the defense asked judge for a mistrial without prejudice today and the judge did not rule on it. jury is back in the courtroom now viewing the drone video. this smarmy ass judge may rule a mistrial before a verdict is reached. i do not trust him at all.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Guess I'm just lucky, not once did any my kids ask to be dropped off at a protest...in the next state.. with an AR15...
But this guys Mom took him? seriously...wtf?
You do realize his Mom did NOT drop him off in Kenosha? I know it sounds great for the overall agenda w/ this trail, but this is a perfect example of Fake news. Congrats
I think he should be acquitted. The homicide charges. And that’s despite the fact that I think he’s a dangerous moron that went there hoping for a reason to use the gun. I don’t think the defense’s reasoning for him being there are good. Protecting businesses? Fuck off. That’s for the cops to do. But the charges here relate to whether or not, when he shot those three guys, was he acting on self-defense. And the prosecution didn’t prove he wasn’t.
The prosecution can say he went there to put himself in a situation where he’d be forced to act in self-defense (which I believe), but in the actual moments of the shootings, which is what the charges relate to, legally, the self-defense argument is gonna win out over the prosecution’s arguments.
The jury wasn’t sequestered so they know the national guard is outside anticipating riots if he’s found not guilty. If I was on the jury, I’d convict the him just based on that. I don’t need them burning down my house.
the defense asked judge for a mistrial without prejudice today and the judge did not rule on it. jury is back in the courtroom now viewing the drone video. this smarmy ass judge may rule a mistrial before a verdict is reached. i do not trust him at all.
But you trust the prosecution? They withheld the high resolution video from the defense. This trial should be over.
the defense asked judge for a mistrial without prejudice today and the judge did not rule on it. jury is back in the courtroom now viewing the drone video. this smarmy ass judge may rule a mistrial before a verdict is reached. i do not trust him at all.
But you trust the prosecution? They withheld the high resolution video from the defense. This trial should be over.
defense had an android not airdrop. the state airdropped the videos to the defense. defense should have made sure the shit was compatible. it is their client facing jail, correct?
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
umm, article I read said that same hi res video was shown during trial to jury. defense had opportunity THEN to object and make a motion. they did not. now that we are more than a day in and jury wants to review they object? fuck that. they know its bad.
the defense asked judge for a mistrial without prejudice today and the judge did not rule on it. jury is back in the courtroom now viewing the drone video. this smarmy ass judge may rule a mistrial before a verdict is reached. i do not trust him at all.
But you trust the prosecution? They withheld the high resolution video from the defense. This trial should be over.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
umm, article I read said that same hi res video was shown during trial to jury. defense had opportunity THEN to object and make a motion. they did not. now that we are more than a day in and jury wants to review they object? fuck that. they know its bad.
the defense asked judge for a mistrial without prejudice today and the judge did not rule on it. jury is back in the courtroom now viewing the drone video. this smarmy ass judge may rule a mistrial before a verdict is reached. i do not trust him at all.
But you trust the prosecution? They withheld the high resolution video from the defense. This trial should be over.
umm, article I read said that same hi res video was shown during trial to jury. defense had opportunity THEN to object and make a motion. they did not. now that we are more than a day in and jury wants to review they object? fuck that. they know its bad.
the defense asked judge for a mistrial without prejudice today and the judge did not rule on it. jury is back in the courtroom now viewing the drone video. this smarmy ass judge may rule a mistrial before a verdict is reached. i do not trust him at all.
But you trust the prosecution? They withheld the high resolution video from the defense. This trial should be over.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
maybe a mistrial and retrial in front of a less prejudiced judge would be better for everyone.
Self defense is still self defense no matter which judge is presiding.
the key is going to be the first victim. the 2nd hit him with the skateboard. the first did not and he was unarmed. kyle knows he was unarmed and he shot him 4 times. if you have an ar-15 and someone is unarmed, how is your life in danger? the crowd came after him after the first victim because he was an active shooter that just shot and killed someone.
you cannot claim self defense if your actions put you in the position to need to use deadly force. the prosecutor argued that beautifully.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
maybe a mistrial and retrial in front of a less prejudiced judge would be better for everyone.
