Wisconsin vs. Kyle Rittenhouse for murder in Kenosha *NOT GUILTY*

Defense Says Kyle Rittenhouse Was Attacked 'in the Street Like an Animal'

During opening statements on Tuesday, a defense attorney for Kenosha, Wis. shooter Kyle Rittenhouse characterized the teen who killed two people and injured a third during civil unrest in the summer of 2020 as someone who pulled the trigger only after others attacked him "in the street like an...

lawandcrime.com

 

[kdg411]

Without getting political, would someone enlighten me regarding the riot in Portland & Queens, NY due to this verdict? I'll gladly move this post and discussion to the appropriate forum if needed. I'm just very perplexed and would appreciate the discussion.

 

[Kimster]

Without getting political, would someone enlighten me regarding the riot in Portland & Queens, NY due to this verdict? I'll gladly move this post and discussion to the appropriate forum if needed. I'm just very perplexed and would appreciate the discussion.

I don’t know anything about Queens, but Portland has a group of people who damage property quite often. The mayor was trying to get funds back into the police department and I don’t know if he got them or not? I know they are horribly low on police officers. The troublemakers in Portland just do what they do. I don’t think they really need a “cause” per se, since they use anything as an excuse.

 

[kdg411]

I don’t know anything about Queens, but Portland has a group of people who damage property quite often. The mayor was trying to get funds back into the police department and I don’t know if he got them or not? I know they are horribly low on police officers. The troublemakers in Portland just do what they do. I don’t think they really need a “cause” per se, since they use anything as an excuse.

Protests spring up in NYC, other cities in response to Rittenhouse verdict

Protests sprang up in New York and other cities across the country Friday night in response to Kyle Rittenhouse’s acquittal, resulting in at least five arrests and some property damage in Que…

nypost.com

 

[Kimster]

BTW, A few of the group that goes around busting up buildings and windows in Portland are the same group that were part of the 99% and the anarchists 10 years ago! It’s crazy. I saw a former member talking about it in a local documentary.

 

[GrandmaBear]

Yep, I can't argue that by Wisconsin law his not guilty verdict is very unjust, Wisconsin just has stupid laws. A guy who has a gun he can't legally possess walks around, alone and with no authority, looking for someone to shoot isn't guilty of anything is hard to accept.

You can say he wasn't looking for someone to shoot, but I believe the CVS video and the fact he brought the gun with him says otherwise. But for his bringing the gun with him, two people would still be alive. His claim to being there was to protect someone's property. So why did he leave if that's the only reason he was there? He wanted to help people? Then leave the gun behind. If you don't want to leave it behind then don't leave at all. You'll need to keep the gun from being stolen from you in an area that you know is experiencing a violent riot. So your ability to render first aid is greatly diminished.

I think he thought shooting someone would be just like the video games he played, but found out it's much different in real life. I believe he was truly traumatized by what he did, but that's not punishment enough.

All JMO.

It's my belief that if you do something to egg someone on to attack you and then kill them. Claiming self defense shouldn't apply. If George Zimmerman had stayed in his car and waited for the police Trayvon Martin would still be alive. If the McMichaels hadn't gone after Ahmaud Arbery he'd still be alive and if Kyle Rittenhouse hadn't brought his AR-15 two other people would still be alive.

At least your opinion seems to be formed by looking at things yourself and putting them together rather than just news "takes" on it and going by actual video and such. That's all we can try to do is inform ourselves, dig and try to determine what is fact and what is not in forming an opinion. Video is sure playing a key piece in a lot of cases these days.

This might get the Wisconsin law looked at who knows. There are some dumb ones (not the only state with dumb ones though) but I don't think I knew about this one until now.

I again wish I knew enough to feel I can discuss or debate in a friendly manner what I think...

I do know one thing--I wouldn't have been there to begin with, not as one of the victims or Rittenhouse. My children wouldn't have either and IF I had a child I knew was going (can't stop them if you don't know), I would have done everything in my power to discourage it, whether a minor or young adult, etc. You can't avoid everything in life and situations can arise, but you can avoid what you know isn't a good idea although some of that wisdom(?) comes from getting older and living and learning.

I do think the law will become a debate and be looked at or hope it will be clarified and refined at least BUT maybe not and news has a way of moving on to the next hot story. It will be tossed around for a bit and will certainly be used politically and with regard to guns, etc. but most media will likely not cover much if the law starts being looked at at the state level and addressed. That's too dry and factual for most sensationalistic outlets. Imo it's also the reason many of us don't know when laws have changed even in our own states. It goes on but you don't hear about it if all one does is watch the typical news.

It sounds to me, if this is correct reporting, that the judge followed the letter of the law/statute as written in its final form. It would be a big debate of its own if any judge in any state started trying to intuit what a law was intended to mean in any given case rather than follow the letter of the law and what it states so to speak. I have heard more than once in my life when someone is giving an opinion of a judge "this one follows the letter of the law always" and another they will say the opposite or "he rules on his emotions" or "you never know what that one is going to do, it depends on the day". Before I start rambling further all over the place, I will end this. Just thoughts on some of the more general points.

