Rittenhouse case

I am familiar with the case but haven't followed it close enough to make a decision but yeah, I think there will be rioting and looting either way but especially if he is found not guilty.
 
boatman37 said:
I am familiar with the case but haven't followed it close enough to make a decision but yeah, I think there will be rioting and looting either way but especially if he is found not guilty.
Click to expand...
Kenosha doesn't deserve this. From the TV, it doesn't look like they have the barricades up. Hopefully the National Guard will be ready and used.

I just hope the jury has the stones to do what is right regardless of the pressure put on by the media and the thugs around the court house.
 
bobeast said:
That's how the mob mentality works. First decide on guilt or innocence, then burn down buildings and steal TVs if the verdict doesn't agree.
Click to expand...
What? You don't believe The Potato head in Chief when he says Kyle is a white supremacist murderer before knowing anything about him?
 
Everyone realizes everyone involved was white right?….The jury is white except one black guy…. The media has been pushing white supremacy and racism…. For god knows why other then to keep the narrative going…but no race here bunch of white guys threatening and shooting each other
 
Blueone said:
Everyone realizes everyone involved was white right?….The jury is white except one black guy…. The media has been pushing white supremacy and racism…. For god knows why other then to keep the narrative going…but no race here bunch of white guys threatening and shooting each other
Click to expand...
Gotta agree with this. I don’t understand the media taking that position. I get that the race issue was the reason for the protest, but this was a horrible tragedy for all involved. I feel bad for the kid, but someone should have told him (or he should have known better) not to take an AR15 down to a protest. Nothing good can come of that, and nothing did.
I don’t know how the trial system works down there, but I hope he is not found guilty of murder, but some lesser charge. Reckless endangerment causing death (if that sort of thing exists) maybe. I don’t think anyone wanted to kill anyone. It just got out of hand and went nuts when he fired the first shot. Just like you would expect in a tense situation. That’s why LEO’s are trained on when to shoot. Kids aren’t.
 
Creekwood said:
Gotta agree with this. I don’t understand the media taking that position. I get that the race issue was the reason for the protest, but this was a horrible tragedy for all involved. I feel bad for the kid, but someone should have told him (or he should have known better) not to take an AR15 down to a protest. Nothing good can come of that, and nothing did.
I don’t know how the trial system works down there, but I hope he is not found guilty of murder, but some lesser charge. Reckless endangerment causing death (if that sort of thing exists) maybe. I don’t think anyone wanted to kill anyone. It just got out of hand and went nuts when he fired the first shot. Just like you would expect in a tense situation. That’s why LEO’s are trained on when to shoot. Kids aren’t.
Click to expand...
He was threatened …the people threatening could have walked the other way but didn’t and approached him and threatened to kill him… so do you wait to be killed or kill… the people not in his shoes seem to think if he was shot it would be okay to shoot back…. He chose not to wait. I would let him go…. Don’t get distracted by the bullshit and AR15 crap…a gun is a gun
 
Tucker Carlson Tonight (11/15) pointed out some obvious things that that have not been reported. It’s worth taking a look at
 
I don’t know what it is about Tomi…. But I can’t help but like her

EC50A258-3F61-4632-8E46-17FB786BE11A.jpeg
 
Blueone said:
He was threatened …the people threatening could have walked the other way but didn’t and approached him and threatened to kill him… so do you wait to be killed or kill… the people not in his shoes seem to think if he was shot it would be okay to shoot back…. He chose not to wait. I would let him go…. Don’t get distracted by the bullshit and AR15 crap…a gun is a gun
Click to expand...
Well I believe if you are carrying an AR15 you appear pretty threatening too. He shouldn’t have been there. He was not a trained LEO or even with mall cop training.
 
