Kyle Rittenhouse: Vigilante White Men

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone answer PP’s question?

If Rittenhouse was a 17 year old girl who was chased into a car lot by a convicted serial rapist who literally just was released from a mental institution and ended up shooting the serial rapist would any of you seriously be arguing that the 17 year old girl should be on trial for murder? Would you also say stuff like “the girl didn’t even know he was a convicted serial rapist” as a rationale for putting the girl on trial for murder? Would some of you go even further and wish the girl was locked up forever and have prison justice and abuse dealt out to her for killing a convicted serial rapist?

Lets assume all the facts are the same. She has an AR 15, Rosenbaum looks the same but has a different criminal past, protest is the same, etc.

If the girl had no more knowledge of Rosenbaum’s criminal history, and no more belief that Rosenbaum was trying to rape her than Rittenhouse had, then yes, it would be the same. Rosenbaum was verbally menacing in threatening to kill Rittenhouse, and then he threw a shopping bag at Kyle and tried to grab Kyle’s gun. That doesn’t equal attempted rape.

No it wouldn’t and you know it. Stop being daft.

I guess you can’t accept that this wasn’t the gotcha question you thought it was.

The reality is that Americans would absolutely not tolerate a 17 year old AR-15 toting girl shooting men because she feared for her safety while breaking the law specifically to be part of a crowd that was actively rioting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone answer PP’s question?

If Rittenhouse was a 17 year old girl who was chased into a car lot by a convicted serial rapist who literally just was released from a mental institution and ended up shooting the serial rapist would any of you seriously be arguing that the 17 year old girl should be on trial for murder? Would you also say stuff like “the girl didn’t even know he was a convicted serial rapist” as a rationale for putting the girl on trial for murder? Would some of you go even further and wish the girl was locked up forever and have prison justice and abuse dealt out to her for killing a convicted serial rapist?

Lets assume all the facts are the same. She has an AR 15, Rosenbaum looks the same but has a different criminal past, protest is the same, etc.

You hypo beggars belief -- no 17 year old girl would put herself in the situation that Rittenhouse put himself in. Rittenhouse's response was not proportional to the threat. He could have and I would expect the girl in the virtually inconceivable hypo you propose to turn around, aim the gun at Rittenhouse, walk backwards toward other people, and call for help. I don't think he should be locked up forever, and I definitely don't wish prison justice on anyone. Rittenhouse didn't know that Rosenbaum had committed vile crimes. My sense of justice would be that he gets the full sentence on count 6 (9 mos) and 5-7 years for manslaughter.

[Anonymous]

You can really tell on this thread who watched the trial and who is just repeating what they "assume" happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone answer PP’s question?

If Rittenhouse was a 17 year old girl who was chased into a car lot by a convicted serial rapist who literally just was released from a mental institution and ended up shooting the serial rapist would any of you seriously be arguing that the 17 year old girl should be on trial for murder? Would you also say stuff like “the girl didn’t even know he was a convicted serial rapist” as a rationale for putting the girl on trial for murder? Would some of you go even further and wish the girl was locked up forever and have prison justice and abuse dealt out to her for killing a convicted serial rapist?

Lets assume all the facts are the same. She has an AR 15, Rosenbaum looks the same but has a different criminal past, protest is the same, etc.

You hypo beggars belief -- no 17 year old girl would put herself in the situation that Rittenhouse put himself in. Rittenhouse's response was not proportional to the threat. He could have and I would expect the girl in the virtually inconceivable hypo you propose to turn around, aim the gun at Rittenhouse, walk backwards toward other people, and call for help. I don't think he should be locked up forever, and I definitely don't wish prison justice on anyone. Rittenhouse didn't know that Rosenbaum had committed vile crimes. My sense of justice would be that he gets the full sentence on count 6 (9 mos) and 5-7 years for manslaughter.

You are aware that scores of young Khurdish women took on ISIS with automatic weapons? You know that this isn’t the Victorian era and there are young women in America who know how to shoot an AR 15 right? Your post is a little sexist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone answer PP’s question?

