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

Posted by: dh | Nov 14 2021 14:33 utc | 501
So it might be that Canadians may be much closer to their own Kenosha-type event than most of them would care to admit

Posted by: YourMom | Nov 14 2021 14:47 utc | 501

@ 502 Not for me to say. My feeling is that antifa and BLM are not as active in Canada as they are in the US.

Posted by: dh | Nov 14 2021 15:04 utc | 502

In this short 2 min video I found on Twitter some female presenter on some TV show called “The Young Turks” admits that based only on MSM narrative she was exposed to before the trial of Rittenhouse, she had no idea what were the true facts of the shooting of the first person shot by Rittenhouse.
She admits that her understanding of who was the persuer and who the persued, as presented to her by the MSM, was completely false…
https://mobile.twitter.com/JoeDanMedia/status/1458192925846872078
Furthermore she points out, quite rightly in my opinion, that “those facts matter”.

Posted by: YourMom | Nov 14 2021 15:05 utc | 503

Posted by: dh | Nov 14 2021 15:04 utc | 503
Probably only a matter of time then.
Though BLM might have a much harder time having their propaganda accepted without any scrutiny, given that they cannot plausibly use slavery as a means to guilt-trip Canadians in to just shutting up and accepting the BLM narrative.
Canadians as far as I know never had Black slavery in their historical record, and in fact acted as a place of safe sanctuary for Blacks escaping from slavery in the US.

Posted by: YourMom | Nov 14 2021 15:09 utc | 504

@ arby | Nov 14 2021 14:19 utc | 498
“Just a guess but I would wager that he was being attacked because he was an obvious very dangerous threat.”
Look at the videos. They were mad at KR because he just put out a fire in a garbage container the rioters had set on fire and were pushing towards the fuel station where KR and his companions were on guard. In the commotion that resulted from that event the rioters managed to separate KR from his group and made him have to flee to an other direction. They chased him threatening KR to the extend that he felt he had to defend himself.

Posted by: GoverntheMente | Nov 14 2021 15:24 utc | 505

@505 “Probably only a matter of time then.”
Not necessarily. Protests and riots are usually sparked off by some event…..like heavy handed police action for instance. They tend to flare up until the anger dissipates. How authorities deal with it depends on how the mainstream population reacts.

Posted by: dh | Nov 14 2021 15:33 utc | 506

Posted by: GoverntheMente | Nov 14 2021 15:24 utc | 506
As far as I can tell they were generally aggressive and seeking open confrontation with anyone not fully onboard with their ideology/behavior.
The twitter video I linked above is actually very useful. https://mobile.twitter.com/JoeDanMedia/status/1458192925846872078
There is a section where, bar Rittenhouse, all the major players in this event, are present and seemingly attempting to create as chaotic a confrontation as possible.
All willingly, and completely unnessecarily, placing themselves at the centre of a maelstrom they themselves were seeking to create.
In that short section we see:

  • Rosenbaum, behaving aggressively and screaming “shoot me” into the faces of surprisingly peaceful, but armed, individuals.
  • Huber, can be seen standing directly behind, and seemingly in support of, Rosebaum as he screams “shoot me”
  • Grosskreutz, passes across the lens briefly, again unnecessarily placing himself right at the center of the chaotic storm, to no productive end.
  • Joshua Zeminski, who later fired the first shot with no justification whatsoever, is also present. By the look on his face he is right where he wants to be, right at the center of the chaos, seemingly having a whale of a time for himself.

All the people I just mentioned are visible in that video clearly enjoying the confrontation with what are, as far as I can see, relatively calm (when compared to those opposing them) armed-individuals who appear to me to not be reacting in any unnessecairly aggressive fashion, despite the obvious aggressive behaviour they are being subjected to.
The absolute most charitable thing I could say about the presence and behavior of those persons I just named during an open confrontation of some armed but peaceful individuals, is that it was “extremely unwise”.
Not one of the above named individuals “needs” to be there.
They have all willingly placed themselves in the center of chaos, and appear to be seeking open confrontation with a number of armed but generally peaceful persons, merely for the trill of it, it seems.
Their presence there is completely unnessecary, and by the looks on their faces, their body language and their general demeanors, none of them appears to be making even the slightest attempt to try and deescalate or improve the atmosphere in any way. Not one of them seems to consider that their own behavior and presence might not be a good idea.

Posted by: YourMom | Nov 14 2021 16:06 utc | 507

re: 508
Keep in mind that during that unnessecarily aggressive encounter with the armed but relatively peaceful individuals, both Grosskreutz and Zeminski are themselves armed with dangerous and fully loaded weapons.
Zeminski is openly visibly armed, carrying a pistol in his hand, and Grosskreutz in contrast to those he is opposing, has illegally and rather unwisely hidden a fully loaded pistol in his waistband.

Posted by: YourMom | Nov 14 2021 16:17 utc | 508

Nobody has mentioned in this long train of commenting that the first guy the lad killed was just released from a psych hospital the day before. Apparently he was there after attempted suicide for a second time, and was bipolar. There were many mentions of his sexually exploitative conduct of 9-11 year-old boys as an eighteen year old person but no mention of the 10- year prison term he served for the crimes afaik. So a sick person hurts/damages children, probably for life, and ends up committing suicide by 17 year-old wannabe cop who himself suffered a difficult childhood with an alcoholic, abusive father.
Looks like a failed society where the insane asylum is also on the outside. Perhaps isolate the entire society until it regains some semblance of heath?

Posted by: suzan | Nov 14 2021 17:47 utc | 509

b—
You are an idiot on this one.
Brecht is horrified enough that you are using his title, but this has him rolling in his grave.

Posted by: Duncan Idaho | Nov 14 2021 17:58 utc | 510

@510
Because it was not allowed to be entered into evidence.
It came close, though, when the prosecutor started to ask a question to Rosenbaum’s girlfriend but was stopped on its tracks by the judge. Her testifying about Rosenbaum’s character would have opened the asking about: why did Rosenbaum went to the hospital (which was mentioned several times because of the see-through plastic bag), why Rosenbaum could not stay with the girlfriend and Rosenbaum’s convictions.
The judge saved the prosecution’s ass.

