Rittenhouse trial

Right wing twitter is having a field day with this, and the left wing MSM is barely covering it at all. Would seem to imply that there is a very strong argument it is self defense (which anyone who saw the videos circulating already knew), and the prosecution doesn't really have a case at all, minus whatever charges there are for transporting the rifle in the first place.

Anyways, according to right wing twitter apparently there is FBI surveillance videos and extra bystander videos the leftist MSM has been suppressing presented at the trial (by the prosecution no less) showing that all the guys he shot (not just the pedo guy) were chasing him before he fired a single bullet.

When right wing twitter is using the prosecution's own evidence to argue for self defense, and the leftist MSM is mostly napping it out, you know there is some serious problems with the case

I actually wonder if the families of the rioters Rittenhouse killed have a case against the state, for not acting adequately to maintain a safe public space. (Similar to how family members of some of the guys killed in CHOP/CHAZ are suing the state for this).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kalam

Right wing twitter is having a field day with this, and the left wing MSM is barely covering it at all. Would seem to imply that there is a very strong argument it is self defense (which anyone who saw the videos circulating already knew), and the prosecution doesn't really have a case at all, minus whatever charges there are for transporting the rifle in the first place.

Anyways, according to right wing twitter apparently there is FBI surveillance videos and extra bystander videos the leftist MSM has been suppressing presented at the trial (by the prosecution no less) showing that all the guys he shot (not just the pedo guy) were chasing him before he fired a single bullet.

When right wing twitter is using the prosecution's own evidence to argue for self defense, and the leftist MSM is mostly napping it out, you know there is some serious problems with the case

I actually wonder if the families of the rioters Rittenhouse killed have a case against the state, for not acting adequately to maintain a safe public space. (Similar to how family members of some of the guys killed in CHOP/CHAZ are suing the state for this).

---

How is this even being tried? Because you're correct that anyone who has seen the video knows he fired in self defense. Its an injustice. Makes it seem like hes being charged because someone does not like his politics

The last guy he shot cracked him in the head with a skateboard. Another one kicked him while he had fallen and had a pistol on him in plain site.

Anyone who thinks this isn’t self defense is a blind retard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jsearles22

The last guy he shot cracked him in the head with a skateboard. Another one kicked him while he had fallen and had a pistol on him in plain site.

Anyone who thinks this isn’t self defense is a blind retard.

---

isnt the bigger issue here the justice system itself that allowed it to even go this far? Seems this is a political trial

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kalam

Right wing twitter is having a field day with this, and the left wing MSM is barely covering it at all. Would seem to imply that there is a very strong argument it is self defense (which anyone who saw the videos circulating already knew), and the prosecution doesn't really have a case at all, minus whatever charges there are for transporting the rifle in the first place.

Anyways, according to right wing twitter apparently there is FBI surveillance videos and extra bystander videos the leftist MSM has been suppressing presented at the trial (by the prosecution no less) showing that all the guys he shot (not just the pedo guy) were chasing him before he fired a single bullet.

When right wing twitter is using the prosecution's own evidence to argue for self defense, and the leftist MSM is mostly napping it out, you know there is some serious problems with the case

I actually wonder if the families of the rioters Rittenhouse killed have a case against the state, for not acting adequately to maintain a safe public space. (Similar to how family members of some of the guys killed in CHOP/CHAZ are suing the state for this).

---

This is likely an act of defiance by the DAs office. Somebody maybe including the DA never wanted this case to get to trial maybe they knew and figured the kid never should’ve been charged themselves but he was due to political pressure. When the DAs office is making the defenses case for them it’s kinda obvious what’s going on. I will say this im not sure of all the charges against him but the only one I can see sticking is potentially illegal possession of a firearm by a minor since he wasn’t 18 when he was playing armed security and nobody was supposedly with him as the adult chaperone as federal law is clear you can possess on your own a long gun at 18 which he wasn’t. I would skeet shoot as a teen and my dad still had to be present until I was 18 even when I’d already graduated HS.

Yeah I never understood the OMG RITTENHOUSE DA WHITESUPREMACIST EXECUTING PEACEFUL PROTESTERS narrative the left kept putting out.

Ths was a 17-year-old kid who was being chased and attacked by very hostile and violent people at a hostile and violent protest. It seemed absurd that he just showed up with the intention to murder people, but that's the narrative which the left pushed pretty hard.

Rittenhouse largely fell out of discussion once January 6 happened, because the left now had a much bigger (and easier to vilify) bogeyman.

I think he probably walks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Yeah I never understood the OMG RITTENHOUSE DA WHITESUPREMACIST EXECUTING PEACEFUL PROTESTERS narrative the left kept putting out.

Ths was a 17-year-old kid who was being chased and attacked by very hostile and violent people at a hostile and violent protest. It seemed absurd that he just showed up with the intention to murder people, but that's the narrative which the left pushed pretty hard.

Rittenhouse largely fell out of discussion once January 6 happened, because the left now had a much bigger (and easier to vilify) bogeyman.

I think he probably walks.