If Rittenhouse was a 17 year old girl who was chased into a car lot by a convicted serial rapist who literally just was released from a mental institution and ended up shooting the serial rapist would any of you seriously be arguing that the 17 year old girl should be on trial for murder? Would you also say stuff like “the girl didn’t even know he was a convicted serial rapist” as a rationale for putting the girl on trial for murder? Would some of you go even further and wish the girl was locked up forever and have prison justice and abuse dealt out to her for killing a convicted serial rapist?

Lets assume all the facts are the same. She has an AR 15, Rosenbaum looks the same but has a different criminal past, protest is the same, etc.

You hypo beggars belief -- no 17 year old girl would put herself in the situation that Rittenhouse put himself in. Rittenhouse's response was not proportional to the threat. He could have and I would expect the girl in the virtually inconceivable hypo you propose to turn around, aim the gun at Rittenhouse, walk backwards toward other people, and call for help. I don't think he should be locked up forever, and I definitely don't wish prison justice on anyone. Rittenhouse didn't know that Rosenbaum had committed vile crimes. My sense of justice would be that he gets the full sentence on count 6 (9 mos) and 5-7 years for manslaughter.

He was not charged with manslaughter, can’t convict on a non charge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone answer PP’s question?

If Rittenhouse was a 17 year old girl who was chased into a car lot by a convicted serial rapist who literally just was released from a mental institution and ended up shooting the serial rapist would any of you seriously be arguing that the 17 year old girl should be on trial for murder? Would you also say stuff like “the girl didn’t even know he was a convicted serial rapist” as a rationale for putting the girl on trial for murder? Would some of you go even further and wish the girl was locked up forever and have prison justice and abuse dealt out to her for killing a convicted serial rapist?

Lets assume all the facts are the same. She has an AR 15, Rosenbaum looks the same but has a different criminal past, protest is the same, etc.

You hypo beggars belief -- no 17 year old girl would put herself in the situation that Rittenhouse put himself in. Rittenhouse's response was not proportional to the threat. He could have and I would expect the girl in the virtually inconceivable hypo you propose to turn around, aim the gun at Rittenhouse, walk backwards toward other people, and call for help. I don't think he should be locked up forever, and I definitely don't wish prison justice on anyone. Rittenhouse didn't know that Rosenbaum had committed vile crimes. My sense of justice would be that he gets the full sentence on count 6 (9 mos) and 5-7 years for manslaughter.

Ironically, KR ran away from Rosenbaum. He didn’t fire until he was cornered and Rosenbaum had closed in from about 15 yards to arm’s disarmacw and reaching for rifle. Have you watched the videos?

Legally, KR’s response did not have to be proportional. If he had a reasonable belief that he was about to suffer imminent serious bodily harm, than he was legally authorized to use force to defend himself, up to and including deadly force. Any person who is chased, cornered and about to be stripped of a firearm would be reasonable in their belief of imminent serious bodily harm.

* caveat of course for provocation by KR.

** it doesn’t matter if Rosenbaum actually intended to cause serious bodily harm to KR or not.

*** it doesn’t matter that KR put himself in that situation by being present that night even though he had no reason to be there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone answer PP’s question?

If Rittenhouse was a 17 year old girl who was chased into a car lot by a convicted serial rapist who literally just was released from a mental institution and ended up shooting the serial rapist would any of you seriously be arguing that the 17 year old girl should be on trial for murder? Would you also say stuff like “the girl didn’t even know he was a convicted serial rapist” as a rationale for putting the girl on trial for murder? Would some of you go even further and wish the girl was locked up forever and have prison justice and abuse dealt out to her for killing a convicted serial rapist?

Lets assume all the facts are the same. She has an AR 15, Rosenbaum looks the same but has a different criminal past, protest is the same, etc.

