Kyle Rittenhouse defense again tries, fails to get gun possession charge dropped

[Rigby5]

The possession wasn't illegal, doofus........

Now you are simply being a troll...

Yes it is.
Ask any WI NRA member, and they will tell you a minor in possession of a firearm is illegal in WI except in a few special conditions, like at a range, when hunting, etc.

 

[Rigby5]

Grosscrud was a felon, had his juvenile record expunged when he turned 18....he was a felon.

Wrong.
He had arrests, but no convictions.
A juvenile felony conviction, even if expunged, would have make the concealed carry permit impossible.
Notice he was not charged for the concealed pistol?
That means he was not a felon.

 

[2aguy]

Wrong.
He had arrests, but no convictions.
A juvenile felony conviction, even if expunged, would have make the concealed carry permit impossible.
Notice he was not charged for the concealed pistol?
That means he was not a felon.

He wasn't charged for carrying the pistol without a permit because the fascist democrat wanted him to testify.........you idiot.

 

[Rigby5]

You speak of "facts" but then demand the state continue the prosecution of a law not broken, a crime not committed . . . How is that giving the jury "facts"?

What you are advocating for is withholding "facts" and trying to get the jury to see "Kyle's actions in a different light", a light distorted by deception and prosecutorial misconduct.

You know that the prosecutor's job is to achive justice, not just get a conviction at any cost, in any manner, right?

There is absolutely no doubt at all that Kyle was in violation of the WI statutes that clearly make it illegal for a minor to be in possession of a firearm.
He did not match any of the exceptions.

He could easily have avoided the violence.
For example, not bringing a rifle, not trying to mix with the crowd in order to frighten them with the rifle, etc.
If he wanted to counter the event, he should have just brought a sign, found private property to defend, and stayed put.

 

[2aguy]

There is absolutely no doubt at all that Kyle was in violation of the WI statutes that clearly make it illegal for a minor to be in possession of a firearm.
He did not match any of the exceptions.

He could easily have avoided the violence.
For example, not bringing a rifle, not trying to mix with the crowd in order to frighten them with the rifle, etc.
If he wanted to counter the event, he should have just brought a sign, found private property to defend, and stayed put.

Except all of the lawyers in that courtroom plus the judge say you are an idiot and you are wrong.........

 

[Rigby5]

View attachment 567123

Kenosha is the guilty party, for allowing Blake to be shot for no reason.
Kenosha needs MORE burning until they get justice for all people.

 

[Orangecat]

Kenosha is the guilty party, for allowing Blake to be shot for no reason.
Kenosha needs MORE burning until they get justice for all people.

You're an imbecile.

 

[2aguy]

Kenosha is the guilty party, for allowing Blake to be shot for no reason.
Kenosha needs MORE burning until they get justice for all people.

Again......did you hit your head.....?

Blake was shot for very good reasons..including rape, resisting the police using a knife, and trying to kidnap children.....

 

[2aguy]

You're an imbecile.

I think they are off their meds...........they usually post more intelligently....

 

[Rigby5]

You were shown two separate videos of gross crud on the stand....what is wrong with you?

Videos are easily chopped up and edited.
The facts are the bullet path through Grosskreutz's arm proves he had his hands up when shot.
We also know Grosskreutz posed no threat to Kyle because Kyle's gun misfired on the first shot at Grosskreutz and he have to recycle.
Which means Grosskreutz had plenty of time to shoot Kyle if he had wanted to.
Which means Kyle was not shooting in defense at all, but deliberate intent to kill.

 

[Rigby5]

Again......did you hit your head.....?

Blake was shot for very good reasons..including rape, resisting the police using a knife, and trying to kidnap children.....

Wrong.
Jacob Blake had a warrant for domestic violence, which has since been dropped.
He was not at all resisting arrest, but simply attending to his children.
He never unfolded the pocket knife that fell on the ground and he simply picked up.
And the destination he was driving to was the children's mother.
In no way was he kidnapping anyone.
Only one cop shot Blake, and Sheskey shot him 7 times in the back, which is totally and completely illegal.
There is no excuse for not prosecuting Sheskey.

