Kyle Rittenhouse trial...already disproving SO MANY LIES from the left

[AZrailwhale]

Why are people here putting words in my mouth all the time? I never said he should die, I never said he was not attacked. I said that given he deliberately attended a violent situation illegally armed and made no attempt to get the hell out of there when trouble was brewing, he simply is not covered under their self-defense law with a firearm. The law states you need to take any and every measure possible to assure you do not have to use that deadly weapon.

It's like my earlier analogy of me going into a biker bar and yelling "all bikers are pussies!" then when a few get pissed and come after me, I gun them down claiming they attacked me. I am not covered under our self-defense law with a firearm. I'm going to jail because I created a situation where they would attack me. Same thing here.

Your analogy is completely wrong. A correct one would be you standing around in a biker bar and when some of them attack you with fists, a club and a gun, you "gun them down". Rittenhouse did nothing to antagonize his assailants, in fact he attempted to disengage at every opportunity,

 

[jc456]

He put himself someplace where he might be harmed.
Under WI law, that negates his right to self-defense?
Can you cite the section and the text to that effect?

and why the prosecution didn't enter that point as evidence?

 

[jc456]

Your analogy is completely wrong. A correct one would be you standing around in a biker bar and when some of them attack you with fists, a club and a gun, you "gun them down". Rittenhouse did nothing to antagonize his assailants, in fact he attempted to disengage at every opportunity,

yes he did.

 

[eagle1462010]

He ran away from the confrontation after he put himself in the confrontation. That's not what I meant.

He put out a fire and the animals lost it.

Then they went after him TO KILL Kyle.

They are responsible for taking a dirt nap now. They should have stayed the fuck home. They initisted contact and made thrests if violence. And they were repest criminals.

Got news for you. Society is better off now.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Here's the relevant section of WI law:

(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.
(b) The privilege lost by provocation may be regained if the actor in good faith withdraws from the fight and gives adequate notice thereof to his or her assailant.
(c) A person who provokes an attack, whether by lawful or unlawful conduct, with intent to use such an attack as an excuse to cause death or great bodily harm to his or her assailant is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense.

Nothing in here even hints at the idea that if you choose to go somwhere that you might find yourself in harms way, you do not have the right to self defense.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

He put out a fire and the animals lost it.

Then they went after him TO KILL Kyle.

They are responsible for taking a dirt nap now. They should have stayed the fuck home. They initisted contact and made thrests if violence. And they were repest criminals.

Got news for you. Society is better off now.

Never said we weren't but that's irrelevant to the charges Rittenhouse faces. It doesn't matter if they were scum of the earth or studying for the priesthood.

 

[eagle1462010]

Never said we weren't but that's irrelevant to the charges Rittenhouse faces. It doesn't matter if they were scum of the earth or studying for the priesthood.

They were scum. They had intent to kill Kyle and they lost. Case dismissed

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Here's the relevant section of WI law:

(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.
(b) The privilege lost by provocation may be regained if the actor in good faith withdraws from the fight and gives adequate notice thereof to his or her assailant.
(c) A person who provokes an attack, whether by lawful or unlawful conduct, with intent to use such an attack as an excuse to cause death or great bodily harm to his or her assailant is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense.

Nothing in here even hints at the idea that if you choose to go somwhere that you might find yourself in harms way, you do not have the right to self defense.

Exactly, now let's go through that.

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.

If the prosecutor had the brains to bring up these laws, he simply has to ask: When Rittenhouse seen the angry mob light a dumpster on fire and push it into a building, did he exercise every means possible to avoid death and being put in harms way? Doesn't seem that way to me. If anything, he pissed off these people so he would be put in harms way. When he seen them light this dumpster on fire, one of the means to assure he would not be put in harms way or need to use deadly force was to get the fuck out of there.

 

[eagle1462010]

Exactly, now let's go through that.

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.

If the prosecutor had the brains to bring up these laws, he simply has to ask: When Rittenhouse seen the angry mob light a dumpster on fire and push it into a building, did he exercise every means possible to avoid death and being put in harms way? Doesn't seem that way to me. If anything, he pissed off these people so he would be put in harms way. When he seen them light this dumpster on fire, one of the means to assure he would not be put in harms way or need to use deadly force was to get the fuck out of there.

LOL

He tried to put out the Riiters Fire. So he chose to get attacked lol

Poor thing had their Burn Loot and Murder Fire put out.

In the future we need mote water cannons to play put out a fire and go Water bowling with Arsonists

 

[jc456]

Exactly, now let's go through that.

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.

If the prosecutor had the brains to bring up these laws, he simply has to ask: When Rittenhouse seen the angry mob light a dumpster on fire and push it into a building, did he exercise every means possible to avoid death and being put in harms way? Doesn't seem that way to me. If anything, he pissed off these people so he would be put in harms way. When he seen them light this dumpster on fire, one of the means to assure he would not be put in harms way or need to use deadly force was to get the fuck out of there.

what does that have to do with rosenbaum chasing him?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Exactly, now let's go through that.
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.

