Topic: Prosecution’s case against Kenosha shooter Kyle Rittenhouse ... BLOWN up - page 3. (Read 502 times)

Rittenhouse was very stupid to put himself into this position. If I'd known him and he'd told me he was going to go into the middle of a riot armed, I'd say, "Are you braindead? You're either going to get killed or arrested." But he was 17, so how much wisdom can you expect out of him? It seems that he put himself into this position partially out of a desire to help people (which is laudable), probably moreso out of ego, but certainly not with the intention of hurting anyone.

It's always a tragedy when anyone dies. The first guy who Rittenhouse shot seems to have been a seriously messed up, violent person who bore full fault in that confrontation, though even his death is a tragedy. The second and third shootings were especially tragic since it seems that they might've honestly thought that Rittenhouse was some sort of mass murderer going on a shooting spree. That said, it's clear to me that Rittenhouse was acting in self-defense when he shot them: they were clearly trying to kill or severely hurt him, and Rittenhouse did not provoke them. It doesn't matter in Rittenhouse's case what the people attacking him thought they were doing.

I hope that he's acquitted of all charges, and the evidence strongly supports that, though I would understand the "recklessly endangering public safety" charges sticking, since open-carrying during a riot obviously turns up the temperature. (I would not agree with him being found guilty of reckless endangerment: the appearance of a riot shouldn't negate your right to defend yourself and your property. But it's a much more understandable charge than saying that he wasn't acting in self-defense in the shootings themselves.)

Rittenhouse's life is pretty much over regardless of the result. He's going to endure harassment and attempts on his life constantly, and his only real career prospect is probably to lean into his history here and become a sort of right-wing celebrity, which is a terrible life to have to lead. What an absolute tragedy all around.

The whole way that this was spun is disgusting. It reminds me a lot of the Zimmerman case, where a Hispanic person who voted for Obama shot someone in obvious self-defense, and this was spun as a "white supremacist hate crime" by politicians as a despicable, cynical way to rile up their base.

That's an important demographic for the Democrats, so naturally their media lapdogs are on the job.

He had an AR-15, not an AK. They are not the same thing and they shoot completely different rounds. Many of the Black Lives Matter protesters are terrorists. Burning down businesses, beating up police and civilians, and destroying property is not the way to get your "peaceful" point across.

"What don't you get about self defense?"
We don't agree so I'm failing to "get something".


"Would you prefer that people have killed Kyle Rittenhouse after he did nothing to provoke anyone?"
You don't think an open carry of an assault rifle at a protest could be perceived as a provoking action? I do.


"It strikes me as odd" that you equate the right to bear arms with the use of deadly force against another citizen, and how often people disjoint that right from the responsibility of gun ownership and btw it's an amendment that I support and exercise.

 but since we're on the subject of "The Constitution"
and "moral corruption"...
it's a short (and extraordinary) document , there is more to it than the 2nd amendment.

The modern world owes much to to the ideal of inalienable rights put forth by our founding fathers, in the review of history it is not a secret that they failed to live up to their own stated idea of "the moral equality of human beings": I feel compelled to strive for that.


I don't have empathy for modern "conservatives" getting triggered by the Black Lives Matters movement especially the (Tucker Carlson) segment of the population that feels they are currently being discriminated against. <---- this takes an extra amount of willful ignorance not to recognize the struggles of your fellow humans
 or indifference unless it's happening to you or a flat out racist need for a sense of supremacy.
So that's how far apart we are on "getting each other" on this topic.


BADecker, you have good points on this one.

We have a judge who doesn't allow those killed by Rittenhouse to be referred to as "victims" because it creates bias but allows those who died to be referred to as "looters" and "rioters".


I wish the world was a better place and that we humans were better at being humane.

Attorneys are officers of the court. The judge is their boss. They need to know what they are talking about if they oppose their boss. They might lose their job or worse if they defy their judge. This is why a good attorney can't file a major claim against his judge.

