What are thoughts on the Kyle Rittenhouse trial?

[globetrotter22]

The Kyle Rittenhouse trial is going on this week after he was accused of killing two men and injuring one other during the Kenosha riots.

From all available evidence I personally think clearly acted in self defense. Also there is NO verified evidence that he was part of some sort of white supremicist group. It’s a huge myth that he belonged to proud boys. Also he did NOT cross state lines with his AR15. He obtained the rifle in Wisconsin through a friend who illegally purchased it for him. That’s still a crime but we need to keep the story straight.

If I was on the jury I would acquit him of all murder related charges. However I might convict him on the unlawful gun possession charge. A 17 year old should not being walking around with a semi automatic rifle. But I would need solid evidence on where broke the law.

He acted in self defense and innocent of all charges

He acted in self defense. He’s innocent of all murder charges but guilty of the gun possession charge. He shouldn’t of went to the riot w/ a gun he illegally obtained.

He’s guilty of all charges.

Other

Updates

+1 y

The vast majority of people who disagree with my opinion have clearly not watched the trial in detail nor have you looked at this in detail.

If some antifa moron went to a Trump rally armed with a rifle and things went down exactly the same way they did with Rittenhouse I would still try my hardest to look at the evidence with a impartial lens. I might hate what he stands for but there is a reason why our judicial system is supposed to be impartial.

We are seeing the uprising of mob rule.

[JustYourTypicalAsian]

So I haven't been watching the trial, and I'm fairly young, so take into account my knowledge for the situation is limited, and slightly biased.
I think that Kyle is guilty of at least one homocide, I also think that, given the circumstances with the footage from the drone that the prosecutors used, it would makes sense why the people would mob Kyle, he was carrying a rifle and had just shot one of the protesters.
Wisconsin Law prohibits the possession of firearms for people under the age of 18 (with exceptions for hunting, and supervised shooting [e. g., shooting range]). This means that Kyle was for sure in violation of Wisconsin law on possession of firearms, as Kyle was only 17 at the time of the event. Not to mention Kyle also received the gun from a friend, which also violates Wisconsin law, in which the transfer and possession of a firearm is limited for those under the age of 18.
I think Kyle is guilty of the following (number for the charge, and then bullet point for why):
1) 2nd Degree reckless (intentional) homicide, use of dangerous weapon
- Kyle Rittenhouse knew exactly what the gun would do when he opened fire, he intentionally opened fire at the victims. This is a second degree homicide because, if you believe his story, then he had reason to defend himself. I might petition for this charge to be increased to a 1st degree charge due to the fact that Kyle went to Kenosha to, as he testified "patrol".
2) 1st Degree reckless endangerment, use of dangerous weapon
- Need I explain this? He brought a AR-15 to a protest, granted, he claimed he was going to "help", the use of a firearm was unnecessary.
3) 2nd Degree intentional homicide, use of dangerous weapon
- His second victim, it appears, was trying to subdue Kyle, but due to the mob, it was a lot more of a threatening situation than one would have liked. Unnecessary use of firearms and something that could have been avoided if Kyle had not brought the gun. I might petition for this charge to be increased to a 1st degree charge due to the fact that Kyle went to Kenosha to, as he testified "patrol".
4) 2nd Degree attempted homicide, use of dangerous weapon
5) First-degree recklessly endangering safety, use of a dangerous weapon
- Kyle didn't need to bring the gun, this whole thing could have been avoided if he didn't go into town with a rifle (of all firearms)
6) Possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18

All in all, I think Kyle deserves 20 years at least.

[globetrotter22]

You may be young but damn you got an amazing eye for detail. I’ll tell you that. I’m impressed and thanks for the feedback.

But it’s too bad you have not watched the trial. I’m posting using my mobile phone but prosecutions case is so weak that their witnesses are helping the defense case. Gaige Grosskreutz straight up admitted on the witness stand that he pointed his hand gun at Rittenhouse.

But I ask you to pay more attention (from a nonpartisan source) of the trial proceedings. Rittenhouse did make a bad decision to go to Kenosha despite his noble intentions of protecting businesses. Also as I agree with you above he illegally obtain a AR15. But as for intentional homicide I disagree with you. In all three shooting incidents his life was being legitimately being threatened and there is solid evidence proving this.

