Kyle Rittenhouse goes to trial

[Vassenor]

But how was he supposed to defend that burned out building without a gun?

Why he had the gun - legally or not - is completely irrelevant. I mean I could point out that one of your “good guys” was a nonce, but that’s irrelevant too.

It speaks to why he was there. Besides, Wisconsin isn't a Stand Your Ground state.

[Dreria]

Why he had the gun - legally or not - is completely irrelevant. I mean I could point out that one of your “good guys” was a nonce, but that’s irrelevant too.

It speaks to why he was there. Besides, Wisconsin isn't a Stand Your Ground state.

He didn’t stand his ground

[Vassenor]

It speaks to why he was there. Besides, Wisconsin isn't a Stand Your Ground state.

He didn’t stand his ground

So at what point did he make efforts to retreat prior to shooting one?

[Dreria]

He didn’t stand his ground

So at what point did he make efforts to retreat prior to shooting one?

When he ran away

[Kerwa]

Why he had the gun - legally or not - is completely irrelevant. I mean I could point out that one of your “good guys” was a nonce, but that’s irrelevant too.

It speaks to why he was there. Besides, Wisconsin isn't a Stand Your Ground state.

He wasn’t standing his ground. And why he was there has nothing to do with his claim of self defense in this instance.

What he did can be reasonably considered as self defense, especially when all relevant facts are construed in a light most favorable to the defendant (which is how it’s supposed to work).

Kid was an arsehole ho doubt, but he wasn’t a murder. There were no “good guys” in this.

[Kerwa]

.

[Relden]

So at what point did he make efforts to retreat prior to shooting one?

The whole thing happened whilst he was trying to retreat.

He tried to run away from the first guy, and only put a bullet in him when the guy tried to grab his rifle.

And have you not seen the video of him where he's sprinting down a street with an angry mob full of rioters hot on his tail, screaming stuff like "get his ass!".

[Page]

I think it is very likely he will be acquitted.

In my view, this case shouldn't have been dealt with in the way it has been, especially because he was 17 when it happened and I do not believe in minors being tried as adults under any circumstances. And he shouldn't have been demonized in the public eye when he has been indoctrinated, people should have directed their anger at the adults who radicalized him.

Were it that he could have gotten counseling and help, perhaps he could have broken free from his indoctrination. I think justice would have been much better served if instead of being imprisoned, Rittenhouse was given the responsibility to use his notoriety for good, to speak to young people and warn them about right-wing extremism, to tell them he was wrong.

Locking him up won't undo the harm he did but if he could steer young people away from the path he went on, the next tragedy might be prevented.

But this is America where half of people don't even see a problem with putting a 7 year old on trial and sending them to prison, much less 17, so Rittenhouse will either be convicted and denied a chance to redeem himself, or he will be acquitted and sent into the arms of white supremacists who will take advantage of his vulnerability and entrench his far-right politics. Either way, it's tragic.

[USS Monitor]

There were no “good guys” in this.

This is the biggest takeaway I've been able to get from the whole mess.

[The Holy Therns]

It's going to be very difficult to have a fair trial on this and avoid it causing disorder, as in so many cases opinions on this are a proxy for feelings about BLM more generally rather than the facts of the case. Whatever is decided, a bunch of people are going to be very angry, because there are very caricatured narratives going about about the case and the individual and people have already made up their minds and will decide that some great injustice has been done if it is not found their way.

So aside from your usual "everything is bad always" schtick, what do you think should happen in this trial?

[Galloism]

Just remember guys, he was only defending himself while two states over with a firearm he wasn't allowed to operate, and waved his gun at a group of people protesting that Police brutality in any capacity is bad. Just defending himself!

This is the kind of misinformation I’m talking about.

[Galloism]

on the basis of what footage i've seen, he sure didn't look very innocent.
bringing a fire arm to any sort of protest ought itself to be a serious fellony.
if anyone he shot was actually trying to shoot him, (sure didn't look that way, but then i wasn't there)
then they're posthumasly guilty too.

the only "right" made by tow wrongs is a political right wing.

Notably, the third guy shot was trying to shoot him at the time.

Teenagers just have lightning reflexes. It’s why the military recruits in high school.

[Galloism]

Rioting in the name of BLM isn't some magic key to being a good guy. Shitty people can support good movements, but they are still shitty people.

Also let me remind you that that Rittenhouse did not intentionally seek to mow people down at the riot. It was the rioters who seethed at the fact that he dare put out their fires and chased him away so they can continue lighting fires.

Then got shot, because chasing someone with a gun into a corner will get you shot.