You hypo beggars belief -- no 17 year old girl would put herself in the situation that Rittenhouse put himself in. Rittenhouse's response was not proportional to the threat. He could have and I would expect the girl in the virtually inconceivable hypo you propose to turn around, aim the gun at Rittenhouse, walk backwards toward other people, and call for help. I don't think he should be locked up forever, and I definitely don't wish prison justice on anyone. Rittenhouse didn't know that Rosenbaum had committed vile crimes. My sense of justice would be that he gets the full sentence on count 6 (9 mos) and 5-7 years for manslaughter.

You are aware that scores of young Khurdish women took on ISIS with automatic weapons? You know that this isn’t the Victorian era and there are young women in America who know how to shoot an AR 15 right? Your post is a little sexist.

I am aware of both points. The OP posited that the facts were all the same. My response was not sexist. I stand by my position that it beggars belief that a 17 year old girl would have undertaken the same actions as KR.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone answer PP’s question?

If Rittenhouse was a 17 year old girl who was chased into a car lot by a convicted serial rapist who literally just was released from a mental institution and ended up shooting the serial rapist would any of you seriously be arguing that the 17 year old girl should be on trial for murder? Would you also say stuff like “the girl didn’t even know he was a convicted serial rapist” as a rationale for putting the girl on trial for murder? Would some of you go even further and wish the girl was locked up forever and have prison justice and abuse dealt out to her for killing a convicted serial rapist?

Lets assume all the facts are the same. She has an AR 15, Rosenbaum looks the same but has a different criminal past, protest is the same, etc.

You hypo beggars belief -- no 17 year old girl would put herself in the situation that Rittenhouse put himself in. Rittenhouse's response was not proportional to the threat. He could have and I would expect the girl in the virtually inconceivable hypo you propose to turn around, aim the gun at Rittenhouse, walk backwards toward other people, and call for help. I don't think he should be locked up forever, and I definitely don't wish prison justice on anyone. Rittenhouse didn't know that Rosenbaum had committed vile crimes. My sense of justice would be that he gets the full sentence on count 6 (9 mos) and 5-7 years for manslaughter.

He was not charged with manslaughter, can’t convict on a non charge.

I acknowledge this. The jury will be given a lesser charge instruction on the second killing. Clearly count 6 stands as is.

[Anonymous]

The sad thing is this tragedy was caused by the failure of the mayor to maintain order in his city.

[Anonymous]

Just stop with all the "if Rittenhouse was black" or "if this were a 17 YO girl."

Neither of these things happened. The case is what it is. Quit making hypothetical arguments that can't be proven or disproven. It is not helpful and not germane.

The evidence has been presented. The trial has occurred. Argue based on the merits of THIS case and not some pretend events.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The sad thing is this tragedy was caused by the failure of the mayor to maintain order in his city.

And, coincidentally (or maybe not so coincidentally), the mayor, the DA, and the lead investigator in this case are all related.

John Antaramian was elected in 2020 for his sixth term as mayor and was the city's leader amid the summer of 2020 riots during which Rittenhouse shot three rioters, two of them fatally.

The mayor's cousin, Ed Antaramian, is the Kenosha City Attorney. The mayor's nephew, Benjamin Antaramian, is the lead detective in the case.

https://trib247.com/articles/blood-ties-kenosha-mayor-da-and-detective-also-democrats-want-kyle-convicted

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wisconsin self-defense requires an objectively reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm.

No one else in the group was threatened. Why was KR objectively reasonably threatened but the others weren't?

Because, in addition to the threats, Rosenbaum chased him down, cornering him and attempting to seize his rifle.

This is really all there is to it. The jury would have to find that KR could not possibly be afraid of a man who had threatened him and chased him into a corner. How would that work? Do people run away when they are not afraid? Does someone who threatened you then chased you mean you no harm?

You can't claim self defense if you provoke the confrontation. The judge today allowed the admission of an FBI drone video that shows Kyle putting the fire extinguisher on the ground and then pointing his AR-15 at a crowd of people right before Rosenbaum chased him.

Also, Kyle is the only person who says Rosenbaum threatened him twice, and in all the hours of video available there's nothing that shows the 2nd encounter between the two.

