Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
November 11, 2021
Rittenhouse Trial Exposes The Democrats’ Reliance On False Narratives

In August 2020 I wrote about the riots in several U.S. cities.

'Mostly Peaceful' Rioting And Looting Is Helping Trump's Campaign

The piece attracted 610 comments which made it the longest Moon of Alabama thread ever.

The immediate starting point of my thoughts had been the riots and shooting in Kenosha:

Last Sunday police in Kenosha, Wisconsin proved to be too incompetent to arrest a man they had already had under control. They shot him 7 times into the back when he was trying to get into his car. Nights of rioting followed. Buildings were burned down and businesses were looted.

Yesterday a white teen with a semi-automatic weapon had the stupid idea to join others in 'protecting the businesses' in Kenosha from further looting. He ended up killing two people and wounding more after he was attacked by some of the rioters. The teen was arrested and he is facing charges but I doubt that he is guilty of more than sheer stupidity and manslaughter in self defense.

Many of the regular commentators disagreed with my conclusion.

The white teen, Kyle Rittenhouse, is now standing trial. Of note is that the casualties in this case were all white and had criminal records, something that the media at the time of the incident intentionally neglected to say.

Yesterday Rittenhouse testified and was cross examined by the prosecutor Thomas Binger. I watched a stream of the trial and was not impressed:

Moon of Alabama @MoonofA – 20:12 UTC · Nov 10, 2021

Watching the Rittenhouse trial.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=si9YXq0A1Vk
That prosecutor is ridiculous.

The judge seemed to have the same impression:

The Kenosha County, Wis., judge presiding over Kyle Rittenhouse’s murder trial clashed with the lead prosecutor several times during the teenager’s cross-examination on Wednesday, while defense attorneys requested a mistrial alleging prosecutorial misconduct.

The defense objected to Binger’s questions about Rittenhouse’s decision to remain silent about the shootings until taking the witness stand Wednesday, arguing that this line of inquiry infringed on Rittenhouse’s Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself.

While Binger said he was making the case that Rittenhouse had tailored his testimony based on what other witnesses had said before him, Kenosha County Circuit Judge Bruce Schroeder appeared to agree with the defense, ordering the jury out of the room before rebuking the prosecutor.

“The problem is this is a grave constitutional violation for you to talk about the defendant’s silence,” Schroeder yelled. “You're right on the borderline, and you may be over it. But it better stop.”

Later on in the cross-examination, Schroeder admonished Binger for attempting to question Rittenhouse about evidence that the judge had previously deemed inadmissible.

It was not only that misbehavior by the extremely arrogant prosecutor which caused me to call him ridiculous. It was the way in which he questioned minor decisions Rittenhouse had taken during the incident implying that they showed this or that malicious intention even when that was clearly not the case. A prosecutor should not behave like a child playing gotcha.

I may well be, as the defense implied, that Binger tried to provoke a mistrial. His chances to win the case are by now practically zero.

The videos prove that Rittenhouse was under attack when he fired his gun. The man who had been wounded in the incident, and who was the prosecution's main witness, admitted under cross examination that he had pointed his handgun at Rittenhouse before Rittenhouse aimed and fired at him.

A clear act of self defense:

In an account largely corroborated by video and the prosecution’s own witnesses, Rittenhouse said that the first man cornered him and put his hand on the barrel of Rittenhouse's rifle, the second man hit him with a skateboard, and the third man came at him with a gun of his own.

Rittenhouse said he “didn't want to have to shoot” Joseph Rosenbaum, the first man to fall that night, but he said Rosenbaum was chasing him and had threatened to kill him earlier.

“If I would have let Mr. Rosenbaum take my firearm from me, he would have used it and killed me with it," he said, "and probably killed more people.”

But Rittenhouse also acknowledged that the strap holding his gun was in place and that he had both hands on the weapon. And Binger suggested that Rosenbaum might have been trying to bat the rifle away.

Rittenhouse testified that he then shot and killed protester Anthony Huber after Huber struck him in the neck with his skateboard and grabbed his gun. Then he wounded Gaige Grosskreutz, saying the protester had lunged at him “with his pistol pointed directly at my head.”

The trial thus confirmed my August 2020 analysis:

The teen was arrested and he is facing charges but I doubt that he is guilty of more than sheer stupidity and manslaughter in self defense.

Some prominent voices are agreeing with me:

Tulsi Gabbard @TulsiGabbard – 0:01 UTC · Nov 11, 2021

The prosecutor in the Rittenhouse trial clearly didn’t do due diligence before making the decision to prosecute. This tragedy never would have happened if the government carried out its responsibilities to protect the safety, lives and property of innocent people.

Glenn Greenwald @ggreenwald – 19:29 UTC · Nov 10, 2021

I never commented on the Rittenhouse case until I started watching large chunks of the trial, and all I can say is that anyone who has done the same and denies that there's a huge gap between the media narrative about this and what actually happened is not telling the truth.

Greenwald also points to this video report by rising which includes video clips from the trial, including the prosecutor witness admitting that he pointed his gun first.

Rittenhouse is not on trial for bad judgment or offensive behavior. He is on trial under murder charges and will likely be acquitted of them. That will of course cause outrage by the usual suspects.

Michael Tracey @mtracey – 11:38 UTC · Nov 11, 2021

Even if the prosecution fails to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he committed the crimes alleged? Telling statement from the chairman of the House Democratic Caucus

Hakeem Jeffries @hakeemjeffries – 21:30 UTC · Nov 10, 2021
Lock up Kyle Rittenhouse and throw away the key.

Jeffries' hypocrisy stinks to high heaven. See this June 2020 tweet by him.

Hakeem Jeffries @hakeemjeffries – 16:17 UTC · Jun 29, 2020

End. Mass. Incarceration.
Defund The Prison Industrial Complex.

The riots in Kenosha were part of the Democrats strategy of tension campaign aimed at increasing the turnout of 'progressive' democrat voters. 'Black life matters', 'abolish the police' and the riots and looting were all part of it. It was what I had earlier sarcastically called the Civil War of 2020. 

Begun The Civil Wars Of 2020 Have

The campaign had the obvious but unintended effect of also increasing the turnout of republican voters for Donald Trump's law and order policies. The campaign was not successful. In the end Joe Biden barely won by some 60,000 votes in three swing states.

With Russiagate exposed as fraud, Rittenhouse getting acquitted and with many of the Democrats campaign promises unfulfilled a majority of midterm voters may well conclude that the Democrats are crooks who do not deserve their vote.

Comments

@ChasMark #22
“That’s not what US legal system was supposed to be about.”
Tell that to Steven Donziger.

Posted by: fnord | Nov 11 2021 22:33 utc | 101

The kid is clearly a guilty murderer. The video shows that the battle lines were already clearly drawn and he was safe on his side of the battlefield. He then made an incursion into enemy territory on his own initiative (and, apparently, under instructions of two adults), with the clear intent either to play Saving Private Ryan (which, in a non-war scenario, is equal to intent of murder, as those kind of missions are sure to involve killing) or with the simple intent to freely kill under a made-up alibi. The fact that one of the survivors pointed a gun to him is irrelevant, as he killed other people. He behaved like if he was in a war, when it was not; he played make-believe.
Those guilty of “murder” are the DNAC know knowingly let loose gangs of thugs to terrorize innocents who disagreed with them gaining power….
I worked and lived in Kenosha…. The terrorists turned that quiet lakeside community into a hell hole…
I think the judge is showing restraint… Were I the judge, i’d fine the prosecutor SOB till the cows come home… and buy the tar and feathers to cover him..
You are full of CRAP!
INDY

Posted by: George W Oprisko | Nov 11 2021 22:34 utc | 102

@Patroklos | Nov 11 2021 20:45 utc | 67 quote –
“Since the real looting takes place on a completely different level why do we give a shit about… (this) ? ” exactly.. meanwhile wall st, etc. carry on out of the limelight..
@ william gruff…. i’m reminded of a drunk who can’t stay away from the bottle… if you could communicate without using the word ‘woke’ while constantly pointing figures at others in your commentary, it would be a nice relief… i notice your attachment to framing things in black and white terms, working to polarize the comments section… maybe you could lay off the ”bottle” and give us a break from this addictive habit?? it would be nice!