Self defense is still self defense no matter which judge is presiding.
if you have an ar-15 and someone is unarmed, how is your life in danger?
Rosenbaum was verbally threatening to kill Rittenhouse. Rosenbaum lunged after Rittenhouse's gun to do just that. Rosenbaum was a threat to Rittenhouse(and the rest of the world I might add). I feel bad for the last 2 that were shot because maybe they did just assume they were trying to disarm a shooter but none of them should've been there in the first place.
maybe a mistrial and retrial in front of a less prejudiced judge would be better for everyone.
Self defense is still self defense no matter which judge is presiding.
if you have an ar-15 and someone is unarmed, how is your life in danger?
Rosenbaum was verbally threatening to kill Rittenhouse. Rosenbaum lunged after Rittenhouse's gun to do just that. Rosenbaum was a threat to Rittenhouse(and the rest of the world I might add). I feel bad for the last 2 that were shot because maybe they did just assume they were trying to disarm a shooter but none of them should've been there in the first place.
rosenbaum was a threat to the rest of the world?
ok i am done here.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
maybe a mistrial and retrial in front of a less prejudiced judge would be better for everyone.
Self defense is still self defense no matter which judge is presiding.
if you have an ar-15 and someone is unarmed, how is your life in danger?
Rosenbaum was verbally threatening to kill Rittenhouse. Rosenbaum lunged after Rittenhouse's gun to do just that. Rosenbaum was a threat to Rittenhouse(and the rest of the world I might add). I feel bad for the last 2 that were shot because maybe they did just assume they were trying to disarm a shooter but none of them should've been there in the first place.
“We’re focusing too heavily on a technological glitch.”
maybe a mistrial and retrial in front of a less prejudiced judge would be better for everyone.
Self defense is still self defense no matter which judge is presiding.
if you have an ar-15 and someone is unarmed, how is your life in danger?
Rosenbaum was verbally threatening to kill Rittenhouse. Rosenbaum lunged after Rittenhouse's gun to do just that. Rosenbaum was a threat to Rittenhouse(and the rest of the world I might add). I feel bad for the last 2 that were shot because maybe they did just assume they were trying to disarm a shooter but none of them should've been there in the first place.
rosenbaum was a threat to the rest of the world?
ok i am done here.
Nuclear arms are all the rage, small, concealable and powerful enough to wipe out planets. Everyone in ANTIIIIIIIIFA carries one.
Guess I'm just lucky, not once did any my kids ask to be dropped off at a protest...in the next state.. with an AR15...
But this guys Mom took him? seriously...wtf?
You do realize his Mom did NOT drop him off in Kenosha? I know it sounds great for the overall agenda w/ this trail, but this is a perfect example of Fake news. Congrats
agenda. hahaha. the politicizing of this by the usual suspects is disgusting, yet unsurprising.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
maybe a mistrial and retrial in front of a less prejudiced judge would be better for everyone.
Self defense is still self defense no matter which judge is presiding.
if you have an ar-15 and someone is unarmed, how is your life in danger?
Rosenbaum was verbally threatening to kill Rittenhouse. Rosenbaum lunged after Rittenhouse's gun to do just that. Rosenbaum was a threat to Rittenhouse(and the rest of the world I might add). I feel bad for the last 2 that were shot because maybe they did just assume they were trying to disarm a shooter but none of them should've been there in the first place.
maybe a mistrial and retrial in front of a less prejudiced judge would be better for everyone.
Self defense is still self defense no matter which judge is presiding.
if you have an ar-15 and someone is unarmed, how is your life in danger?
Rosenbaum was verbally threatening to kill Rittenhouse. Rosenbaum lunged after Rittenhouse's gun to do just that. Rosenbaum was a threat to Rittenhouse(and the rest of the world I might add). I feel bad for the last 2 that were shot because maybe they did just assume they were trying to disarm a shooter but none of them should've been there in the first place.
I'm sorry but I don't have any respect for sexual predators.
do you always radically over dramatize situations like this? obviously gimme wasn't defending him. saying he was a threat to 7 billion people is ludicrous.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
maybe a mistrial and retrial in front of a less prejudiced judge would be better for everyone.
