Kyle Rittenhouse: Vigilante White Men

[Anonymous]

If people here would just admit they want him to be guilty because he’s a white conservative we wouldn’t need pages of people ignoring the evidence that it’s was 100% self defense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I think the idea is that if they lose this trial they would charge him with other charges anyway and he would have a second trial. They did ask Rittenhouse if he would consent to other charges being included in this trial and he said he did. Personally I would of said no and made them have a second trial if they were so inclined.

No, double jeopardy prevents a new trial with lesser charges. Maybe the feds could bring on a different case, but the state can’t.

The defense can fight new, lesser charges, and did so with some of the charges. But it’s a risk for them. A jury might decide they’d rather stretch their interpretations of the facts than let him free entirely.

Didn't the Feds step in after a few southern acquitals during the civil rights era? They charged supremecist murderers with violating civil rights. But RFK was an Attorney General with courage.

Also, on Thursday Kyle's mom went on Hannity and said if Kyle is released he will do it again. https://www.rawstory.com/kyle-rittenhouse-2655547192/

He would go out AGAIN with fire extinguishers to put out fires set by rampaging pedophiles bent on destroying livelihoods and turning neighborhoods into burnt out wastelands; and defend himself against pedophiles who attack him for foiling their plans to blow up gas stations and police cars?

Oh nos, what a terrible person!

Doesn’t he know to sit meekly and allow pedophiles free reign to lay waste to communities if the police don’t have the manpower to prevent it ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If people here would just admit they want him to be guilty because he’s a white conservative we wouldn’t need pages of people ignoring the evidence that it’s was 100% self defense.

This. This is it 100%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not buying any shirts, but it’s obvious to me having watched most of the trial that this was classic self defense since he was running away and they attacked him and so the kid should walk. I also think the world is a better place without a child rapist and thugs, vandals, and looters in it, so it’s not like there’s any great loss there.

People aren’t buying the shirt because of Kyle though. They’re buying it to show that they are standing up for law and order and justice in this country. It’s a different thing. It’s just like the let’s go B meme isn’t about Biden, it’s about how screwed up the mainstream media is in this country and how they spin everything the way they want. Which is happening here too, of course.

Kyle was not legally permitted to be out on the streets. He violated the curfew, just like the rioters did. He most likely violated the law by carrying the gun that he used to shoot 3 people. This is the difference between people who like “law and order,” (i.e., it’s good when people who agree me use guns to keep other people in line) and people who like “the rule of law,” (if you’re out breaking the law and adding to the chaos and violence and creating more work for the police, you’re no better than the original rioters). You may be extremely unhappy with the way Kenosha’s mayor and police force handled the rioters, but Kyle didn’t make those streets any safer or calmer. Had he stayed home, there’s an excellent chance no one would have died.

Pretty sure that’s not an effective prosecution strategy.

I wasn’t discussing his prosecution; I was discussing the idea that Kyle represented “law and order.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not buying any shirts, but it’s obvious to me having watched most of the trial that this was classic self defense since he was running away and they attacked him and so the kid should walk. I also think the world is a better place without a child rapist and thugs, vandals, and looters in it, so it’s not like there’s any great loss there.

People aren’t buying the shirt because of Kyle though. They’re buying it to show that they are standing up for law and order and justice in this country. It’s a different thing. It’s just like the let’s go B meme isn’t about Biden, it’s about how screwed up the mainstream media is in this country and how they spin everything the way they want. Which is happening here too, of course.

Kyle was not legally permitted to be out on the streets. He violated the curfew, just like the rioters did. He most likely violated the law by carrying the gun that he used to shoot 3 people. This is the difference between people who like “law and order,” (i.e., it’s good when people who agree me use guns to keep other people in line) and people who like “the rule of law,” (if you’re out breaking the law and adding to the chaos and violence and creating more work for the police, you’re no better than the original rioters). You may be extremely unhappy with the way Kenosha’s mayor and police force handled the rioters, but Kyle didn’t make those streets any safer or calmer. Had he stayed home, there’s an excellent chance no one would have died.

Pretty sure that’s not an effective prosecution strategy.

I wasn’t discussing his prosecution; I was discussing the idea that Kyle represented “law and order.”

Fair enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not buying any shirts, but it’s obvious to me having watched most of the trial that this was classic self defense since he was running away and they attacked him and so the kid should walk. I also think the world is a better place without a child rapist and thugs, vandals, and looters in it, so it’s not like there’s any great loss there.

People aren’t buying the shirt because of Kyle though. They’re buying it to show that they are standing up for law and order and justice in this country. It’s a different thing. It’s just like the let’s go B meme isn’t about Biden, it’s about how screwed up the mainstream media is in this country and how they spin everything the way they want. Which is happening here too, of course.

Kyle was not legally permitted to be out on the streets. He violated the curfew, just like the rioters did. He most likely violated the law by carrying the gun that he used to shoot 3 people. This is the difference between people who like “law and order,” (i.e., it’s good when people who agree me use guns to keep other people in line) and people who like “the rule of law,” (if you’re out breaking the law and adding to the chaos and violence and creating more work for the police, you’re no better than the original rioters). You may be extremely unhappy with the way Kenosha’s mayor and police force handled the rioters, but Kyle didn’t make those streets any safer or calmer. Had he stayed home, there’s an excellent chance no one would have died.

Wasn’t he awful, preventing the fires that pedophile set from burning out of control and then shooting the pedophile attacking yet another minor (him) when said pedophile became enraged at the interruption of his plans to burn things down.

Yes, it was awful that a minor with poor judgment and a hero complex was packing heat at a riot when he should have been at home, and shot 3 people, one of whom, unbeknownst to Kyle, was a pedophile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If people here would just admit they want him to be guilty because he’s a white conservative we wouldn’t need pages of people ignoring the evidence that it’s was 100% self defense.