Posted by: james | Nov 11 2021 22:41 utc | 103

@Erelis #23
“AntiFa has been outside the court house filming the jurors.”
Oh, were they wearing name tags and uniforms? Perhaps you were there and checked their official antifa-issued ID cards?

Posted by: fnord | Nov 11 2021 22:46 utc | 104

fnord @97
Wisconsin is not one of the very few states that requires gun registration.
In the current session the Supreme Court seems likely to emphasize/clarify the individual right to bear arms established by D.C. vs Heller.
Wisconsin does require concealed carry permits. Grosskreutz’s had expired so he was carrying illegally.

Posted by: Lefty665 | Nov 11 2021 22:48 utc | 105

Sad that so many on this thread are cleaving to the “mostly peaceful” nonsense put out by the mainstream media.
While I do not agree with b on everything, the main reason I spend time on MoA is that he is reasonable and unswayed by either MSM or popular opinion.
These lame attempts by drive-by commenters to try and oppose a sober analysis of the situation through rhetoric do nothing.
Anti-gun agenda: this would have never happened if he didn’t have a gun. Perhaps but irrelevant. Guns are legal, lots of people support that, deal with it.
What anti-gun morons don’t seem to understand is that guns equalize terms between people. A woman, a teen, almost anyone can use a gun. Without guns, strength dominates.
Oh but the law protects us, these idiots will say. The same law permitting the riots and arson last summer?
We are all supposed to be equal under the law, but somehow this has morphed to only those “worthy” are protected by the law even as those who enforce the laws are demonized.
What an amazing pack of morons.

Posted by: c1ue | Nov 11 2021 22:52 utc | 106

@William Gruff @32
If you show up in our neighborhood armed with a semi-automatic rifle we’re going to fuck you up.

Posted by: fnord | Nov 11 2021 22:54 utc | 107

In cities that have “defunded” the police or have experienced labor shortages due to mass retirement of officers the crime rate has shot up.
In those cities, private security firms are taking over and raking in record profits.
The American Police Force is one of the last socialist aspects of American Society, and now that too is being privatized.
Seems intentional and driven by the fascist right wingers who call themselves Democrats….not to be confused with the fascist right wingers who call themselves Republicans.

Posted by: ArthurDent | Nov 11 2021 22:57 utc | 108

@Lefty665 #106
I fail to see how your point addresses my comment.

Posted by: fnord | Nov 11 2021 22:59 utc | 109

@Z #40
You’re the one calling them “antifa”.

Posted by: fnord | Nov 11 2021 23:05 utc | 110

@figleaf23 #49
If you come to our neighborhood armed with a semi-automatic rifle we’re going to fuck you up.

Posted by: fnord | Nov 11 2021 23:11 utc | 111

@Cadence Calls #54
Who the fuck are you to decide how citizens fed up with state sanctioned murder, carried out with impunity, get to express that frustration? Let’s deal with state sanctioned murder before we pass judgement on the victims of state-violence.

Posted by: fnord | Nov 11 2021 23:20 utc | 112

@Tom_Q_Collins #57
Apparently, it was normal for him to bring a rifle to work. I mean, don’t we all do that?

Posted by: fnord | Nov 11 2021 23:23 utc | 113

@fnord #many
It is 100% clear that none of the people in this incident were “from” that neighborhood.
Your comment is meaningless.
Nor am I impressed by your “fuck you up” comment.
Idle posturing.

Posted by: c1ue | Nov 11 2021 23:24 utc | 114

dumb me didn’t put any text after the closing ….sigh

Posted by: psychohistorian | Nov 11 2021 23:27 utc | 115

Two of three victims, or whatever you wish to call them, are Jewish. Huber is arguably Jewish although he could also be German. German would make sense in Kenosha. Two of three or three of three does not make sense in Kenosha at all. And while those filthy New Left hippies rioting fifty odd years ago were heavily Jewish, and Jewish people do indulge in street actions with guns in Israel, Jews are just not who runs around with guns in Kenosha. This is all play acting. A show.

Posted by: Oldhippie | Nov 11 2021 23:27 utc | 116

Posted by: ArthurDent | Nov 11 2021 22:57 utc | 109
The crime (and murder) rates were already doing up due to the pandemic even in cities where nothing was defunded. Besides it’s way too soon to tell given the lack of available data as to whether short term or temporary reduced staffing levels in PDs is a causative factor in the rise in crime. I do notice that people keep overlooking the amount and prevalence of guns and gun violence. Hmm….a record number of firearms were sold in 2020 and probably 2021 as well. Many states removed any kind of licensing requirements or training to carry a concealed weapon as well.

Posted by: Tom_Q_Collins | Nov 11 2021 23:29 utc | 117

@ Gazza I think you are the only person i have heard make the ludicrous claim he killed them because they had criminal records. Both were convicted child rapists who should not be in the vicinity of minors, let alone attacking them as they were registered sex offenders. He killed them as they were attacking him, as the videos clearly show, and as their star witness testified too, even testifying he told the guy bludgeoning kyle with a skateboard to stop. Your argument is intellectually dishonest, and whats referred to as a strawman.

Posted by: RC213V | Nov 11 2021 23:30 utc | 118

I frankly have better things to worry about than crackpot-on-crackpot violence. But I’ll say this: the same people who screamed about the police murdering black people who may or may not have had a criminal record, and the same people justifying the murder on the basis of the criminal record, had better apply the same principles while shrieking about Rittenhouse and his victims.

Posted by: Biswapriya Purkayast | Nov 11 2021 23:31 utc | 119

If Rittenhouse had been black this would have been an open and shut case.
He would not have lived to make the trial.

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Nov 11 2021 23:44 utc | 120

I’m astonished at the vitriol and victim blaming in these comments, directed at the then 17 year old child, Kyle Rittenhouse. Anyone who has followed the trial (including the video evidence clearly showing he acted purely in self-defence and demonstrated enormous restraint) with any objective viewpoint draws this conclusion. Yes, he demonstrated poor judgment, but these charges should never have been laid in the first place. This is a political prosecution, and it was patently obvious even at the outset of the trial, during testimony of the prosecution’s own witnesses, that the charges were improper.
Shame on you who are blaming young Mr. Rittenhouse. Your comments belie a serious ignorance of the facts in the case, and suggest you’ve been too lazy to look for yourself. Instead of reading the media nonsense, simply watch. the. trial.