One of the greatest maxims of court law is that the accused is innocent until proven guilty. If Rittenhouse went home to sleep in his own bed after the shootings, it was because he was innocent until proven guilty. If he has spent any time in jail at all, it was because all law enforcement and attorneys and judges involved broke their oath of office. The major law is, innocent until proven guilty, and they swear to uphold it... not innocent until there are a bunch of people who think that he could or might be proven guilty.

Kyle's attorneys must go along with guilty until proven innocent, because they might lose their job.

Properly done, a claim should be filed by Kyle against the attorneys and judges for the innocent until proven guilty thing. Kyle should stand as a man, without the attorneys being able to speak officially in court, but only as co-counsel to advises him on what to say. Same for the judges and attorneys who broke their oaths of office by holding Kyle guilty until proven innocent. Kyle could negate everything done against him if he stood this way.

A further trick is that under common law, Kyle can't even speak because he is under age. His Dad would have to do the actual speaking, which could easily change the whole operation of the court.

He did the world a favor by killing a pedophile. What don't you get about self defense? Would you prefer that people have killed Kyle Rittenhouse after he did nothing to provoke anyone? You know, it strikes me as odd that the US constitution can have the right to bear arms written in plain English, yet when someone decides to practice that right, it's an act of moral corruption. May as well erode the entire constitution while you're at it. It's getting old anyways. 2 centuries, hell of a run.

I didn't call him an "active shooter".

"Community" ?
He went armed with an AK into someone else's community to protect property against people.

I don't believe that all Black Lives Matters protestors are "terrorists" and there's plenty of irony here since the Trayvon Martin case was its catalyst.

Rittenhouse has plenty of Alt-right adjacent supporters to help fund his legal campaign: he is being well represented and things like that will continue to twist our sense of community in America.

Rittenhouse was not an active shooter. He shot three people who were trying to actively harm him. The people that were trying to harm Rittenhouse were using deadly force and were the instigators of the confrontations.

Rittenhouse was trying to protect the community that the BLM terrorists were trying to burn down.

Yes---> anyone who is able should try to disarm someone who is actively shooting.
It's disgusting to see the sympathy for Rittenhouse being there armed and killing people,
without even the slightest effort given towards understanding the reasons protests were happening.

It reminds me of this Gallup poll data where 5.6 percent of the US identifies as LGBT, with one in six of <24 identifying as LGBT.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/329708/lgbt-identification-rises-latest-estimate.aspx

I don't see this trend in countries outside of the US. I assume only because the tribalism is so large in the US, and that it's becoming socially and culturally the norm to identify as whatever letter of the alphabet. It could be untreated mental illness too, but to me it's just a fad that will run its course and phase away. But, still, the number will rise before it goes back down. What does will the peak be?

It is interesting how the anti-conservatives seem to always be taking the side of pedophiles and other mentally ill individuals.  I recently saw a statistic that showed more than half of white liberal women between the age of 19-29 have been diagnosed with a mental illness.  It is the highest risk group.  If you are a liberal white woman between the age of 19-29 the odds are that you are mentally ill.  If you aren't mentally ill, you have beaten the odds...  I think a lot of people should keep this in mind when seeing responses from certain members of this community who fit this demographic to a T. 

I don't think he should've been there, that doesn't mean you get to kill someone who has a gun. And no, there isn't evidence he was "waving the gun" at people. Post if it you have it, because it doesn't exist.

Did you hear the testimony where Joseph Rosenbaum was *chasing* after someone who attempted to get away? And then he jumped and lunged for the person's firearm?

Tell me, franky, if you are threatened by someone's gun, and they haven't pointed it at you, your reaction is to run at them, chase them down, throw something at them while chasing, say "fuck you" while chasing (not disputed by the prosecution)?


And how do they know the shooting was or was not justified? They made that assumption? You don't get to chase someone down and deliver justice based on an assumption. Their assumption was wrong.

So yes, in a rational world, you are allowed to run away from a threat and only use force if you have to. Kid had to use force, he was being hunted.