Creekwood said:
Well I believe if you are carrying an AR15 you appear pretty threatening too. He shouldn’t have been there. He was not a trained LEO or even with mall cop training.
Click to expand...
But he was there and it’s a free country…. I am with you ..no normal person would go there. But that doesn’t change the fact he was threatened to the point he defended himself….and get over the AR15 it’s a long rifle nothing more
 
If he is convicted, the appellate court will have a field day going over all of the errors, most notably the Griffin issues. The prosecutor in his cross of the defendant commented on the defendant asserting his 5th Amendment right. The defense attorney raised the objection and the judge tried to cure it by just admonishing the prosecutor and instructing the jury to disregard the statement. Here is the wiki article on Griffin: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griffin_v._California
And some news coverage of the issue: https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/prosecutors-questions-rittenhouse-draw-judges-anger-81096096

On another note, both the prosecutor and the defense attorney were both very personal in their closings, showing their distain for one another. I remember watching the OJ trial when I was in law school. Say what you want about the defendant in that case, but the lawyering was exceptional. Hopefully young law students didn't tune in to the broadcast today.
 
Last edited:
Shoyrtt said:
If he is convicted, the appellate court will have a field day going over all of the errors, most notably the Griffin issues. The prosecutor in his case in chief commented on the defendant asserting his 5th Amendment right. The defense attorney raised the objection and the judge tried to cure it by just admonishing the prosecutor and instructing the jury to disregard the statement. Here is the wiki article on Griffin: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griffin_v._California
On another note, both the prosecutor and the defense attorney were both very personal in their closings, showing their distain for one another. I remember watching the OJ trial when I was in law school. Say what you want about the defendant in that case, but the lawyering was exceptional. Hopefully young law students didn't tune in to the broadcast today.
Click to expand...
I watched a little bit of the closing arguments today….and I thought to myself if this is the best we got…we are in trouble
 
Creekwood said:
Well I believe if you are carrying an AR15 you appear pretty threatening too. He shouldn’t have been there. He was not a trained LEO or even with mall cop training.
Click to expand...
First of all it wasn’t a protest. It was a freaking riot. The town was destroyed. That doesn’t happen in a protest.

Second, whether he shouldn’t have been there is completely irrelevant. It’s not an element of any crime.

Third, law enforcement wasn’t anywhere to be found. They certainly where not protecting the town. And that’s what happens when law enforcement ceases to do their job (at the order of the powers that be).
 
I think these three looked at this kid and thought he would an easy target. One grabs the gun by the barrel, he gets shot. Next takes a few swings at him with a skateboard, he gets shot. Then you have the medic, this guy is trained to help people. Instead of going to the aid of the others he pulls his illegal carried handgun and points it at the kid, he gets one round in the arm. Then claimed in court he thought this was a active shooter. The kid was retreating during all of this and they were actively going after him. The medic was very lucky in my book, he would be just like the two before him.

The kids only real mistake was being there with his long arm. Even then he owned and open carried.

This kid should go free and should have never been charged. If this isn’t self defense I don’t know what is.

So before any one of us can pass a judgment on this kid we would need to be in his shoes. There are many officers on this site who might back me up on this. Some local ranges have simulators now, go and run a situation like this and see how you would react. You’d be very surprised at yourself and be thanking every officers you’d meet afterwards.
 
Creekwood said:
Gotta agree with this. I don’t understand the media taking that position. I get that the race issue was the reason for the protest, but this was a horrible tragedy for all involved.
Click to expand...

If you consider that a protest, I'd hate to see what you call a riot...
 
In my opinion it wasn't the smartest decision to go there in the first place but he had a legal right to be there and a legal right to have the weapon he had (doesn't matter if it is an AR or a .22 handgun). What firearm he had is irrelevant in this case. From the video I saw it looks like he was hit in the head with that skateboard? Or at least the other guy was aiming for the head? That could be construed as deadly force. The legal definition for deadly force is 'could cause death or serious bodily injury'. Being hit in the head by a swinging skateboard while on the ground could very well be seen as deadly force. If he was able to articulate that to the jury then that shoot could be considered justified. I don't know the sequence of events so can't say about the other shootings but it all comes down to how well he can articulate that he felt he was in danger of death or serious bodily injury.

DISCAIMER: I am not an attorney but have a few years of law enforcement experience and several college level courses in criminal justice (I started out as a criminal justice major)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
113,154
Messages
1,427,389
Members
61,061
Latest member
Rod01
Back
Top