Posted by: JaimeInTexas | Nov 14 2021 23:24 utc | 511

The punk went to the show with a loaded weapon. Was he prepared to shoot and kill someone who was going to burn a trash can , smash some windows, steal some junk?
If he was not ready to kill someone , why was the weapon loaded?
OR , did he have a premonition that the protesters might take exception to this dick head and go after him in which case he would have to kill them?

Posted by: arby | Nov 15 2021 0:04 utc | 512

In self defence of course.

Posted by: arby | Nov 15 2021 0:06 utc | 513

Posted by: arby | Nov 15 2021 0:04 utc | 513
haven’t you posted that little rant of your’s about 3 or 4 times already in this thread?
It’s beginning to look like an obsessive compulsion…..

Posted by: YourMom | Nov 15 2021 0:34 utc | 514

Maybe it is. I don’t quite know why.
IMO he went there prepared to commit murder.
As it turned he did but not for the reason he imagined.
Premeditated murder.

Posted by: arby | Nov 15 2021 0:41 utc | 515

513
perhaps he thought that it would be unsafe to offer medical services and not be armed for his own protection, considering that a sizeable number of the rioters were themselves armed with deadly weapons and behaving extremely aggressively to anyone not fully on board with their plan for rioting and arson.
There are many reports detailing and photos depicting numerous armed rioters on the night in question
Of the 4 rioters named @508, 2 (50%) were armed with a deadly weapon, one of whom was openly waving around in a very reckless manner a loaded pistol which he later discharged in an equally reckless fashion, while the 2nd of those 2 armed with a deadly weapon rioters was illegally concealing a fullyloaded pistol in his waistband, which he later was seen to brandish in a threatening manner before being disabled through some rather nifty marksmanship imo

Posted by: YourMom | Nov 15 2021 0:48 utc | 516

B, please stick to commenting on subjects you know about and not expose your yawning ignorance on race relations
In the USA

Posted by: DougDiggler | Nov 15 2021 1:24 utc | 517

@514
Irrelevant.
No riots, no rioters.
No abandonment of property and owners by local authorities, no need for help by non-police.
No attack on Rittenhouse, no shooting.
I guess everyone would be happy had Rittenhouse lost control of his AR and shot dead.
If you are in favor of the rioters and arsonists, you are for conviction.

Posted by: JaimeInTexas | Nov 15 2021 2:53 utc | 518

@arby
Sounds to me like you might be a leftist agitator.
You wouldn’t happen to be on fantasy sharks, would you?
Mang?
(If you are, I’m glad Shane is dead)

Posted by: Cadence | Nov 15 2021 6:33 utc | 519

IMO he went there prepared to commit murder.
As it turned he did but not for the reason he imagined.
Premeditated murder.
Posted by: arby | Nov 15 2021 0:41 utc | 516
—-
While you are entitled to your own option, you are not entitled to your own facts.
And you sir have done nothing but ignore all relevant facts since your first post in this thread.
Clearly you have no interest in fact and are determined to just keep repetitively posting the same set of debunked nonsense over and over, as if suffering from some compulsive mental illness.

Posted by: YourMom | Nov 15 2021 9:02 utc | 520

Liberals Accuse Rittenhouse Of Trying To Avoid Punishment Through Legal Loophole Known As ‘Trial’
“This is very concerning,” said Chip Cordray, progressive legal expert covering the case. “Using this obscure loophole, Rittenhouse’s fate will be decided by an impartial jury of peers based on evidence, rather than the whims of noble communist revolutionaries on Twitter—such as Bette Midler and Joe Biden.”
Experts confirm that if Rittenhouse is found “not guilty,” liberals won’t be getting their way, which could lead to massive temper-tantrums, such as arson and looting.
“We can’t let this happen,” said Cordray. “It’s time to talk about closing the ‘trial’ loophole so that justice can be done according to the whims of the leftist mob, as our founding fathers intended.”

Posted by: YourMom | Nov 15 2021 9:15 utc | 521

Shitbag in the US shoots a few others for kicks, commentariat has a six-page brawl.
Is this some joke I’m too european to understand?
I’d have sworn that shooting each other for shits and giggles was a common pastime in eagleland.

Posted by: Misotheist | Nov 15 2021 10:38 utc | 522

arby @516: “IMO he went there…”
IMO = “in my opinion”
News to the “woke”: Your opinion is something that exists only in your own head. Your opinion has no physical manifestation in the real world. Your opinion does not overrule the real world. Your opinion does not trump reality. Most importantly, your opinion cannot be and should never be the basis of justice.
An example of when opinions were allowed to override reality in trials? The Salem Witch Trials. That’s where we are once again. Are we to convict people again for “attacks” the evidence for which only exists in people’s opinion? For which the evidence only exists in the supposed victims’ heads, that is?
“But he had a gun! Obviously he was an attacker!” = “But she has a black cat! Obviously she is a witch!”
That is literally how stupid and irrational your point is. I realize that it is difficult for you to see that at the moment because you are in the throes of mass hysteria, just like the people of Salem Massachusetts were when they were certain they were being attacked by witches. Still, it remains your own choice to continue to let your mind race around in an irrational loop that short circuits reason. “Yes, he was attacked by a mob that was present for violence, but….GUNS! Argh!”

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 15 2021 10:42 utc | 523

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 15 2021 10:42 utc | 524
As has been shown, repeatedly, not only did KR have a gun, so too did many of the rioters. Their motivations for carrying fully-loaded deadly weapons, while engaging in riotous looting and arson is ignored entirely in Arby’s repeatedly debunked fact free compulsively repetitive rants.
Arby is of course not interested in those facts. Arby in fact seems to have a strong aversion to fact, particularly the relevant ones
Facts don’t seem to figure large in, nor have any influence on, the distorted world view he carries around in his little head.

