Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BumRushDaShow

(129,543 posts)
Fri Nov 12, 2021, 11:20 AM Nov 2021

Judge in Kyle Rittenhouse trial faces backlash from 'Asian food' joke: 'Definitely not okay'

Source: Washington Post

As the court in the murder trial of Kyle Rittenhouse was set to adjourn for lunch Thursday, Judge Bruce E. Schroeder thought it was a good time to joke about whether their food would get there on time. “I hope the Asian food isn’t coming … isn’t on one of those boats from Long Beach Harbor,” he said. The comments, which appeared to refer to the supply-chain backlog at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, Calif., were met with backlash from critics who said the judge made “a thinly-veiled anti-Asian comment,” questioning how Schroeder could oversee a trial with racial implications and make a joke at the expense of Asians and Asian Americans.

“Maybe I’m supposed to applaud him for not saying ‘Oriental food,’” tweeted John C. Yang, executive director of Asian Americans Advancing Justice, an advocacy group defending the human and civil rights of Asian Americans. “During a trial that clearly has race implications, no less. Definitely not okay.” The judge’s joke comes as closing arguments in Rittenhouse’s divisive trial are expected on Monday. Rittenhouse, 18, is charged with killing two people and wounding a third during unrest in Kenosha, Wis., that unfolded last year after a White police officer shot Jacob Blake, a Black man, in the back. The 18-year-old emotionally broke down on the stand in testimony this week, later saying he was attacked and in danger that night.

“I defended myself,” he said.Schroeder, 75, has gained national attention, and generated anger and confusion, through his rulings and comments during the course of the trial. When the trial began earlier this month, Schroeder forbade the prosecution from calling the three men Rittenhouse shot “victims,” which the judge has long called a “loaded term.” Schroeder, the longest-serving active judge in Wisconsin’s trial courts, prefers “decedents” or “complaining witnesses.” While Wisconsin lawyers say the ruling on “victims” has been long-standing in Schroeder’s courtroom, others pointed out the judge allowed the defense to call the men Rittenhouse shot “looters” and “rioters,” if the attorneys could prove they were involved in those acts.

Several other incidents put Schroeder in the spotlight. He dismissed a White juror after the man made a joke to a police deputy about the 2020 shooting of Blake. When Schroeder’s phone went off in court this week, many noted the ringtone sounded like the opening to the 1984 Lee Greenwood song “God Bless the U.S.A.,” which became a music staple at rallies for President Donald Trump. The judge’s attempt to honor veterans on Veterans Day resulted in the courtroom applauding for a witness for the defense, who appeared to be the only veteran in the room.

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/11/12/rittenhouse-judge-asian-food-schroeder/

40 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Judge in Kyle Rittenhouse trial faces backlash from 'Asian food' joke: 'Definitely not okay' (Original Post) BumRushDaShow Nov 2021 OP
Bullshit HighFired49 Nov 2021 #1
Yep. twodogsbarking Nov 2021 #2
Well, coupled with his attitude throughout the trial, his phone ring, and in general his demeanor Escurumbele Nov 2021 #5
What's with phone? Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Nov 2021 #16
Okay, I'll bite Zeitghost Nov 2021 #26
True, but the problem is it is ambiguous. If it is a snark about the ships not getting unloaded, JohnSJ Nov 2021 #9
JohnSJ for the Win SheCat Nov 2021 #22
The judge's role must be impartial IzzaNuDay Nov 2021 #17
Bull Shit SheCat Nov 2021 #21
Post removed Post removed Nov 2021 #29
One word. Mistrial. paleotn Nov 2021 #3
Not if he's acquitted, which will probably happen. NYC Liberal Nov 2021 #10
Granted. Lets hope it doesn't come to that. paleotn Nov 2021 #12
I hope not too, but count me pessimistic... NYC Liberal Nov 2021 #13
This judge needs to be removed from the bench. truthisfreedom Nov 2021 #4
This is a new low in fake outrage TheFarseer Nov 2021 #6
Pretty much, yeah. Its the constant grasp for anything to be offended by. oldsoftie Nov 2021 #15
Outrage is addictive for some folks. They're always looking for a fix. N/T Jedi Guy Nov 2021 #19
He probably knew what the jury was eating Sympthsical Nov 2021 #24
TOTALLY Agree, this whole thing is getting out hand. nt Raine Nov 2021 #31
Seems like this would be the only right thing for a judge to do? MichMan Nov 2021 #7
Racial implications??? 2Gingersnaps Nov 2021 #8
Weren't the three people he shot all white men? madville Nov 2021 #18
Yes they were all white, I don't see where this is a racial trial. 🤔 nt Raine Nov 2021 #32
believe him GETTINGTIRED Nov 2021 #11
That's bad, but... LudwigPastorius Nov 2021 #14
You're disturbed that he asked the court to applaud a veteran on Veterans' Day? Jedi Guy Nov 2021 #20
Yes LudwigPastorius Nov 2021 #25
Okay, if you say so. People are REALLY reaching on this stuff. Jedi Guy Nov 2021 #28
It seems you are too AZProgressive Nov 2021 #33
My objection is to the deliberate distortion that's going on here. Jedi Guy Nov 2021 #34
I just posted a link from someone with years of experience in the courtroom AZProgressive Nov 2021 #35
Okay, so an appeal to authority. There's a lot of that going around, it seems. Jedi Guy Nov 2021 #36
I never got any special respect from the legal system for being a veteran AZProgressive Nov 2021 #37
Okay, but one off-color remark that some perceive as racist is not evidence of bias. Jedi Guy Nov 2021 #38
It's glaringly clear that this judge is biased. Lunabell Nov 2021 #23
Jesus Christ on a triscut womanofthehills Nov 2021 #27
"I hope it isn't soul food" "I hope it isn't Mexican food" wellst0nev0ter Nov 2021 #30
I get that he's a tool.. tonekat Nov 2021 #39
How is it a "problem" of "the left" when most of the people complaining BumRushDaShow Nov 2021 #40

