08 Dec 2021, 10:14 pm
Brictoria wrote:
Pepe wrote:
ironpony wrote:
Well as for Rosenbaum it seemed he was suicidal because he got out of prison recently, and was yelling at other people to kill him, according to witnesses there. The prosecution wanted to protray Rosenbaum as a hero, since they kept saying he was a hero in the closing argument. So could it be, that they didn't call his gf because they didn't want the gf to confirm that he was suicidal and therefore out to try to attack someone to provoke them into killing him? In other words his gf would make him look less heroic if they put her on the stand?
This is news to me, but it fits in with my initial assessment of Rosenbaum's state of mind.
It has been a niggling thought at the back of my mind around that subject:
* His attempts to provoke a reaction from those present with visible firearms.
* His use of the "n" word towards those present to "protect" the property could have the potential to inflame those from "his" side against him.
* His final actions in waiting for an isolated person with a visible fireamr to pass him before charging at this person.
* The reason for his recent hospitalisation (for which he had left the hospital that morning)
All have the ability to be seen to align with what Ironpony is suggesting.
What I had been wondering about is whether his pursuit of Mr Rittenhouse wasn't with intent to cause injury to him, but rather so he could have access to a firearm to further this suicidal behaviour, either through a reaction to his actions with the rifle by another person present (likely one of those "protecting" the properties), or to assist an attempt at "suicide by cop" - And had those with rifles not been present, whether he wouldn't have been acting in a similar (potentially more aggressive) manner towards the police instead.
He was certainly a troubled person (with a colourful, and troubled past), and so this isn't an entirely implausible possibility, but there is also nothing to show that this thought\intention was in his mind, either, so this is purely speculation\a hypothetical exercise, not in any way an assertion that this was his goal that evening.
As I have stated before, had Rosenbaum not been there, the unfolding tragedy may not have happened.
Could this have been another "Black Operation" using someone who was driven to the edge?
Perhaps.
Interesting *speculation*.
08 Dec 2021, 10:20 pm
cyberdad wrote:
Pepe wrote:
BTW, Way to go in being age-ist. 
umm no I'm not. Schroeder himself admitted he's a ignoramus when it comes to technology.
https://mashable.com/article/rittenhous ... -ipad-zoom
Here's another litany of things I collected on him.
Schroeder, 75, has audibly admonished prosecutors throughout the trial, he told Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger, "Don't get brazen with me!" after Binger mentioned Rittenhouse’s right to remain silent in front of the jury. Sounds dodgy as hell.
There is a constitutional right (5th ammendment) for a defendant to remain silent. It is also established case law that no commentary\inference on a defendant's decision to do so is to be made by the prosecution (or anyone else in the trial, although the prosecution would be the most likely to do so) - see https://healinglaw.com/blog/defendants-silence-may-not-be-used-against-him-by-prosecutor-case-law-and-jurisprudence/.
The attempt to violate the defendant's constitutional rights was the "dodgy as hell" part. In fact, had you done more than look at "favourable" (to what you desire) headlines (such as watching the video of the interaction) you would have been perfectly well aware of this. (I'm fairly sure it has been explained on this site as well).
cyberdad wrote:
Schroeder's cellphone briefly rang on Wednesday with a ringtone of Lee Greenwood’s God Bless the U.S.A., which is commonly played at former President Donald Trump’s rallies.
So, because a person you do not know likes something that another person you appear to despise (among many, it seems), that person must automatically be aligned with the person you despise? Following that "logic", it must be difficult to survive, given I believe Mr Trump was also breating air at those same rallies - he possibly even drank water - should anyone else who breathes air, or drinks water also be considered a fan of (or aligned with) Mr Trump?
Treating people as "guilty by association", as you are attempting here, is the sort of action which tends to lower the credibility of the person doing so, as well as showing a lack of integrity on their part...
cyberdad wrote:
Schroeder questioned whether prosecutors might be distorting evidence by showing a video on an iPad while pinching to zoom in, after the defense baselessly claimed the pinch-to-zoom feature could prompt artificial intelligence programming to distort the original video.
