- Mar 10, 2017
- Reaction score
Hey everybody! When Professor Freyasman goes on vacation, let's go hang out at his house!
I am using Georgia Law as a guide. At least as it was until they changed it this year.
Specifically the statutes for Citizens Arrest as was in force when the McMichaels did their idiocy.
The law made sense. Whatever the guy had done before that time was irrelevant. The actions of that moment were paramount. The guy could have been Charles Manson and you had no right to do anything if you did not witness a crime.
Kyle had no clue who the guy was. Kyle had no way of knowing what the guy had done. It was what was happening at the time.
Kyle was trespassing too. He had no authority from the owner to be there. He had no authority from any Government agency. He was a wannabe hero.
He was a boy playing at being a man with real weapons.
943.14 Criminal trespass to dwellings Whoever intentionally enters the dwelling of another without the consent of some person lawfully upon the premises, under circumstances tending to create or provoke a breach of the peace, is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.History: 1977 c. 173.Criminal trespass to a dwelling is not a lesser included offense of burglary. Raymond v. State, 55 Wis. 2d 482, 198 N.W.2d 351 (1972).Regardless of any ownership rights in the property, if a person enters a dwelling that is another's residence, without consent, this section is violated. State v. Carls, 186 Wis. 2d 533, 521 N.W.2d 181 (Ct. App. 1994).Entering an outbuilding accessory to a main house may be a violation. 62 Atty. Gen. 16.
Rittenhouse ran because Rosenbaum, who might have been armed with a heavy chain at that point, went to chase him.None of that is relevant to what I said.
Rittenhouse judged the man to be a threat, to the point he ran away from him.
He was chased and eventually he defended himself from the man.
My point was, that the man's record, supports Rittenhouse's judgement on him at that point in time.
I don't know exactly what Rittenhouse saw in that man, that led him to consider him a threat worth running from, that portion of time seems to NOT have been recorded or if it was, not..."found".
BUT, it seems that Rittenhouse's take on the man was correct.
In the second Naked Gun movie. The character of Frank Drebbin was being honored for his 1,000th drug dealer killed. He stands up and thanks the crowd for his applause. He then said. “Truthfully I backed over the last two with my car, thankfully they turned out to be drug dealers.”
So he wasn’t a reckless driver who was a hazard to everyone on the road. He was a dedicated public servant who was doing a service to the community in getting rid of drug dealers.
That is the standard for ends justify the means that you use. I gun a man down for no reason. I’ve never seen him before. But he turns out to be a guy who beats little old ladies and take their purses. I am a hero. I knew none of that. But hey what matters is the guys record. Right?
If you want to know where that ends ask Philandro Castillo. Oh wait. You can’t. He was shot to death but it is OK despite being a valid weapons license holder. He was a traffic menace with a lot of traffic tickets.
Odd. You refuse to deal with the reality that Rittenhouse was committing a crime before he shot anyone.......
If you have to break and enter that's different and you know it.The bowling alley closes at 11. Lets go get in some free bowling at midnight or so!