HighFired49

(351 posts)
1. Bullshit
Fri Nov 12, 2021, 11:28 AM
Nov 2021

Just because he said "Asian" does not mean that he was making a racist comment. Seems to me that it was more a joke about our not being able to operate our ports. Sheesh, some people try to make something of nothing.

Escurumbele

(3,403 posts)
5. Well, coupled with his attitude throughout the trial, his phone ring, and in general his demeanor
Fri Nov 12, 2021, 11:46 AM
Nov 2021

one can come up with the conclusion that having demonstrated he is a MAGAT, that his "joke" was also racist.

The other conclusion can be that his joke was not racist (although there was no need to make implications about "Asian food", could have been McDonalds who also imports meats and other stuff from Asia) that the judge is simply an ignorant and stupid man who should not be presiding over any case as judge.

I tend to believe, from all that has happened with that judge, that he is both a racist and an ignorant man who should not be presiding over any court case, least of all one where the accused is a white supremacist.

Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin

(108,234 posts)
16. What's with phone?
Fri Nov 12, 2021, 02:17 PM
Nov 2021

Every courtroom I've been to requires you either shut down personal electronic communications devices or put them on buzz. Guess the judge figures the rules don't apply to him.

Zeitghost

(3,871 posts)
26. Okay, I'll bite
Fri Nov 12, 2021, 08:19 PM
Nov 2021

What makes the judge a racist?


And why would he use McDonalds if they were actually having Asian food? It seems to me this was clearly a joke about ports being overloaded.

JohnSJ

(92,422 posts)
9. True, but the problem is it is ambiguous. If it is a snark about the ships not getting unloaded,
Fri Nov 12, 2021, 11:54 AM
Nov 2021

why bring Asian food into the picture? Wouldn’t just lunch do?

If he inserted Italian, Irish, or another type of cuisine, would there have been the same concern?

I don’t know, and I am pretty sure that much of this is because of his behavior in court, and why some are looking for any excuse to criticize him whether it is valid or not

I also think there is a lot of sensitivity about this in particular because of the anti-Asian attacks that have occurred around the country

IzzaNuDay

(362 posts)
17. The judge's role must be impartial
Fri Nov 12, 2021, 02:48 PM
Nov 2021

Given current events, he didn't even have to specify an ethnic cuisine. Period.

 

SheCat

(34 posts)
21. Bull Shit
Fri Nov 12, 2021, 03:52 PM
Nov 2021

You are obviously not paying attention. He has shown who he is day in and day out. He deserves zero deference and everything he says should be assumed offensive, ignorant, and racist, until proven otherwise.

Response to HighFired49 (Reply #1)

TheFarseer

(9,326 posts)
6. This is a new low in fake outrage
Fri Nov 12, 2021, 11:47 AM
Nov 2021

Asia in this case refers to a location and not anything about race. We can’t even talk about how Asia is in another location now?!

oldsoftie

(12,615 posts)
15. Pretty much, yeah. Its the constant grasp for anything to be offended by.
Fri Nov 12, 2021, 02:11 PM
Nov 2021

Its going to backfire with the a lot of the voters we need

Sympthsical

(9,121 posts)
24. He probably knew what the jury was eating
Fri Nov 12, 2021, 05:00 PM
Nov 2021

Probably some kind of Asian food. So he makes some comment about lunch not being late. It's not like the port situation is super political. Only partisans would be sensitive to that.