I'd suggest you watch the testimony regarding this... Software can (and does) add detail when performing this action, in order to provide a smoothed (not "blocky" image) - Maybe have a read of https://input-ace.com/can-pinch-to-zoom-alter-video-evidence/
From that link:
Quote:
One of our training classes contains an example of this exact scenario. In that example, the original image of a suspect contained only a few pixels around his hand area:
Nearest Neighbor Interpolation - pinch to zoom
One of the experts resized the image using bicubic interpolation (image on the left, below) which added dozens of extra pixels and rounded out the shape of the hand area – giving it the appearance of a gun in the individual’s hand. That “fabrication” of shape is something done entirely by the interpolation algorithm:
Pinch to Zoom Bicubic Interpolation vs Nearest Neighbor
Originally, the DVR only recorded a jagged block of a few pixels. From a forensic perspective, we should not be able to say anything about that area. The individual could have a gun, or he might not. From the few pixels we have, there is simply no way to know.
Nearest Neighbor Interpolation - pinch to zoom
One of the experts resized the image using bicubic interpolation (image on the left, below) which added dozens of extra pixels and rounded out the shape of the hand area – giving it the appearance of a gun in the individual’s hand. That “fabrication” of shape is something done entirely by the interpolation algorithm:
Pinch to Zoom Bicubic Interpolation vs Nearest Neighbor
Originally, the DVR only recorded a jagged block of a few pixels. From a forensic perspective, we should not be able to say anything about that area. The individual could have a gun, or he might not. From the few pixels we have, there is simply no way to know.
cyberdad wrote:
Schroeder took the very unusual step of called for a break in the trial Wednesday after Rittenhouse broke down on the witness stand,
So, the judge showed compassion and wanted to allow him to be able to regain his composure before facing further questioning... Did it prevent him answering further questions, or impact on his ability to give evidence?
Or is it that you gain some sort of pleasure from seeing people in a highly emotional state during situations where what they say\do will have a major impact on their life?
08 Dec 2021, 10:22 pm
cyberdad wrote:
Pepe wrote:
BTW, Way to go in being age-ist.
umm no I'm not. Schroeder himself admitted he's a ignoramus when it comes to technology.
https://mashable.com/article/rittenhous ... -ipad-zoom
<Pepe thinks>
<why am I even bothering?>
You said:
Quote:
The man is 100 years old and should not have used his ignorance of technology to block the prosecution
He doesn't look 100 years old.
If he is, I need to learn what moisturiser he is using.
cyberdad wrote:
Here's another litany of things I collected on him.
Schroeder, 75, has audibly admonished prosecutors throughout the trial, he told Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger, "Don't get brazen with me!" after Binger mentioned Rittenhouse’s right to remain silent in front of the jury. Sounds dodgy as hell.
Schroeder's cellphone briefly rang on Wednesday with a ringtone of Lee Greenwood’s God Bless the U.S.A., which is commonly played at former President Donald Trump’s rallies.
Schroeder questioned whether prosecutors might be distorting evidence by showing a video on an iPad while pinching to zoom in, after the defense baselessly claimed the pinch-to-zoom feature could prompt artificial intelligence programming to distort the original video.
Schroeder took the very unusual step of called for a break in the trial Wednesday after Rittenhouse broke down on the witness stand,
Schroeder, 75, has audibly admonished prosecutors throughout the trial, he told Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger, "Don't get brazen with me!" after Binger mentioned Rittenhouse’s right to remain silent in front of the jury. Sounds dodgy as hell.
Schroeder's cellphone briefly rang on Wednesday with a ringtone of Lee Greenwood’s God Bless the U.S.A., which is commonly played at former President Donald Trump’s rallies.
Schroeder questioned whether prosecutors might be distorting evidence by showing a video on an iPad while pinching to zoom in, after the defense baselessly claimed the pinch-to-zoom feature could prompt artificial intelligence programming to distort the original video.