Posted by: YourMom | Nov 15 2021 10:53 utc | 524

YourMom @525
Arby has made intelligent posts before (not in this thread, of course!) so it is within his ability to recognize the logical errors he is making here. It is tough, even for smart people, to come to grips with the fact that they are not only wrong, but they have the whole issue backwards (victims were attackers and attackers were victims), and that is the position Arby finds himself.
As well I strongly suspect that Arby is a youngster from a very sheltered environment. Quite likely his parents never let him use sharp scissors (only the plastic kind with rounded tips) and he never owned a Boy Scout or other kind of pocket knife. Many young people today have grown up in an environment where all of the sharp edges and corners in the world are safely covered in padding and brightly identified with OSHA spec black and yellow hazard warning tape. They carry this sheltered attitude through to adulthood so when they see something that could be dangerous if mishandled they freak out. It isn’t just guns that get these people freaking out but the aforementioned Boy Scout knife or (the horror!) a chainsaw. Really, anything that has exposed dangerous bits that kids used to just learn to be respectful of and careful with will trigger panic in these sheltered kids.
It is probable that Arby cannot open a can of tuna. The can opener itself would likely get him quite tense.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 15 2021 11:33 utc | 525

I think you’re being a little to charitable in this instance.
Upthread I linked to a video of some of the events of that night, and demonstrated that there can be no doubt that rioters were themselves armed with fully loaded deadly weaponry.
Not once has Arby even acknowledged the existence of the video, let alone conceded that it does in fact show armed rioters. And not only that, it shows them attempting to escalate what could simply have been a relatively peaceful encounter into an extremely chaotic and dangerous confrontatation.
Therefore it is safe to conclude that Arby is willfully being extremely selective in his outrage.
He is deliberately ignoring relevant facts.
He is deliberately choosing to ignore completely the fact that the behaviour and motivations of the armed rioters was at least as questionable as any of Rittenhouse’s.
Prior to the attack on Rittenhouse which resulted in him having to defend himself with deadly force, from several of those very same chaos-seeking rioter looters and arsonists, his behavior would likely have been seen as a welcome protection by many if not most of the innocent law-abiding citizenry of Kenosha.
It might even be fair to say that even after the deadly-force events in question, many if not most of the innocent law-abiding citizenry of Kenosha would defend Rittenhouse’s use of deadly force in order defend himself again attack by armed and unarmed rioters looters and arsonists.
Not once has Arby questioned why the rioters choose to be armed.
Not once has Arby questioned their motivations for behaving in the riotous manner they are seen bahaving in the linked video.
Not even once has he admitted that the rioters posed any threat to wholly innocent law-abiding citizens of Kenosha.
That’s beyond mere “growing up in a sheltered environment”.
Unless his parents taught him to always promote dishonest narratives, its hard to see how any blame may lie with his parents.
That’s simply deliberate dishonesty on his part.
He has repeatedly deliberately chosen to lie by ommision and to lie by distortion.

Posted by: YourMom | Nov 15 2021 12:08 utc | 526

Ha ha ha,
Youse guys are correct. I can’t be bothered watching any of the videos and BS.
Deny the fact that he went there with the complete intention of perhaps having to shoot someone who he deemed as trash That to me is to some degree pre meditated .
BTW, it is not me who is hysterical.
I don’t give two shits what happens to him, but from a way off viewpoint I certainly cannot defend him. He went there to possibly commit murder.

Posted by: arby | Nov 15 2021 13:50 utc | 527

@516 you stated “he went there prepared to commit murder”
now @528 you’ve downgraded the certainty of that accusation to “He went there to possibly commit murder.”
So, that’s progress, I guess.
Perhaps you’re not quite as pathologically obtuse as you earlier appeared.
But of course you’re still demonstrating that you’re not at all prepared to let anything as inconsequential as mere fact disturb whatever twisted narrative the distorted worldview inside you little head has conjured up….
“I can’t be bothered watching any of the videos and BS.”
because of course video evidence recorded on the night, the validity of which has been accepted by the prosecution, the judge and by literally everyone but liars and fools, needs to be dismissed as “BS” lest it clash with the twisted narrative conjured up by your distorted worldview, otherwise the resultant cognitive dissonance might cause your little head to explode.
Your apparent extreme fear of confronting the fact that your twisted narrative might be challenged by the actual factual evidence is quite interesting.
Not often does one see an apparent adult react so negatively in real time, to the threat posed by mere fact. Fascinating stuff to watch. PHD thesis material for any trainee psychologist no doubt.
…….
@ William Gruff | Nov 15 2021 11:33 utc | 526
After reading that latest update from Arby I now suspect your theory that we are dealing with a snowflake manchild has a lot more validity to it than I was earlier prepared to admit….

Posted by: YourMom | Nov 15 2021 14:38 utc | 528

It should seem obvious to you but apparently it’s not.
I am looking at the big picture while you try to look at the minutiae and pick out a small part out to justify your American paranoia that everybody is out to get you.

Posted by: arby | Nov 15 2021 14:51 utc | 529

If it is OK in the US to shoot and kill people because they are smashing windows or something similar then I am wrong about my concepts of the event.
To me that is what the police can do but not 17 year old wannabe cops.
BUT, maybe I’m wrong.

Posted by: arby | Nov 15 2021 14:59 utc | 530

Posted by: arby | Nov 15 2021 14:59 utc | 531
but arby there was literally no one shot that night because “they [we]re smashing windows or something similar”
literally not one person in the large windowsmashing arsonist crowd was shot for window smashing nor for arson.
There was plenty of video evidence of rioters window smashing and committing arson but ZERO video evidence of any of them being shot while doing so
I guess that’s why you’re so adverse to ever viewing any video evidence from the scene, ….. because it will force you to admit that none exists to support the false claims you continuously repeat.
Even the prosecution in the trial never made such a ludicrously unfounded claim. Or if they did they certainly were complely unable to provide any evidence to support it, in court. We both know if they had such evidence it would have been used in court.
there’s simply too much video evidence for you to pretend otherwise.
This is something you have simply invented entirely in your overactively imaginative little head.

Posted by: YourMom | Nov 15 2021 15:17 utc | 531

So are you saying this kid brought a loaded weapon in case he needed self defence?
Other than that he just wanted to see the show?

Posted by: arby | Nov 15 2021 15:20 utc | 532

LOL, you dance around my straight forward questions every time.
Looks like your 517 insinuates that he brought the gun for self defence and nothing more.
Not what I heard or read somewhere. As far as I know he went there to protect some businesses from vandalism.