No, he just showed up from two states over, and lied about being a medic, waved his rifle around and people tried to take it away from him so he couldn’t hurt anyone with it and he shot two people. Perhaps if he had bothered to mind his own fucking business and not try to play army man, he would have his ass in this sling and two people wouldn’t have had to die.

There is also the fact that he was in commission of a crime when he was in possession of that rifle: Wisconsin state law 948.60(2)(a) states: "Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor."

I really don’t see what possible defence he could have. He killed two people while in the commission of a crime. He is lucky Wisconsin doesn’t consider that a felony or he would be guilty of two counts of felony murder and we all know what that means.

None the less, we should all thank Texas as a side note. Now that they have made it possible to completely circumvent the constitution by having private citizens enforce abortion laws, states are now able to pass even more restrictive gun laws that allow citizens to privately enforce said gun laws. What a time to be alive!

Once more, we have misinformation and legal ignorance.

He was not “two states over”. This is a lie.

He lived approximately 1 mile from the Wisconsin/Illinois state line, and worked in Pleasant Prairie, WI, which is in Kenosha County, right next to Kenosha.

His best friend and father both live in Kenosha. He spent lots of time in Kenosha and was a member of the community.

In addition, even if he was committing a misdemeanor with the gun, that has no bearing on self defense in any substantial way, most misdemeanors don’t.

[USS Monitor]

I think it is very likely he will be acquitted.

In my view, this case shouldn't have been dealt with in the way it has been, especially because he was 17 when it happened and I do not believe in minors being tried as adults under any circumstances. And he shouldn't have been demonized in the public eye when he has been indoctrinated, people should have directed their anger at the adults who radicalized him.

Were it that he could have gotten counseling and help, perhaps he could have broken free from his indoctrination. I think justice would have been much better served if instead of being imprisoned, Rittenhouse was given the responsibility to use his notoriety for good, to speak to young people and warn them about right-wing extremism, to tell them he was wrong.

Locking him up won't undo the harm he did but if he could steer young people away from the path he went on, the next tragedy might be prevented.

But this is America where half of people don't even see a problem with putting a 7 year old on trial and sending them to prison, much less 17, so Rittenhouse will either be convicted and denied a chance to redeem himself, or he will be acquitted and sent into the arms of white supremacists who will take advantage of his vulnerability and entrench his far-right politics. Either way, it's tragic.

Also, agree with this. ^

I don't think trying him as an adult is helpful. We don't use a flexible definition of adulthood for other things like voting rights or the ability to buy alcohol, so why should we for criminal responsibility? He was obviously not very mature.

[South Americanastan]

on the basis of what footage i've seen, he sure didn't look very innocent.
bringing a fire arm to any sort of protest ought itself to be a serious fellony.
if anyone he shot was actually trying to shoot him, (sure didn't look that way, but then i wasn't there)
then they're posthumasly guilty too.

the only "right" made by tow wrongs is a political right wing.

Notably, the third guy shot was trying to shoot him at the time.

Teenagers just have lightning reflexes. It’s why the military recruits in high school.

Said third guy had also previously surrendered before whipping out his pistol and aiming it at the back of Rittenhouse's head, might I add.

[Kerwa]

There were no “good guys” in this.

This is the biggest takeaway I've been able to get from the whole mess.

Well I would hope that you’d also get it was self defense too.

[South Americanastan]

I think it is very likely he will be acquitted.

In my view, this case shouldn't have been dealt with in the way it has been, especially because he was 17 when it happened and I do not believe in minors being tried as adults under any circumstances. And he shouldn't have been demonized in the public eye when he has been indoctrinated, people should have directed their anger at the adults who radicalized him.

Were it that he could have gotten counseling and help, perhaps he could have broken free from his indoctrination. I think justice would have been much better served if instead of being imprisoned, Rittenhouse was given the responsibility to use his notoriety for good, to speak to young people and warn them about right-wing extremism, to tell them he was wrong.

Locking him up won't undo the harm he did but if he could steer young people away from the path he went on, the next tragedy might be prevented.

But this is America where half of people don't even see a problem with putting a 7 year old on trial and sending them to prison, much less 17, so Rittenhouse will either be convicted and denied a chance to redeem himself, or he will be acquitted and sent into the arms of white supremacists who will take advantage of his vulnerability and entrench his far-right politics. Either way, it's tragic.

Also, agree with this. ^

I don't think trying him as an adult is helpful. We don't use a flexible definition of adulthood for other things like voting rights or the ability to buy alcohol, so why should we for criminal responsibility? He was obviously not very mature.