But, you know, Asian food.

The man is practically burning crosses at this point.

MichMan

(11,977 posts)
7. Seems like this would be the only right thing for a judge to do?
Fri Nov 12, 2021, 11:49 AM
Nov 2021
"He dismissed a White juror after the man made a joke to a police deputy about the 2020 shooting of Blake."

What is wrong with that?

Just curious if anyone know if they indeed had ordered Asian food for lunch or something else?

Jedi Guy

(3,259 posts)
20. You're disturbed that he asked the court to applaud a veteran on Veterans' Day?
Fri Nov 12, 2021, 03:48 PM
Nov 2021

Would you still be disturbed if that veteran was acting as a witness for the prosecution rather than the defense?

LudwigPastorius

(9,178 posts)
25. Yes
Fri Nov 12, 2021, 08:17 PM
Nov 2021

Regardless of the thanks veterans deserve, this constitutes a prejudicial endorsement of the witnesses credibility by the judge.

AZProgressive

(29,322 posts)
33. It seems you are too
Sat Nov 13, 2021, 09:56 PM
Nov 2021

Usually I see you in police shooting threads but have noticed you a lot in Rittenhouse threads. It isn’t only DUers that find the judge questionable.

Rittenhouse legal expert: I've never seen a judge act like this in a criminal trial.

In the Kyle Rittenhouse murder trial, Judge Bruce Schroeder began the day on Thursday asking everyone in the courtroom, including the jury, if they had served in the military. As it turned out, the only military veteran in the courtroom who spoke up was the defense expert on use-of-force, John Black. Schroeder then motioned to the jury, and said that he thinks that everyone should give a “round of applause to the people who have served,” while gesturing back over toward Black.

I have been a criminal law attorney for 27 years. I was both a federal and state prosecutor, and defense attorney. In all my years of practice, I have never seen a trial judge during a trial put the jury in a position where they would have to applaud a defense witness right before they are about to take the stand and testify.

Bad behavior on the bench

A judge in any criminal jury trial should never put members of the jury in a position where they are asked to applaud for a witness about to testify for something that they have done in the past. I am a Marine Corps veteran. I certainly appreciate it when people thank me for my service. But trial judges must do everything possible to avoid any appearance that they favor or agree with one side or another in a trial. A judge must also not express a favorable personal opinion about a witness – even to laud them for military service.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/rittenhouse-legal-expert-ive-never-seen-a-judge-act-like-this-in-a-criminal-trial/ar-AAQDzW7

I don’t think it is safe for police for 17 year olds doing their own thing with assault rifles.

Jedi Guy

(3,259 posts)
34. My objection is to the deliberate distortion that's going on here.
Sat Nov 13, 2021, 10:29 PM
Nov 2021

For instance, the bit about not allowing the word "victim" to be used? That's a longstanding rule in Schroeder's courtroom. He didn't just make it up for this trial, but that's how it's presented damn near every time it's brought up.

The bit about calling the victims "looters," "arsonists," or "rioters"? That gets brought up a lot too, and once again, damn near every time the bit about "if the evidence shows they engaged in those behaviors" is left out. The judge advised them against doing so but said they could if the evidence supported it. But it's presented as if the judge just shrugged and said, "Sure, whatever." That's not the case.

The "pinch and zoom" thing is presented as this huge outrage. The zoomed-in video the prosecution wanted to show was allowed the following day, and the judge admitted he didn't have a firm grasp of the technology involved. People mention the former, but not the latter.

People behave as if he's sided with the defense every single time, which is straight-up nonsense. He handed the prosecution huge wins in the jury instructions just yesterday by allowing them to consider lesser charges, which increases the likelihood of a conviction, and by allowing them to consider provocation, which undermines the claim of self-defense.

The prosecution straight-up lied to the jury about evidence that was to be presented. They skated riiiiiiiiiiiiight up to the line of violating Rittenhouse's Fifth Amendment rights. They tried to sneak in evidence that had been banned from the trial without asking if it was now okay to introduce it after certain testimony. The defense moved for dismissal with prejudice based on that behavior. If the judge was as biased as people claim, why didn't he grant the dismissal? He's not up for election again until 2026 and he's 75 years old, so what does he care? If he really wanted to aid the defense, that right there was his golden opportunity.

So he asked the people in the courtroom to applaud for a veteran on Veterans' Day. So what? Had it not been Veterans' Day I could see the objection. If he'd looked at the jury and said, "Now folks, we all know veterans are honest, so pay close attention here" I could see the objection. I'm sorry, I just don't see anything sinister there.

