Store owner found not guilty of murder in 2023 killing of Black teen in South Carolina

[Zincwarrior]

That this 14yr old didn't steal anything and why the hell were they chasing this kid.

Defendant said he threatened his son with a gun. Teen did in fact have an illegal gun and was committing a felony. Seems clear.

What am I missing? I only know the case from the OP?

 

[drudge X]

That this 14yr old didn't steal anything and why the hell were they chasing this kid.

You keep on pushing your fantasized version of your opinion and deemed your opinion as factual. Fortunately, the jury had a different say. I am sure they saw and heard the evidence.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

So carrying a weapon justifys you being ran down and murdered.

1. He was killed, not murdered.
2. He wasn't "carrying a weapon" he pointed an illegal weapon at your son.
3. The man who killed your son served 3 years in prison

 

[Superbadbrutha]

Rittenhouse was 18 and it is legal to carry a long gun if you are over 18. This kid was 14, it is not legal to carry a handgun at 14, or a long gun. Is Rittenhouse had been carrying a handgun that would have been a problem. You also do not know how I felt about Rittenhouse because I didn’t post my opinions on it. I just stated the facts and the legality.

Kyle Rittenhouse was 17 years old at the time of the Kenosha shooting on August 25, 2020.
Kyle Howard Rittenhouse was born on January 3, 2003, in Antioch, Illinois, and traveled to Kenosha, Wisconsin, on August 25, 2020,

 

[Superbadbrutha]

1. He was killed, not murdered.
2. He wasn't "carrying a weapon" he pointed an illegal weapon at your son.
3. The man who killed your son served 3 years in prison

No he was murdered.
It has been established he didn't point his weapon at my son or anybody else's.
Dumbass he didn't murder my son, he should spend the rest of his days in prison.

 

[Superbadbrutha]

Defendant said he threatened his son with a gun. Teen did in fact have an illegal gun and was committing a felony. Seems clear.

What am I missing? I only know the case from the OP?

There is no way he was lying, is it?

What was the felony he was committing?

Dr. Amy Durso of the Medical University of South Carolina, testified about the autopsy of 14‑year‑old Cyrus Carmack‑Belton performed on May 29, 2023, she explained that if the shooter were standing directly behind an upright victim in a standard stance, the bullet would not have traveled upward and across the body. The angle was consistent with the victim hunched over and running away, not turning to face the shooter, but what the hell does she know.

 

[Superbadbrutha]

You keep on pushing your fantasized version of your opinion and deemed your opinion as factual. Fortunately, the jury had a different say. I am sure they saw and heard the evidence.

Amazing how you felt totally different about the jury in the OJ murder trial.

 

[drudge X]

Amazing how you felt totally different about the jury in the OJ murder trial.

You seriously believe OJ didn’t murder his ex wife and Goldman?

 

[Superbadbrutha]

You seriously believe OJ didn’t murder his ex wife and Goldman?

Oh, now it doesn't matter about the jury in that trial. Didn't they see and hear the evidence.

 

[drudge X]

Kyle Rittenhouse was 17 years old at the time of the Kenosha shooting on August 25, 2020.
Kyle Howard Rittenhouse was born on January 3, 2003, in Antioch, Illinois, and traveled to Kenosha, Wisconsin, on August 25, 2020,

Because WI law allows him to carry.

 

[drudge X]

Oh, now it doesn't matter about the jury in that trial. Didn't they see and hear the evidence.

No, I am asking you.
All white jurors or potentials were dismissed.

How many jury members are black in this case?

 

[Superbadbrutha]

Because WI law allows him to carry.

It allows a 17yr old to carry if he is hunting, what was Kyle hunting?

 

[Superbadbrutha]

No, I am asking you.
All white jurors or potentials were dismissed.

How many jury members are black in this case?

3 black men, 2 black women and the rest were white.

 

[drudge X]

It allows a 17yr old to carry if he is hunting, what was Kyle hunting?

Again, doesn’t matter what you believe. His attorney was able to argue successfully in court that it wasn’t illegal for Rittenhouse to carry.

 

[Zincwarrior]

There is no way he was lying, is it?

What was the felony he was committing?

