Kyle Rittenhouse not guilty?

[weegiemum]

How? He shot 2 people dead in front of witnesses, but apparently it was "self defence"?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/nov/19/kyle-rittenhouse-verdict-kenosha-shooting?CMP=ShareiOSAppp_Other

I've quite unexpectedly ended up watching quite a bit of the trial and also the witness footage and I didn't think it looked like self defence after JR. If you'd just shot and at the least wounded (I'd accept he wouldn't have known to what extent, maybe) someone why would you stay out on the street and put yourself in the position where you needed to defend yourself from two more people?

But I agree the prosecution didn't exactly give a good advert for himself.

@WonderfulYou

You're on the floor, people are trying to stop you, how do you know they will pin you down until the police arrive but not hit you? how do you know they don't have a gun? that's the problem with carrying guns.

Yes people are trying to stop you from shooting people.
He had a massive gun he could have easily just pointed it at them and threatened to shoot them.

Just to add to this.

South Africa is, unlike the US, a genuinely violent country, not just one where a large number of people like to tote guns in order to look like The Big Man.

The average South African will tell you that you shouldn't carry a gun because it'll be taken off you and used on you.

I understand you're all mums, you're not from the UK, you see this crying young man and feel bad for him, but for god's sake please don't fall for this guy's bullshit narrative

I doubt anyone feels bad for him and thinks boo hoo he's crying poor lad hope he gets off lightly. But the verdict was the correct one given the evidence, you can see that without feeling a shred of sympathy for him

So the GQPs on Mumsnet in force? I guess that explains the state of the Feminism board.

@FOJN

BelleHathor

He was using his own computer too, there are some interesting stills of evidence his laptop was loaded with video manipulation soft wear.

The softwares called Handbrake, it's used to re-encode videos to different formats/resolutions. He then allegedly emailed it via gmail (chain of custody and rules of handling evidence be damned!).

Funny how the lower resolution video the defence received has a created/timestamp 20 minutes later than the prosecutions higher resolution video. There's a reason Benger was so quiet.

There is a lot of context to these events that I think is not obvious if you're not from the US.

I'm not a mum either. I don't think the context is relevant unless you think the law changes according to the situation. I read what US newspapers wanted people to think but it bore no relation to the trial I was watching.

He was lawfully in Kenosha, he was lawfully in possession of the gun (the law was unclear because of his age but the charge was dropped because where the law is unclear a ruling judge will favour the defendant, this is standard practice) he was attacked and the jury was satisfied that he reasonably believed he was under threat of serious bodily harm or death and he defended himself. Where the criteria for self defence has been met you cannot be found guilty of reckless endangerment.

The jury instructions were lengthy but clear on these points. The deliberations took so long because of some "questionable" drone footage that was introduced into evidence and despite the prosecution making no claims of provocation in their opening arguments they added it to their closing by claiming KR had pointed his gun at someone when not defending himself. Provocation denies you the privilege of self defence, this privilege can be regained if you retreat. The video footage was very unclear and is "dubious" to say the least but the jury clearly wanted to be certain on this point.

@FOJN

Don't be naive

Seriously, you think a white supremacist organisation would be lead by a black man. I think I'm being logical. I seem to recall his first wife was black. He has explicitly said he rejects white supremacy and racism. Can a black person be a white supremacist? As I said they are deeply unpleasant (an understatement) but better to accuse them based on evidence rather than emotion. They are ultra nationalists (and extreme misogynists) but that is not the same as white supremacists.

It is actually not that unusual for extremist groups to have members from targeted victim groups. The dynamics are very complicated.

For example, there were German Jews who volunteered for the Wehrmacht, seeing themselves as primarily German and distinct from the Eastern European Jews who seemed to be the Nazis' primary targets.

In this case, it's likely that the Proud Boys saw Tarrio primarily as Cuban-American, not Afro-Cuban, which actually does make a difference in the American context. There is no dissonance with a Cuban-American standing up for white supremacy and against Marxism.

It is also worth trying to understand how people felt whose homes and businesses were being torn up during the riots.
Combined with a strong sense that the police aren't doing their job of protecting people since the protests.

I understand that the huge amounts of guns in my city make it more unsafe.
But a couple of weeks ago a Neighbour shot a car thief dead on our street after the thief shot at him.
The British part of me was just appalled by the whole thing and the senseless waste. But part of me thought, well at least it will put criminals off if they think this area is protected.
Emotionally I felt safer even if I understood that it just feeds into a cycle of violence. And that loss of life over a cat converter is absolutely awful.
It is much easier to have a logical take on a situation when you aren't living it.

BelleHathor

Thank you, I couldn't recall the name of it. Have you been watching Rekieta Law?

The case should never have been taken to trial. It was clearly self-defense. Rittenhouse was running away from them, they held a gun to his head, etc etc. There was so much public pressure to bring the case that the prosecutors felt they had to, despite having no hope of winning.

All 4 people involved were white, and all were there for nefarious purposes. Rittenhouse being there to defend the town is stupid, but the facts are that the other 3 were all criminals and there to riot (nothing to do with BLM). The one that held a gun to his head did so with an illegal firearm.

The prosecution was left arguing that Rittenhouse should have let hardened criminals beat him up, rather than defend himself.

