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.
To be fair it is crystal clear in the footage Rosenbaum attacked Rittenhouse, not the other way around. He was determedly running after him and Rittenhouse only got a shot away by the skin of his teeth after swerving. Rittenhouse was running away.
Apparently diagnosed as having bipolar , PTSD, possibly other mental disorders ,he had a thing for noncompliance around authority figures ,and multiple suicide attempts according to media reports.
Hyper aggressive In a stressful and noisy environment likely led to his actions that night ,he was hyper aggressive but didn't attack anyone other than rittenhouse,
I accept that, Why he chose to push it so hard with Kyle is the great unknown and Why he is dead.
I deleted that last we'll agree to disagree.
There's video of Rittenhouse running in Rosenbaums direction ,all of the footage of rittenhouse shows him casually strolling around the area ,and they suddenly sprinted towards the man who had as he Claimed threatened to kill him,
Some of the stuff out of this judge was absolutely motivated by not wanting to be seen to favour Rittenhouse. To the extent that he allowed the provocation charge when he even described as garbage the enhanced blob that is supposed to show Rittenhouse pointing a gun at someone before he shot the nounce. The states "witness" had no idea how the enhancement took place and in no way does it offer a 'fait and accurate representation' of the original.
As a matter of interest do you know if the defense put forward the motions for a directed verdict or mistrial with prejudice?
Zero relevance to the trial though.
The chap is on trial for killing. They were killed by him. They are his victims. They are not on trial.
I don't know U.S. law, you could be right. Guilty of murder or manslaughter, they'd be his victims.
Their intent is alledged. They are not on trial.
But the Judge can't allow them to be called victims. As that can imply that what happened to them wasn't the only option left and that ultimately their demise wasn't because they forced it.
Victim is loaded with the impression that they were innocent or uninvolved and undeserving of being shot.
Their actions are looked at by the court. It is at the heart of the trial.
I've no issues with anyone on here ,
It's a discussion nobody will or should agree on everything , yes Rosenbaum was a sex offender ,but he's also a victim whose lived a horrible I'm not making any excuses for him,
But he has mental disorders and tried to commit suicide , maybe the hospital shouldn't have allowed himself to leave that day ,he might not have came across Rittenhouse ever , but now two people are dead and another injured ,the only common factor is two of the individuals Rittenhouse and rosenbaum should not have been there ,
Just imagine what could have happened if everyone who's was armed that night got into a massive gun battle , rioters,others , armed vigilantes and the police ,we wouldn't be looking at two death's it could have been a lot higher all because of these two individuals
I wouldn't disagree with that.
He was man with a history of assaulting children, so his decision to assault another child isn't inexplicable. Luckily this child was able to successfully defend themselves, and no doubt other children are safer as a result.
Rittenhouse wasn't a young boy ,he was 17 with a gun and mag full of 5.56 FMJ ,
Rittenhouse has he threatened to kill him ,no mention of he was going to do anything sexual to him.
A man's game charges a man's price. He should of stayed at home.
I'm going to do you a favour and let you know that as far as the US goes, anyone below the age of 18 is a child. As for Rosenbaum - I doubt he explained to his victims exactly what he planned to do to them. All we know is he assaulted them. Rosenbaum died as he lived, assaulting children. Children today are safer because Rittenhouse defended himself.
What you need to ask yourself is what dark path of the internet you wandered down that you are here defending a convicted child rapist.
That is true. He should have stayed home. The laughable truth is Rittenhouse was out there with the misconceived idea that he could provide medical aid to BLM/Antifa paedophile's like Rosenbaum. Even if a BLM/Antifa paedophile was to have a medical emergency, no one would have benefited by them receiving medical aid. Rittenhouse should indeed have stayed home. He comes across as a good kid, very badly misled by dumb libertarian ideology.
Same path as Rosenbaum. Only thing that explains why anyone would defend a pedophile who was assualting another person.
The chap is on trial for killing.
Except, he's not. He's on trial for several different counts, none of which is "killing", since "killing" in and of itself is not a crime. And since the defense is bringing forward the argument that Rittenhouse acted in self defense, and if that defense is successful then there are no legal "victims" because there are no crimes, it could be prejudicial for the people who were shot to be referred to in the courtroom as victims.
It's perfectly fine for you to call them victims, to call Kyle a murderer and whatever else if that's how you see it, but the reason that's not allowed in the courtroom is pretty clear.
If Rittenhouse's self defense claim is not upheld by the jury, then immediately the three people who were shot will be referred to as victims in the court.
Hyper aggresive, in a stressful noisy environment? You sound like you're making excuses for a dog that bit someone 😂
Although even a dog deserves a second chance, that child raping dirt bag deserved a bullet and karma delivered it via a teenage boy
Assaulting someone and attempting to take their firearm would be considered proof of a crime
Smacking someone across the head with a board would be considered proof of a crime
Illegal possesion of a firearm and pointing it a someone would be considered proof of a crime
If there was not proof that they were committing crimes Rittenhouse wouldnt have a leg to stand on.
Well, "progressive" ideology, carried to its natural conclusion does lead misguided people to situations where they are defending the reputation of paedophiles. When you are in the position that you say, sure X was convicted of raping 5 kids. But they were 19, and they had "no other or previous sex offences" as some sort of weird character reference...I mean, come on - have a word with yourself. They raped 5 kids. In any decent society, Rittenhouse would be getting a medal for what he did. But in Biden's America, a child is put on trial for defending himself from a convicted paedophile.
Rittenhouse stood up when his community needed him. He put the greater good above his own.
He protected those who could not protect themselves from what we all agree where exceptionally bad people.
It's not like they were coming down his street. He had to be drove twenty miles to find trouble. Militia's have no legal standing, what exactly was his mandate? They do have police etc to deal with riots. Do you know who also stood up when their community needed them? The Provos, early on that's that they did, see where that got us.
there is clear video of at least one of them attempting to attack some one ,
another admitted to pulling a gun on the same person
lucky he was able to defend him self
Victim implies that they suffered a particular fate/outcome, because of someone else's actions.
But this trial could decide that Rittenhouse was in fact the victim, who defended himself against those aggressors. There for, they would have suffered that particular fate/outcome as a result of their own actions.
Labeling them as victims, before the trial has decided who was the victim, would unfairly influence the jury.
There is footage of Rosenbaum pushing a burning dumpster into a filling station. !
Solidarity drove him. The idea that innocent people deserved to be protected from self entitled mobs who believed their privilege allowed them destroy others to satisfy their own need for gratification.
He wasn't a look away or hide kind of Man. No offense, Doesn't mean he is better or worse than you.
The petrol station where the black men were that he was screaming ni6634 at.
Rosenbaum would be surprised that he has a fan base in Ireland. He lived the dream I guess, if that's your thing
He didn't rape 5 kids it's not me defending him and it's not some weird character withness it's the fact he wasn't charged with rape , he was charged molestation , exposure of a minor of pornograpic material , allowing a minor to consume alcohol ,and a controlled substance weed I believe and found guilty on the above and served a 15 year sentence
It still has no bearing on this case ,
Many people would find a grown man performing oral sex on pre pubescent boys to be problematic.
The only bearing is that it is another reason to thank Rittenhouse for his service to the people.
I'm not disputing anything he did , I've already explained this ,
There we go with the rittenhouse is a hero , hero's don't Jump girls from and punch the heads off them do they ,
being he has form for attacking people /girls he can hardly be considered a victim now .
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/efd3dd9d0bb9a4718dd25ad32419f424.svg)