(1) wow so kyle managed to do a criminal records check and psychiatric assessment on a guy weilding a carrier bag.
.. reality is in a world of 2 people one with a gun and one with a bag.. the guy with a gun cant play victim.

(2) so if trump asked you to break into capital hill.. ud do it, no question
so if someone asked you to jump off a bridge, ud jump
so if an adult drug dealer asked a kid to be a drug mule/street hustler, its all fair and no criminal act occured involving the adult dealer
maybe the adult that owns the car dealership should also be prosecuted, much like how a husband hires a hitman to kill their wife. or a gang leader employees kids to do the street deals.

(4) unarmed people chasing an armed kid. and your not asking why they are chasing him and trying to take away his gun
whats next a kid walks into a school with a gun and if the teachers try to disarm the kid before he shoots, the kid gains rights to kill everyone('coz they tried to take my gun from me)... um no thats not how real world, morals, logic and laws work

(5) did you hear the testimony where the kid who shouldnt have a gun , had a gun.. and was waving it around at unarmed people.
are those unarmed people suppose to be happy and content with being threatened when they were unarmed?

(6)unhinged mob?
a unarmed guy got shot and other people wanted to disarm him
i dont think you are noticing the morals
if someone shoots an unarmed person. the rational act is to disarm the one with the gun. not treat the only person with a gun as a victim


seems in gyfts local neighbourhood if you want to get away with murder. you have 3 loop holes
1. claim a carrier bag was a threat to life
2. play victim if anyone tried to disarm you, saying being disarmed is a defensive reason to kill anyone that tries
3. pretend you done a criminal record check and a medical check on anyone trying to disarm you, saying you killed them because they are a criminal you knew about before shooting them

in a rational world away from gyfts neighbourhood.
if someone with a gun points it at unarmed people, its the unarmed peoples right to defend themselves

1. That doesn't mean he doesn't get to shoot a raging pedophile that is chasing after him.

2. Doesn't matter if he was asked be there, but he was asked to be there anyways.

3. Yeah, agreed. The rioters shouldn't have been there either.

4. That wasn't the deadly threat, it was chasing after the kid trying to take his gun from him.

5. Do you recall from testimony where the guy said to the kid "if I catch you alone I'm going to kill you" earlier in the night?

6. He did try to surrender after shooting the guy in the car parking lot, except the unhinged mobbed tried to chase him and then physically started to attack him. You don't get to start mobbing someone because you "think" he might be a mass shooter. That's not how it works.

1. rittenhouse was underage and shouldnt have had a gun
2. a business called him to protect a dealership. pfft. any mature adult would not phone a kid with no security experience to drive miles to another town to protect a property thats not the kids
3. rittenhouse(a kid) again for emphasis should not have even been in the town let alone with a gun

4. if throwing a plastic bag is a deadly threat.. then massacres are going to be more common

5. after shooting someone for throwing a bag. ofcourse its going to escalate where people seeing this will start to give chase to stop the immature idiot from killing others.

6.. so lets get this straight.. the defense once to say
someone throwing a non lethal object is excusable to get shot with a lethal object. and then when other people try to disarm the idiot shooter. they are fair game to get shot too... sorry no.
idiot kid should have surrendered. and took his punishment.

Never seen so much sympathy for an antifa scumbag and a convicted pedophile, hope Mr. Joseph Rosenbuam is resting peacefully.

As Tucker Carlson put it succinctly - https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1458603356721541126

He died how he lived, touching an unwilling minor.

All this trial needs is a jury that will look at the evidence, acquit Kyle Rittenhouse on all charges. Not much hope for the US legal system, with kangaroo courts dominating the judicial system, but when the prosecutorial witnesses admits to holding a gun up to the defendants head, there doesn't leave many options. Self defense is self defense!

The BLM bad guy just couldn't condemn Kyle to a bad life in prison. His sympathy made him answer with the truth.

Do you see what many attorneys are? Damn the truth! It's the money and the power.


Prosecution’s case against Kenosha shooter Kyle Rittenhouse appears to have BLOWN up after frank admission by wounded attacker