Posted by: arby | Nov 15 2021 16:13 utc | 533

Not only that but now you have turned him from a wannabe cop to a nice doctor type who just happened to have a loaded AK 47 in his doctors bag. lol

Posted by: arby | Nov 15 2021 16:19 utc | 534

arby @536
Excellent! You are getting closer to the real world!
The only reason for which evidence exists for Rittenhouse bringing the rifle is self defense, which is exactly what Rittenhouse originally said. All of the evidence indicating that Rittenhouse intended to murder exists only in your head. Evidence like that is not admissible in court.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 15 2021 16:34 utc | 535

Lawyer Jonathan Turley’s take on the trial for those who are still interested:
https://jonathanturley.org/2021/11/15/rittenhouse-goes-to-jury-after-case-collapses-in-court/
Quote:
“The trial of Kyle Rittenhouse increasingly seems like a legal version of the parable of the blind men and the elephant. By only touching discrete parts of the animal, the men describe vastly different animals. In coverage of this trial, one would think that there were parallel trials occurring in Kenosha, Wisconsin.
One consensus however is emerging: Things are not going well for the prosecution.”

Posted by: Blue Dotterel | Nov 15 2021 18:41 utc | 536

Thanks BD. I think we picked all the meat off that one. Perhaps b would like to run a poll on the verdict?

Posted by: dh | Nov 15 2021 20:01 utc | 537

@jinn #329
You left out the previous clause:

(3) The privilege of self-defense extends not only to the intentional infliction of harm upon a real or apparent wrongdoer, but also to the unintended infliction of harm upon a 3rd person, except that if the unintended infliction of harm amounts to the crime of first-degree or 2nd-degree reckless homicide, homicide by negligent handling of dangerous weapon, explosives or fire, first-degree or 2nd-degree reckless injury or injury by negligent handling of dangerous weapon, explosives or fire, the actor is liable for whichever one of those crimes is committed.

So no, Wisconsin law does not permit coming to others aid using lethal or harmful force – which physical beating with fists or skateboard definitely constitutes, much less drawing a gun and pointing it.
These kinds of half-assed “Good Samaritan” laws are why people stand around in a subway car while a rape occurs.

Posted by: c1ue | Nov 15 2021 20:15 utc | 538

c1ue wrote:
You left out the previous clause:
_______________________________________________
The statute you quote relates to “unintended infliction of harm upon a 3rd person” . Had Rittenhouse’s bullets injured some bystander that he didn’t intend to shoot, then that statute might have some relevance, but I haven’t heard of that happening.
The statute you quote also has nothing to do with Wisconsin’s good samaritan law which can be found here:
https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/895/ii/48/1

Posted by: jinn | Nov 15 2021 22:40 utc | 539

A teenage kid with poor judgment chose the wrong opportunity to stand out and make a difference, and got caught up in a greater madness in which there are only losers.
As a sports shooter, I’m not for an all-out ban on guns. But open carry and a slack interpretation of stand-your-ground emboldens foolish people to act foolishly with grave consequences.

Posted by: Leif Sachs | Nov 16 2021 11:42 utc | 540

Let’s not Forget, He had a firearm that he was not allowed by law to have!

Posted by: Ken Weeks | Nov 16 2021 13:16 utc | 541

The Rittenhouse lovers are entirely ignorant of the law and of the reality of the trial. Rittenhouse is a lying punk. You can not go looking for trouble, provoke the trouble and then claim self defense.

Posted by: Mark | Nov 16 2021 13:50 utc | 542

Let’s not Forget, He had a firearm that he was not allowed by law to have!
Posted by: Ken Weeks | Nov 16 2021 13:16 utc | 542
Completely untrue – KR is not even charged with “illegal possession of a firearm”.
Judge looked at law and said no evidence presented in court which would convict him of that charge.
…..
Posted by: Mark | Nov 16 2021 13:50 utc | 543
Congratulations!
You have just posted a perfect example of how to everyone “I have no idea what I am talking about”Let’s not Forget, He had a firearm that he was not allowed by law to have!
Posted by: Ken Weeks | Nov 16 2021 13:16 utc | 542
Completely untrue – KR is not even charged with “illegal possession of a firearm”.
Judge looked at law and said no evidence presented in court which would convict him of that charge.
…..
Posted by: Mark | Nov 16 2021 13:50 utc | 543
You have just posted a perfect example of how to everyone “I have no idea what I am talking about” without you actually saying “I have no idea what I am talking about”
Well done you!

Posted by: MP3 | Nov 16 2021 14:18 utc | 543

A teenage kid with poor judgment chose the wrong opportunity to stand out and make a difference, and got caught up in a greater madness in which there are only losers.
Posted by: Leif Sachs | Nov 16 2021 11:42 utc | 541
but, but, but,…..Joseph Rosenbaum was not a teenager, he was 37 yrs old.

Posted by: MP3 | Nov 16 2021 14:20 utc | 544

Kind of interesting how these new names show up defending the kid’s actions all tossing in insults.

Posted by: arby | Nov 16 2021 14:26 utc | 545

Kyle Rittenhouse did in fact ‘provoke’ the crowd into stalking him and trying repeatedly to kill him.
He provoked them by bringing a fire extinguisher to the carlot with the intention of putting out the fires they were setting
The press and all the pretend lawyers posting here pretend he was walking around with the gun in his hands pointing it at rioters, but it was in fact for the most part on a sling over his shoulder until the very moment the rage-filled Rosenbaum lunged at him to grab it to try to take it away from him and KR then prevented him from doing so.
What he had in his hands until rage-filled Rosenbaum attacked was a fire extinguisher, which he dropped when he was about to be attacked by a rage-filled Rosenbaum.

Posted by: MP3 | Nov 16 2021 14:31 utc | 546

Posted by: arby | Nov 16 2021 14:26 utc | 546
you must be very easily insulted.
where and when were you insulted?

Posted by: MP3 | Nov 16 2021 14:32 utc | 547

This kid’s act imo was like waving a red flag in front of a bunch of half crazed bulls. A wannabe cop strutting his imaginary self in front of people who were protesting the very same thing he was feigning.
Interesting is that many posters say they are against fascism which he kind of represented.
The man on horseback.

