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

@NekoShiro

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.

I've seen a longer clip where he is running up the road, saying he's looking for the police just after he shot the first person.

Another man starts shouting to the rest of the fairly aggitated crowd, about how he's just shot someone.

Then they all start chasing him and grabbing him. He wasn't aiming his gun at anyone at this point.

For the 2nd and 3rd shooting, I'm not suprised it was found to be self defense. It was a very febrile situation and they were attacking him. Most of those people would have no idea who he was or what had happened.

He would have no idea if those people would just pin him down or kill him. One of them did have a gun.

The same clip shows the first shooting and I honestly can't tell what happens there.

@WonderfulYou

What exactly are you shocked about? Your post is incorrect. There’s a lot of accurate information in these posts. Do you prefer to not know the truth?

Watch the video.

How many people did he shoot or shoot at?
What was he doing there with a gun?

No one else in the video looks like they even have a gun.
The entire crowd is trying to stop him and shouting that he has a gun.

If he didn’t see the blue flashing lights it would have been a lot worse.

Have you read the evidence?. He was chased, there were death threats against him, he was threatened with a gun, he was assaulted whilst on the ground. What would you do if you thought you were going to be killed? Just lie there and take it? He didn't shoot anyone until he was chased and threatened. The prosecution called witnesses they considered neutral or who would give evidence against Rittenhouse, and they all backed up Rittenhouses version of events. How could a jury convict? Even the DA, a guy who's won awards for his prosecuting skills, decided on one of the most important trials Kenisha has ever had, not to prosecute himself but to pass it over to his deputy. Why? Because he knew the case was weak, losing was likely and he didn't want it attached to his name. Honestly, just take 5 minutes out of your day and read the actual evidence.

@Carboncheque

The man he shot but didn’t manage to kill actually was a paramedic who was treating people and had a gun for his own protection.

Wasn't the man that you are defending also the one that was filmed firing the first shot in to the air?

, I keep hearing that someone had a gun

The victim said in court that he drew his own gun.

@Carboncheque

The man he shot but didn’t manage to kill actually was a paramedic who was treating people and had a gun for his own protection.

Gaige Grosskreutz was carrying a gun illegally and he actually followed Rittenhouse through the streets and then advanced on him with his gun pointing at him. How was that defending himself? He admitted in court that it wasn't until he actually aimed his gun at Rittenhouse, that Rittenhouse shot and wounded him. He also has numerous complaints against him, including convictions for carrying a gun while intoxicated. Was he just defending himself then as well?

The gun laws in America are insane, but there were loads of people in footage of the protests carrying guns. Rosenbaum's friend Ziminski was carrying a gun. Grosskreutz was carrying a gun. Rosenbaum had no reason to single out Rittenhouse over any other person who was carrying a gun. Rosenbaum had been threatening people that evening (and using the most extreme racist language) and allegedly targeted Rittenhouse because he was separated from others and going to put out a fire. The person who did a flying jump-kick into Rittenhouse's head, the person who hit him over the head with a skateboard, and the person who aimed a gun at him probably thought he was an active shooter, but it was reasonable for him to think they were endangering his life. This is about criminality, not ideology. If anyone was to blame for the whole clusterfuck it was Rosenbaum and his aggressive criminal actions.

FOJN Viva is a sweetheart, totally not what I previously would have thought a lawyer would be (he's too nice!). Barnes is more abrasive and I have felt uncomfortable with how hard he has been criticising Richards (whose closing arguments and post interview today was quite brilliant).

@WonderfulYou

The idea that the gun charges were dropped were ridiculous too. His barrel was too long for it to be illegal - that’s insane.

As soon as I heard that I knew the other charges would be dropped too.

Two charges were dropped against him because there was not enough evidence over curfew breaking, and his gun did not meet the specifications that would make it illegal.

The other 5 charges were not dropped. He was found not guilty.

If you can't even get that right, I'd say you have very little knowledge over what happened and you'd be best not commenting as if you do.