Self defense is still self defense no matter which judge is presiding.
if you have an ar-15 and someone is unarmed, how is your life in danger?
Rosenbaum was verbally threatening to kill Rittenhouse. Rosenbaum lunged after Rittenhouse's gun to do just that. Rosenbaum was a threat to Rittenhouse(and the rest of the world I might add). I feel bad for the last 2 that were shot because maybe they did just assume they were trying to disarm a shooter but none of them should've been there in the first place.
I'm sorry but I don't have any respect for sexual predators.
do you always radically over dramatize situations like this? obviously gimme wasn't defending him. saying he was a threat to 7 billion people is ludicrous.
Like I said, I have no respect for sexual predators.
Rosenbaum was obviously a danger to society and I'm glad there's one less pedophile in the world.
Edit: and for the record, Gimme was defending Rosenbaum.
maybe a mistrial and retrial in front of a less prejudiced judge would be better for everyone.
Self defense is still self defense no matter which judge is presiding.
if you have an ar-15 and someone is unarmed, how is your life in danger?
Rosenbaum was verbally threatening to kill Rittenhouse. Rosenbaum lunged after Rittenhouse's gun to do just that. Rosenbaum was a threat to Rittenhouse(and the rest of the world I might add). I feel bad for the last 2 that were shot because maybe they did just assume they were trying to disarm a shooter but none of them should've been there in the first place.
I'm sorry but I don't have any respect for sexual predators.
do you always radically over dramatize situations like this? obviously gimme wasn't defending him. saying he was a threat to 7 billion people is ludicrous.
Like I said, I have no respect for sexual predators.
Rosenbaum was obviously a danger to society and I'm glad there's one less pedophile in the world.
Edit: and for the record, Gimme was defending Rosenbaum.
and that info wasnt known when he was murdered. and even if it was, not being engaged in that act, its irrelevant to the crime against him.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
maybe a mistrial and retrial in front of a less prejudiced judge would be better for everyone.
Self defense is still self defense no matter which judge is presiding.
if you have an ar-15 and someone is unarmed, how is your life in danger?
Rosenbaum was verbally threatening to kill Rittenhouse. Rosenbaum lunged after Rittenhouse's gun to do just that. Rosenbaum was a threat to Rittenhouse(and the rest of the world I might add). I feel bad for the last 2 that were shot because maybe they did just assume they were trying to disarm a shooter but none of them should've been there in the first place.
I'm sorry but I don't have any respect for sexual predators.
do you always radically over dramatize situations like this? obviously gimme wasn't defending him. saying he was a threat to 7 billion people is ludicrous.
Like I said, I have no respect for sexual predators.
Rosenbaum was obviously a danger to society and I'm glad there's one less pedophile in the world.
Edit: and for the record, Gimme was defending Rosenbaum.
and that info wasnt known when he was murdered.
I don't really care when it was known. It is as f'ed up as can possibly be. Besides these facts, Rosenbaum was trying to disarm Rittenhouse to kill him and paid for it with his life.
maybe a mistrial and retrial in front of a less prejudiced judge would be better for everyone.
Self defense is still self defense no matter which judge is presiding.
the key is going to be the first victim. the 2nd hit him with the skateboard. the first did not and he was unarmed. kyle knows he was unarmed and he shot him 4 times. if you have an ar-15 and someone is unarmed, how is your life in danger? the crowd came after him after the first victim because he was an active shooter that just shot and killed someone.
you cannot claim self defense if your actions put you in the position to need to use deadly force. the prosecutor argued that beautifully.
Hmm, he was actively running away from him though, and only really fired when he realised the guy had gained too much pace on him and he wasn't going to get away, so he either faced a beating or having his gun taken from him and potentially used against himself. If the argument is that he should have in the split moment accepted a beating, which reasonably still could have ended in his death (plenty of people are killed in fistfights, after all) I don't think many people if they had a gun in their hand would choose a beating.
To make it clear, I don't think Rittenhouse had any business being there that night, regardless of how noble his declared intentions may have been in terms of administering first aid, putting out fires etc. I think it's pretty clear he had a very naive, childlike attitude towards the situation, and he very quickly found himself in a situation he clearly wasn't prepared for. I think he thought the fact that he had a gun meant nobody would fuck with him, so when a crazy dude started chasing him completely unphased, even when Rittenhouse turned and pointed the gun at him, panic well and truly set in and he did what he had to do to defend himself in the moment.