Do you see what I'm getting at here? My belief is that people thought this was a slam-dunk case, and when it became apparent that it wasn't and that an acquittal seemed possible or likely, people seized on "the judge is biased" as an excuse rather than actually paying attention to the substance of the trial, the evidence, arguments, and law.

Lastly, is there a particular reason you felt a need to bring up the threads I choose to post in? I used to work for a police department as a dispatcher, several of my friends are officers, and the fact of the matter is that most people don't have the first clue about police work or the laws/rulings that govern it. Does it irk me to see the broad-brush attacks on cops? You bet it does, so I'm going to post in those threads.

In the same vein, does it bother me seeing the deliberate distortion of reality so that people can cling to a false narrative? Yep, and so I'm going to post in those threads, too.

AZProgressive

(29,322 posts)
35. I just posted a link from someone with years of experience in the courtroom
Sat Nov 13, 2021, 10:41 PM
Nov 2021

And he never seen anything like that. What if the defendant is a veteran? Anyways Im a veteran and feel the judge is biased.

Jedi Guy

(3,259 posts)
36. Okay, so an appeal to authority. There's a lot of that going around, it seems.
Sat Nov 13, 2021, 10:45 PM
Nov 2021

The defendant isn't a veteran, so your what-if scenario doesn't apply here. For the sake of argument, if that had been the case, I'd agree with you that it was inappropriate.

You can feel the judge is biased all you like, but as I pointed out in my response to you, the facts of the situation do not support that opinion from where I'm standing. I believe people are seizing on that idea to argue that the fix was in, in the event of an acquittal.

AZProgressive

(29,322 posts)
37. I never got any special respect from the legal system for being a veteran
Sat Nov 13, 2021, 10:51 PM
Nov 2021

Nor do I deserve it which is why I brought up the what-if scenario. It isn’t one thing when it comes to the judge. Look at the OP. Not surprised a majority white and older board wouldn’t find the same thing offensive as Asian-American advocacy groups but as a white male I admit I have a blind spot when it comes to some of these things.

Jedi Guy

(3,259 posts)
38. Okay, but one off-color remark that some perceive as racist is not evidence of bias.
Sat Nov 13, 2021, 11:09 PM
Nov 2021

I'm sorry, but it just isn't. He's a 75-year-old white dude from Wisconsin. As remarks from 75-year-old white dudes go, that was pretty damn tame. I don't think it was racist, I think it was the sort of joke one would hear from their goofy grandpa.

My point is that for nearly every allegation of bias that actually matters (i.e., on something that actually impacts the trial), if you actually dig deeper than the headlines and the tweets, you discover that there is no "there" there. But for those who don't look beyond the headlines and tweets, a false narrative is being constructed in advance of a possible acquittal.

Lunabell

(6,111 posts)
23. It's glaringly clear that this judge is biased.
Fri Nov 12, 2021, 04:15 PM
Nov 2021

After this gig, he'll be on fox noise. Probably making the conservative clown show rounds with his new buddy, Kyle.

 

wellst0nev0ter

(7,509 posts)
30. "I hope it isn't soul food" "I hope it isn't Mexican food"
Sat Nov 13, 2021, 03:05 AM
Nov 2021

The judge made a biased statement. He needs to be removed.

tonekat

(1,820 posts)
39. I get that he's a tool..
Sun Nov 14, 2021, 12:02 AM
Nov 2021

...and stinks as a judge in this case, but jumping on this food faux pas makes the left look like they're lost in the trivia. Criticize him for his egregious legal offensives.

BumRushDaShow

(129,543 posts)
40. How is it a "problem" of "the left" when most of the people complaining
Sun Nov 14, 2021, 05:38 AM
Nov 2021

per the OP article, were actually Asian-American organizations and activists?

From the excerpts -

“Maybe I’m supposed to applaud him for not saying ‘Oriental food,’” tweeted John C. Yang, executive director of Asian Americans Advancing Justice, an advocacy group defending the human and civil rights of Asian Americans.


Also in the article -

Eric Feigl-Ding, an Asian American immigrant and epidemiologist and health economist with the Federation of American Scientists, denounced Schroeder’s remarks as racist.

“The boats in the harbor are majority boats from Asia. And he said Asian food — which further connects the Asian boats,” he tweeted. “He could have just said the lunch was late.”


(the above guy is cited quite a bit on DU regarding COVID-19)

“All I can say is, Ugh,” Mae Ngai, the Lung Family professor of Asian American studies and professor of history at Columbia University, told CNN. “Old racist stereotypes die hard.”


The "problem" in a system of racism-white supremacy is that the majority population demands to define what "they" think is "racist" or not. That's the very definition of "superiority" and it will never go away as long as this mentality continues.
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Judge in Kyle Rittenhouse...