This. This is it 100%.

Bullshit. Rosenbaum wasn't a credible threat. All he had was a plastic bag with socks and deodorant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If people here would just admit they want him to be guilty because he’s a white conservative we wouldn’t need pages of people ignoring the evidence that it’s was 100% self defense.

This. This is it 100%.

Bullshit. Rosenbaum wasn't a credible threat. All he had was a plastic bag with socks and deodorant.

You obviously have not watched. He threatened to kill Kyle earlier and was in the process of trying to take his gun. He had his hands on the barrel when he was shot. That’s what the prosecution witnesses testified to, not even the defense.

Think about that, the prosecution agrees that he was trying to take the gun away. That’s not a threat?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If people here would just admit they want him to be guilty because he’s a white conservative we wouldn’t need pages of people ignoring the evidence that it’s was 100% self defense.

This. This is it 100%.

Bullshit. Rosenbaum wasn't a credible threat. All he had was a plastic bag with socks and deodorant.

Oh so Kyle stopped him, looked inside the bag, saw socks and deodorant, then said “screw it, imma shoot you anyway!”?!?
Sounds legit. If, of course, this interaction happened IN YOUR HEAD. Thankfully we have video that proves otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG, the people supporting Rittenhouse’s “heroic” actions are the same saying that 1/6 Capitol invasion was a nothing burger.

The 1/6 attack on the capitol was treason, at least by some of the participants. And Rittenhouse is almost certain a racist who was looking to provoke the protestors. But that doesn’t mean he committed homicide. An acquittal on the charges should not exonerate him as a person.

Yes and the proof he is a racist is he tried to protect property during a totally legit, planned riot.

You guys deserve the crime you get.

Nobody pulling this crap in the south lands and the rural west.

Please show me what states make it legal to kill to protect property. It’s been established the law in WI says you may only use reasonable force to protect yourself. You can’t escalate the force. I bet he gets off but that’s not justice.

He will “get off” because at the times he pulled the trigger he really was acting in self-defense, regardless of his motives for going there to begin with.

[Anonymous]

Why is the left so hell bent on defending those criminals rather than admitting that even IN JUST THIS ONE CASE, the guy was completely justified in defending himself?

It’s just so hard to take you seriously. Stop watching CNN.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If people here would just admit they want him to be guilty because he’s a white conservative we wouldn’t need pages of people ignoring the evidence that it’s was 100% self defense.

This. This is it 100%.

Bullshit. Rosenbaum wasn't a credible threat. All he had was a plastic bag with socks and deodorant.

Oh so Kyle stopped him, looked inside the bag, saw socks and deodorant, then said “screw it, imma shoot you anyway!”?!?
Sounds legit. If, of course, this interaction happened IN YOUR HEAD. Thankfully we have video that proves otherwise.

We do have a video. Kyle turns around and immediately shoots Rosenbaum - he didn't shoot him because he thought he was grabbing for his gun. He shot him because he heard the pistol shot in the air far behind him and he panicked.

But I think he'll get off for the Rosenbaum shooting because the judge allowed no lesser included charges and the prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Kyle acted unreasonably.

He may be convicted for some of the other shootings, or he could get a jury that just lets him off the hook. I won't be surprised if he walks, but I'll be very disappointed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If people here would just admit they want him to be guilty because he’s a white conservative we wouldn’t need pages of people ignoring the evidence that it’s was 100% self defense.

This. This is it 100%.

Bullshit. Rosenbaum wasn't a credible threat. All he had was a plastic bag with socks and deodorant.

Oh so Kyle stopped him, looked inside the bag, saw socks and deodorant, then said “screw it, imma shoot you anyway!”?!?
Sounds legit. If, of course, this interaction happened IN YOUR HEAD. Thankfully we have video that proves otherwise.

We do have a video. Kyle turns around and immediately shoots Rosenbaum - he didn't shoot him because he thought he was grabbing for his gun. He shot him because he heard the pistol shot in the air far behind him and he panicked.

But I think he'll get off for the Rosenbaum shooting because the judge allowed no lesser included charges and the prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Kyle acted unreasonably.

He may be convicted for some of the other shootings, or he could get a jury that just lets him off the hook. I won't be surprised if he walks, but I'll be very disappointed.

Rosenbaum had his hands on the barrel of the gun, trying to take it away. That’s according to the prosecution.
Why should the judge allow lesser charges now that the prosecution is losing its case? They should have charged him with less from the start.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If people here would just admit they want him to be guilty because he’s a white conservative we wouldn’t need pages of people ignoring the evidence that it’s was 100% self defense.

This. This is it 100%.

Bullshit. Rosenbaum wasn't a credible threat. All he had was a plastic bag with socks and deodorant.

You obviously have not watched. He threatened to kill Kyle earlier and was in the process of trying to take his gun. He had his hands on the barrel when he was shot. That’s what the prosecution witnesses testified to, not even the defense.

Think about that, the prosecution agrees that he was trying to take the gun away. That’s not a threat?

I did watch and saw no such evidence. Neither the forensic enhancements of the drone video nor the FLIR video conclusively show Rosenbaum grab his gun.
There is also nothing I've seen in the powder residue that conclusively proves Rosenbaum was grabbing the gun. Powder residue on his hands could also be from Rosenbaum raising his hands defensively as Rittenhouse turned and raised his gun at him.

Meanwhile it's also known that Rittenhouse provoked the interaction. It's a serious problem if people can go around provoking fights with random people and then shoot those people if the situation you provoked goes sour. It's basically legalizing shooting anyone you don't like.

[Anonymous]

Why did the judge not allow any lesser offenses?
That's hugely problematic.

This entire court case has been a complete sham.