You also used the term active shooter, which I think is a bit of a stretch, at that point he had shot one person, in what was arguably a self-defence situation, then got chased by a hostile crowd. He wasn't arbitrarily shooting people, in each incidence these individuals engaged with him in acts of aggression.
It's a difficult case, and I can certainly understand why people have no sympathy for him. There's a huge politically charged narrative to the riots, and definitely a perceived right-wing element to anyone who tried to stand up against those protesting/rioting. But if you take all that narrative away, what transpired, demonstrably fulfils the definition of self-defence, as I understand it. The prosecution's point is absolutely null and void, the defence only have to prove that Rittenhouse feared the aggressor was about to commit an unlawful interference with his person.
maybe a mistrial and retrial in front of a less prejudiced judge would be better for everyone.
Self defense is still self defense no matter which judge is presiding.
the key is going to be the first victim. the 2nd hit him with the skateboard. the first did not and he was unarmed. kyle knows he was unarmed and he shot him 4 times. if you have an ar-15 and someone is unarmed, how is your life in danger? the crowd came after him after the first victim because he was an active shooter that just shot and killed someone.
you cannot claim self defense if your actions put you in the position to need to use deadly force. the prosecutor argued that beautifully.
Hmm, he was actively running away from him though, and only really fired when he realised the guy had gained too much pace on him and he wasn't going to get away, so he either faced a beating or having his gun taken from him and potentially used against himself. If the argument is that he should have in the split moment accepted a beating, which reasonably still could have ended in his death (plenty of people are killed in fistfights, after all) I don't think many people if they had a gun in their hand would choose a beating.
To make it clear, I don't think Rittenhouse had any business being there that night, regardless of how noble his declared intentions may have been in terms of administering first aid, putting out fires etc. I think it's pretty clear he had a very naive, childlike attitude towards the situation, and he very quickly found himself in a situation he clearly wasn't prepared for. I think he thought the fact that he had a gun meant nobody would fuck with him, so when a crazy dude started chasing him completely unphased, even when Rittenhouse turned and pointed the gun at him, panic well and truly set in and he did what he had to do to defend himself in the moment.
You also used the term active shooter, which I think is a bit of a stretch, at that point he had shot one person, in what was arguably a self-defence situation, then got chased by a hostile crowd. He wasn't arbitrarily shooting people, in each incidence these individuals engaged with him in acts of aggression.
It's a difficult case, and I can certainly understand why people have no sympathy for him. There's a huge politically charged narrative to the riots, and definitely a perceived right-wing element to anyone who tried to stand up against those protesting/rioting. But if you take all that narrative away, what transpired, demonstrably fulfils the definition of self-defence, as I understand it. The prosecution's point is absolutely null and void, the defence only have to prove that Rittenhouse feared the aggressor was about to commit an unlawful interference with his person.
There were plenty of armed citizens during all of these 2020 riots but this situation didn't happen anywhere else. I think Rosenbaum saw how young and innocent Rittenhouse looked and chose to go after him because of that. Specifically in Kenosha, there were plenty of much bigger guys with guns that didn't get attacked. That is what bullies do. They go after the weakest of the bunch.
In regards to your first point, the prosecutor said that Rittenhouse should've allowed Rosenbaum to beat him up instead of shooting him. If Rosenbaum had gotten his hands on Rittenhouse and disarmed him, we will never know what would've happened. What we do know is that Rosenbaum was one sick f*ck and had a violent past.
Guess I'm just lucky, not once did any my kids ask to be dropped off at a protest...in the next state.. with an AR15...
But this guys Mom took him? seriously...wtf?
You do realize his Mom did NOT drop him off in Kenosha? I know it sounds great for the overall agenda w/ this trail, but this is a perfect example of Fake news. Congrats
Can you please post your source? I’m trying to find the truth and without sources none of us will know the truth. Usually when I ask for sources on other forums, far, far right media sources are supplied then removed for containing false information. How can any of us decide if you can’t supply your source?