Posted by: arby | Nov 16 2021 14:43 utc | 548

This kid’s act imo was like waving a red flag in front of a bunch of half crazed bulls
Posted by: arby | Nov 16 2021 14:43 utc | 549
A fire extinguisher should not be a “red flag” to anyone.
Being enraged by a fire extinguisher is a serious “red flag” in my opinion.
That sort of person would be more far more likely to be a fascist than the person using the extinguisher to extinguish fires set by a mob of arsonists, in orderto help protect the lives of innocent Kenoshsa citizens who lived in the vicinity.

Posted by: MP3 | Nov 16 2021 14:56 utc | 549

Elderly man FASCIST doing defending store FASCISTY-stuff, during Kenosha riots, has jaw broken
An elderly man’s FASCIST’S jaw was broken in a sickening caught-on-camera attack as he tried to protect a store that was eventually torched during the Kenosha protests, according to reports
The man FASCIST — only identified as Robert (The FASCIST) and in his 70s — ran toward a mattress store where he works and used a fire extinguisher to chase away arsonists who broke in Monday night during protests over the police shooting of Jacob Blake, his bosses told Fox6.
“They just threw a bottle at this guy FASCIST” a woman filming a now-viral video complained — seconds before a man dressed all in black ran up and knocked him down with a punch to the head.
“No! No! No!” the videographer repeatedly cried as the senior FASCIST collapsed to the ground, leaving a woman crying hysterically….

Posted by: MP3 | Nov 16 2021 15:15 utc | 550

The Defense wants us to focus on just the two minutes in which Rittenhouse killed two and wounded a third. That entire sequence of events began when the lying Rittenhouse dropped the fire extinguisher and threatened deadly force at two individuals. Rossenbaum had the right to try to stop Rittehhouse from shooting those folks–which Rossenbaum successfully did at the cost of his own life. Rossenbaum was unarmed, had not touched Rittenhouse when Rittenhouse shot him. Rittenhouse had a duty to flee and then to only use the force necessary to defend himself. Instead he shot Rossenbuam three times AFTER his initial shot had wounded Rossenbaum in the groin causing him to fall forward. Rittenhouse had no right to continue to shoot at Rossenbaum, but he did until Rossenbaum was dead. Guilty of homicide in Wisconsin.
You want shoot outs on the street–go to Florida or Texas with the other barbarians.

Posted by: mark kaufmann | Nov 16 2021 16:07 utc | 551

🎼Racist, Rashist
Fayshist, fascist
Let’s call the whole thing off🎼

Posted by: Cadence calls | Nov 16 2021 16:25 utc | 552

b you’re way off the mark on this one and frankly out of touch with real underground social movements that occur in amerika and happen to despise the democratic party as much as any other facet of the ruling class.
as a so-called investigative journalist, it’s best for you to move beyond your german obsession with order and calm and look at social movements with the nuance they demand. your posts on this (and most of your reporting on demonstrations in amerika) really come off as uncritical bootlicking.
i’m personally hoping this little cracker rots in hell. if he walks, then that gives explicit permission for others like him (racist, angry, cosplaying militant) to kill people on the street if they feel unsafe.
don’t cushion the little fascists. they don’t need your sympathy.

Posted by: garbage man | Nov 16 2021 17:03 utc | 553

People for convicting Rittehhouse are:
1) In favor of arsonists and rioters. Protesters who aid and abet arsonists and rioters are arsonists and rioters.
2) Think that other people are supposed to lay and take it from criminal, arsonists and rioters. But, reserve the right to self-defense for themselves.
3) Defend pedophiles are pedophiles or are to afraid to be one.

Posted by: JaimeInTexas | Nov 16 2021 17:09 utc | 554

Race relations LOL
Looks like another person who thinks the people shot were black.
No, it was 4 white people involved: 3 rioters, 1 Kyle Rittenhouse.
The numbers are very clear: the biggest danger to blacks is other blacks.
The 13 to under 50 blacks shot by police – at least some of which are legitimate, compare vs. 2500+ blacks killed by other blacks every year.

Posted by: c1ue | Nov 16 2021 17:23 utc | 555

The Defense wants us to focus on just the two minutes in which Rittenhouse killed two and wounded a third.
Posted by: mark kaufmann | Nov 16 2021 16:07 utc | 552

Correct – those are the salient events, to not focus on them would be professional incompetence.
That entire sequence of events began when the Rittenhouse dropped the fire extinguisher
Correct
and threatened deadly force at two individuals.
Likely Incorrect – this is merely a prosecution claim for which no eye-witness testimony exists. All that was presented in court was a blurry photo and enlarged blurry-video.
Prosecution claims are neither evidence nor testimony.
The prosecution chose not to call any alleged eye-witness to testify to that alleged event.
It is for a jury to decide if it meets their standard of reliable evidence. That’s why juries exist.
Rossenbaum had the right to try to stop Rittehhouse from shooting those folks
Only correct if the provocation claim is believed by the jury.
However, even if it is believed by the jury there is still the fact that KR immediately runs away.
Once KR retreats, Rosenbaum loses all “provocation” priviledge according to the relevant statutes and case-law.
Once KR retreats, any pursuit by Rosenbaum immediately becomes threatening in the legal sense according to the relevant statutes and case-law.
Rossenbaum was unarmed, had not touched Rittenhouse when Rittenhouse shot him.
Incorrect – testimony from the closest person to the events, the Prosecution’s own witness and therefore testimony likely to be given priority by the jury, was that “Rosenbaum yelled “Fuck you!” and then lunged for the weapon”.
Prosecution Witness Pathologist Douglas Kelley, in testimony likely to be given priority by the jury due to him being an expert employed by the relevant authorities, testified that Rosenbaum grabbing the weapon would be consistent with the wounds and gunpowder pattern found on Rosenbaum’s left hand.
Furthermore this expert prosecution-witness disagreed several times with all of the prosecution’s several differing attempts to present alternative theories as to how those power-burn marks came to be on Rosenbaum’s left-hand.
Rittenhouse had a duty to flee
Correct – a duty he fulflled by retreating, as ALL the video evidence clearly shows.
and then to only use the force necessary to defend himself.
Correct – which he claims he did. It is for a jury to decide if they believe his claim. That’s why juries exist.
Instead he shot Rossenbuam three times AFTER his initial shot had wounded Rossenbaum in the groin causing him to fall forward.
All shots fired in the space of 0.76 seconds (ZERO point Seven Six seconds). Not remotely possible in that time to know the effect of any particular one shot.
This is again an issue for the jury to decide. That’s why juries exist
Rittenhouse had no right to continue to shoot at Rossenbaum,
According to the relevant statutes and case-law Rittenhouse had every right to continue to take defensive action until the attaker was no longer in a position to threaten his life.
This is again an issue for the jury to decide. That’s why juries exist.
but he did until Rossenbaum was dead.
Correct – Rittenhouse testified that unfortunately Rosenbaum’s impulsive lunge to unwisely attempt to take Rittenhouse’s weapon neccessitated drastic action resulting in Rosenbaum’s unfortunate demise. That’s why it was unwise.
This is again an issue for the jury to decide. That’s why juries exist
Guilty of homicide in Wisconsin.
Incorrect, so far. – As with all defendants in court proceedings in the US, Rittenhouse is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by either a judge or a jury of his peers. That’s why juries exist.
A jury of his peers, made up of the citizens of Kenosha, has yet to make any such determination.