Posted by: AngusinCanada | Nov 11 2021 23:45 utc | 121

Cadence Calls @ 54
If the cops had done their fucking job, we wouldn’t be talking about this.
Looters, arsonists, and rioters aren’t protestors. They are criminals.
Arrest them. Let the people gathering and protesting in a legal manner do their thing.
Instead, the cops stood behind a line and let the criminals burn the town.
Disgraceful
Yes, i agree Rittenhouse stood up .. and because the city failed to do their job, Rittenhouse found himself involved..what matters his mens res. Good for him, its like the old west.. none of the players belonged on the street..none were innocent, the city was the guilty party. So to me it was like a situation in which the cop kills an innocent bystander in a cop-crook shoot out, once there, the defender is faced with but split seconds to take out any competition to personal safety no matter how remote.. . this reasoning puts Rittenhouse standing in the unprepared, unlicensed, unauthorized Doc Holiday place, somebody needed to stand up.. and no innocent parties were injured. they all assumed the risk. so the boy should be excused. had an innocent party been injured then excuse would be out of the question?
ChasMark @ 22.. IMO the more interesting trial is the one taking place in Charlottesville. <=agree.. this trial exposes the inner workings of the political control system .. yesterday i posted this link. which suggest Biden adm intends to deprive people .. for various things.. Treasury Department Nominee Says Biden Administration Purposefully Wants to Bankrupt Oil, Coal and Gas Companies Nov. 10, 2021..
the covid 19 scam was depriving small business and putting mom and pop out in the street…

Posted by: snake | Nov 11 2021 23:50 utc | 122

Posted by: AngusinCanada | Nov 11 2021 23:45 utc | 125
Sorry, but Rittenhouse was not in legal possession of the firearm and he was violating the same curfew as the protestors, looters and rioters. It’s not a political trial other than how the judge has made it one. FWIW, I just read that the judge made some anti-asian (food) comment in closing today. Unsure what the context is.
If you want to see political trials look to Julian Assange, Steven Donziger and Jessica Reznicek. They are *never* framed as such, but that’s exactly what they are.

Posted by: Tom_Q_Collins | Nov 11 2021 23:56 utc | 123

Sure fnord @108.
Remind me again who got “fucked up” in the instance that is the topic of this thread?
You “woke” phuque-knuckles really need to think a bit more deeply upon who your enemies really are and who your allies could be if you only stopped being moronic asshats.
If you cannot manage that then my advice to you is seriously to avoid armed conflict with the “deplorables”. That cannot end well for you.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 0:00 utc | 124

Arch Bungle @124
Nonsense! A Black guy caught on multiple videos being chased down the street by a rampaging mob of white thugs screaming they were gonna kill him? In the current environment? Like Rittenhouse he would rightfully be considered a hero for shooting those assholes. I’d be arguing his case even louder!

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 0:05 utc | 125

David F @48

When I was a lad, I was lamenting the fact that I could not do something because it was illegal. My wiser, older companion said to me that I could quite literally do whatever the hell I pleased as long as I was willing to suffer the consequences of my actions

You are deeply confused. The entire legal issue regarding the deaths is whether or not Kyle Rittenhouse was acting in self-defense. Self-defense is a defence to charges of homicide. If Kyle killed them in self-defense, there are no “consequences of [his] action” that he needs to live with, at least in terms of the criminal law. And that is what is under discussion. Criminal liability for homicide. Which can be refuted by a defence of self-defence, construed in narrow legal terms. Crap like “he put himself in the situation nah nah nah” with your fingers in your ears doesn’t cut it in terms of analysis.

Posted by: Herr Ringbone | Nov 12 2021 0:07 utc | 126

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 0:05 utc | 129
Maybe if Ahmaud Arbery had been armed, we’d be seeing such a trial play out. Instead he ended up the dead one as in so many other instances.
Looks like the defense in that case is saying the quiet stuff out loud.
https://news.yahoo.com/defense-attorney-ahmaud-arbery-killing-205238182.html

Posted by: Tom_Q_Collins | Nov 12 2021 0:11 utc | 127

Inspired by this post, I sent and spent a few minutes reading this:
https://www.thenation.com/article/society/kyle-rittenhouse-judge/
…which accuses not just Rittenhouse but his judge of being white racists, and ends with a quote about being black in America, but somehow manages to not mention even once that not one of the three shot by Rittenhouse was black.

Posted by: Biswapriya Purkayast | Nov 12 2021 0:14 utc | 128

Posted by: Biswapriya Purkayast | Nov 12 2021 0:14 utc | 133
Allegedly Rittenhouse was, a few days prior, observing some looters or shoplifters exiting a CVS and commented to his friend that he wished he had his AR with him then because he’d open fire if he did. From what I understand, most of the people leaving the CVS were black. The judge did not allow the prosecution to enter this into evidence if I’m reading the stories correctly. But that may be where the accusations of racism stem from.

Posted by: Tom_Q_Collins | Nov 12 2021 0:19 utc | 129

vk@80
Self-defense has nothing to do with “authority”. What are you talking about? Another intelligent man willing to publicly throw out his intellect over a cause that hits him in the political and intellectual feels!

Posted by: Herr Ringbone | Nov 12 2021 0:21 utc | 130

As usual, the liberal men ignore what started this whole thing- a violent thug attacked one of his baby mamas, ignoring the restraining order she had on him, then tried to steal her car with her children in it. The cops were trying to stop him and he went for a knife, so they shot him, injuring him severely.
Then the antifa/BLM types who spent the year calling for “defund the police, we can police our own communities” started rioting, burning and looting.
After spending time cleaning graffiti and stopping (really!) a dumpster fire (at which point Rosenbaum threatened to kill him if he found him alone, it was his dumpster fire and he had plans for it, which involved burning down a gas station), Kyle went to guard a business from arsonists. He was attacked by the man who threatened him earlier, and he killed him and then ran for his life, while other criminals chased him.
Now the antifa/BLM types who call for community policing are calling for Kyle to be found guilty and thrown into a prison to be raped (but not by Rosenbaum, who has been removed from those opportunities). Because, you know, they care so much about prison reform, and they are so concerned about prison conditions in the USA.
VK is especially hilarious in his blatant hypocrisy.
Ignoring the bedrock of US jurisprudence, innocent until proven guilty, he proclaims the boy “guilty”, using military language to do so. And not two sentences later, tells us that it wasn’t war!
“The kid is clearly a guilty murderer. The video shows that the battle lines were already clearly drawn and he was safe on his side of the battlefield. He then made an incursion into enemy territory……He behaved like if he was in a war, when it was not”.
One wonders at the elasticity of the liberal mind.

Posted by: wagelaborer | Nov 12 2021 0:38 utc | 131

BP and Tom, accusations of “white supremacy” have nothing to do with the color of one’s skin.
They are an insult hurled at anyone who doesn’t meet liberal standards of group think and dogma.
Hence, the recent California election, in which a white man ran against a black man, and the black man was the one accused of “white supremacy”.
Even more recently, Dave Chapelle was accused of “white supremacy” for pointing out that men cannot be women.
And Nicki Minaj was accused of “white supremacy” for tweeting about a vaccine injury she knew about.
There are many other examples, but these are some of the most recent.
It’s how we roll here in the USA.

Posted by: wagelaborer | Nov 12 2021 0:45 utc | 132

This is laughable: the “lone survivor” “victim” admitted in court, under oath, that he was armed, had pointed the loaded gun at Rittenhouse and that Rittenhouse did not fire until after this.
MSM 0, b 1
Then the prosecutor: I have never seen such a feckless idiot. He is no doubt choking under the realization that his career is over. The man who failed to convict Rittenhouse; who clearly did not do even a minimum amount of homework (like why put up a witness who is going to kill your case?) and who instead chooses to go after basic non-self-incrimination rights and ex-post-facto behavior as evidence…this guy is clearly incompetent.
I also love how the last minute FBI video popped up.
So no, all these idiot commenters trying to push their agendas on police violence whatever – you are all on crack. This is entirely an MSM/Democrat party own goal. I particularly like how POTUS is calling an “innocent until proven guilty” minor, a white supremacist clearly based on zero evidence.
Lawsuits all around…

Posted by: c1ue | Nov 12 2021 0:49 utc | 133

Rosenbaum, the first thug that Rittenhouse shot, had been charged with eleven (11) counts of sexual assault (anal rape) of children between the ages of nine (9) and eleven (11).

