Kyle Rittenhouse: Vigilante White Men

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hope they convict this vigilante POS and make an example of him.

+1000 and if they don’t I hope an example gets made of what happens when they don’t convict white supremacist POS.

Wow.
Seems almost like jury intimidation there, Skippy.

I hope he is found not guilty of all charges. You know... since it was self defense.

DP. Whether it was self-defense is for the jury to decide, not you

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is a mistrial heard before the same judge? Could a mistrial be the better outcome in this case if not?

I don’t know Wisconsin has any quirks of state court rules, but typically when a case is remanded for a new trial it is remanded to the same judge unless there was some kind of serious impropriety by the judge (not just a legal error) warranting refusal or removal. A mistrial without prejudice would give both sides a chance to clean up their case and avoid missteps they made in the first trial. The court typically won’t revisit any prior rulings (such as on admission of evidence) unless ordered to do so by the appellate court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hope they convict this vigilante POS and make an example of him.

+1000 and if they don’t I hope an example gets made of what happens when they don’t convict white supremacist POS.

Wow.
Seems almost like jury intimidation there, Skippy.

I hope he is found not guilty of all charges. You know... since it was self defense.

This shouldn't have made it to court. The would be thugs/looters went after him because he looked young and small. Gun or not he was going to be severely harmed.

[Anonymous]

Vigilante White Men — and the WannaBes who love them: In other reassuring news, Rittenhouse already has a job offer: congressional intern. Or something. Matt Gaetz is publicly slavering.


https://www.huffpost.com/entry/matt-gaetz-kyle-rittenhouse-congressional-intern_n_6195d238e4b0451e54f494ae

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: The perpetrators ... had criminal records.

Rittenhouse wouldn't have known about their criminal records when he shot them, so that detail is irrelevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here, because R plead self defense, the prosecutor has to convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that he was not acting in self defense. The burden of proof on the prosecutor is not so convince them they R did it. R stipulated to that by pleading self defense. Given all the strife and violence in the videos, I think convincing them beyond a reasonable doubt that it was not self defense is an incredibly high bar.

But force must be proportionate to the risk. Rosenbaum had not used any force against Rittenhouse, was not armed with a weapon.

A skateboard is not a proportionate weapon to an AR-15.

Escalation of force and proportionate response are concepts that must be met when making self-defense claims. His claim of self-defense is weakest with Rosenbaum.

Hmmm......

You seem confused on facts and timeline.

Rosenbaum wasn't the one with the skateboard. That was Huber. All Rosenbaum had was a plastic bag with socks and deodorant, which he quite ineffectually threw after Rittenhouse was seen provoking and waving his AR around. After that, Rosenbaum was unarmed. That's when Rittenhouse shot him.

Huber didn't show up with the skateboard until after people realized Rittenhouse was running around waving his AR at people and after he had already murdered Rosenbaum.

Rittenhouse was responsible for the escalation.

The misinformation in this thread is troubling.

-Rosenbaum was a convicted child rapist who was having a mental health crisis. He was just let out of jail for being arrested on a domestic abuse charge for hitting his girlfriend. He chased Rittenhouse, a 17 year old minor, into a dark car lot with the intent of assaulting him. Fact matter. Rosenbaum’s charging documents for child rape can be found here. For those of you who think these documents are a right wing hoax they have been quoted in extensive articles detailing the Rittenhouse episode in The NY Times and The Washington Post.

https://www.wisconsinrightnow.com/2021/03/11/joseph-rosenbaum-sex-offender/

-Huber hit Rittenhouse with a skateboard. A skateboard is a wood plank with metal struts attached to it. The people who are mocking it’s utility as a lethal weapon are not arguing in good faith. By the same logic a baseball bat is innocuous and someone should be totally fine being beaten with a bat as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: The perpetrators ... had criminal records.

Rittenhouse wouldn't have known about their criminal records when he shot them, so that detail is irrelevant.

No it’s not and it does not pass the smell test. If someone was convicted of multiple hate crimes would this be relevant to a case where a 17 year old armed black kid was being chased by a white supremacists with a history of hate crimes into a dark car lot and the black kid shot him? Of course it would be. Rittenhouse was a minor and Rosenbaum has a documented history of raping minors. I have no idea why that isn’t relevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: The perpetrators ... had criminal records.

Rittenhouse wouldn't have known about their criminal records when he shot them, so that detail is irrelevant.