Posted by: MP3 | Nov 16 2021 17:47 utc | 556

don’t cushion the little fascists. they don’t need your sympathy.
Posted by: garbage man | Nov 16 2021 17:03 utc | 554
….
Fire Crews Fascists attacked, apparatus fascist-wagons damaged during civil unrest mostly-peaceful protests
Jun 3, 2020
Some rioters innocent cherubs have thrown projectiles anti-fascist weapons at fire crews fascist groups, smashed apparatus fascist-wagon windows, and tossed firecrackers anti-fascist weapons under fire fascist-wagons while fire crews fascist groups work endanger the lives of innocent cherubs.

Do you believe Fire Crews Fascists should be provided body armor for responses?
Take our poll so we can better understand your department’s Fascist group’s needs.

Fascists responding to emergencies anti-fascist actions related to civil unrest mostly-peaceful protests over the weekend have been confronted, sometimes violently mostly-peacefully, by rioters innocent cherubs in several cities.
Fire departments Fascist Leaders and news outlets their lying propagandist fellow-travellers are reporting that some protesters and rioters innocent cherubs – who have taken to the streets following the death of George Floyd, a Minneapolis man who died while in police custody on Monday – have damaged apparatus fascist-wagons and engaged in violent confrontations mostly-peaceful protests with fire crews fascist groups responding to emergencies anti-fascist actions…..

Posted by: MP3 | Nov 16 2021 17:49 utc | 557

“Jump Kick Man” Identified
https://newstalk1130.iheart.com/featured/common-sense-central/content/2021-11-16-the-disturbing-story-of-the-rittenhouse-cases-mysterious-jump-kick-man/
The enduring mystery of the Kyle Rittenhouse criminal trial, which went to a jury Tuesday, has been the identity of “Jump Kick Man.”
As Rittenhouse ran away from a crowd of people, he testified that one of the pursuers hit him in the head with his skateboard. When Rittenhouse fell to the ground, Jump Kick Man flew through the air and stomped on his head. Rittenhouse fired two shots at Jump Kick Man, but missed.
Almost immediately, the man who had struck Rittenhouse with his skateboard, Anthony Huber, hit him with the skateboard again, and Rittenhouse fired a single round, killing Huber. A third man, Gaige Grosskreutz, saw this and approached Rittenhouse with his hands up. However, when Rittenhouse looked down for a split second, Grosskreutz pulled out a handgun and pointed it at Rittenhouse’s head. Rittenhouse fired a single shot, striking Grosskreutz in the arm.
Jump Kick Man, whose attack on Rittenhouse (and Rittenhouse’s subsequent response) arguably led to both Huber’s and Grosskreutz’s actions (and Rittenhouse’s response to them), has never been identified–until now.
“The Dan O’Donnell Show” can now report exclusively that Jump Kick Man is a 40-year-old Black male from Kenosha with an extensive criminal record who was at the time of the Rittenhouse shootings on probation following a conviction for domestic violence battery.
He faced a maximum sentence of nine months in jail, but less than two months before he kicked Rittenhouse, he accepted a plea deal that netted him 12 months’ probation.
The following year, he violated the terms of his probation and was sentenced to seven months in jail.
Sources indicate that he contacted prosecutors and offered to testify, but in exchange requested immunity from an ongoing drunk driving and domestic abuse case with which he was charged in June. Prosecutors declined his offer and chose not to call him as a witness in the Rittenhouse case.

Posted by: Capital | Nov 16 2021 20:49 utc | 558

Sums things up pretty good IMO.
Kyle Rittenhouse Is No Hero

Posted by: arby | Nov 17 2021 17:08 utc | 559

Does it matter if he is acquitted or he goes to jail? Either way he’ll be a hero to many people and and evil fascist murderer to others. Either way I’m sure he’ll get a lot of lucrative offers.

Posted by: dh | Nov 17 2021 23:08 utc | 560

@563 MP3
That was very well said. Many thanks for your coverage of this issue.

Posted by: Grieved | Nov 18 2021 0:09 utc | 561

@563 I get all that. And of course it matters to KR. But will it change anything if he is acquitted or if he goes to jail? Will the US be any less polarized? The only thing I can see coming out of it all is arson got more dangerous.

Posted by: dh | Nov 18 2021 0:13 utc | 562

@567 I think I understand you. Why be so confrontational?
All I am trying to do is predict what effect the verdict will have. Some are saying that acquitting him will give people the idea that it’s OK to do what he did. The argument for putting him in jail is that it will deter anyone from intervening when they see someone committing arson. It’s a tough call. I’m quite impressed with the judge so far.

Posted by: dh | Nov 18 2021 1:13 utc | 563

@569 MP3
I’m quite sure there are plenty of readers here who appreciate your input. It’s been a tough thread to persist through, but in the end we have what you and others are saying: that this is about the rule of law.
Yes, what happens to Rittenhouse matters to him, of course, but what matters to the nation – and may even matter more to Rittenhouse than his own existence – is what comes from the jury with regard to the law as it applies to the facts that are proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
What’s actually on trial here, as you and others point out, is the genius gift to a society of a trial by a jury of peers. How will the rule of applicable law emerge from this testing?