Guess I'm just lucky, not once did any my kids ask to be dropped off at a protest...in the next state.. with an AR15...
But this guys Mom took him? seriously...wtf?
You do realize his Mom did NOT drop him off in Kenosha? I know it sounds great for the overall agenda w/ this trail, but this is a perfect example of Fake news. Congrats
Can you please post your source? I’m trying to find the truth and without sources none of us will know the truth. Usually when I ask for sources on other forums, far, far right media sources are supplied then removed for containing false information. How can any of us decide if you can’t supply your source?
"Black testified
that he, his brother and Rittenhouse had gone to downtown Kenosha on
the morning of the shootings to view the aftermath of the previous days’
violence, and that he and Rittenhouse returned to Black’s home before
going back downtown about 5 p.m.
Rittenhousetestified
that he went to Kenosha with his sister and friends to provide first
aid after seeing online pleas for people to come to the city to help
protect it.
Rittenhouse testified that after the shootings, Black drove him home
in Antioch, where he told his mother and two sisters what happened. He
said his mother drove him to the local police station, where he
surrendered.
Wendy Rittenhouse told
the Chicago Tribune in November that she would have tried to stop her
son from going to Kenosha, but she didn’t know where he was or what he
was doing."
maybe a mistrial and retrial in front of a less prejudiced judge would be better for everyone.
Self defense is still self defense no matter which judge is presiding.
the key is going to be the first victim. the 2nd hit him with the skateboard. the first did not and he was unarmed. kyle knows he was unarmed and he shot him 4 times. if you have an ar-15 and someone is unarmed, how is your life in danger? the crowd came after him after the first victim because he was an active shooter that just shot and killed someone.
you cannot claim self defense if your actions put you in the position to need to use deadly force. the prosecutor argued that beautifully.
Hmm, he was actively running away from him though, and only really fired when he realised the guy had gained too much pace on him and he wasn't going to get away, so he either faced a beating or having his gun taken from him and potentially used against himself. If the argument is that he should have in the split moment accepted a beating, which reasonably still could have ended in his death (plenty of people are killed in fistfights, after all) I don't think many people if they had a gun in their hand would choose a beating.
To make it clear, I don't think Rittenhouse had any business being there that night, regardless of how noble his declared intentions may have been in terms of administering first aid, putting out fires etc. I think it's pretty clear he had a very naive, childlike attitude towards the situation, and he very quickly found himself in a situation he clearly wasn't prepared for. I think he thought the fact that he had a gun meant nobody would fuck with him, so when a crazy dude started chasing him completely unphased, even when Rittenhouse turned and pointed the gun at him, panic well and truly set in and he did what he had to do to defend himself in the moment.
You also used the term active shooter, which I think is a bit of a stretch, at that point he had shot one person, in what was arguably a self-defence situation, then got chased by a hostile crowd. He wasn't arbitrarily shooting people, in each incidence these individuals engaged with him in acts of aggression.
It's a difficult case, and I can certainly understand why people have no sympathy for him. There's a huge politically charged narrative to the riots, and definitely a perceived right-wing element to anyone who tried to stand up against those protesting/rioting. But if you take all that narrative away, what transpired, demonstrably fulfils the definition of self-defence, as I understand it. The prosecution's point is absolutely null and void, the defence only have to prove that Rittenhouse feared the aggressor was about to commit an unlawful interference with his person.
There were plenty of armed citizens during all of these 2020 riots but this situation didn't happen anywhere else. I think Rosenbaum saw how young and innocent Rittenhouse looked and chose to go after him because of that. Specifically in Kenosha, there were plenty of much bigger guys with guns that didn't get attacked. That is what bullies do. They go after the weakest of the bunch.
In regards to your first point, the prosecutor said that Rittenhouse should've allowed Rosenbaum to beat him up instead of shooting him. If Rosenbaum had gotten his hands on Rittenhouse and disarmed him, we will never know what would've happened. What we do know is that Rosenbaum was one sick f*ck and had a violent past.
I saw a comment on a youtube video about the case referring to Rittenhouse as being like Forrest Gump's kid, and I couldn't help but laugh at how accurate the description was. Very childlike, nowhere near savvy enough to navigate a situation like that, and absolutely a sitting target.