IIRC, it was Ziminski, the friend of Rosenbaum - and another one with a lengthy rap sheet, who fired the first shot into the air as Rosenbaum was chasing down Rittenhouse.

@Aquamarine1029

How? The prosecution didn't prove their case and the jury found him not guilty.

I think you could be onto something

I just watched a report on ITV where they didn't report accurately, fairly or dispassionately on the trial. Instead they used Biden's quote of how angry he was by the acquittal to convey general hostility and incredulity at the verdict. They implied it was shocking he'd got off even though commentators had said the evidence was so weak it was amazing the case had been brought at all. I guess I should expect dire reporting from Tom Bradby because every night he tries to sensationalise things. He never speaks impartially. But this was really bad.
And how shocking of a US president to speak so impartially like that. What's the difference between him and Trump?
Then to come on here and see such misinformation being passed around and claims made. When people who can't even bother to educate themselves on the actual facts hold as much sway as 12 people sat in a courtroom, listening to all the evidence and unanimously returning not guilty verdicts, then there should be sanctions on social media.

Biden's statement:

While the verdict in Kenosha will leave many Americans feeling angry and concerned, myself included, we must acknowledge that the jury has spoken. I ran on a promise to bring Americans together, because I believe that what unites us is far greater than what divides us. I know that we’re not going to heal our country’s wounds overnight, but I remain steadfast in my commitment to do everything in my power to ensure that every American is treated equally, with fairness and dignity, under the law.

I urge everyone to express their views peacefully, consistent with the rule of law. Violence and destruction of property have no place in our democracy. The White House and Federal authorities have been in contact with Governor Evers’s office to prepare for any outcome in this case, and I have spoken with the Governor this afternoon and offered support and any assistance needed to ensure public safety.

Sorry, should have put the link for that: www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/11/19/statement-by-president-biden/

@soapboxqueen
The same clip shows the first shooting and I honestly can't tell what happens there.

But there was a witness, Richie McGinniss, an impartial journalist, who saw the whole thing go down. The prosecution called him as one of their witnesses but his evidence exonerated Rittenhouse. So no matter what can be seen, a witness the prosecution trusted gave evidence in Rittenhouse's favour.

Exactly. The President of the USA is condemning the verdict...
While the verdict in Kenosha will leave many Americans feeling angry and concerned, myself included..
Trump would gave been, quite rightly, hauled over the coals for this.

Is that a joke? Trump would have been tweeting, "Bruce Schroeder, he could declare him guilty if he wanted to. Ask Bruce to do the right thing."

He certainly wouldn't be saying "we must acknowledge that the jury has spoken".

[quote madisonbridges]@soapboxqueen
The same clip shows the first shooting and I honestly can't tell what happens there.

But there was a witness, Richie McGinniss, an impartial journalist, who saw the whole thing go down. The prosecution called him as one of their witnesses but his evidence exonerated Rittenhouse. So no matter what can be seen, a witness the prosecution trusted gave evidence in Rittenhouse's favour.[/quote]
I was not in any way critiquing the judgement of the jury in relation to the first shooting.

I simply stated what I could and could not observe from the video I saw.

Have people's memories wiped Trump clean out of existence or something?

I mean, criticise Biden (or anyone) by all means, but this reflex false equivalence of "so they must be as bad as some opposing guy".

Yeah. No.

I watched the trial and there was such a difference between what was actually being presented and what was being said in the media and by people in the public eye, even Joe Biden. I haven’t seen anyone who watched the trial say anything other than it was the right verdict. It’s shocking that the media can judge someone so wrongly without any facts especially when they they hadnt yet been tried. The jury were very brave in delivering the right verdict with the threats to their safety.

@ThreeLocusts

Good grief. Yes the ppl who got shot challenged KR, but they only did so because he was carrying a semi-automatic gun, at a demonstration.

He had no business being there that night with a weapon, he was 17 and even according to barmy US laws he wasn't entitled to that thing. He was a reckless fool and it was his recklessness that led to the deaths. It was manslaughter at least.