Schroeder took the very unusual step of called for a break in the trial Wednesday after Rittenhouse broke down on the witness stand,
I have given you all the attention fix I'm prepared to give.
Now, you go to your room and read up on "Credibility", young man.
08 Dec 2021, 10:30 pm
Brictoria wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Pepe wrote:
BTW, Way to go in being age-ist.
umm no I'm not. Schroeder himself admitted he's a ignoramus when it comes to technology.
https://mashable.com/article/rittenhous ... -ipad-zoom
Here's another litany of things I collected on him.
Schroeder, 75, has audibly admonished prosecutors throughout the trial, he told Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger, "Don't get brazen with me!" after Binger mentioned Rittenhouse’s right to remain silent in front of the jury. Sounds dodgy as hell.
There is a constitutional right (5th ammendment) for a defendant to remain silent. It is also established case law that no commentary\inference on a defendant's decision to do so is to be made by the prosecution (or anyone else in the trial, although the prosecution would be the most likely to do so) - see https://healinglaw.com/blog/defendants-silence-may-not-be-used-against-him-by-prosecutor-case-law-and-jurisprudence/.
The attempt to violate the defendant's constitutional rights was the "dodgy as hell" part. In fact, had you done more than look at "favourable" (to what you desire) headlines (such as watching the video of the interaction) you would have been perfectly well aware of this. (I'm fairly sure it has been explained on this site as well).
cyberdad wrote:
Schroeder's cellphone briefly rang on Wednesday with a ringtone of Lee Greenwood’s God Bless the U.S.A., which is commonly played at former President Donald Trump’s rallies.
So, because a person you do not know likes something that another person you appear to despise (among many, it seems), that person must automatically be aligned with the person you despise? Following that "logic", it must be difficult to survive, given I believe Mr Trump was also breating air at those same rallies - he possibly even drank water - should anyone else who breathes air, or drinks water also be considered a fan of (or aligned with) Mr Trump?
Treating people as "guilty by association", as you are attempting here, is the sort of action which tends to lower the credibility of the person doing so, as well as showing a lack of integrity on their part...
cyberdad wrote:
Schroeder questioned whether prosecutors might be distorting evidence by showing a video on an iPad while pinching to zoom in, after the defense baselessly claimed the pinch-to-zoom feature could prompt artificial intelligence programming to distort the original video.
I'd suggest you watch the testimony regarding this... Software can (and does) add detail when performing this action, in order to provide a smoothed (not "blocky" image) - Maybe have a read of https://input-ace.com/can-pinch-to-zoom-alter-video-evidence/
From that link:
Quote:
One of our training classes contains an example of this exact scenario. In that example, the original image of a suspect contained only a few pixels around his hand area:
Nearest Neighbor Interpolation - pinch to zoom
One of the experts resized the image using bicubic interpolation (image on the left, below) which added dozens of extra pixels and rounded out the shape of the hand area – giving it the appearance of a gun in the individual’s hand. That “fabrication” of shape is something done entirely by the interpolation algorithm:
Pinch to Zoom Bicubic Interpolation vs Nearest Neighbor
Originally, the DVR only recorded a jagged block of a few pixels. From a forensic perspective, we should not be able to say anything about that area. The individual could have a gun, or he might not. From the few pixels we have, there is simply no way to know.
Nearest Neighbor Interpolation - pinch to zoom
One of the experts resized the image using bicubic interpolation (image on the left, below) which added dozens of extra pixels and rounded out the shape of the hand area – giving it the appearance of a gun in the individual’s hand. That “fabrication” of shape is something done entirely by the interpolation algorithm:
Pinch to Zoom Bicubic Interpolation vs Nearest Neighbor
Originally, the DVR only recorded a jagged block of a few pixels. From a forensic perspective, we should not be able to say anything about that area. The individual could have a gun, or he might not. From the few pixels we have, there is simply no way to know.
cyberdad wrote:
Schroeder took the very unusual step of called for a break in the trial Wednesday after Rittenhouse broke down on the witness stand,
So, the judge showed compassion and wanted to allow him to be able to regain his composure before facing further questioning... Did it prevent him answering further questions, or impact on his ability to give evidence?