A child shooting a child rapist that was assaulting him seems like perfect justice to me.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 0:49 utc | 134

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 0:30 utc | 137
There’s a lot behind that short statement. For one thing, I know that police shoot (and beat up and abuse) white guys too because I’ve been abused by police and had loaded (possibly chambered) guns held to my head not less than twice.
But the way I (and probably fnord) see it is that the very institution of policing in the USA stems from slavery and union/strike busting. For that reason, as you I’m sure are aware, cops have historically been particularly hard on Blacks because they were (and are) largely both poor and segregated or treated as less than equal by statute even in some places until the 1980s. That’s not deniable. Now, someone will surely argue that Blacks commit more crimes and more violent crimes, but when you adjust for income/poverty level and education, the statistics are about even. Hence while violence in the Black community of descendants from slavery is a cultural issue (and Black people will say this), the police have all too often turned otherwise non-violent encounters/events with Black people into violent ones. Again, often by statute or unspoken racism. It’s not a lie that even middle class and wealthy Blacks (see pro sports players) have a healthy fear of police that most white people don’t. It’s not even debatable. I could also go on and on about how way more Blacks are locked up for non-violent drug crimes by percentage and how the War on Drugs was intended to crush the anti-war left and keep Blacks “in their place” and that because so many Black males are incarcerated in this system, the cycle of poverty, violence and criminality is kept going. At some point you gotta look at it as intentional. It’s a known fact that Blacks are policed differently, charged differently, tried differently and given harsher sentences for the same (mostly non-violent drug) crimes than whites are. That kind of system will never hold and peace will be difficult to come by if it is perpetuated. Just see the “riots” from 2020.
But another angle that I don’t see addressed much is the “first they came for….but I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t…..” and here in 2021 you’re 100% correct. Cops kill too many white people and do so with impunity too. They are able to spy on us, deny us our constitutional rights and otherwise evade consequences based on the scheme set up initially to target blacks and hippies. The War on Drugs gave them many tools and much court precedent to abuse people and whites mostly sat idly by until those forces began more to turn on them. The War on Terror, well, I don’t even have to continue.
What really makes me laugh these days (used to irritate me) is that to some simple minded individuals, solely stating the facts and the history means that I’m some kind of apologist for criminals or a “bleeding heart liberal” or, worse still, “woke.”
The institutions of policing have also historically taken a circle the wagon approach to any attempts to hold them accountable or reform. Right wing judicial appointments at all levels of the state and federal court systems have enabled this. That’s also not hyperbole. Look at virtually any of the “qualified immunity” cases and it’s the Republican nominated judges letting cops off the hook and the Democrat nominated ones dissenting. It’s just the truth, and not an endorsement of the Democratic party in any way.

Posted by: Tom_Q_Collins | Nov 12 2021 0:53 utc | 135

So no, all these idiot commenters trying to push their agendas on police violence whatever – you are all on crack. This is entirely an MSM/Democrat party own goal. I particularly like how POTUS is calling an “innocent until proven guilty” minor, a white supremacist clearly based on zero evidence.
Lawsuits all around…
Posted by: c1ue | Nov 12 2021 0:49 utc | 141
This thread go to heck awfully fast. Gunz, who would have thought?
I think you are right about the Dems, they will have to shower us with more money to get re-elected now. Ha ha.

Posted by: Bemildred | Nov 12 2021 0:55 utc | 136

Posted by: wagelaborer | Nov 12 2021 0:45 utc | 140
Dave Chappelle wasn’t accused of white supremacy. He was accused of homophobia or transphobia. So that one deserves a strikethrough. In fact he’s very much anti-white supremacy and he used to talk about it quite a lot. Have you ever seen any of his routines or his old comedy show?
https://www.vulture.com/2016/02/on-chappelles-show-black-white-supremacist-skit.html
Even in the most recent event, the one where he allegedly made anti-trans comments, he railed for a good bit against white supremacy.

Posted by: Tom_Q_Collins | Nov 12 2021 0:55 utc | 137

I’m glad someone brought up Dave Chappelle. This was his 16 minute monologue on SNL last November, to the day.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Un_VvR_WqNs

Posted by: Tom_Q_Collins | Nov 12 2021 1:06 utc | 138

Tom_Q_Collins @143
Oh, I fully agree that police forces need to be replaced with local community militias. Once communities properly organize themselves then “professional” police should be disbanded.
Here’s the thing though, do you imagine those neighborhood militias will look more like Joseph Rosenbaum (the child rapist who got killed) or Kyle Rittenhouse? I would prefer the militia in my neighborhood be people more like Kyle than like psycho Joe the kiddy porker. Just sayin`.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 1:06 utc | 139

test
@William Gruff #147
Nope, wrong. The entire point of a professional police force is that it is much less likely to reflect local biases than a community “policing itself”.
If an HOA board can go really bad, why does anyone think the far greater power of policing would be any better? Or let’s say an executive or leader in the community police force is the criminal – are they really going to prosecute themselves? This is ignoring the conflict of interest inherent in a community policing itself.
“Community policing” is nothing more than a euphemism for vigilante justice and is based on no principle, whatsoever, backed by real world success.

Posted by: c1ue | Nov 12 2021 1:19 utc | 140

Sadly vk has some weird ideas about what really happened (showing some closet wokeness?) but here is a video (5:10) that shows most of the events that night. Note that the “red shirt bro” seen at 0:48 in the video is Rosenbaum.
It is getting tough to find videos that show this much of the event these days. Everything is carefully edited to not show Rosenbaum acting like a psycho and threatening people.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 1:25 utc | 141

“Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary”
Karl Marx
The irony being Rittenhouse protecting a working class neighborhood from bourgeoisie marauders. It wasn’t a fascist killing communists as some would claim, but a communist killing fascists.

Posted by: ArthurDent | Nov 12 2021 1:27 utc | 142

c1ue @148
Yeah, American society certainly needs to mature a little before community militias can work. I’m not denying that.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 1:29 utc | 143

@William Gruff #83
If you come to my neighborhood brandishing a loaded weapon we’re going to whoop your ass.

Posted by: fnord | Nov 12 2021 1:30 utc | 144

@ Posted by: Herr Ringbone | Nov 12 2021 0:21 utc | 136
Only one of the murders could be considered self defense (against the one with the handgun). The other guys (one with a skateboard, the other who tried to touch his gun) are not self defense.
Self defense is very hard to prove from a legal standpoint. It is not that loose concept most people here are thinking it is.
–//–
@ Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 1:25 utc | 149
Thing is Rosenbaum is just one of the many murders Rittenhouse committed.
–//–
@ Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 0:49 utc | 142
Maybe, but that was not for Rittenhouse to decide, as per bourgeois law that is applied in the USA.
You have to work with the justice system that exists, not with the one you think should be.
–//–
@ Posted by: wagelaborer | Nov 12 2021 0:38 utc | 138
The ones who started the riots will face separate trials, for separate crimes.
There’s no concept of “historical context justice” in US Law. Otherwise, we could blame everything on the capitalist system on court and always be acquitted.
Again, there’s a difference between the justice system you think should exist and the justice system that actually exists.