[JustYourTypicalAsian]

I'll agree on that, after further research, it does appear that Kyle was more than likely indirectly responsible, and that the homicides were unintentional at most. Perhaps a lessened sentence of 5-15 years? He went to kenosha with a rifle, showing that he was prepared to take someone's life, but the acts of self defense at least discredit an intentional homicide.
I don't have sympathy for the way the riots turned out (I still support BLM), but I also think that Kyle was in the wrong and that had he not gone to Kenosha with a gun (however noble his intentions, as you said), this situation wouldn't be happening.
At this point, if I was the prosecuting team, I would go for 5 years max prison sentence and drop the everything but possession of dangerous weapon and reckless endangerment. I am not the prosecuting team though, and I'm also only 16, so yeah. Thanks for updating me with the recent facts though.

[globetrotter22]

Although I don’t agree that Rittenhouse deserves “20 years” I gave you MHO because of the details you provided. You put some though into that post.

[globetrotter22]

The evidence points to him being guilty of the gun charge at most.

Also BLM has done much more to harm minorities than help them. Inner city homicide rates have skyrocketed due to weakened law enforcement presence. Most of the victims are minorities. But that’s a separate discussion

[exitseven]

It never should have gone to trial. It was a good shoot.

[Rogue77]

Absolutely true. 100% self defense, and the only reason he is alive today.

[BeMuse]

The Proud boys aren’t White supremacists. Kyle Rittenhouse shot 3 White guys in self defense so drop the communist racist propaganda narrative. People are allowed to belong to whatever groups they want and can have whatever ideas they fucking please so drop the thought police bullshit. People can be racists if they want to be; it is perfectly legal. It has no baring on the case whatsoever.

It’s also not illegal to purchase a gun in Wisconsin. Wisconsin does not issue a purchase permit or any other exclusive permit for the purchase of firearms. The gun was purchased and owned by the friend who kept it within the state thus it was never transferred. Federal law specifically allows one to lend a firearm to another individual, provided the individual is not prohibited. To be prohibited one must have been convicted of a felony, found not guilty of a felony by reason of mental illness, been committed under mental health laws and ordered not to possess a firearm, be subject to a restraining order, or be on parole. There are similar stipulations under state statute 941.29. None of that applies to Kyle Rittenhouse. Thus his friend could legally purchase, store, and lend the firearm to Kyle Rittenhouse at the time.

It’s legal to open carry in Wisconsin so people can walk around with a gun in plain sight all they want in most places. The limitation is that you must be 18 to open carry in the state of Wisconsin unless you are hunting or conducting target practice. The law indicates that a person 16 years or older can legally process a long gun (rifle or shotgun) with very limited adult supervision. So his purpose for open carrying as a minor is not legitimate under state law in this case. That would be a Class A misdemeanor. The friend that lent the gun to Kyle Rittenhouse would be subject to felony charges being that he was responsible to supervise the use of the firearm and people died from the discharge of the firearm. But that is not what Kyle Rittenhouse is on trial for.

Wisconsin is also a castle doctrine state which means there is no requirement to retreat in home or place of residence, “place of business”, or vehicle.. Kyle Rittenhouse was attacked by a violent mob that was equipped with deadly weapons at his place of business, however he was not the property owner of the business. That said he did retreat continuously and only used defensive force.

Should he have been defending his business after the armed terrorists of ANTIFA/BLM burned his city and committed wide scale violence against the citizenry? Morally yes. Was it the responsibility of the government to carry out that function? Yes, but they failed their constituency and are thus negligent. Legally in the state of Wisconsin he was violating the proper purpose of procession of a firearm for his age range, but the Supreme Court has established that the right to bear arms is a fundamental right, and has yet to address the right as it relates to age. The general constitutional consensus is that age is not defined in constitutional law, thus age restrictions are unconstitutional by their very nature, but their is no ruling yet. Maybe that is where this needs to go...

Clearly Kyle Rittenhouse was acting in self defense against a violent mob that was acting illegally, setting fires, violently attacking people, looting, brandishing deadly weapons like 12 inch heavy chains, firearms, skate boards, and who attempted to stomp his head when he was on the ground. He was fully justified to defend and preserve his own life from the onslaught of criminal attackers.