Or is it that you gain some sort of pleasure from seeing people in a highly emotional state during situations where what they say\do will have a major impact on their life?
Where on earth do you get your patience from?
I think I am in luv.
08 Dec 2021, 10:39 pm
Pepe wrote:
Where on earth do you get your patience from?
I think I am in luv.
I think I am in luv.
Yeah, even I'm impressed.
08 Dec 2021, 11:08 pm
08 Dec 2021, 11:11 pm
08 Dec 2021, 11:20 pm
Pepe wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Pepe wrote:
BTW, Way to go in being age-ist.
umm no I'm not. Schroeder himself admitted he's a ignoramus when it comes to technology.
https://mashable.com/article/rittenhous ... -ipad-zoom
Here's another litany of things I collected on him.
Schroeder, 75, has audibly admonished prosecutors throughout the trial, he told Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger, "Don't get brazen with me!" after Binger mentioned Rittenhouse’s right to remain silent in front of the jury. Sounds dodgy as hell.
There is a constitutional right (5th ammendment) for a defendant to remain silent. It is also established case law that no commentary\inference on a defendant's decision to do so is to be made by the prosecution (or anyone else in the trial, although the prosecution would be the most likely to do so) - see https://healinglaw.com/blog/defendants-silence-may-not-be-used-against-him-by-prosecutor-case-law-and-jurisprudence/.
The attempt to violate the defendant's constitutional rights was the "dodgy as hell" part. In fact, had you done more than look at "favourable" (to what you desire) headlines (such as watching the video of the interaction) you would have been perfectly well aware of this. (I'm fairly sure it has been explained on this site as well).
cyberdad wrote:
Schroeder's cellphone briefly rang on Wednesday with a ringtone of Lee Greenwood’s God Bless the U.S.A., which is commonly played at former President Donald Trump’s rallies.
So, because a person you do not know likes something that another person you appear to despise (among many, it seems), that person must automatically be aligned with the person you despise? Following that "logic", it must be difficult to survive, given I believe Mr Trump was also breating air at those same rallies - he possibly even drank water - should anyone else who breathes air, or drinks water also be considered a fan of (or aligned with) Mr Trump?
Treating people as "guilty by association", as you are attempting here, is the sort of action which tends to lower the credibility of the person doing so, as well as showing a lack of integrity on their part...
cyberdad wrote:
Schroeder questioned whether prosecutors might be distorting evidence by showing a video on an iPad while pinching to zoom in, after the defense baselessly claimed the pinch-to-zoom feature could prompt artificial intelligence programming to distort the original video.
I'd suggest you watch the testimony regarding this... Software can (and does) add detail when performing this action, in order to provide a smoothed (not "blocky" image) - Maybe have a read of https://input-ace.com/can-pinch-to-zoom-alter-video-evidence/
From that link:
Quote:
One of our training classes contains an example of this exact scenario. In that example, the original image of a suspect contained only a few pixels around his hand area:
Nearest Neighbor Interpolation - pinch to zoom
One of the experts resized the image using bicubic interpolation (image on the left, below) which added dozens of extra pixels and rounded out the shape of the hand area – giving it the appearance of a gun in the individual’s hand. That “fabrication” of shape is something done entirely by the interpolation algorithm:
Pinch to Zoom Bicubic Interpolation vs Nearest Neighbor
Originally, the DVR only recorded a jagged block of a few pixels. From a forensic perspective, we should not be able to say anything about that area. The individual could have a gun, or he might not. From the few pixels we have, there is simply no way to know.