Posted by: vk | Nov 12 2021 1:36 utc | 145

@fnord #131
Let’s say that all 1000 people killed by police every year, are all black and innocent. They are not, but I’ll use the whole number just for the sake of argument. Let’s scale that double to represent George Floyd situations to 2000. Terrible!
The problem is that the number of black people murdered in this country, by other black people is still higher.
FBI database on murder offenders and victims in the US in 2019
The above shows 2574 “Black or African American” murderers and 2298 “Black or African” murder victims.
So if you want to be afraid, be afraid of being a “Black or African American” around other “Black or African Americans”.
What is the actual number of “Black or African American” deaths due to police – shooting or otherwise in 2019? It is well under 50. The real number is almost certainly higher than the 8 or 13 claimed by some, but it is nowhere even close to 50.
So this fear of police is idiotic and misplaced.
Your “ass whooping” seems mostly to be directed at each other.
Nor is this just a dry analysis of data. I ride public transportation – I don’t know how many times a black man has attempted to bully me or someone else. I can remember more than 6 incidents just this year.
Note that I’m not a white either. But as a 240 lb man, I don’t take that garbage in person, much less online.
But what really is sad is that I’ve seen, twice in the past 6 months, a black man openly threaten a black woman with her child/children who asked him politely to put his mask on. Note that the city I live in requires all people to be masked on public transportation.
So yes, I am certain that there is unequal policing based on race. Some of it is legitimate – there is no question that the underprivileged commit more crimes per capita than the rich, and that some of it is racially biased. But as an over-represented minority in colleges, that shit can be fixed but not by legislation. Outlaw outright blatant discrimination, fine. The over-affirmative action BS going on today isn’t going to help anyone but a handful of grifters.

Posted by: c1ue | Nov 12 2021 1:52 utc | 146

@ Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 1:25 utc | 149
Just a disclaimer:
I’m not an American, therefore I cannot possibly be Woke. Woke are endemic to the USA.
Second, you’re all getting it twisted: I’m having a lot of fun in this thread. I consider this a relax thread, because the subject in it is small and insignificant.
Third, I think it is good for Americans to waste time killing themselves instead of killing the peoples of the rest of the world. The more the USA hesitates with its worldwide aggression because it has to reroute its resources to solve domestic problems, the better for Humanity.
I just think it is hilarious that people here are defending a clearly qualified murderer who should get death sentence or life at the minimum just because you think he’s some kind of reincarnation of the American spirit or some kind of American version of Jesus Christ. Some loser, obese and probably diabetic kid without future is the American Jesus Christ, how ironic is that?
You all pretend to be enlightened intellectuals here, only to come out of the closet as the same degenerate messianic shit that keeps mounting over the USA since the post-war.
–//–
@ Posted by: ArthurDent | Nov 12 2021 1:27 utc | 150
From the reports and the video, it looked like Rittenhouse was protecting the petty bourgeoisie (the small businesses from downtown and elsewhere) against the lumpenproletariat (the vagabonds, bandits, outlaws, do-nothing kids etc).
Hardly a revolutionary scenario.

Posted by: vk | Nov 12 2021 1:56 utc | 147

Joseph Rosenbaum’s last night alive (0:38) using “the N-word” and demanding the ad-hoc militia shoot him.
He got his wish.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 2:08 utc | 148

@149
Sorry to say, you come across as THE most arrogant and fucked up commenter at the bar, in regards to this topic.
You are so all over the place as regards justice in America, that you should just shut the fuck up about it.
With all do respect to your enormous intellect, you need a time out, as much as you think you don’t.

Posted by: Cadence Calls | Nov 12 2021 2:29 utc | 149

vk@136

Only one of the murders could be considered self defense (against the one with the handgun). The other guys (one with a skateboard, the other who tried to touch his gun) are not self defense.
Self defense is very hard to prove from a legal standpoint. It is not that loose concept most people here are thinking it is

This is just a bunch of assertions on your part. I don’t think you know anything about self-defence in common law systems. That said, neither do most of the people here, and they are native English speakers who don’t hail from South America.

Posted by: Herr Ringbone | Nov 12 2021 2:29 utc | 150

@ Posted by: Herr Ringbone | Nov 12 2021 2:29 utc | 161
The self defense argument is very easy to dismantle.
Just to give you an example:
1) do you live in Kenosha (Mr. Rittenhouse)? No.
2) do you have family in Kenosha? No.
3) do you work in Kenosha? Yes.
4) ok, that’s good. Were you working in your job at Kenosha at the moment of the riots? No.
5) oh, too bad. Then what were you doing in Kenosha that Sunday night? Some people in Kenosha telephoned my militia to help protect their property.
6) so you came to Kenosha as a militiaman? Well that means you’re a military target, or, alternatively, that you came to do a job whose intrinsic characteristics involve direct engagement with gun fight. Therefore, you cannot have been in self defense that specific Sunday night in Kenosha.
The kid is not from Kenosha. He doesn’t have property in Kenosha. He doesn’t have family (therefore, indirect property) in Kenosha. He dislocated to Kenosha that night specifically to work as a hired militiaman, an armed mercenary, therefore with the intent to kill and aware of the risk of being killed. That’s textbook not self defense.
The safest strategy for Rittenhouse’s defense no doubt is the 2nd Amendment. In this narrative, Mr. Rittenhouse was just a random guy enjoying his 2nd Amendment rights, doing tourism in Kenosha, when, suddenly, walking downtown, two people tried to disarm him (one with a skateboard strike, the other trying to grab his gun from him from the turret) and one person tried to outright kill him with a handgun. The three cases were then self defense, because being disarmed of your AR-15 certainly means death (this is some kind of circular argument, where the more dangerous the gun you carry, the more right of self defense you have, but here we are). Mr. Rittenhouse was never part of any militia and there was never any phone call to hire him as a militiaman/mercenary.

Posted by: vk | Nov 12 2021 2:42 utc | 151

vk @158
Sorry vk, but you are an academician, not a worker. You may be poor by first world standards, but you exist in that middle layer of Brazilian society that exists to perpetuate the status quo and protect capitalism. That layer may be thinner in Brazil than it is in advanced countries but it exists nonetheless. Everywhere that layer exists has the possibility of catching the wokeness disorder. Your bitterness about Rittenhouse’s probable acquittal is unmistakable and sounds a great deal like wokeness.
As for people in America killing each other, as measured per capita, you should try to understand that at the very top of the list, and by a very large margin, are Black Americans. Black Americans account for roughly half of the violent crime in the United States, and much of that crime targets other Black Americans. Pretending this reality isn’t so, like the “woke” do, cannot make it go away.
I recognize that violence in the American Black community is the result of generations of lumpenization, but that recognition on its own cannot make the violence go away either. The only thing that can cure it is revolution, and the Black community has no alternative but to team up with the “deplorables” for revolution to happen.
Like you I derive some schadenfreude joy from these foolish tools getting themselves killed. They should be presented, posthumously as is the custom, with the Darwin Award. Unlike you it doesn’t bother me that Rittenhouse wasn’t also killed and that he will be found innocent of murder. Would it bother me if he were killed? Probably not as much as it should. I’m American after all, and if we Americans are to be honest with ourselves we must acknowledge that our displays of outrage and sympathy over these events are nothing more than aping expected behavior and virtue signalling. The intensely competitive individualism of raw capitalist society has left its mark on Americans and the result is that real empathy is out of reach for most of the population. You need look no further than those in this forum raging for the Rittenhouse kid’s blood to see the proof of my words.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 3:03 utc | 152

vk@163
Utter rubbish. You’re just pulling stuff out of your nether regions here. None of what you said is of any relevance when considering the self-defence claim.
That is the most fanciful analysis I’ve ever heard anyone attempt.
You’re starting from principles that won’t even be considered at all. What matters is whether Rittenhouse was defending himself from attack, and whether the force he used was reasonable. That is the most basic starting point for any analysis at common law. Not whether Rittenhouse was supposed to be in Kenosha, or fanciful crap about militias. Unbelievable.

