Judge: Prosecutors can't show Rittenhouse link to Proud Boys

[getagrip_already]

6. I'm not sure here....

A judge is within their swim lane when the decide if someone's associations, and even past accusations against them (not convictions), can be entered into evidence.

It can very much be prejudicial to a jury. It goes both ways. If they wanted to paint someone as a leftist jihadist, should a prosecutor be able to enter into evidence an ACLU donation and some unfounded internet troll charges?

It doesn't relate to the illegal act directly and is not even proof, just an indication.

I'm not a lawyer and not playing one here, but it seems to me that if I were being charged with capitol murder, I wouldn't think it was fair for unrelated associations and accusations to be piled on during a trial.

The prosecution should still be able to prove his actions were not in self defense. They should have plenty of evidence with his posts, emails, and text messages - which are admissible. The videos taken are also going to be shown.

It's not as bad as it sounds; at least to me (a dumb observer).