Though the ppl who most need to be on trial were the grownups who called on fb for ppl to turn up with guns and then didn't even send this obviously out of his depth kid home. And where the f**k were his parents?

No, this isn't true in so many ways. Read the evidence.

Rosenbaum was heard by several people, including a journalist, threatening to kill people, including KR. He then approached KR who ran away. Rosenbaum then chased after him and lunged to wrestle the gun off him. Thats when KR shot him. Rosenbaum was not a choirboy out to do his civic duty. He'd served time for raping five boys aged 9 to 11. He had charges of domestic violence against him. He was a thug. I don't think it's unreasonable that a 17yo would be scared. KR never threatened him. On the contrary he tried to get away from him.

He was chased by a crowd of people, who he gad not threatened, shouting 'get him'. He fell over and people started kicking at him and beating him with a skateboard. He did not threaten any of them with a gun until he was, as he thought, fighting for his life.

Grosskreutz testified in court that he followed KR with a group of other people and that KR never levelled his gun at Grosskreutz, until he had pointed his own gun at KR.

USA gun laws are crazy. No argument from me. But KR was not breaking the law with the gun he had. He was charged over it but the judge threw it out because the law is specific over what makes a gun illegal and KR's gun did not meet those criteria. Therefore he'd broken no laws. If he's not broken a law to carry it, and bearing in mind other people had guns with them and they didn't get charged either, it can't be deemed reckless to just take a gun with you. And as he never fired the gun until he was threatened and/or attacked, how can he be judged to have behaved recklessly?

Your last point - 100% agree with you. But this was a riot. None of them should have been there.

@mathanxiety

Really glad I'm not in Kenosha tonight.

In my opinion, if you go to a place where there are protests, carrying a weapon, you are looking for trouble, and if you do get into trouble, you should be asked what you thought you'd end up doing with the gun.

A further question would be whether property is worth a life.

Also, who asked you to go there and bring your gun?

Precisely.

If we look at the bare bones of it, it's self defense but there are so many hows and whys that make the level of force inappropriate, and premeditated.

As an American I have to say that I'm very pleasantly surprised at how well informed this discussion has been. I was really expecting it would just be another let's rubbish the Americans pile on.

What KR did was monumentally stupid but him having that rifle was clearly legal and the videos and witness testimony show he was retreating from people who threatened to kill him then acted in self defense. I think the Kenosha police deserve a lot of the blame for letting things get that out of control.

@PerkingFaintly

Is that a joke? Trump would have been tweeting, "Bruce Schroeder, he could declare him guilty if he wanted to. Ask Bruce to do the right thing."

He certainly wouldn't be saying "we must acknowledge that the jury has spoken".

Trump would no doubt have said totally wrong things. And he would have been rightly condemned for it. I already said that.

But Biden said he was angry at the verdict. That's saying he believes the verdict us wrong. No matter what he says after that, he's accusing 12 people of doing the wrong thing for the wrong reasons. He can say that the US has to respect the verdict but it doesn't negate his criticism.

You can't have it both ways. Just because you don't like Trump but you do like (or dislike less) Biden, it's wrong to give Biden a pass when he's said the wrong thing. It's being hypocritical to hold them to different standards based on your politics. There was no evidence to convict and Biden said what he said purely to win votes. Politicking at the expense of 12 people who were actually listening to evidence (probably while Joe was napping) is a disgusting thing to do.

I never referred to Trump. You brought Trump into it. Trump is the past. Biden is the present. And what Biden has done is wrong. Who cares if Trump would have done worse. Trump isn't the president.

madisonbridges Sat 20-Nov-21 00:32:38
What's the difference between him and Trump?

madisonbridges Sat 20-Nov-21 01:35:18
I never referred to Trump. You brought Trump into it.

This is a good explainer. www.persuasion.community/p/the-rittenhouse-verdict-shouldnt