What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

JUDGE: Those Allegedly Shot By Rittenhouse Can’t Be Called ‘Victims’ During Trial, ‘Rioters’ And ‘Arsonists’ Both More Accurate

Ghost of a Rider

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2018
Messages
3,089
Reaction score
1,166
Points
210
Location
South Louisiana
Then you made a mistake. Because the video does not show that. It is a claim made by 2 witnesses.

I don't know anything about the two witnesses but I was in error about Rittenhouse putting out the fire.

However, as I pointed out in my post to Coyote, Rittenhouse was being chased before he shot anyone and the first person he shot (Rosenbaum) was the one chasing (and then attacking) him.

The other two guys chased Rittenhouse for shooting Rosenbaum but Rosenbaum chased Rittenhouse for no apparent reason other than that Rittenhouse appeared to be with the group that put out the dumpster fire. For some reason this enraged him.
 

WEATHER53

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2017
Messages
15,018
Reaction score
6,115
Points
400
I don't know anything about the two witnesses but I was in error about Rittenhouse putting out the fire.

However, as I pointed out in my post to Coyote, Rittenhouse was being chased before he shot anyone and the first person he shot (Rosenbaum) was the one chasing (and then attacking) him.

The other two guys chased Rittenhouse for shooting Rosenbaum but Rosenbaum chased Rittenhouse for no apparent reason other than that Rittenhouse appeared to be with the group that put out the dumpster fire. For some reason this enraged him.
Triggered and then got the trigger.
Justice!
 

Fort Fun Indiana

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
59,706
Reaction score
12,797
Points
2,220
However, as I pointed out in my post to Coyote, Rittenhouse was being chased before he shot anyone and the first person he shot (Rosenbaum) was the one chasing (and then attacking) him.
Yes, but two things:

1) the video does not encompassall of the events

2) that may be irrelevant anyway, as Kyle's mere presence that night may be an illegal act
 

Bootney Lee Farnsworth

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
36,319
Reaction score
20,361
Points
1,915
Location
Tejas
He was there illegally. He chased AFTER he shot and killed an unarmed man. He was illegally armed. He did not have the maturity or experience to handle the situation that was real life and not some game. Notice that no one else had to shoot anyone. He had no business being there.
Assume all of that is true. That still does not leave Rittenhouse without a self-defense claim under Wisconsin law. Video of that incident clearly shows Rosenbaum approaching Rittenhouse from behind after a confrontation over an attempt to burn a dumpster. Further videos shows a mass of people yelling at Rittenhouse while he is attempting to retreat, then 3 men attack him.
There was no dumpster fire they were involved in. Two of the guys only started chasing him after some yelled that he had shot and killed someone. At the moment the only illegal action by those three he shot was violating curfew. This is why we have police, not good ol boys and vigilante wannabes. But tbe police were grossly negligent here.
I saw several videos of attempts to start dumpster fires.

Those two guys started chasing him, and one hit him in the head with a skateboard while he was attempting to retreat. Certainly he feared for his life and acted appropriately in that situation, no?
 

Bootney Lee Farnsworth

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
36,319
Reaction score
20,361
Points
1,915
Location
Tejas
2) that may be irrelevant anyway, as Kyle's mere presence that night may be an illegal act
Rittenhouse's alleged illegal actions do not bar his self-defense claim under Wisconsin law.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
146,351
Reaction score
33,896
Points
2,180
So you are saying you are a corrupt liar who would sit on a jury and send innocent people to jail, because of your politics. I mean, you just assumed it about 12 jurors. That must be because you think they would sink as low as you would.
Isn't that exactly what the Chauvin jurors did?
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
146,351
Reaction score
33,896
Points
2,180
Well, unfortunately for you educated slobs, the judge and prosecutors know the law better than you do.
Right, and the judge isn't buying that argument. He's the only one who matters.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
146,351
Reaction score
33,896
Points
2,180
According to you and the other poster. Which is really just you two admitting you are corrupt liars who would send innocent people to prison, because of your personal political fetishes.
Nope, I wouldn't, but you would send Chauvin to prison despite knowing he didn't murder the dumbass drug addict.
 

Bootney Lee Farnsworth

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
36,319
Reaction score
20,361
Points
1,915
Location
Tejas
Actually, they may. That's where your wrong. Thus the charges.
Wrong. They do not bar his self-defense claims.

Wisconsin Statutes - Self-Defense

939.48  Self-defense and defense of others.
(1)  A person is privileged to threaten or intentionally use force against another for the purpose of preventing or terminating what the person reasonably believes to be an unlawful interference with his or her person by such other person. The actor may intentionally use only such force or threat thereof as the actor reasonably believes is necessary to prevent or terminate the interference. The actor may not intentionally use force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm unless the actor reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself.


***

(2) Provocation affects the privilege of self-defense as follows:
(a) A person who engages in unlawful conduct of a type likely to provoke others to attack him or her and thereby does provoke an attack is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense against such attack, except when the attack which ensues is of a type causing the person engaging in the unlawful conduct to reasonably believe that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. In such a case, the person engaging in the unlawful conduct is privileged to act in self-defense, but the person is not privileged to resort to the use of force intended or likely to cause death to the person's assailant unless the person reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm at the hands of his or her assailant.


This is a textbook case in favor of Rittenhouse.

Charges were filed regardless of any affirmative defenses.
 

Bootney Lee Farnsworth

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
36,319
Reaction score
20,361
Points
1,915
Location
Tejas
According to you and the other poster. Which is really just you two admitting you are corrupt liars who would send innocent people to prison, because of your personal political fetishes.
Oh, that is so rich.
 

bodecea

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
153,974
Reaction score
25,385
Points
2,180
Location
Will.Trade.Racists.For.Refugees
Sounds like a perfect set up to abuse.
Call 'em 'victims' anyway and make the judge object to it/find the lawyers in con-tempt................in front of the jury.
 

Moonglow

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
175,632
Reaction score
30,718
Points
2,220
Location
sw mizzouri
Call 'em 'victims' anyway and make the judge object to it/find the lawyers in con-tempt................in front of the jury.
What else do you call people that were shot by a guy but victims?
 

Bootney Lee Farnsworth

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
36,319
Reaction score
20,361
Points
1,915
Location
Tejas
Call 'em 'victims' anyway and make the judge object to it/find the lawyers in con-tempt................in front of the jury.
The judge will grant a mistrial and start all over again. Do it again and the judge will dismiss the case.
 

ElmerMudd

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2009
Messages
8,548
Reaction score
2,967
Points
310
Location
Northwest
At one point, the judge rebuked Binger for nonchalantly referring to acts of arson. “All we’re talking about is arson, we’re talking about being loud and disorderly,” Binger said of Rosenbaum’s conduct on the night of the rioting.

“I can’t believe some of the things you’re saying,” the judge interjected. “All we’re talking about is arson? Come on.”



What do you call the lady shot and killed during the January 6th insurrection?
What do you call all those who participated in the insurrection. rioters.
Is it OK for a 17 year old to shoot and kill the rioters on January 6th?
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$95.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top