Posted by: Herr Ringbone | Nov 12 2021 3:05 utc | 153

In case anyone is interested this is the pertinent Wis Statutes:
939.48  Self-defense and defense of others.
(1)  A person is privileged to threaten or intentionally use force against another for the purpose of preventing or terminating what the person reasonably believes to be an unlawful interference with his or her person by such other person. The actor may intentionally use only such force or threat thereof as the actor reasonably believes is necessary to prevent or terminate the interference. The actor may not intentionally use force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm unless the actor reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself.
(2)(a) A person who engages in unlawful conduct of a type likely to provoke others to attack him or her and thereby does provoke an attack is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense against such attack, except when the attack which ensues is of a type causing the person engaging in the unlawful conduct to reasonably believe that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. In such a case, the person engaging in the unlawful conduct is privileged to act in self-defense, but the person is not privileged to resort to the use of force intended or likely to cause death to the person’s assailant unless the person reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm at the hands of his or her assailant.

Posted by: jinn | Nov 12 2021 3:06 utc | 154

They are going to let him “walk away” because they are going to find him innocent because the evident proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that he is innocent of murder and that he obviously shot in self-defense. All of these liberal test cases are always the opposite of what the media says they are. All of them.

Posted by: Techcumthai | Nov 12 2021 3:11 utc | 155

@ Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 3:03 utc | 164
??? All of Rittenhouse’s victims were white. This had nothing to do with violence against blacks.
–//–
@ Posted by: Herr Ringbone | Nov 12 2021 3:05 utc | 165
Read @ Posted by: jinn | Nov 12 2021 3:06 utc | 166 and get your answer.
Sincerely, I don’t think Rittenhouse’s defense will seek for self defense argument. Self defense is not license to kill many Americans think it is: every other possibility imaginable must be exhausted in order for a judge to consider it self defense.
The only case I know self defense is somewhat presumable is when a wife kills her confirmed abusive husband inside the place they live (because the husband controls all the resources of the household, dominates her psychologically and materially, and can go after her anywhere she flees to, and is a permanent threat to her life while in the same place, at the same time). But that’s an exceptional case, the exception to the rule.

Posted by: vk | Nov 12 2021 3:12 utc | 156

@ El 14 “The liberal media as an extension of the Democrat controlled security state …”
A couple of points:
First: corporate media is by no means “liberal”. It is largely controlled by the security state and has been for a very long time. This was exposed by the Church Committee Hearings in 1975. Carl Berstein has a good piece on the CIA and the media. Thus the NYT trumpeting (no pun intended) Russian election interference front page, above the fold, with “unnamed intelligence officals, citing secret documents”.
Second, the security state controls the Democrats, not the other way around.
Third, the security state controls the Republicans, too.

Posted by: Black Cloud | Nov 12 2021 3:18 utc | 157

VK @168
I’m sorry, but you read it. I’ve read it already. Obviously you haven’t read it carefully enough.
And as I tried to hint to you before, your intuitions based on Brasilian culture and law aren’t going to help you here.

Posted by: Herr Ringbone | Nov 12 2021 3:21 utc | 158

Well obviously Rittenhouse has a clear-cut defense in terms of self-defense. He was only seventeen years old. His attackers were obviously brutal pseudo-left fascists. Not to say he made a smart move in just going there.
This thread is deep in false flag trolls!

Posted by: blues | Nov 12 2021 3:21 utc | 159

Posted by: vk | Nov 12 2021 3:12 utc | 168
Sincerely, I don’t think Rittenhouse’s defense will seek for self defense argument.
_____________________________________________
It is the only possible defense and those are the statutes that define that defense in the jurisdiction where he is charged.

Posted by: jinn | Nov 12 2021 3:23 utc | 160

vk @163
The Rittenhouse kid’s father lives in Kenosha, so the kid does have family there and spends a significant amount of time there. The fact that he apparently typically sleeps at his mother’s house doesn’t mean that his father’s house is not also his home.
But that is really beside the point. The Rittenhouse kid had just as much right to be in Kenosha that night as anyone else did.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 3:28 utc | 161

Vk is losing this one.
He has zero clue how the law works in America.
The legal defense IS self defense.
That’s all there is.

Posted by: Cadence Calls | Nov 12 2021 3:40 utc | 162

vk @168: “Sincerely, I don’t think Rittenhouse’s defense will seek for self defense argument.”
Except that is precisely what they have already done. The trial is already practically over.
I admit I don’t know how things work in Brazil, but you are allowed to defend yourself in America even if you are not inside your own home. You are allowed to defend yourself pretty much no matter where you are.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 3:40 utc | 163

I wasn’t in Kenosha but I agree with b who wrote:
“Last Sunday police in Kenosha, Wisconsin proved to be too incompetent to arrest a man they had already had under control. They shot him 7 times into the back when he was trying to get into his car. Nights of rioting followed. Buildings were burned down and businesses were looted.Yesterday a white teen with a semi-automatic weapon had the stupid idea to join others in ‘protecting the businesses’ in Kenosha from further looting. He ended up killing two people and wounding more after he was attacked by some of the rioters. The teen was arrested and he is facing charges but I doubt that he is guilty of more than sheer stupidity and manslaughter in self defense.”
The police had the man under control and shot him in the back. This incompetence is also evident in Australia, here is a tragic and famous case of an innocent man shot dead by incompetent police, I knew his sister, she may never recover from her loss:
https://en.everybodywiki.com/David_Gundy
Following this incompetent policing the police failed to act to stop days of rioting and looting. Further incompetence is demonstrated by failing to act against a stupid vigilante armed with an AR15. It must have been obvious.
I blame the Wisconsin police.
Sometimes the police are too heavy handed and sometimes they are pathetic. In NZ police fail to act against criminals involved in property crime. I am told it is to save money. The word is out and the criminals know there will be no investigation or consequences so they can do as they please. except to banks, big business and insurance companies.
Impunity has effectively been granted to crooks. This increases the crime problem.
In NSW the armed hold up squad did armed hold ups and murders, the drug squad imported and distributed drugs for years.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evyma3PspLw

Posted by: Paul | Nov 12 2021 3:40 utc | 164

Posted by: Cadence Calls | Nov 12 2021 3:40 utc | 175; Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 3:40 utc | 176
Read my comment again. The “self defense” argument only makes sense in a 2nd Amendment framework – which is exactly what the prosecution used:
Explainer: Could jury weigh lesser charges for Kyle Rittenhouse?

Binger spent the first seven days of Rittenhouse’s trial trying to portray him as a wide-eyed, inexperienced kid who shouldn’t have been on the streets that night and who overreacted when he fired.

I.e. not a militiaman. The prosecutor fell for the defense’s trap. Good for them – it’s not Rittenhouse’s problem if the prosecution fucks up.
It’s interesting to see how the spirit of the new interpretation of the 2nd Amendment is strong in the USA. The kids comes to a foreign city with an AR-15 and it is not strange at all.

Posted by: vk | Nov 12 2021 3:58 utc | 165

@ Posted by: blues | Nov 12 2021 3:21 utc | 171
It means absolutely nothing. The prosecution could simply ask: how did you know they were “brutal pseudo-left fascists”? Were they carrying a flag? Were they wearing a uniform? Could you see them clearly in the dark of the night? Do you have some kind of gaydar?
It would be an even more ridiculous line of defense if he claimed that.
–//–
@ Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 3:28 utc | 173
He had the right to be there. But between the right to come and go and self defense there’s a good distance. The people he killed also had the right to be there, after all.

Posted by: vk | Nov 12 2021 4:10 utc | 166

vk @178
From the article that you linked:

Rittenhouse testified that he fired in self-defense after the three men attacked him. If jurors find that he sincerely believed his life was in danger when he pulled the trigger and any reasonable person in his situation needed to use deadly force, they must acquit him of the most serious charges.

And:

Daniel Adams, a former Milwaukee County assistant district attorney who isn’t involved in the trial, described Binger’s [the prosecutor] case as “incredibly underwhelming.”
“He’s got nothing,” Adams said. “I just don’t understand it. What are we doing here? We’re all kind of scratching our heads.”