Breaking: Fucked up legal system is fucked up.

[Kaztropol]

He was a dumbass for being there, but being a dumbass isn't a criminal offence (if it was, the prison population would skyrocket).

quite possible he'll be acquitted, in which case, social media being what it is, a career being a right-wing pundit on right-wing media is likely, with no opportunity given for him to pause, think, and stop being a dumbass, resulting in more dumbasses becoming radicalised, with even more needless acts of violence occurring, deepening the rifts in American society.

[Galloism]

Rioting in the name of BLM isn't some magic key to being a good guy. Shitty people can support good movements, but they are still shitty people.

Also let me remind you that that Rittenhouse did not intentionally seek to mow people down at the riot. It was the rioters who seethed at the fact that he dare put out their fires and chased him away so they can continue lighting fires.

Then got shot, because chasing someone with a gun into a corner will get you shot.

So what rioting had the people he shot done?

Also just taking his word as gospel because people never ever lie to make themselves look better.

Well, according to the prosecution discovery with a witness they interviewed, the first assailant (Rosenbaum) had threatened to murder Rittenhouse in particular, and according to defense witnesses had also threatened to murder multiple others WITH Rittenhouse. He had also stated he had “just gotten out of jail and wasn’t afraid to go back” according to multiple witnesses interviewed by the state (the record shows he had gotten out of jail 4 days prior).

Then, according to the prosecution witness and backed by video, Rosenbaum charged at Rittenhouse, chased him down, attempted to assault him, then continued pursuing him until he was caught and attempted to seize a deadly weapon to go with violent attack and stated murderous intent.

Then, when Rittenhouse fled towards police, stating that was explicitly where he was going to Gaige Grosskreutz, he was chased down and attacked again. He was punched in the back of the head by an unknown man, then hit in the back as he was running by a large blunt instrument - a skateboard.

He then fell, was drop kicked by unknown man #2, then struck with the skateboard a second time in the head/neck area. Then the person he told he was going to police approached with a handgun, who did a fake surrender, then tried to shoot him.

That’s what they did.

[USS Monitor]

This is the biggest takeaway I've been able to get from the whole mess.

Well I would hope that you’d also get it was self defense too.

There are so many conflicting versions of the story, it is honestly confusing. I'm sort of withholding judgement until we see what happens at the trial.

[Galloism]

Why he had the gun - legally or not - is completely irrelevant. I mean I could point out that one of your “good guys” was a nonce, but that’s irrelevant too.

It speaks to why he was there. Besides, Wisconsin isn't a Stand Your Ground state.

Btw, this fact - it’s not a stand your ground state - actually favors Rittenhouse.

Do you know why this fact favors Rittenhouse Vassenor?

[Galloism]

There were no “good guys” in this.

This is the biggest takeaway I've been able to get from the whole mess.

I think that’s a fair assessment.

[Dumb Ideologies]

It's going to be very difficult to have a fair trial on this and avoid it causing disorder, as in so many cases opinions on this are a proxy for feelings about BLM more generally rather than the facts of the case. Whatever is decided, a bunch of people are going to be very angry, because there are very caricatured narratives going about about the case and the individual and people have already made up their minds and will decide that some great injustice has been done if it is not found their way.

So aside from your usual "everything is bad always" schtick, what do you think should happen in this trial?

Fascinating revelations of personal hostility aside, my first instinct is that he'll be acquitted because it sounds as though he could legitimately have considered himself under threat, or at least there is enough doubt to muddy the waters on that score. If we are talking "shoulds", then in an ideal world lawmakers would look at this case in terms of the dangers posed by guns at protests. However, that's a bit of a political and constitutional landmine in America so I don't know that practically there is a lot that can be done to prevent a repeat.

[The Holy Therns]

So aside from your usual "everything is bad always" schtick, what do you think should happen in this trial?

Fascinating revelations of personal hostility aside, my first instinct is that he'll be acquitted because it sounds as though he could legitimately have considered himself under threat, or at least there is enough doubt to muddy the waters on that score. If we are talking "shoulds", then in an ideal world lawmakers would look at this case in terms of the dangers posed by guns at protests. However, that's a bit of a political and constitutional landmine in America so I don't know that practically there is a lot that can be done to prevent a repeat.

Wasn't meant as hostility. Little snarky perhaps.

[FNU]

I hope he gets convicted for, at the bare minimum, for transporting a weapon across state lines, but knowing the court, I'm almost certain he's going to be found innocent on all charges and be given a ticker-tape parade.

I would have been arrested and put in jail years ago if transporting a gun across state lines was a crime.