 

[2aguy]

Videos are easily chopped up and edited.
The facts are the bullet path through Grosskreutz's arm proves he had his hands up when shot.
We also know Grosskreutz posed no threat to Kyle because Kyle's gun misfired on the first shot at Grosskreutz and he have to recycle.
Which means Grosskreutz had plenty of time to shoot Kyle if he had wanted to.
Which means Kyle was not shooting in defense at all, but deliberate intent to kill.

You're trolling now...right? You can't be this stupid....right?

 

[2aguy]

Wrong.
Jacob Blake had a warrant for domestic violence, which has since been dropped.
He was not at all resisting arrest, but simply attending to his children.
He never unfolded the pocket knife that fell on the ground and he simply picked up.
And the destination he was driving to was the children's mother.
In no way was he kidnapping anyone.
Only one cop shot Blake, and Sheskey shot him 7 times in the back, which is totally and completely illegal.
There is no excuse for not prosecuting Sheskey.

You are trolling now.......stop.......it isn't funny....and you look really stupid doing it...

 

[Rigby5]

Except all of the lawyers in that courtroom plus the judge say you are an idiot and you are wrong.........

There is not a single person in the world who thinks it is legal for a minor to be in possession of a firearm in WI, (if not at a range, in the military, under adult supervision, or hunting with a permit).

 

[2aguy]

There is not a single person in the world who thinks it is legal for a minor to be in possession of a firearm in WI, (if not at a range, in the military, under adult supervision, or hunting with a permit).

Except for all the lawyers at the trial and the judge.....except for them....

 

[Rigby5]

You are trolling now.......stop.......it isn't funny....and you look really stupid doing it...

If you were there, would you have shot Blake in the back 7 times?
Or would you have shot or arrested Sheskey for attempted murder?

 

[AZrailwhale]

Here is your image again.

And no, clearly Grosskreutz is not in the image.
The person who appears to be on the witness stand, appears to be bald.

And that is not the judge.
Here is the judge.

I hate to break it to you, but the bald guy in your first photo is the head defense lawyer and the one in the second is the judge.

 

[2aguy]

If you were there, would you have shot Blake in the back 7 times?
Or would you have shot or arrested Sheskey for attempted murder?

Yep.....Blake had a knife and was trying to leave with those children, having violated a restraining order and having raped his baby momma.....

What part of that is too hard for you to understand, troll....

 

[2aguy]

I hate to break it to you, but the bald guy in your first photo is the head defense lawyer and the one in the second is the judge.

He has to be trolling right now......he can't be this stupid........

I am pretty much done with him......unless the real Rigby comes back and says his kid was playing games on the computer...

 

[marvin martian]

KENOSHA — Kyle Rittenhouse's defense team has tried again to get a charge for possession of a dangerous weapon by a minor dropped. Again, Kenosha County Circuit Judge Bruce Schroeder denied the motion, and the charge remains.

The charge in question on Tuesday was possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18, connected to Rittenhouse's possession of an AR-15 semiautomatic rifle during the shootings. Rittenhouse, who is now 18, was 17 at the time.

According to Wisconsin Statute 948.60(2)(a): "These restrictions only apply to a person under age 18 who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the firearm is a short-barreled rifle or short-barreled shotgun, or if the person is not in compliance with the hunting regulations."

An AR-15 is classified as a rifle.



The defense has disputed this charge since early in the case, including right out of the gate when nationally recognized and controversial attorney John Pierce made himself available to defend Rittenhouse. A Second Amendment argument was raised, arguing that the law itself banning minors from carrying rifles is unconstitutional, but that argument has thus far been unsuccessful.

Kyle Rittenhouse defense again tries, fails to get gun possession charge dropped

Kyle Rittenhouse's defense team has tried again, unsuccessfully, to get a charge for possession of a dangerous weapon by a minor dropped.

www.kenoshanews.com

Do you think the law banning minors from carrying weapons violates the Second Amendment?

6 year olds with AR15s?

^^^Aged like milk.