I really don’t understand the point you are trying to make vk. The article that you linked very clearly states that the defense is arguing that Rittenhouse acted in self defense, and the commentary in the article suggests that the defense has a very strong case. Indeed, they are saying that they don’t see the prosecution as having any case at all. How are you getting this all backwards?

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 4:13 utc | 167

@vk #178
You have no idea what you are talking about: neither about US federal nor Wisconsin state law.
It is abundantly clear that you also do not have any actual experience with criminal prosecution cases.
I have laid out, in detail, only a few of the enormous mistakes the prosecutors have made. They are of such magnitude as to question the competence of the state prosecutor.
It is a valid statement to say that prosecutors get away with overstepping the boundaries all the time, but there is a time and a place for it. In particular, if the defense is nonexistent or a sad sack state provided attorney, they can and will get away with it.
But it isn’t the case here. This trial is heavily scrutinized and the Democrat political establishment has built at least a hill, if not a mountain, to die on here.
And they’re in the process of dying on it.
The proposition of self defense is very simple:
if you feel you are going to suffer severe bodily harm, you have the right to defend yourself. This isn’t true everywhere in the world, but it is true for the vast majority of the United States including Wisconsin.
The fact that the 3rd “victim” admitted that he pointed a loaded gun at Rittenhouse, and that Rittenhouse did not fire until after that point, makes it abundantly clear that Rittenhouse was not going around looking to shoot someone.
It makes it abundantly clear the the initiation of violence was by the shooting “victims”.
It shows clearly that Rittenhouse was already physically threatened with severe bodily injury or death.
There can be no judicial outcome but acquittal of murder charges although misdemeanor possession of a firearm is going to stick, but the various scumbag Democrat politicians, media and what not will do their best to skew the results as a victory nonetheless.
The filming of jurors is flat out intimidation that should be stopped with arrests were it not for the fact that the Democrat establishment in power has given implicit carte blanche to thugs, from the POTUS on down.
This entire incident is shameful and an indication of just how corrupt the entire Democrat establishment and the mainstream media is – not that this is a secret to anyone at this point. They have jumped the shark, crossed the Rubicon, you name it. I fully expect the blowback from this to be severe – beyond what was already going to happen in the 2022 elections due to inflation etc.
The stark juxtaposition of the facts vs what has been trumpeted for a year now is reinforcement of the already powerful meme that the Democrats will do anything, say anything to get their way including flat out lies.
Sad to say, Russiagate was mere exaggeration compared to what is going on with Rittenhouse.

Posted by: c1ue | Nov 12 2021 4:18 utc | 168

@ Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 4:13 utc | 180
If you’re going to cherry pick from the article, let me do the same:

Adams said Binger will “100%” ask Schroeder to include lesser charges in the jury instructions, most likely second-degree versions of the homicide and endangerment counts.
Second-degree homicide charges could apply if jurors determined that Rittenhouse sincerely believed his life was in danger but used an unreasonable amount of force, University of Wisconsin-Madison criminal law professor Cecelia Klingele said. Second-degree reckless endangerment could apply if jurors found that he put someone in harm’s way but did so without showing utter disregard for human life, she said.
Second-degree intentional homicide carries a maximum 60 years in prison. The maximum sentence for second-degree attempted intentional homicide is 30 years. Second-degree reckless endangerment, meanwhile, carries a maximum prison term of 10 years.
[…]
A life sentence wouldn’t be an option if prosecutors sought convictions on lesser charges, but they would give jurors the flexibility to convict him of something, said Adams.
“It gives the jury negotiation room,” he said. “They think something bad happened but they’re not convinced the level of force was necessary. And that gives prosecutors two kicks at the cat.”

Posted by: vk | Nov 12 2021 4:20 utc | 169

I think showing up at a protest with an assault rifle is very threatening. There is more to this story then its ending where 3 men assault Rittenhouse, perhaps trying to disarm him. What was the general context? Maybe Rittenhouse was a victim, but you can’t tell just from the fight at the very end, which may have been the result of an attempt to disarm the teen by people who felt he might shoot them. The entire situation needs to be laid out.
If the lead prosecutor is botching up the trial, then that means the trial is of limited value for evaluating Rittenhouse’s guilt, and perhaps using this trial amounts to a straw man argument.

Posted by: Edward | Nov 12 2021 4:22 utc | 170

vk @179: “The people he killed also had the right to be there, after all.”
They sure did, but they didn’t have the right to attack the kid. Even if the adults who attacked Rittenhouse were also kids they still wouldn’t have the right to attack him.
And here is the thing: It is already established that these three men attacked the kid. It is all on video. The defense doesn’t have to prove that YOU thought Rittenhouse’s life might be in danger, they just have to prove that Rittenhouse believed his life was in danger.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 4:23 utc | 171

Edward @183
I’ve linked video above. The first guy to get shot (Rosenbaum, the multiple child rapist) is seen clearly threatening Rittenhouse. The guy (Rosenbaum) is clearly deranged and a danger. Multiple witnesses report that he threatened to kill Rittenhouse. Video later shows him chasing Rittenhouse.
There is tons of video showing the lead-up to Rosenbaum chasing Rittenhouse, but it is buried very deeply in the search results (gee, I wonder why?). Rosenbaum was very obviously the aggressor.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 4:32 utc | 172

Edward @183
I should clarify that multiple witnesses testified in court that Rosenbaum threatened to kill Rittenhouse.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 4:34 utc | 173

@ K 99
It was a semi-automatic weapon, not automatic.
Destruction of property is not what makes Rittenhouse innocent. He was defending his own life.

Posted by: figleaf23 | Nov 12 2021 4:35 utc | 174

This is sure an unusual discussion for MOA. Though from the USA, I am mostly concerned with anti-imperialism. The ideal would be for the so-called “left” and so-called “right” to unite against the 0.0001% who have been calling all the shots since the emergence of the imperialist security state after 1945. What this discussion shows is there is no hope for that at all, because it is so easy for the elite to exploit and exacerbate already existing differences among us. Unfortunately, from the tone of this discussion, it seems far more likely that a civil war will break out in the US. That will finish off the imperialism, true, but at what a cost! The corrupt empire cannot deserve any defense when it is itself primarily responsible for the mess, but I cannot see supporting either party to such a conflict either. As usual, no one agrees.

Posted by: Cabe | Nov 12 2021 4:44 utc | 175

vk@181
So what? All those charges still depend on reasonable use of force, or reasonable behavior on Rittenhouse’s part. Those charges won’t stick either.
Stop floundering about and retreat with grace. You started out too sure of yourself on this and waded right in. You got most of it wrong. It happens. It’s not the end of the world.

Posted by: Herr Ringbone | Nov 12 2021 4:45 utc | 176

@ Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 4:23 utc | 183
All the arguments you use to defend the actions of the kid can be symmetrically used to defend his victims.
After all, he was walking with an AR-15. He was a threat to the others. It could be equally claimed they tried to disarm him to save other people’s lives.
He probably will get away with Rosenbaum because he didn’t die and admitted to have threatened on his life, but it is a twisted justice system that which allows one to kill someone with a skateboard. By that logic, I’m allowed to mow down football fans rioting in my neighborhood after a Europa League game with a semi-automatic gun – I feel threatened after all.

Posted by: vk | Nov 12 2021 4:46 utc | 177

vk @173
Sure, the prosecution is moving the goalposts. That means they don’t have a case. Maybe when they are done moving those goalposts around they can convict on a parking violation or something.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 4:46 utc | 178

I’d rather have Kyle defending my family, than vk.
Kyle would shoot.
Vk would extrapolate all kinds of bullshit while my family was murdered.
You are on the wrong path with this one, vk.

