I for one do not believe he shot them people out of self defence and never meant to kill them. I think he intended to kill them and thought he would get away with it. The Judge as well is a joke. What a very strange trial. Only in America.
Him being a liar does matter given he is their star witness.
The prosecution has shown plenty to suggest that it wasn't and in any normal society he'd have the book thrown at him - in the US, especially with this judge, he'll walk
I'd argue a violent insurrection against the US government is a much great scale than the looting of a few shops.
It's either legal or not in the place it happened.
Its interesting that you seem to think his skill set is in someway relevant to the trial, but why don't you link to whatever quote in the trial where he claimed to have no experience with the rifle (not a gun) and what exactly you think he was lying about, because your posts are a bit incoherent.
Goes from bad to worse to desperate from the prosecution
Of all the nonsense ever posted on Boards…………
The video of the shootings shows it is an obvious case of self defence. Some one's back story has zero relevance to their guiltiness, you might consider it sentencing but not for guilt. End of story.
I agree it is utter nonsense the idea that an active shooter has the right to shoot whoever tries to disarm them once they are retreating from the people they shot.
This 17 year old wasn't defending his community though
Arguable. Rittenhouse's father lives in Kenosha. Rittenhouse lived there with him for a while, visited regularly, and had friends in the area.
He crossed state lines armed with a gun
He did not cross state lines armed with a gun.
I am not going through 6 hours of testimony to find something that won't do a thing to change your mind.
He is lying about his experience with the weapon - he is very well coached but so much of his story makes no sense.
There was no “active shooter”. As per the FBI, an active shooter is defined as “an individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area”.
Rittenhouse was not actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill anyone, otherwise there’d be a hell of a lot more people dead. He only opened fire in self defence.
You can waffle away about whatever you like, but you cannot alter those facts.
So if he made a video saying he was planning to shoot multiple people when he got to Kenosha , regardless of who or what they were doing it's shouldn't be admitted and shown to the jury ,???
If something like that existed would it not show the person was planning to shoot people and going under the guise of being an EMT was cover to explain why he or she was there ???
I know it's hypothetical
If my aunt had balls she’d be my uncle. Another hypothetical
No he would be trans
Im just asking you to back your assertion up with proof. Fairly standard stuff.
Is someone who shoots up a school no longer an 'active shooter' as soon as they start retreating while holding their gun (or 'rifle' for the pedants out there)?
When did that happen?
I watched his full testimony yesterday, Rittenhouse stated he barely used the weapon and disagreed with the testimony of his friend that he practiced shooting the gun at a longer range.
You believe his experience is irrelevant so how would finding the clip change your mind on anything?
You conveniently left out the word 'whites' which was in your initial post, which had already been pointed out to you as bulls41t, seeing as a massive portion of antifa and BLM protesters are actually white.
It didn't because in no situation have I ever heard of an active shooter no longer be one because they start to retreat while holding their gun.
If the police had shown up right as Rittenhouse had killed his first victim (or the others) he would have been treated as an active shooter until he put his gun down and surrendered.
He saw the protests and riots on Fox, bought into the spin and thought he was free to join in with his rifle. At best he was an armed vigilante. IMO he thought he would enjoy himself by attending.
His defense is a judgment on the people he killed.
He'd no business being there to police and protect businesses, as he claimed.
It is hypothetical but the child rapist and the kidnapper decided to leave him no choice either way.
What ever shi7 talk he may have had before hand, the 2 abusers pushed it so he had no choice.
They were shot because they attacked a person in a manner Which he feared for his life and with so much phone footage made it clear, that they deserved it for what they were, didn't matter, no offense.
What happened is what is.
But... Is fantasy and hyperbole.
His claim of wanting to be a medic might be somewhat believable if he'd tried to lift a finger to save the lives of the men he killed - he didn't even think about that. He called his friend after the first shooting instead of 911
He called his friend to tell him he killed someone ,not bad for someone who was in fear for his life and being attacked by a baying mob
He was at no stage an active shooter, as per the FBI definition.
So basically let just blame the victims
That they are dead is just a fortunate outcome, that would be the case whether Rittenhouse shot them in self defense or cold blood.
The videos show clear self defense.
I'm just looking for the upside for everyone here, regardless of what they think of the legality of it.
They could have been people whose life had worth and he still would have been legally justified to fire.
Again - I am not making excuses. I am explaining the situation in the cultural context of where the ongoing trial is. If I heard it in an Irish courtroom it would be shocking. In a US one, I wouldn't even blink.
You cant attack someone and then claim to be the victim when it doesn't work out for you
Do you think it's logical to try to render first aid to someone/people you just shot in the middle a riot with loads of other people actively trying to attack you at the same time? Really?
In hindsight he probably should have called 911 first but he was a kid in a stressful situation. Who knows how any of us would react in a similar situation.