Not if they attacked him--which they did. Witnesses said he had threatened them. Did they have a criminalhistory of attacking other people? Yes. Grosskreutz had a gun pointed at his head before Rittenhouse shot him in the arm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: The perpetrators ... had criminal records.

Rittenhouse wouldn't have known about their criminal records when he shot them, so that detail is irrelevant.

No it’s not and it does not pass the smell test. If someone was convicted of multiple hate crimes would this be relevant to a case where a 17 year old armed black kid was being chased by a white supremacists with a history of hate crimes into a dark car lot and the black kid shot him? Of course it would be. Rittenhouse was a minor and Rosenbaum has a documented history of raping minors. I have no idea why that isn’t relevant.

What. The. Hell.

And, in your example, that history would certainly be relevant if the w.s. shot the kid. It would be relevant if the kid new the w.s.'s history. It could be relevant if the kid were to testify and provide evidence of conduct in the course of the chasing that was consistent with w.s.'s hate crimes, I suppose. This is without regard to the overall patterns of different treatment for black vs white offenders, of course.

As to your trying to connect Rosenbaum's 18 years prior child sexual molestation charges, start with the fact that he was not convicted of rape, he was convicted of molestation, which is a different crime in AZ and involves touching genitals. But it is not relevant, not at all. And you have had plenty of opportunity to understand that fact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: The perpetrators ... had criminal records.

Rittenhouse wouldn't have known about their criminal records when he shot them, so that detail is irrelevant.

No it’s not and it does not pass the smell test. If someone was convicted of multiple hate crimes would this be relevant to a case where a 17 year old armed black kid was being chased by a white supremacists with a history of hate crimes into a dark car lot and the black kid shot him? Of course it would be. Rittenhouse was a minor and Rosenbaum has a documented history of raping minors. I have no idea why that isn’t relevant.

What. The. Hell.

And, in your example, that history would certainly be relevant if the w.s. shot the kid. It would be relevant if the kid new the w.s.'s history. It could be relevant if the kid were to testify and provide evidence of conduct in the course of the chasing that was consistent with w.s.'s hate crimes, I suppose. This is without regard to the overall patterns of different treatment for black vs white offenders, of course.

As to your trying to connect Rosenbaum's 18 years prior child sexual molestation charges, start with the fact that he was not convicted of rape, he was convicted of molestation, which is a different crime in AZ and involves touching genitals. But it is not relevant, not at all. And you have had plenty of opportunity to understand that fact.

In that example the black kid obviously shoots the white supremacist. Assume exact same circumstances as the Rittenhouse case. Do you think evidence of prior hate crimes by white supremacist would be relevant to case? If this wasn’t allowed in court what do you think the public and media outcry would be?

And you are being factually incorrect about Rosenbaum. Read count 2 and count 5. Here is Count 2 spelled out:

COUNT TWO: (SEXUAL CONDUCT WITH A MINOR UNDER FIFTEEN, A CLASS TWO FELONY, A DANGEROUS CRIME AGAINST CHILDREN)
On or about the 27th day of March, 2002, JOSEPH DON ROSENBAUM committed sexual conduct with a minor, by intentionally or knowingly engaging in an act of sexual intercourse with (second victim), a minor under the age of fifteen years, by penetrating the victim’s anus with his penis.

[Anonymous]

When Rittenhouse gets acquired the first thing he should do is sue Biden for defamation.

[Anonymous]

Kenosha police are investigating a report that a "media person" followed one of the jurors home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kenosha police are investigating a report that a "media person" followed one of the jurors home.

DP. There’s more context being reported by the same person.

[Anonymous]

Just now, Judge saying MSNBC had someone trying to tamper with the jury while they are being transported. MSNBC banned from the court now until the investigation is over and this case is over. Yikes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: The perpetrators ... had criminal records.

Rittenhouse wouldn't have known about their criminal records when he shot them, so that detail is irrelevant.

No it’s not and it does not pass the smell test. If someone was convicted of multiple hate crimes would this be relevant to a case where a 17 year old armed black kid was being chased by a white supremacists with a history of hate crimes into a dark car lot and the black kid shot him? Of course it would be. Rittenhouse was a minor and Rosenbaum has a documented history of raping minors. I have no idea why that isn’t relevant.

Rittenhouse was not afraid that he was about to be raped.