---

The last guy he shot actually pulled a gun out before Rittenhouse shot him. Does anyone know if that's part of the trial?

Entire thing is absurd.

Well, there is the dynamic that left wing Twitter and the MSM and progressive Democrats will intimidate and harass the jurors, so there is a chance of a guilty verdict just as a matter of self preservation. Maybe the ADs strategy is to highlight there is no actual case so the left doesn’t go after the jurors.

One thing you can count on is a few leftists will go full BLM (Burn,Loot,Murder) when he is acquitted.

Perhaps we should reserve judgment until the evidence is presented at trial.

Good call Jay.....

They lost a juror that could have helped them get him acquitted....

Quote:

---

A juror was dismissed in Kyle Rittenhouse's homicide trial Thursday morning after he told a joke to a deputy earlier this week about the police shooting of Jacob Blake.

The incident occurred when a male juror being escorted to his car made a joke about the shooting, Judge Bruce Schroeder said.
"I'm going to summarize what I remember, what I was told," Schroeder said. "He was telling a joke ... he told the officer ... he made a reference about telling a joke about 'Why did it take seven shots to shoot Jacob Blake,' something to that effect."

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jayjami

Perhaps we should reserve judgment until the evidence is presented at trial.

---

Ummm yeah, we are actually discussing the evidence that was presented at trial. By the prosecution in fact. Overhead drone video of Rittemhouse being chased, unknown gunfire seconds before he shoots, more video of him being chased and assaulted, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jayjami

Perhaps we should reserve judgment until the evidence is presented at trial.

---

So after the left media has painted him as a murderer for over a year we should now wait for the evidence?

:wtf

RITTENHOUSE IS GOD

Rittenhouse is an American hero. That he is being charged at all proves that the justice system is a farce.

The DA should leverage the criminal case with the civil rights case that is sure to be filed against those responsible for ever charging this kid with murder or anything which holds him more responsible than the dearly departed for what happened. Something like time served for the ancillary charges, a million five or so to release liability for those responsible for charging him and dismiss the most serious stuff. I'm not constitutional expert but there has to be some civil rights violation in there somewhere. Maybe its a good idea for the city to settle it all at the same time?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by country978

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kalam

Right wing twitter is having a field day with this, and the left wing MSM is barely covering it at all. Would seem to imply that there is a very strong argument it is self defense (which anyone who saw the videos circulating already knew), and the prosecution doesn't really have a case at all, minus whatever charges there are for transporting the rifle in the first place.

Anyways, according to right wing twitter apparently there is FBI surveillance videos and extra bystander videos the leftist MSM has been suppressing presented at the trial (by the prosecution no less) showing that all the guys he shot (not just the pedo guy) were chasing him before he fired a single bullet.

When right wing twitter is using the prosecution's own evidence to argue for self defense, and the leftist MSM is mostly napping it out, you know there is some serious problems with the case

I actually wonder if the families of the rioters Rittenhouse killed have a case against the state, for not acting adequately to maintain a safe public space. (Similar to how family members of some of the guys killed in CHOP/CHAZ are suing the state for this).

---

How is this even being tried? Because you're correct that anyone who has seen the video knows he fired in self defense. Its an injustice. Makes it seem like hes being charged because someone does not like his politics

---

Because as a matter of public policy law enforcement and local/state government want to discourage severely any use of firearms by citizens--read Massad Ayoob's writings on self-defense with firearms (In the Gravest Extreme or Deadly Force). Ayoob estimates you will spend $10,000 in legal fees for every bullet you shoot in self-defense even if you are 100% justified. It's all about control and monopolization of the use of force by police & government for the purpose of maintaining order for business, not about protecting or serving the public.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrenadaRoger

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by country978

How is this even being tried? Because you're correct that anyone who has seen the video knows he fired in self defense. Its an injustice. Makes it seem like hes being charged because someone does not like his politics

---

Because as a matter of public policy law enforcement and local/state government want to discourage severely any use of firearms by citizens--read Massad Ayoob's writings on self-defense with firearms (In the Gravest Extreme or Deadly Force). Ayoob estimates you will spend $10,000 in legal fees for every bullet you shoot in self-defense even if you are 100% justified.

---

what about the reasonable person standard? what reasonable person would say there is evidence of murder or any of the lesser charges associated with the killing after seeing the video? What other evidence should there need to be to show he acted in self defense? I'm sure there have been many instances where a person kills another person and sufficient evidence exists to prove the innocence of the person doing the killing and this leads to a dismissal of charges or no charges at all. He's not entirely innocent but charging him in the killing itself seems politically motivated in whats supposed to be a country free from such injustice.

He could not be on trial unless he was indicted by a grand jury. That doesn’t mean he will be convicted, as an indictment is easier to get than a conviction. Clearly there was enough evidence against him to at least get the indictment.

The system doesn’t work based on what you or I think is right, it works based on the law.

2 dead and 1 shot, of course the kid needs to be tried for something.

Will probably get the max on the weapons charge and not guilty on the rest.

Guy brought a skateboard to a gun fight….dipshit.