 

[RoundPeg]

Without getting political, would someone enlighten me regarding the riot in Portland & Queens, NY due to this verdict? I'll gladly move this post and discussion to the appropriate forum if needed. I'm just very perplexed and would appreciate the discussion.

I'm very jaded but I believe a lot of the rioters feel the verdict of self defense lessens their chances of hurting people (and things) and getting a pat pat pat on the head. They've been treated like tantrum throwing toddlers for ages.

 

[RoundPeg]

BTW, A few of the group that goes around busting up buildings and windows in Portland are the same group that were part of the 99% and the anarchists 10 years ago! It’s crazy. I saw a former member talking about it in a local documentary.

Isn't it Portland where business owners call the graffiti removal team every morning?

 

[Kimster]

Isn't it Portland where business owners call the graffiti removal team every morning?

They might! I don’t know what the businesses are doing in the Chinatown area. That’s where it’s really really bad. And the train station. I used to like to take the train from Eugene to Portland and then walk around Portland. Can’t do that anymore!

 

[Cousin Dupree]

I think it's interesting that the judge is so thin skinned.

 

[kdg411]

I'm very jaded but I believe a lot of the rioters feel the verdict of self defense lessens their chances of hurting people (and things) and getting a pat pat pat on the head. They've been treated like tantrum throwing toddlers for ages.

I'm jaded as well since I witnessed the riots here in 2014. Behind the MSM coverage though, we knew who/what was inciting the riots however that was never in the headlines.

Thanks for the response. I appreciate others perspective & respect those who have such strong opinions about this case regardless of which 'side' they favor.

 

[Tresir]

Yep, I can't argue that by Wisconsin law his not guilty verdict is very unjust, Wisconsin just has stupid laws. A guy who has a gun he can't legally possess walks around, alone and with no authority, looking for someone to shoot isn't guilty of anything is hard to accept.

You can say he wasn't looking for someone to shoot, but I believe the CVS video and the fact he brought the gun with him says otherwise. But for his bringing the gun with him, two people would still be alive. His claim to being there was to protect someone's property. So why did he leave if that's the only reason he was there? He wanted to help people? Then leave the gun behind. If you don't want to leave it behind then don't leave at all. You'll need to keep the gun from being stolen from you in an area that you know is experiencing a violent riot. So your ability to render first aid is greatly diminished.

I think he thought shooting someone would be just like the video games he played, but found out it's much different in real life. I believe he was truly traumatized by what he did, but that's not punishment enough.

All JMO.

It's my belief that if you do something to egg someone on to attack you and then kill them. Claiming self defense shouldn't apply. If George Zimmerman had stayed in his car and waited for the police Trayvon Martin would still be alive. If the McMichaels hadn't gone after Ahmaud Arbery he'd still be alive and if Kyle Rittenhouse hadn't brought his AR-15 two other people would still be alive.

I don't think he did egg anyone on to attack him. The first guy attacked him first with a skateboard, knocked him down and was going to hit him again. The second guy had already earlier threatened to kill him and then attempted to grab his gun. The third guy had a glock pistol already drawn and pointed at him and he shot him in the arm. If walking around armed to protect your community is wrong, then why do LE allow it in the first place?

Also, they were all quite a bit older than Kyle but did not act in a very mature way, in my opinion. Why did they want to attack him?

 

[Tresir]

I think it's interesting that the judge is so thin skinned.

He is a Democrat apparently, which surprised me, but judges are gods in their own courtrooms.

I thought it was funny when he was clearing the courtroom of all cameras and people so the jury could come in to view the videos. He said to the jury " don't sit in my chair" and one piped up "how would you know?" . He said "Good point" and laughed. I bet they all had a go at sitting in his chair.

 

[Cousin Dupree]

I don't think he did egg anyone on to attack him. The first guy attacked him first with a skateboard, knocked him down and was going to hit him again. The second guy had already earlier threatened to kill him and then attempted to grab his gun. The third guy had a glock pistol already drawn and pointed at him and he shot him in the arm. If walking around armed to protect your community is wrong, then why do LE allow it in the first place?

Also, they were all quite a bit older than Kyle but did not act in a very mature way, in my opinion. Why did they want to attack him?

Why does law enforcement allow it in the first place is a very good question that you'd have to research a lot of information to determine. It seems to me that people with guns feel bolder and more apt to incite things. Since the person they kill can't tell their side...?

I can see the self defense thing, but why was he there with a long gun in the first place? A gun he wasn't allowed to own but could walk around unsupervised with. It was a terrible decision on his part and his having the gun in the first place may be why he was singled out. If it was then he was inviting an attack.

I don't walk around dangerous areas with wads of money sticking out of my pockets and carrying a concealed weapon. If I did and somebody came up to me with a knife I could shoot and kill them and claim self defense. I could become a serial killer and get away with it. We need to start thinking about where the trouble began. The trouble began with his decision to walk into the thick of things alone with a long gun. If we started holding people accountable for doing stupid things from the very beginning maybe stuff like this would stop.