Ok...
He ran. They caught him.
What reasonable means does he have left to exhaust?

If the prosecutor had the brains to bring up these laws, he simply has to ask: When Rittenhouse seen the angry mob light a dumpster on fire and push it into a building, did he exercise every means possible to avoid death and being put in harms way?

Under WI law, while there is a duty to retreat when faced with a direct threat, there is no duty to retreat from a situation where you -might- face a threat.

Doesn't seem that way to me. If anything, he pissed off these people so he would be put in harms way.

That's a claim of motive.
I haven't seen any testimony from anyone that supports the idea that Rittemhouse did anything of the sort.
Have you?

 

[Cecilie1200]

He'll have PTSD..anger issues and night terrors at a minimum.

I'd like to think he'll get some counseling to help him deal.

 

[Cecilie1200]

It is incredible the prosecution TRIED to use the fact that Kyle EXERCISED HIS 5TH AMENDMENT RIGHT as an indication of GUILT.

That right there warrants a MISTRIAL.

Think about how many times prosecutors SHIT all over defendants civil rights and a SYMPATHETIC POLITICAL JUDGE allows it....FUCKING VOMITOUS.

Judge isn't allowing it. He stopped him, and verbally tore a strip off of him for trying it.

 

[Cecilie1200]

This seems to be a complete trainwreck for the prosecution. The case should have never even been brought in the first place. Right now, if I were the defendants, I would not want a mistrial because that just means another trial and I just can't see this one ending badly for the defense. They should just let it ride and be over and done with.

They asked for a mistrial with prejudice, meaning it can't be retried.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Under WI law, while there is a duty to retreat when faced with a direct threat, there is no duty to retreat from a situation where you -might- face a threat.

But the law states you are not covered under self-defense using deadly force unless you do. Read it again. You are covered under the self-defense law IF you exercised every possible way not to be put in harms way or death. When he put out that dumpster fire pissing off the people who lit it, you think that he did exercise every possibility from being put in harms way or death?

That's a claim of motive.
I haven't seen any testimony from anyone that supports the idea that Rittemhouse did anything of the sort.
Have you?

Well that's why he's probably going to get off in this case, and if he does it will set a new precedent in the state of Wisconsin. Any yahoo with a gun that feels like killing people simply has to address an angry mob and piss them off. Then they can kill anybody that goes near them. Anarchists will be having a field day with this ruling.

 

[struth]

Being in the house and being out in public are two different things followed by two sets of different laws. In the house you may only be endangering yourself and family. When out in public we may be endangering others, especially if you have no training on when to shoot in public.

the law doesn’t require you to have any training to defend your life from violent rioters

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

I don't think he's guilty of murder. I said repeatedly manslaughter since he didn't travel to another state with the full intention of killing people. But since he did know without a doubt he would likely be putting himself at high risk of using that gun, then manslaughter would be the appropriate verdict.

I don't believe he thought he was putting himself at high risk. He probably thought the gun would act as a deterrent.

But even so, we know of at least two other people - both of them rioters - that were also armed. We also know now from testimony that one of those guys pointed his gun at Rittenhouse. We know that Rittenhouse's first act when things were looking hairy was to run. We know he only fired when he got cornered by someone who was bent on doing him harm and who he probably thought had fired his weapon.

There were people there that night doing the exact same thing Rittenhouse was doing: violating curfew and carrying a weapon. If what you say is true then the other guys also knew they were putting themselves at high risk and should also be judged accordingly. The only thing that sets Kyle apart here is that he used his weapon and used it in self defense, which he was justified in doing.

Remember, Rittenhouse did not instigate this situation and he tried to defuse it by running away. But that wasn't enough for Rosenbaum, apparently.

We have to ask an important question here: If Rittenhouse had not been armed, what was Rosenbaum prepared to do to him?

 

[M14 Shooter]

But the law states you are not covered under self-defense using deadly force unless you do. Read it again.

No. Cite the text that states you must retreat from a situation where you -might- face a threat.
The law refers to an -actual- threat, not a -possible- threat.

Well that's why he's probably going to get off in this case, and if he does it will set a new precedent in the state of Wisconsin. Any yahoo with a gun that feels like killing people simply has to address an angry mob and piss them off. Then they can kill anybody that goes near them. Anarchists will be having a field day with this ruling.

This is a willful misrepresentation of what happened..

 

[struth]

No. Cite the text that states you must retreat from a situation where you -might- face a threat.
The law refers to an -actual- threat, not a -possible- threat.

This is a willful misrepresentation of what happened..

of course it’s a willful misrepresentation

the dembot cult will ignore the facts and the law to justify their cultist beliefs. Their cult leader, joey xiden, already proclaimed this kid guilty and a racist, therefore they can’t let reality away them

 

[jc456]

of course it’s a willful misrepresentation

the dembot cult will ignore the facts and the law to justify their cultist beliefs. Their cult leader, joey xiden, already proclaimed this kid guilty and a racist, therefore they can’t let reality away them

I like Ray. I'm certainly disappointed in his reaction to this trial. He seems to have wandered out of civil morals.