What has been really awful about this case is how the media have used it to stoke up division through deliberate misreporting. Many people think that Rittenhouse shot black BLM protestors, not white rioters. Even today the Independent was reporting the victims as black.

I'm no Trump fan, but the fact that Rittenhouse was shouldn't prejudice the case.

The argument that if it had been a black man that the outcome would have been different is fair, however in this case they also shouldn't be prosecuted. Black people have been treated appallingly in the US judicial system, but the fix isn't to wrongly imprison white people as a gesture.

@dreamingbohemian

Anyway I look forward to seeing what you all think when the men who lynched Ahmaud Arbery are also found not guilty. Because that is likely to happen as well.

It's a completely different case though. I don't think you can make miscarriages of justice against black men any less awful by supporting miscarriages of justice against white men, which from what I've read, this would have been.

It is much easier to have a logical take on a situation when you aren't living it.

I agree

I see footage of a man shooting people in the street. He is guilty. If he had no gun no one would be dead. The victims were trying to remove the gun from him because he was the danger. And then he proved it.

The prosecution was left arguing that Rittenhouse should have let hardened criminals beat him up, rather than defend himself.

Yes and I quote, "sometimes you just gotta take a beating." There were also some comments about everyone knows what it's like to be involved in a bar fight!

And let's not forget pointing a gun at the jury with finger in trigger as if the Alex Baldwin incident had never happened.

Based on the evidence and the local laws at the time of the incident (and this is all that matters, really), the correct verdict was reached. The fact that you may disagree with open carry / gun ownership / Rittenhouse's political leanings is entirely irrelevant in this context. If you want to change the law, go and lobby politicians. The judge and jury of a criminal trial are not the people you should be criticising here. It's really not that hard to understand.

I can completely understand why he was acquitted on the basis of self defence. No questions there from me.

What is harder to take is the overall result: that he bears no criminal responsibility for what happened.

He chose to go to a disturbance and choose to take a lethal weapon with him. As a result he caused the death of some people. And there is no sanction under law for this.

Utterly stupid.

He is guilty. If he had no gun no one would be dead

I agree that if he didn't have a gun no one would have died.

The victims were trying to remove the gun from him because he was the danger.

But thats the grey part, he felt under threat & retaliated plus one of the victims had a gun & certainly other people in the vicinity would have had guns.

<a class="break-all" href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DiryQSpxSlrg&ved=2ahUKEwj1kNKry6X0AhVCQEEAHfhkCjkQo7QBegQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw2CwUp5Q2wmhxpOgqO0_RPi" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DiryQSpxSlrg&ved=2ahUKEwj1kNKry6X0AhVCQEEAHfhkCjkQo7QBegQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw2CwUp5Q2wmhxpOgqO0_RPi

I posted a link to the footage for anyone who wants to watch it, he is being chased while brandishing a gun, people are trying to take it off of him as they don't feel safe, I keep hearing that someone had a gun but I can't see them pointing it at him, and one person hit him with a skateboard and apparently shooting and killing them is an appropriate self defense for that.

He blindly starts shooting people because he fell over, I don't believe this is justice.

@FOJN

BelleHathor

Thank you, I couldn't recall the name of it. Have you been watching Rekieta Law?

Yes!!! I have followed Robert Barnes and Viva Frei for a couple of years and they recommended Rekieta Law a couple of weeks ago. It's Law Nerd heaven (happy that Wisconsin is on the East Coast so don't have to stay up too late😆 !).

Wisconsin is the Midwest, for better or worse 😉

Yes!!! I have followed Robert Barnes and Viva Frei for a couple of years and they recommended Rekieta Law a couple of weeks ago.

Me too. Not a huge fan of Robert Barnes but think Viva is an all round decent guy.

@Carboncheque

He chose to go into a violent situation with a gun. He shot three people. Two died. If he had stayed away, two people would still be alive.

You could say if those two people hadn't been protesting but had stayed at home as they'd been asked, they wouldn't have been shot. And if Rosenberg, a convicted paedophile and child rapist, with pending charges of domestic violence against him, hadn't already threatened to kill Rittenhouse and then chased him through the street, attempting to take the gun off him, he wouldn't have been killed. And if Huber, a domestic abuse repeat offender, hadn't been involved in chasing Rittenhouse with a group of other men, all shouting 'get him' then attacked him with a skateboard and then struggled to get the gun off him, he'd still be alive. And if Grosskreutz, with multiple complaints against him including a conviction of being drunk with a firearm and who was armed with a handgun illegally, hadn't pointed his Glock and advanced at Rittenhouse, he wouldn't have been shot and wounded. And if Kenosha had had a reasonable prosecution, they would haven't presented three witnesses who all ended up testifying in Rittenhouse's favour. If, if if. Have you actually bothered to read the court case and all the evidence?

@verymiddleaged

Wisconsin is the Midwest, for better or worse 😉

😆 Oops, apologies I thought is was EST, at least it's only 6 hours behind GMT (unlike Arizona which starts far too late for me to stay up to watch in the UK!).

I keep hearing that someone had a gun but I can't see them pointing it at him
gaige Grosskreutz, he testified in court he pointed it at rittenhouse and you can see him at 21seconds in the footage with the gun.