In terms of Rosenbaum, it takes a special type of crazy to run after an armed individual, regardless of how young and ineffective they look - not even a gun aimed at him was going to stop him from trying to attack Rittenhouse.
maybe a mistrial and retrial in front of a less prejudiced judge would be better for everyone.
Self defense is still self defense no matter which judge is presiding.
the key is going to be the first victim. the 2nd hit him with the skateboard. the first did not and he was unarmed. kyle knows he was unarmed and he shot him 4 times. if you have an ar-15 and someone is unarmed, how is your life in danger? the crowd came after him after the first victim because he was an active shooter that just shot and killed someone.
you cannot claim self defense if your actions put you in the position to need to use deadly force. the prosecutor argued that beautifully.
Hmm, he was actively running away from him though, and only really fired when he realised the guy had gained too much pace on him and he wasn't going to get away, so he either faced a beating or having his gun taken from him and potentially used against himself. If the argument is that he should have in the split moment accepted a beating, which reasonably still could have ended in his death (plenty of people are killed in fistfights, after all) I don't think many people if they had a gun in their hand would choose a beating.
To make it clear, I don't think Rittenhouse had any business being there that night, regardless of how noble his declared intentions may have been in terms of administering first aid, putting out fires etc. I think it's pretty clear he had a very naive, childlike attitude towards the situation, and he very quickly found himself in a situation he clearly wasn't prepared for. I think he thought the fact that he had a gun meant nobody would fuck with him, so when a crazy dude started chasing him completely unphased, even when Rittenhouse turned and pointed the gun at him, panic well and truly set in and he did what he had to do to defend himself in the moment.
You also used the term active shooter, which I think is a bit of a stretch, at that point he had shot one person, in what was arguably a self-defence situation, then got chased by a hostile crowd. He wasn't arbitrarily shooting people, in each incidence these individuals engaged with him in acts of aggression.
It's a difficult case, and I can certainly understand why people have no sympathy for him. There's a huge politically charged narrative to the riots, and definitely a perceived right-wing element to anyone who tried to stand up against those protesting/rioting. But if you take all that narrative away, what transpired, demonstrably fulfils the definition of self-defence, as I understand it. The prosecution's point is absolutely null and void, the defence only have to prove that Rittenhouse feared the aggressor was about to commit an unlawful interference with his person.
There were plenty of armed citizens during all of these 2020 riots but this situation didn't happen anywhere else. I think Rosenbaum saw how young and innocent Rittenhouse looked and chose to go after him because of that. Specifically in Kenosha, there were plenty of much bigger guys with guns that didn't get attacked. That is what bullies do. They go after the weakest of the bunch.
In regards to your first point, the prosecutor said that Rittenhouse should've allowed Rosenbaum to beat him up instead of shooting him. If Rosenbaum had gotten his hands on Rittenhouse and disarmed him, we will never know what would've happened. What we do know is that Rosenbaum was one sick f*ck and had a violent past.
I saw a comment on a youtube video about the case referring to Rittenhouse as being like Forrest Gump's kid, and I couldn't help but laugh at how accurate the description was. Very childlike, nowhere near savvy enough to navigate a situation like that, and absolutely a sitting target.
In terms of Rosenbaum, it takes a special type of crazy to run after an armed individual, regardless of how young and ineffective they look - not even a gun aimed at him was going to stop him from trying to attack Rittenhouse.
I'd argue the nowhere near savvy to navigate a situation like that. He only shot the ones that were attacking him. At any point, he could've opened fire on the whole crowd but knew not to do that. He tried running away from Rosenbaum before having to shoot him. He could've shot as soon as Rosenbaum started running at him but he tried to do the right thing. He also had his chance to fire at Grosskreutz but didn't until he was an immediate danger to him. Rittenhouse has some serious self control. Some cops with full training wouldn't be able to navigate a situation like this.
Guess I'm just lucky, not once did any my kids ask to be dropped off at a protest...in the next state.. with an AR15...
But this guys Mom took him? seriously...wtf?