In typical democrat fashion, that is a misleading description of events. The judge was very dubious but ended up saying that he would let the prosecution try to argue that point in closing arguments, but making it clear that he expected the defense to easily rebut it. The judge wanted to leave the decisions on this case to the jury as much as possible.

The prosecution still does not have a case.

NP. That poster wasn’t even accurate about provocation. Yes, under Wisconsin law you can still assert self-defense even if you provoked the attack. There’s just a higher bar for showing that you exhausted other options before resorting to lethal force. That makes things harder for the defense, but there’s certainly a plausible argument that Rittenhouse didn’t have any other reasonable options at the times he fired the gun.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone answer PP’s question?

If Rittenhouse was a 17 year old girl who was chased into a car lot by a convicted serial rapist who literally just was released from a mental institution and ended up shooting the serial rapist would any of you seriously be arguing that the 17 year old girl should be on trial for murder? Would you also say stuff like “the girl didn’t even know he was a convicted serial rapist” as a rationale for putting the girl on trial for murder? Would some of you go even further and wish the girl was locked up forever and have prison justice and abuse dealt out to her for killing a convicted serial rapist?

Lets assume all the facts are the same. She has an AR 15, Rosenbaum looks the same but has a different criminal past, protest is the same, etc.

You hypo beggars belief -- no 17 year old girl would put herself in the situation that Rittenhouse put himself in. Rittenhouse's response was not proportional to the threat. He could have and I would expect the girl in the virtually inconceivable hypo you propose to turn around, aim the gun at Rittenhouse, walk backwards toward other people, and call for help. I don't think he should be locked up forever, and I definitely don't wish prison justice on anyone. Rittenhouse didn't know that Rosenbaum had committed vile crimes. My sense of justice would be that he gets the full sentence on count 6 (9 mos) and 5-7 years for manslaughter.

He was not charged with manslaughter, can’t convict on a non charge.

I acknowledge this. The jury will be given a lesser charge instruction on the second killing. Clearly count 6 stands as is.

I’ll never understand how it’s fair to change the charge when you realize you can’t win the case as it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone answer PP’s question?

If Rittenhouse was a 17 year old girl who was chased into a car lot by a convicted serial rapist who literally just was released from a mental institution and ended up shooting the serial rapist would any of you seriously be arguing that the 17 year old girl should be on trial for murder? Would you also say stuff like “the girl didn’t even know he was a convicted serial rapist” as a rationale for putting the girl on trial for murder? Would some of you go even further and wish the girl was locked up forever and have prison justice and abuse dealt out to her for killing a convicted serial rapist?

Lets assume all the facts are the same. She has an AR 15, Rosenbaum looks the same but has a different criminal past, protest is the same, etc.

You hypo beggars belief -- no 17 year old girl would put herself in the situation that Rittenhouse put himself in. Rittenhouse's response was not proportional to the threat. He could have and I would expect the girl in the virtually inconceivable hypo you propose to turn around, aim the gun at Rittenhouse, walk backwards toward other people, and call for help. I don't think he should be locked up forever, and I definitely don't wish prison justice on anyone. Rittenhouse didn't know that Rosenbaum had committed vile crimes. My sense of justice would be that he gets the full sentence on count 6 (9 mos) and 5-7 years for manslaughter.

He was not charged with manslaughter, can’t convict on a non charge.

I acknowledge this. The jury will be given a lesser charge instruction on the second killing. Clearly count 6 stands as is.

I’ll never understand how it’s fair to change the charge when you realize you can’t win the case as it is.

I actually share your feelings on this point, but it is where we are in this case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope the jurors realize their culpability in rendering a verdict that might cause further unrest. If there is an acquittal, the violence that follows will be on them. That bloodshed will be on their hands. Hopefully someone has communicated this to these people.

Ah, here’s the person who posted that violent, vulgar, sociopathic post yesterday.

And apparently loves mob rule. I think this cements my thinking that some of the posters on this thread are indeed Antifa.

+1 Lawless imbeciles……a bunch of emasculated losers.

You trumpers are the emasculated losers. Running around with military high-action weapons slaughtering people at a protest for justice.