|
|
| Re: Arbery case - Jury says guilty (1866514) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > OTChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Arbery case - Jury says guilty |
|
|
Posted by Easy on Fri Nov 26 16:01:08 2021, in response to Re: Arbery case - Jury says guilty, posted by AlM on Fri Nov 26 15:27:00 2021. I watched that part of the trial and the people that actually took the stand were the sons of the owners. There are three Kenosha properties owned by the same family. The one that Rittenhouse was "protecting" is kitty (catty?) cornered across the street from another and there's another a block or two away. One of the properties is owned by the mom, likely to take advantage of minority and women owned business incentives and the other two by the dad. It sounds like the two owners on paper have limited English and neither testified.The son that operates the Kenosha business that was being protected testified (the other son that testified was also there that day, but technically he runs a separate family dealership in Milwaukee) but did not appear to be reliable. He said that he never met Kyle, but then he was shown on video talking to Kyle. He said that he didn't hire them, but then a few of the people used to work there and there's a text message to his personal cell number where Kyle said that he was going to be there to protect the property. The "protectors" were seen inside and on the rood of the dealership and he claims that he doesn't know how they got inside. They claimed that he gave them a key. He claims that they must have broken in although nothing was broken. He repeatedly claimed to not understand simple questions, such when he was asked "Did you meet Kyle Rittenhouse on ...", he replied "I don't understand the question". Happened maybe a dozen times. He was in charge of "inventory" and gave an interview to the local press detailing the amount of damage that they suffered, but during trial claimed that he didn't know how much damage. In the interview he claimed that insurance wouldn't pay the full amount, and in trial he claimed that he didn't file an insurance claim or something g ridiculous like that. Over and over, on and on,.. |
|
|
|