 

[Cousin Dupree]

He is a Democrat apparently, which surprised me, but judges are gods in their own courtrooms.

I thought it was funny when he was clearing the courtroom of all cameras and people so the jury could come in to view the videos. He said to the jury " don't sit in my chair" and one piped up "how would you know?" . He said "Good point" and laughed. I bet they all had a go at sitting in his chair.

Democrats and Republicans can be thin skinned at times. I just don't like the idea of a guy who gets his ego bruised that easily making decisions on a case. Is he going overrule one sides objection just because he doesn't like something they said?

The judge in the Ahmaud Arbery case is what I think a judge should be. JMO

 

[Tresir]

Why does law enforcement allow it in the first place is a very good question that you'd have to research a lot of information to determine. It seems to me that people with guns feel bolder and more apt to incite things. Since the person they kill can't tell their side...?

I can see the self defense thing, but why was he there with a long gun in the first place? A gun he wasn't allowed to own but could walk around unsupervised with. It was a terrible decision on his part and his having the gun in the first place may be why he was singled out. If it was then he was inviting an attack.

I don't walk around dangerous areas with wads of money sticking out of my pockets and carrying a concealed weapon. If I did and somebody came up to me with a knife I could shoot and kill them and claim self defense. I could become a serial killer and get away with it. We need to start thinking about where the trouble began. The trouble began with his decision to walk into the thick of things alone with a long gun. If we started holding people accountable for doing stupid things from the very beginning maybe stuff like this would stop.

From following the rulings, the way I think the law was interpreted is that it was legal because of the length of the barrel. A shorter barrel would have not been allowed at all for a 17 year old to carry.

ETA and yes I guess you could walk around like you suggest.

 

[Cousin Dupree]

From following the rulings, the way I think the law was interpreted is that it was legal because of the length of the barrel. A shorter barrel would have not been allowed at all for a 17 year old to carry.

I know, that's why it's a stupid law. I understand the ruling, but that needs to be changed. Nobody under the age of 21, IMO, should be allowed to walk around with a long gun or any other type of gun alone.

 

[GrandmaBear]

He is a Democrat apparently, which surprised me, but judges are gods in their own courtrooms.

I thought it was funny when he was clearing the courtroom of all cameras and people so the jury could come in to view the videos. He said to the jury " don't sit in my chair" and one piped up "how would you know?" . He said "Good point" and laughed. I bet they all had a go at sitting in his chair.

I read the article you posted and was surprised as well to see he is a Democrat. I can say there are a ton of people who apparently don't know that either.

I am trying to skirt politics but Wisconsin has many old school Democrats who do not identify with the far side of the party (and some still believe the parties are the same ones as of old) and that is likewise imo in the Republican party in some areas. Wisconsin has historically been a democratic state or so it is said but the more accurate pictures is the races are almost always very close and I would say it is close to 50/50 although populations are changing rapidly.

I don't think most people are overly radical in either direction no matter what side of a fence they might be on but they sure want us to all thing any member of the opposing side is (and again, no matter which side that is). Imo it is done for a reason and sadly, it works.

Better stop there. I don't discuss politics for some of these very reasons.

I guess what I come around to in thinking this out is it is sad we would be surprised by what party he is... One can vote a certain way but still no agree with all a party stands for or things that go on in the "name" of either party...

 

[kdg411]

Just jumping in to remind everyone that we do have a political thread so be cognizant of that prior to any deep political discussions.

This case borders those boundaries & I'd really like to keep this thread open.

ty!

 

[Imamazed]

I think the jury made the right decision.. I was very disheartened at how the prosecution acted throughout this trial, and the games he played. I was so glad the judge yelled at him and told him he didn't believe him. I didn't either. I watched an interview on Court TV with the defense lawyer and he also claimed the prosecutor put on witnesses that they knew were lying. Now how that came about about I do not know but after everything else the prosecutor did I wouldn't doubt it.

Like I said before I don't think Kyle or any of these other idiots with guns had any business there. Do I think Kyle was attacked? Yes I do. I mean what kind of idiot chases down a kid with an AK-15 rifle? What kind of idiot grabs it and tries to get it away from him? I think he did feel like he was being attacked. Looked like it to me. Then we have the guy that hits him over the head with a skateboard twice! The prosecution can act like it was no big deal all he wants. I watched it. Kyle was being attacked.

The medic points his gun at him? I mean what did these people think was going to happen? Looks to me as though Kyle didn't shoot at anyone until he was being attacked. That's how I see it. I went into this thinking Kyle was guilty and should be put away. I changed my mind after see the trial.

Ima

 

[Imamazed]

I read where someone here wrote the judge is a Democrat? If he is that makes me think he was being very fair. Dems have been against this kid from day one. I think all the hate mail the judge and defense lawyers were getting is terrible, all they threats they were receiving is terrible. The left should be better than that, I see now they are not.

ETA... I am a Democrat in case anyone doesn't know this and I am so disheartened about all of this.