[globetrotter22]

I know the proud boys aren’t white supremicists. But if I said that in my post above also libtards skulls would even get thicker if I made that distinction.

[Grond21]

I'm saving this

[BeMuse]

@Grond21 The sad part is the negligence of the governing officials of the state of Wisconsin. First, the local police forces and or National Gaurd had the legal obligation and could have easily contained the situation if given the order. Second, in the event that they could not handle it with their given manpower, the state congress could call forth the state Militia to execute the Laws of the Union and suppress the insurrection and rebellion of the ANTFIA/BLM. In which case all able bodied men 17 to 45 would be obligated to defend Laws of the Union, thus making Kyle Rittenhouse's actions perfectly legal for his age range. The situation occurred due to a failure of leadership...

[Grond21]

Yes. They wanted the riots. It helped their narrative. Human lives and property sacrificed on the alter of power

[BlacktyBlaque]

white dude with a gun white dude with board and thrid white dude chased him. they pull a gun out tried to hit him to death he popped them end of the story.

I don't care for the kid personally but its l20% self defnense.
the real case is the ahumad aubury.
kyle case is just a waste of tax payer money should been over the 1st day

[globetrotter22]

I 100% agree with the Ahmud Arberry case as well. Why the hell isn’t that getting any media attention. Of all the racial motivated shootings that one was plain as day fucked up. I expected all the defendants to be convicted.

[BlacktyBlaque]

kyle case has a bigger name BLM white supremacy's 3 dead. and he might be a kkk white suepmacy but who cares

[globetrotter22]

He’s not a white supremacist. He went to Kenosha to defend businesses and help people and brought a gun for protection.

Should a 17 year old kid head out to a riot while illegally getting a gun? Hell no. Noble or not that was stupid.

But back to the Ahmed case yes that’s should be on the headlines. Those guys were trying to do a “civilian arrest” which is rare and only legal if you witnessed someone doing a crime. I don’t know too criminals who wear jogging shorts and tshirt while engaging in a crime. The one guy who shot is a retired cop who should god damn know better. Plus in the car behind him yelled the n word (caught on tape). Also those guys were released from the cops right after questioning and let free for over 30 days. THAT was bullshit.

Out of all the incidents I seen last year the Ahmed Arberry shooting was by far the worst. Absolutely no grey area on that one. 24 year old blameless young guy jogging in the morning on the middle of the road. Gets shot because three inbreds because they thought he was burglar when if you just looked at him and background for 15 seconds you can plain as day he’s minding his own business.

I hope all those dipshits get out away for that one. I’ve seen other incidents that were complicated. But that was a closed shut case

[BlacktyBlaque]

I know he was protecting his property or friends property I'm talking about the gang sign he threw up

[BlacktyBlaque]

aubury case is gonna be weird. I feel like they only gonna give those guys 10 years. At best

[Morgador]

https://vm.tiktok.com/ZM8q6ogfA/

[globetrotter22]

Excellent. However I wish he went into more detail on how these guys attacked him. Also I didn’t know that one guy beat up his mom.

But still even if all three of these so called “victims” had spotless records they all three chased, threatened and attacked Rittenhouse meaning to do grave bodily injury or death. You don’t (nor should you) have to wait for someone to harm you until you fight back.

[jshm2]

Doesn't matter how you try and spin it, kiddo.

You do NOT leave your house illegally armed.
You do NOT go armed to another state with pre-planned motive.
You do NOT shoot at unarmed men.

If you're too dense to understand facts, then you're too daft to be on a jury, and should always knock it back citing mental retardation.

[Grond21]

Not one of those applies to this case. So what are you saying?

[Rogue77]

Rittenhouse was fleeing his attackers. He never instigated anything, only defended himself. The man he shot in the arm pulled a pistol and aimed it at Rittenhouse, first. Not to mention he was being physically attacked by others.