Carrying an illegal firearm

Dr. Amy Durso of the Medical University of South Carolina, testified about the autopsy of 14‑year‑old Cyrus Carmack‑Belton performed on May 29, 2023, she explained that if the shooter were standing directly behind an upright victim in a standard stance, the bullet would not have traveled upward and across the body. The angle was consistent with the victim hunched over and running away, not turning to face the shooter, but what the hell does she know.

He could have the firearm out and threatening the defendant. Again I do not know what the evidence showed.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It allows a 17yr old to carry if he is hunting, what was Kyle hunting?

Felons, obviously.

 

[jotathought]

Chikei Rick Chow maintained he shot 14-year-old Cyrus Carmack-Belton in the back because he was trying to defend his son.

The jury returned the verdict for Chikei Rick Chow. Chow, 61, who is Asian, shot Cyrus Carmack-Belton in the back after chasing him from his convenience store in Columbia. He maintained he acted to defend his son.

Defense lawyer Jack Swerling said they’re very pleased with the verdict but also feel for Carmack-Belton’s family.
“My heart goes out to them, but 14-year-old kid should not be roaming the streets of Columbia or South Carolina with semiautomatic pistol loaded and ready to fire,” he said.

Prosecutors and a defense lawyer in closing arguments painted different pictures of the 2023 shooting. Prosecutors said Chow acted in anger because he wrongly thought the teen had stolen four bottles of water from the store. A defense lawyer said Chow fired to defend his son only after the teen pointed a gun at him.

Prosecutors acknowledged Carmack-Belton had a semiautomatic pistol, but they say it fell on the ground during the chase and he never threatened anyone with it. Prosecutors said Chow chased the teen more than 130 yards from the store.

Gipson told jurors that Chow “chased a kid down, shot him in the back.”

During closing arguments, Gipson placed a bottle of water before jurors. Gipson said that Chow “at the end of the day, believed that a human is not more than that.”

Gipson said multiple witnesses testified that they didn’t see anything in Carmack-Belton’s hands and didn’t see him point a gun as he ran from the store.

“Nobody testified that happened that doesn’t have the last name Chow,” Gipson said.

Store owner found not guilty of murder in 2023 killing of Black teen in South Carolina

Chikei Rick Chow maintained he shot 14-year-old Cyrus Carmack-Belton in the back because he was trying to defend his son.

www.nbcnews.com

Here we go again, a grown man runs a child down and shoots him in the back over 4 bottles of water they claimed he stole and yet he didn't have any water on him, then he claims the kid pointed a gun at him and threatened his son, but the he never fired a gun and no one saw him threaten to shoot anyone.

I would love to know the makeup of this jury.

You do realize one doesn’t have to point a gun at someone to be guilty of aggravated assault— fear of life .. meanwhile, the weak prosecution was unable to present the case that left no doubt, and instead focused on meaningless actions — “shot in the back,” “chasing a teenager,” and “it was only water bottles.”

The jury only had to find reasonable doubt, and evidently they did. Blame the piss poor prosecution, instead of the jury, which you probably wouldn’t have cared about if it was a different race based scenario

 

[eagle1462010]

Right, but white ass kisser you didn't have a problem with Kyle Rittenhouse carrying one.

Kyle dropped his weapon and obeyed LEO orders

Other guy. HEY LETS WRESTLE WITH COPS WHILE CARRYING A GUN.

 

[Kruska]

Carrying an illegal firearm


He could have the firearm out and threatening the defendant. Again I do not know what the evidence showed.

Acting in self-defense would have required shooting the alleged offender on site (aka, at or next to the shop entrance) - and not 130 yards outside the store. So it was MURDER - if true (according the defendants own statement), self-justice MURDER in pursuit.

I am not aware that a private organized posse - in the USA is still a legal concept.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Acting in self-defense would have required shooting the alleged offender on site (aka, at or next to the shop entrance) - and not 130 yards outside the store. So it was MURDER - if true (according the defendants own statement), self-justice MURDER in pursuit.

I am not aware that a private organized posse - in the USA is a legal concept.

Just pursuing is not grounds for murder (either way fyi). Now if the shooter pursued and the shootee was unarmed yea thats very bad.

As I said I don't know anything about this case going to shut up now.