Posted by: Cadence calls | Nov 12 2021 4:51 utc | 179

=> vk | Nov 12 2021 4:10 utc | 170
Are you suffering from brain damage?
They were clearly attacking him with very potentially lethal force.
So he shot them. You would too.

Posted by: blues | Nov 12 2021 4:52 utc | 180

Excellent analysis as always

Posted by: Brad | Nov 12 2021 4:52 utc | 181

me at 179
whoops, meant vk@172 … apologies

Posted by: Herr Ringbone | Nov 12 2021 4:52 utc | 182

@ Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 4:46 utc | 181
The prosecutor immediately came up with multiple charges against Rittenhouse. According to one of the experts from the linked article, it was a mistake by the prosecutor, because there’s no focus. The crime is so multifaceted that it is hard to precise the just qualification for it, and there’s a jury to be convinced, so you never know.
Those regional prosecutors are like gods in America. For him, this is just fun and a cheap opportunity to climb the political ladder inside the Democratic Party. He clearly didn’t prepare for the trial, it’s all just a game for him.
Biden doesn’t give a fuck about this trial. He probably doesn’t even know who this Rittenhouse kid is. He has much greater issues to occupy with.
It is only the alt-right that thinks Rittenhouse represents the American Lucretia. They believe his acquaintance will somehow open a golden era, where they will be allowed to freely murder (alleged) communists in the public. They are for a rude awakening, no pun intended.

Posted by: vk | Nov 12 2021 4:56 utc | 183

@ Posted by: blues | Nov 12 2021 4:52 utc | 182
Maybe. He had a fucking AR-15, after all, therefore he could kill anybody in their radius at any time.
Read my comment @ 179.

Posted by: vk | Nov 12 2021 4:57 utc | 184

=> vk | Nov 12 2021 4:57 utc | 186
Aim a pistol at somebody with a powerful rifle?
What do you expect?
A Darwin Award. For sure.
Let’s get real.

Posted by: blues | Nov 12 2021 5:03 utc | 185

vk @180: “By that logic, I’m allowed to mow down football fans rioting in my neighborhood after a Europa League game with a semi-automatic gun…”
Indeed you are! You just have to demonstrate that you had reason to believe your life was in danger. The numerous videos of the attacks on Rittenhouse support his claim that he felt his life was in danger. If the jury believes Rittenhouse’s claims that he believed his life was in danger then he will be acquitted of the homicide charges. It is pretty simple, actually.
By the way, feeling your life is in danger just from seeing a gun is kinda a woke snowflake meltdown sort of reaction. Feeling your life is in danger because a mob is chasing you is likely to be seen as a little more realistic threat to the jury.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 5:04 utc | 186

@ Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 5:04 utc | 187
Except it is not. A gun is specifically projected to kill people, the most efficient and easiest way possible. It is not an imaginary threat.
Being feeling for your life for a skateboard, on the other side, is, as you say it, is “kinda a woke snowflake meltdown sort of reaction”.

Posted by: vk | Nov 12 2021 5:09 utc | 187

vk @184: “They believe his acquaintance will somehow open a golden era, where they will be allowed to freely murder (alleged) communists in the public.”
Jeesh, vk! Chill out with the hysteria! That’s some alarmist overreaction that is going way off into ridiculous extremes. As I am an American and a “communist” why don’t you let me worry about if my neighbors want to murder me in public or not, OK?

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 5:16 utc | 188

vk@188
The guy tried to brain Rittenhouse with the skateboard. That’s how the self-defense claim arises. Not because “Oh dear, a skateboard! Can’t stand those things.”
Do you really think any legal system would entertain a self-defence claim on skateboards qua skateboards?

Posted by: Herr Ringbone | Nov 12 2021 5:19 utc | 189

vk @188
It was the mob that was the threat, not necessarily the skateboard, though I’m sure a moderately healthy young man could kill you with a skateboard without the help of a mob if he tried.
As for the gun, yes, it is an imaginary threat. Who was killed in Kenosha on August 25, 2020? 100% of the people killed were people who attacked the Rittenhouse kid. The thousands of people in Kenosha who did not attack the Rittenhouse kid were not killed. If the Rittenhouse kid was a crazed killer then he was an unusually restrained one.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 5:25 utc | 190

Bringing guns to demonstrations, even fake ones, always ends in tears.

Posted by: Carol Davidek | Nov 12 2021 5:26 utc | 191

I’m with cabe @176 – the kid was stupid to have gone there. and with an AR15? stupid. I guess… testestrone? Mine has long since waned. It’s all boring and depressing theater. we’re all being played. sad, boring and stupid. he should have stayed home and watched Adult Swim.

Posted by: lex talionis | Nov 12 2021 5:27 utc | 192

@ Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 5:25 utc | 191
A mob into which he entered voluntarily, as the video shows.
And the fact is the skateboard hit didn’t kill him. It didn’t even come close. He had time to get up, react and pull the trigger. He saw he shot a person with a skateboard. That’s certainly not self defense.
If you enter into a mob and only you has an AR-15, you are there to kill and not be killed, that’s for certain (and indeed what happened).

Posted by: vk | Nov 12 2021 5:30 utc | 193

@c1ue #115
“It is 100% clear that none of the people in this incident were “from” that neighborhood.
Your comment is meaningless.”
Sorry, let me dumb it down for you: If you show up brandishing a loaded firearm you must expect violence to occur.
“Nor am I impressed by your “fuck you up” comment.
Idle posturing.”
I know every neighbor on my street. I assure you that if someone showed up brandishing a firearm they would not be welcome and would be dealt with. Surely they understand that they’re not the only one that can own a firearm.

Posted by: fnord | Nov 12 2021 5:31 utc | 194

This was simply and purely self-defense. And yet, people are outright calling it on 100% USDA Grade “A” political bias.
PATHETIC

Posted by: blues | Nov 12 2021 5:40 utc | 195

William Gruff #125
Wow! You’re in my head. Are you telepathic?
What’s a “woke” phuque-knuckle and how does it apply to me?
I own several firearms and if some “phuque-knuckle” showed up in my neighborhood brandishing a loaded weapon they might find out that other folks own weapons, too. I’ll dumb down my post for you. If you show up someplace brandishing a loaded weapon then you are obviously looking for violence. Rittenhouse found violence.

Posted by: fnord | Nov 12 2021 5:42 utc | 196

@ Cabe | Nov 12 2021 4:44 utc | 176.. alternatively it might be that we are only hearing from the hot heads here – especially the ones firing off multiple posts..

Posted by: james | Nov 12 2021 5:43 utc | 197

William Gruff #126
You don’t even know to whom you are responding. Put the “bottle” down.

Posted by: fnord | Nov 12 2021 5:44 utc | 198

fnord@197
The irony. So you’re the man with the gun, coming out to defend his “neighborhood”.
You don’t see that is how Rittenhouse was thinking? It’s OK for you, but not for him?
And don’t say “He didn’t live there”. Your ties to your neighbourhood are affective ties, not just based on postal district.

Posted by: Herr Ringbone | Nov 12 2021 5:48 utc | 199

The law called time out on itself and let the city burn.
What are you supposed to do?
I say, arm yourself and defend yourself, and others of like mindedness.
Fuck everything at that point. There is no law
IMO, the law doesn’t get retro active jurisdiction after it abdicated that responsibility.
Kyle shouldn’t even be a discussion.
When the law stands down, it’s game on.
Vk can argue all he wants. And when the law doesn’t stand anymore,
he’ll still be arguing while his daughters are raped,
his family slaughtered, and his home burned to the ground.
It’s called “Growaset”. Get some, like Kyle did.

Posted by: Cadence Calls | Nov 12 2021 5:48 utc | 200