[globetrotter22]

@Rogue77 facts don’t matter to libtards like @jshm2. He’s a grown ass 43 year old man and what he wrote above clearly demonstrates the following:

- He likely belongs to antifa or is a sympathizer
- He didn’t follow the trial nor read any impartial evidence in the case. Or if he did he already has his mind made up about the verdict.
- He likely follows celebrity tweets or reads headlines from publications like the Guardian

@jshm2 If Rittenhouse didn’t act in self defense he would be dead. Period. And speaking of illegally owning a gun. Child molesting convicted pedo Joseph Rosenbaum chased Rittenhouse (hard evidence proved this) while another man yelled “kill him”. He tried to steal Rittenhouse’s rifle. If he succeeded do you think he would of just done nothing to Rittenhouse? Rittenhouse shot him in self defense

Anthony Huber then hit Rittenhouse twice with his skateboard. Maybe Rittenhouse should of kept letting him do it?

Gaige Grosskreutz is a convicted felon who illegally carried a handgun admitted on the witness stand that he pointed his hand gun at Rittenhouse’s head prior to being shot in the arm.

[globetrotter22]

@jshm2S those above are the facts “kiddo”. The prosecution’s case is going so poorly that when they cross examined witnesses it ended up helping the defense’s case.

And i never opened up this question calling anybody names or bringing up politics. However since you want to go down that route then i have to congratulate you for taking grand prize for the most libtarded remark possible. You are a grown ass 43 year old man but it sounds to me you are the type that read a few headlines and immediately came to your conclusion that fits your narrative.

Seriously man just get your head out of your ass. It’s pretty far up there.

[Rogue77]

Don't think a skateboard can be called a lethal wapon? How would you like to be beaten with one? I don't think you'd enjoy that at all. A skateboard being used as a striking weapon is capable of not just causing injury, but death. Being it was used to commit a violent and potentially lethal act, self defense of equal or greater force is legally authorized.

[SmokinAces2000]

I’ve said it many times and I’ll say it again. “You can’t claim self defense if you are going towards the danger with a gun”
That’s like if I ran into a burning building and got severely injured and tried to sue the owner even though I decided to run in there myself

[exitseven]

Cops do this all the time.

[SmokinAces2000]

And he wasn’t a cop so bad example

[exitseven]

Still America is a free country. THere is no border for the state of Wisconsin. We do not even have a border to Mexico. He had every right to be in Wisconsin and it is a free carry state so he broke no law carrying a gun. I know for a fact I would not mess with anyone carrying an AR-15. I have no sympathy for these idiots.

[SmokinAces2000]

Did it ever occur to you that they saw an active shooter and tried to stop him?

[exitseven]

They are not cops ether and if you really believe that I would really begin to doubt your sanity.

[SmokinAces2000]

Yeah you’re right they aren’t cops but they were already there and close enough to Kyle, they didn’t travel to another state running into danger

[exitseven]

The video clearly shows they were out to kill him. He was running away. All they had to do was leave him alone. He was actually running towards the cops.

[SmokinAces2000]

They were out to “kill him” with a skateboard, clearly they didn’t and he didn’t think they were going to actually kill him

[exitseven]

Actually the skateboards they make today are big and heavy enough to cave in your skull. If you are armed the last thing you want to do is give up control of your weapon where it could be used against you. Gettink knocked unconcious by a skateboard would qualify.
My own philosophy is that I really try to avoid fights even though I am pretty sure I could win most of the time. Any time you get into a fight with somebody there is a good chance that somebody will end up dead. It ia not like you see on television. To get in a fist fight over a stupid argument over politics is a stupid reason to end up dead or ending up killing somebody. To purposely chase somebody and threaten his life means they were looking for trouble. I bet they were surprised when they found it.

[SmokinAces2000]

Like I said they were most likely chasing him because he had already shot one guy so they very well could have been trying to be hero’s like you guys claim Kyle is 🙄

[Rogue77]

Kyle didn't start anything. He responded appropriately to everything, including attempting to flee danger.

[SmokinAces2000]

He was the danger

[exitseven]

If nobody chased him and assaulted him there would have been absolutely no conflict. Thst does not sound like danger to me.

[SmokinAces2000]

And if he stayed his under 18 ass at home instead of going to another state and bringing a gun to a riot than there would be no conflict

[globetrotter22]

@SmokinAces2000. This video is about 30 seconds long. Please watch it. It’s not far right propaganda but is proving a point that men Rittenhouse shot are not exactly model citizens.

https://vm.tiktok.com/ZM8q6ogfA/

Now should of Rittenhouse gone to Kenosha with a rifle he illegally obtained? Fuck no. I can agree that he is guilty of a gun charge. But all three guys he shot in self defense were utter and complete dipshits. They sure as hell shouldn’t of been there either. One of them (Rosenbaum) shouldn’t of even been let out in society. He as convicted of molesting 5 boys.