Posted by: Grieved | Nov 18 2021 1:50 utc | 564

@ 570 Just trying to take an objective look at the whole case. If that’s possible.
I’m biased towards the defendant too. I see a young guy who couldn’t restrain himself. If he hadn’t had the gun he would probably be dead or maimed for life. I sense the judge sees things much the same way. The jury? We are waiting.

Posted by: dh | Nov 18 2021 1:50 utc | 565

@ 574 Nothing to do with Rosenbaum. I see a lack of restraint in KR’s behavior. He was riled up. The police weren’t doing anything about the arson. He felt he had to walk towards the protestors with a gun. Not the sort of thing I personally would do. But I’m old and much to cautious.

Posted by: dh | Nov 18 2021 2:36 utc | 566

@576 Of course Rosenbaum, Huber and Grosskreuz were not models of restraint either……trying to head off another misunderstanding.

Posted by: dh | Nov 18 2021 2:49 utc | 567

@578 I’m sure you are right. But I think I’ll just leave it at that. You have reminded me of why I try to avoid internet discussion.

Posted by: dh | Nov 18 2021 3:04 utc | 568

@582 Correction to previous post #576. He felt he had to walk towards the protesters with a fire extinguisher in his hand and a rifle over his shoulder. I must learn to be more careful with words.

Posted by: dh | Nov 18 2021 3:19 utc | 569

Should it be acceptable to kill people for protesting? Think about what happened in Ukraine or in the Gaza strip. Protesters were threatening with firebombs or rocks. Guess that makes it acceptable to kill them with automatic weapons.

Posted by: Joe | Nov 18 2021 3:21 utc | 570

All of the woke freaks here thirsting for the Rittenhouse kid’s blood should just watch the trial. Few of you have any idea what you are talking about at all. You are just regurgitating the brainwashing that the corporate mass media fed you to get you clutching at your pearls over “white supremacists” and other imaginary boogeymen.
Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 12 2021 18:25 utc | 300

++++++++
One of the few smart comments made in the thread.
Naturally it was complely ignored by the Woke-eratti, who in their pell-mell rush to judgement never seem to let a little thing like “the facts” get in the way of a bit of opportunistic pseudo-moralistic high-groundism.

Posted by: Schmarx | Nov 18 2021 11:33 utc | 571

Who was obligated to“restrain themselves” from being present that night in Kenosha?
One humorous visual from the night was when Rittenhouse extinguished the fire in the dumpster that the thugs were pushing towards the gas station. One “gentleman” among the rioters was carrying an empty oil drum. The moment the fire was extinguished it was as if someone had pulled his plug and he deflated, dropping his projectile in palpable disappointment.
As funny as it was, this “scene” in the drama illustrated clearly what Rittenhouse was there for and what the rioters were there for.
So we should revisit the question of who didn’t belong on the Kenosha streets that evening. The answer, of course, depends upon one’s perspective, but Rittenhouse was there to protect his community and his presence needs no justification.
But what about the rioters? Is it not curious that none in the mass media question their presence on the streets of Kenosha that night? Are we to believe they were really incensed at a violent thug with an arrest warrant out for him and who was violating a restraining order was injured while resisting arrest? Of course not. The rioters were just dirtbags out for an evening of fun. They had been summoned, Pied Piper style, by the mass media and Sorosian NGOs with assurances of impunity and media lionization. In a very real sense the rioters were thus under the protection of the mass media, and the mass media was responsible for their behavior and safety. Is it any wonder then that the mass media piled on Rittenhouse when he ruined their little carnival?
Simply put, the rioters were mindless pawns deliberately manipulated to act by the mass media. Nobody questions their motives or reasons because it is pointless to question the motives and reasons of mindless pawns. They are mindless, after all. They have no motives beyond enjoying the carnival. The only legitimate and productive question in this regard would be about the motives of the mass media. And you know the mass media, from the CEOs down to the paid social media nickel-posting trolls, don’t want the discourse to head in that direction.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 18 2021 11:52 utc | 572

@ Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 18 2021 11:52 utc | 590
Your argument is nonsense because of one very simple fact: Rittenhouse’s incursion didn’t end the riots. On the contrary: it only added to the mayhem of the riots, which continued well after he gave himself in to the police.
Had his murders really stopped the riots, then his defense would actually have a completely different, much easier case. But they didn’t – it was just senseless murder.
The argument for self defense is senseless. The question is simple: to which extent did the knowledge of military superiority motivate Rittenhouse to go to Kenosha that day? In other words: would Rittenhouse have done what he did that day if he didn’t have an AR-15? Would he be as “brave”, as “dutiful” if he had just, say, a pocket knife instead of an AR-15? By the video with the audio, the answer is clearly a “no” – he was part of a militia de facto hired by local petty bourgeois from the city (that he was friends with some of them is irrelevant to the case) and, the moment he set foot on the city, he was already fully geared, his weapon locked and loaded, and he knew exactly the job he had to execute, and the full spectrum of tasks (and correspondent risks) he could be designated to do.
It is ok to claim one single, fortuitous murder as self defense. But three (one attempt)? And in a row? By a fully equipped militiaman? In a known danger zone? That would open a very dangerous jurisprudence in the American justice system.

Posted by: vk | Nov 18 2021 12:24 utc | 573

The defense is an embarrassment. They brought Rittenhouse on the stand and had him lie repeatedly. If Rittenhouse had kept his mouth shut he would have walked. His lies allowed the prosecution to enter the rebuttal video showing Rittenhouse threatening others provoking the entire incident resulting in Rittenhouse murdering two and maiming a third.
Right wing gun nuts are delusional if they think this jury would find Rittenhouse “not guilty”. The judge would have dismissed the charges if Rittenhouse had kept his mouth shut.
Stupid criminal punk doing criminal activity on the witness stand lost the judge. Rittenhouse best case is a plea deal—unlikely now.

Posted by: Mark | Nov 18 2021 13:15 utc | 574

@588 OK. But I don’t enjoy talking to you. I started with a bit of innocuous speculation about the verdict and I get attacked for everything I say. Next you’ll be accusing me of arson.
Anyway as regards the guns. I have no idea what was in Rosenbaum’s mind when he attacked KR. I’m sure the gun was a factor but most likely he was enraged because his dumpster fire was being put out. Rosenbaum seems (seemed) to be angry about everything. I have no sympathy for him whereas I can understand KRs actions. Best I can do.

