, it is really the facts. The prosecution can not say that they weren’t aggressive. Their aggressiveness almost led to them getting in trouble. They nearly crossed multiple lines. In this instance, The prosecution made every effort, but didn’t have the best facts. Because an acquittal in all cases is good news, no matter what you call it.