The point I’m trying to make is why are you standing up for pieces of shit in Kenosha? All of them had criminal records and all of them weren’t in Kenosha just to hand out pamphlets. Last but not least ALL of them attacked Rittenhouse intending grave bodily harm. Despite their backgrounds I would of agreed with homicide charges if Rittenhouse just started randomly shooting people but that is NOT what he fucking did. He was there to protect businesses and he actually tried to run away from these dipshits

Quit trying to defend them just because they supported a cause you believe in. They had it coming considering what they did in their lives and more specifically what they tried to do to Rittenhouse that night.

[SmokinAces2000]

Globetrotter22 I’m not standing up for anyone because they “support a cause I believe in” 😂 and what they’ve done is irrelevant because Kyle was the one that shot people

[globetrotter22]

@SmokinAces2000 alright. But the bottom line is this. If Rittenhouse didn’t shoot those guys he would of likely been badly or dead. All three guys he shot started the confrontation, chased him, attacked him and threatened him. There is plenty of hard evidence supporting this.

The MSM is trying to promote this bullshit twisted lie that Rittenhouse went to Kenosha just to kill people. Absolutely zero evidence has supported that narrative.

[globetrotter22]

*badly injured

[SmokinAces2000]

He had a big ass semi-automatic gun which isn’t common for people to walk around with unless they are planning to shoot a place or area up so how do you know that the guys weren’t trying to stop him from shooting shit up

[globetrotter22]

You can kill someone with a skateboard, your fists or a handgun. One felon rioter who admitted on the witness stand they he pointed a gun at Rittenhouse’s head FIRST before Rittenhouse shot him in the arm. That guy illegally owned a gun too. Felons are not allowed to carry firearms.

The so called “evil” semi automatic rifle won’t do anything unless someone misuses which Rittenhouse didn’t. Plus he was going into a dangerous situation by himself. If was forced into that situation I would of picked up an AR too.

But the bottom line is rittenhouse went to protect businesses. He’s 17 and shouldn’t of done that. Noble intentions or not he shouldn’t of went there. But why is it that everybody who argues rittenhouse is guilty seem to have some sort of sympathy for all the POS rioters in Kenosha? Several of them were armed too.

They sure as hell shouldn’t of been out there doing that bullshit either. What makes them so “noble”. Also it’s not like rittenhouse pursued them and starred shooting them. It was the other way around. Why can’t you own up to that fact?

[SmokinAces2000]

First dude he shot threw a bag at him, oh yeah I can definitely see how Kyle felt like his life was on the line

[globetrotter22]

While chasing him while other people were yelling “kill him” and then trying to steal his gun? What was Kyle supposed to do? Just let him take his gun?

That guy was a crazy, homeless and last but not least a convicted pedo. He shouldn’t even be out in society anyway. Also lots of people would of liked to see him shot dead whether he threatened Kyle or not. Personally I believe it would of been murder if Kyle shot him for the hell of it. But that’s not how it went down.

You know it’s actually possible to believe rittenhouse is innocent of the homicide charges and STILL support BLM, gun control, etc. Yes that is very possible. Just acknowledging the facts doesn’t automatically mean you changed your political beliefs.

For example if some antifa radical showed up to the Jan 6th riots (which were disgusting) and everything went down the exact same way as Kenosha I would still believe in the guys innocence given the evidence. That doesn’t mean I like him, his cause, etc. But I am able to look at these scenarios with an objective lens. I think rittenhouse is guilty of the gun charge (not homicide though). But most other people seem to lack that crítical thinking. It’s scary on a broader level.

[SmokinAces2000]

Yeah they were probably trying to take his gun because like I said he was an active shooter

[globetrotter22]

Except he didn’t fire a shoot until that chased him and tried to take his gun. And again Joseph Rosenbaum was a homeless, crazy and had been convicted of sexually assaulting 5 boys. Do you really trust that guys judgment? If Rittenhouse really was an “active shooter” then why was he trying to run away before firing a shot?