Posted by: dh | Nov 18 2021 13:26 utc | 575

Posted by: vk | Nov 18 2021 12:24 utc | 591
LOL
Oh I think we all know nonsense when we see it.
Rittenhouse’s incursion didn’t end the riots On the contrary: it only added to the mayhem of the riots,
The exact opposite is true.
Putting out fires reduced the mayhem quite effectively.
As anyone knows, Burning buildings are very dangerous to the community, and by all accounts Rittenhouse and his comrades reduced that threat quite effectively several times throughout the night.
which continued well after he gave himself in to the police.
Absolutely untrue. The rioting stopped quite abruptly very shortly after Rittenhouse attempted to surrender to Poilce. There were no riots, no looting and no arson on any of the following days.
The argument for self defense is senseless.
Only to someone with no concern for things like details and facts.
The argument for self defence is backed up by countless videos and numerous eye-witness testimony from the prosecution’s very own witness’ including the person closest to the first shooting and the prosecution expert-witness, pathologist Doug Kelley.
The question is simple: to which extent did the knowledge of military superiority motivate Rittenhouse to go to Kenosha that day?
An equally pertinent and just as simple a question is: to which extent did the knowledge of numerical superiority, and complete lack of any law enforcement of Government preventative response, motivate the mob to go on a 3day rampage through the city of Kenosha?
This question remains, quite predictably, completely unasked, unaddressed and unanswered by the Woke-eratti.
In other words: would Rittenhouse have done what he did that day if he didn’t have an AR-15?
Would the rampaging mob have gone on a 3-day rampage through the city of Kenosha, without the benefit of numerical superiority, and complete lack of any law enforcement of Government preventative response?
This question remains, quite predictably, completely unasked, unaddressed and unanswered by the Woke-eratti.
the moment he set foot on the city, he was already fully geared, his weapon locked and loaded,
As photographic and video evidence presented at trial clearly showed, the moment he set foot in the city that day he began cleaning graffitti, offering medical aid, protecting local business from a rampaging arsonist drunk-on-power looting mob
and he knew exactly the job he had to execute, and the full spectrum of tasks (and correspondent risks) he could be designated to do.
LOL
He sure did,.
As we knew from all the photographic and video evidence presented at trial, the moment he set foot in the city that day he began cleaning graffitti, offering medical aid, and protecting local business from a rampaging arsonist drunk-on-power looting mob.
What an absolute scoundrel!
One certainly would be hard-pressed to find a more egregious example of anti-social behaviour and complete and utter disregard for the safety of the local community than cleaning graffitti, offering medical aid, and protecting local business.
It is ok to claim one single, fortuitous murder as self defense.
According to the law of self defence in Wisconsin, it certainly is.
But three (one attempt)? And in a row?
If that’s what it took, hat’s what it took.
Hardly his fault if 3 criminals took it upon themselves to attack him.
You’re straying deep into “the victim deserved it because of how she was dressed” territory there VK.
But you do you, VK.
It’s fascinating to watch the logical contortions you need to conjuror up to justify your victim blaming.
That would open a very dangerous jurisprudence in the American justice system.
Removing the right to defend one’s self from a rampaging power-drunk mob opens a far more dangerous door to the future of American Jurisprudence.

Posted by: Schmarx | Nov 18 2021 13:36 utc | 576

Pretty comprehensive video record:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkTnQfjRvk0

Posted by: JR | Nov 18 2021 16:07 utc | 577

The real culprits are the mayor and governor who allowed Kenosha to be pillaged. looted and burned. Of course the main stream media covered this up by a false narrative all to serve the Democrat political objectives.
Biden ought to be be impeached on his baseless statement characterizing Kyle as White Supremacist.

Posted by: JR | Nov 18 2021 16:19 utc | 578

vk @574
You are ignorant of the facts of the case. You should look to correcting that before investing so much into support of the wrong side.
In fact, the riots ended immediately after the guy who illegally had a gun was disarmed. There have been no more riots in Kenosha since.
This leads me to an interesting suspicion. It has been asked if there were provocateurs at the riots. The three that Rittenhouse shot, plus the one other who fired a handgun while the psycho pedo dwarf was chasing Rittenhouse, were all seen together throughout the night and were in the thick of the most provocative rioting. Perhaps these four were the principal provocateurs recruited by the FBI to “warm up” the riots?
It would explain why those four in particular attacked Rittenhouse, and also why the riots ended so fast.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 18 2021 18:46 utc | 579

@580 William Gruff
Man, that vk is a piece of work. You called it with “logical contortions” in your prior post. Contortion is exactly how that commenter “argues”.
I don’t usually disparage people as people, but when their arguments are as saturated in twist as those are, it’s hard to distinguish between the crap and the crapper, so to speak.
~~
Mostly I wanted you to know I appreciate your sheer dogged persistence in fighting for the facts over the appalling display of non-thinking happening in this thread.
You’re not alone, as I’m sure you know. Many people are like me and feel strongly for the truth but don’t have the stomach for this kind of fight. It’s people like you and Rittenhouse, who go in to do the cleanup work and put forth effort for the general community – and who then don’t shy away from a fight if someone brings it – that are the backbone of any society.

Posted by: Grieved | Nov 18 2021 21:46 utc | 580

Grieved @581–
Ditto for me too.

Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 18 2021 21:51 utc | 581

Not for me. I agree with VK.

Posted by: arby | Nov 19 2021 13:32 utc | 582

That’s a wrap, folks!
Not guilty, as allllllllllllll the rational posters here argued.
For the woke crowd, maybe a time to reflect on their views of what self defense in America entails.
Cheers

Posted by: Cadence calls | Nov 19 2021 18:36 utc | 583

Jury speaks: Rittenhouse innocent.
That means you cannot say nonsense like “… Rittenhouse’s victims…” anymore. Rittenhouse was the victim and acted in self defense. The people he shot were the aggressors. Most of us were clear headed enough to see the obvious in the videos, but now the jury says so too.
Case closed.
As to the “woke”? Go back to sleep and dream some more.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 19 2021 19:16 utc | 584