You do realize his Mom did NOT drop him off in Kenosha? I know it sounds great for the overall agenda w/ this trail, but this is a perfect example of Fake news. Congrats
Can you please post your source? I’m trying to find the truth and without sources none of us will know the truth. Usually when I ask for sources on other forums, far, far right media sources are supplied then removed for containing false information. How can any of us decide if you can’t supply your source?
"Black testified
that he, his brother and Rittenhouse had gone to downtown Kenosha on
the morning of the shootings to view the aftermath of the previous days’
violence, and that he and Rittenhouse returned to Black’s home before
going back downtown about 5 p.m.
Rittenhousetestified
that he went to Kenosha with his sister and friends to provide first
aid after seeing online pleas for people to come to the city to help
protect it.
Rittenhouse testified that after the shootings, Black drove him home
in Antioch, where he told his mother and two sisters what happened. He
said his mother drove him to the local police station, where he
surrendered.
Wendy Rittenhouse told
the Chicago Tribune in November that she would have tried to stop her
son from going to Kenosha, but she didn’t know where he was or what he
was doing."
Edit: Sorry, it was 2 days ago that it was stated here by multiple people that his Mom drove him....
No I didn’t ask before because Kat just reminded us all to post sources and by the way not everyone on here is a jagoff. I was being serious, not only because I honestly wanted to know but so that others would see it as well.
But you know what, fuck it. Apparently you’ve never read my posts or you’d know I stay in the middle, where the truth exists. Sorry I tried to further understand your statement.
AND I don’t monitor the days I post so I’m clueless about 2 days ago.
Comments
the problem is if the jury hangs on all of them he cannot be tried again.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
https://apnews.com/article/kyle-rittenhouse-wisconsin-homicide-kenosha-0e4b6ad5a286af9ddbb8c8546550f1dc
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
you cannot claim self defense if your actions put you in the position to need to use deadly force. the prosecutor argued that beautifully.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
ok i am done here.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
-EV 8/14/93
-EV 8/14/93
and that info wasnt known when he was murdered. and even if it was, not being engaged in that act, its irrelevant to the crime against him.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I don't really care when it was known. It is as f'ed up as can possibly be. Besides these facts, Rosenbaum was trying to disarm Rittenhouse to kill him and paid for it with his life.
To make it clear, I don't think Rittenhouse had any business being there that night, regardless of how noble his declared intentions may have been in terms of administering first aid, putting out fires etc. I think it's pretty clear he had a very naive, childlike attitude towards the situation, and he very quickly found himself in a situation he clearly wasn't prepared for. I think he thought the fact that he had a gun meant nobody would fuck with him, so when a crazy dude started chasing him completely unphased, even when Rittenhouse turned and pointed the gun at him, panic well and truly set in and he did what he had to do to defend himself in the moment.
You also used the term active shooter, which I think is a bit of a stretch, at that point he had shot one person, in what was arguably a self-defence situation, then got chased by a hostile crowd. He wasn't arbitrarily shooting people, in each incidence these individuals engaged with him in acts of aggression.
It's a difficult case, and I can certainly understand why people have no sympathy for him. There's a huge politically charged narrative to the riots, and definitely a perceived right-wing element to anyone who tried to stand up against those protesting/rioting. But if you take all that narrative away, what transpired, demonstrably fulfils the definition of self-defence, as I understand it. The prosecution's point is absolutely null and void, the defence only have to prove that Rittenhouse feared the aggressor was about to commit an unlawful interference with his person.
Rittenhouse testified that he went to Kenosha with his sister and friends to provide first aid after seeing online pleas for people to come to the city to help protect it.
Rittenhouse testified that after the shootings, Black drove him home in Antioch, where he told his mother and two sisters what happened. He said his mother drove him to the local police station, where he surrendered.
Wendy Rittenhouse told the Chicago Tribune in November that she would have tried to stop her son from going to Kenosha, but she didn’t know where he was or what he was doing."
Here is another article if you want more: https://www.yahoo.com/now/kyle-rittenhouses-mother-did-not-183807767.html
Edit: Sorry, it was 2 days ago that it was stated here by multiple people that his Mom drove him....
In terms of Rosenbaum, it takes a special type of crazy to run after an armed individual, regardless of how young and ineffective they look - not even a gun aimed at him was going to stop him from trying to attack Rittenhouse.