Look man this isn’t a “I’m right and your wrong” argument. That is I am not trying to one up your viewpoint. If Rittenhouse seriously was a far right terrorist who went to Kenosha to randomly kill people then I say throw the book at him. But there is airtight evidence that is NOT the case. All available evidence supports his side of the story. He also didn’t need to take the witness stand. But he did because he wanted to tell his side of the story.

I encourage you to look at non partisan articles (heavy. con is good at reporting facts only) and then come to your conclusion. You aren’t betraying your political beliefs if you at some point come to a different conclusion. But please stick to the facts.

[SmokinAces2000]

Again you are assuming that my stance on this is tied to my political beliefs and disbeliefs when that isn’t the case, from what I saw he’s guilty of murder on the first guy and at the very least manslaughter on the second

[globetrotter22]

And by the way I think he is guilty of a weapons charge. But chances are he will get let off for everything because the prosecution so completely screwed all this up and overcharged him that the jury will likely throw their hands up in the air and say “fuck it I acquit him on everything”.

This is danger with politicized criminal cases and mob rule thinking. People either get completely let off or overcharged. When in reality they are likely guilty of some criminal charges but not others.

[globetrotter22]

@SmokinAces2000 alright man I’ll agree to disagree. I guess I’ve just seen so many people get politically motivated about his guilt or lack thereof. I too don’t think he’s innocent just because I’m a conservative. If a leftist activist went to Jan 6th riots with a rifle to protect the Capitol building (alright I’ve never seen anybody on the left protect government property but anyway) and be shot 3 people in self defense just like Rittenhouse then my opinion would be the same too (considering all the evidence).

But I do encourage you to look hard at the details and legal definitions of the case. Anyway nice chatting and best of luck to you man.

[OddBeMe]

I don’t know the charges offhand. I think murder may be high honestly. Def manslaughter

[globetrotter22]

I recommend you read the details about it

[OddBeMe]

What am I missing?

[globetrotter22]

In every incident he opened fire he was being chased and threatened. The one guy who testified for the prosecution admitted he unholstered his pistol and pointed it right at Rittenhouse’s head prior to being shot in the arm.

[OddBeMe]

I saw the video. It’s borderline at best. But that’s why there’s a trial. He at least should get a weapons charge.

[globetrotter22]

I might be convinced he is guilty of a weapons charge. But the prosecution screwed this up so much that he is likely to be let off for all charges.

This trial was politically motivated. If it wasn’t he wouldn’t of faced murder and attempted murder charges via all three of his assailants. At best they might of been able to get him on a involuntarily manslaughter charge for the Joseph Rosenbaum shooting. He was unarmed but he did in fact chase Rittenhouse and try to steal his rifle. But as for the other two shootings one guy hit him with a skateboard twice and the other pointed his handgun at his head. It’s insane that prosecution even attempts criminal homicide charges for those two incidents.

This is why America needs to get its head out of its ass when it comes to mob rule. We are so politicized that almost nobody takes a step back (including Biden) before passing judgment. Biden made a grossly inaccurate comment that Rittenhouse was a white supremacist. There is zero evidence he is.

[OddBeMe]

I’m starting to think the prosecution intentionally screwed it up like it does when cops go on trial.

[globetrotter22]

That’s a bit of a stretch there. I don’t know if any prosecutor who gamble his entire reputation and career by doing that. If he really was that corrupt and it was exposed than antifa would show up at his house with Molotov cocktails.

No he took this case because there was a very strong but false narrative that rittenhouse is a white supremacist activist who went to Kenosha to kill BLM
supporters. But evidence points to the contrary. Also speaking of money Facebook actually shut down links to fundraisers for Rittenhouse’s legal expenses.

Anyway I said this earlier. If a far left activist showed up to the Jan 6th riots with a rifle to protect the Capitol Hill building and everything went down the exact same way it went down for Rittenhouse then I would acknowledge his innocent via self defense. I might not like his political beliefs (I don’t like any of the Jan 6th rioters either) but still I look at these cases as impartially as possible. It’s hard not to judge with our innate biases but when it comes to criminal trials especially homicide trials our legal system HAS to do this. No matter how much you hate the defendants background you have to give them a fair trial. Mob rule has been done in history and it’s a very ugly thing.

[Guardian45]

Prison or Hang