Nearest Neighbor Interpolation - pinch to zoom
One of the experts resized the image using bicubic interpolation (image on the left, below) which added dozens of extra pixels and rounded out the shape of the hand area – giving it the appearance of a gun in the individual’s hand. That “fabrication” of shape is something done entirely by the interpolation algorithm:
Pinch to Zoom Bicubic Interpolation vs Nearest Neighbor
Originally, the DVR only recorded a jagged block of a few pixels. From a forensic perspective, we should not be able to say anything about that area. The individual could have a gun, or he might not. From the few pixels we have, there is simply no way to know.
cyberdad wrote:
Schroeder took the very unusual step of called for a break in the trial Wednesday after Rittenhouse broke down on the witness stand,
So, the judge showed compassion and wanted to allow him to be able to regain his composure before facing further questioning... Did it prevent him answering further questions, or impact on his ability to give evidence?
Or is it that you gain some sort of pleasure from seeing people in a highly emotional state during situations where what they say\do will have a major impact on their life?
Where on earth do you get your patience from?
I think I am in luv.
It's not so much "patience" as impatience with lies, mistruths, misinformation and the like (and those intentionally\repeatedly spreading such) - The reason I provide quotes\links regarding what I say is so that if I am mistaken, people can see what my comments were based upon, and so provide appropriate links\sources to assist me in understanding what I got wrong.
As occurred in another thread, I also try to correct myself if I make a mistake (I don't want to be the cause of someone else receiving incorrect information)...
08 Dec 2021, 11:45 pm
09 Dec 2021, 12:03 am
cyberdad wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
So, because a person you do not know likes something that another person you appear to despise (among many, it seems), that person must automatically be aligned with the person you despise? Following that "logic", it must be difficult to survive, given I believe Mr Trump was also breating air at those same rallies - he possibly even drank water - should anyone else who breathes air, or drinks water also be considered a fan of (or aligned with) Mr Trump?
His Trump ringtone and overall positive disposition toward the defendant seems to follow a pattern
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 59564.html
Freudian slip? he certainly doesn't care if he offends black people and enthusiastically got rid off women and PoC from the jury.
Did he *say* they were "off"?
If he did, whoa!
Political incorrectness of steroids.
<joke>
09 Dec 2021, 12:11 am
Brictoria wrote:
It's not so much "patience" as impatience with lies, mistruths, misinformation and the like (and those intentionally\repeatedly spreading such) - The reason I provide quotes\links regarding what I say is so that if I am mistaken, people can see what my comments were based upon, and so provide appropriate links\sources to assist me in understanding what I got wrong.
Should repeat misrepresentation/misinformation offenders be pinged?
Should this be allowed on the website without comment, regardless if it is or isn't deliberate?
If a person hasn't the capacity to learn, what is one to do?
Brictoria wrote:
As occurred in another thread, I also try to correct myself if I make a mistake (I don't want to be the cause of someone else receiving incorrect information)...
Yes, I noticed.
You probably saw I gave you a gold star of credibility for your correction.
Here, have another one.
You deserve them both.
09 Dec 2021, 12:26 am
Pepe wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
So, because a person you do not know likes something that another person you appear to despise (among many, it seems), that person must automatically be aligned with the person you despise? Following that "logic", it must be difficult to survive, given I believe Mr Trump was also breating air at those same rallies - he possibly even drank water - should anyone else who breathes air, or drinks water also be considered a fan of (or aligned with) Mr Trump?
His Trump ringtone and overall positive disposition toward the defendant seems to follow a pattern
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 59564.html
Freudian slip? he certainly doesn't care if he offends black people and enthusiastically got rid off women and PoC from the jury.
Did he *say* they were "off"?
If he did, whoa!
Political incorrectness of steroids.
<joke>I think I would make a bad lawyer/Judge. I seem to get too emotional over these cases. I retract the last statement about the jury.
09 Dec 2021, 12:37 am
09 Dec 2021, 12:39 am
09 Dec 2021, 2:21 am
09 Dec 2021, 3:12 am
