Rittenhouse Defense Releases New Video That Clearly Proves Self Defense

[dudley0]

I don't know, I thought it was big that the expert said that Rittenhouse wouldn't have had reason to fear for his life if he didn't have the rifle with him. I know people that would convict him simply because he brought the rifle that killed the person, regardless of anything else. If the defense witness says on the stand that the only reason he feared for his life was because they were trying to take the very rifle that he was responsible for bringing to the scene, I don't think he stands a chance. I know that's not a popular viewpoint, but I am being realistic about the type of jury he is likely to get.

But the judge is excluding having the rifle as illegal, so that should help.

 

[KLB]

I don't know, I thought it was big that the expert said that Rittenhouse wouldn't have had reason to fear for his life if he didn't have the rifle with him. I know people that would convict him simply because he brought the rifle that killed the person, regardless of anything else. If the defense witness says on the stand that the only reason he feared for his life was because they were trying to take the very rifle that he was responsible for bringing to the scene, I don't think he stands a chance. I know that's not a popular viewpoint, but I am being realistic about the type of jury he is likely to get.

That should be easy to counter as it is attune to a woman deserving to be raped for dressing in sexy clothing.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I'm speaking from a legal perspective. Also this doesn't matter. It doesn't matter how you feel.\

The charge is for possession of a deadly weapon under the age of 18. If that charge holds he's in trouble. Everything else out the window he can't claim self-defense with a weapon he has illegally. This would be a different story if he was in his home and shot a home invader, but that was not the case. He came here with a purpose, to patrol the streets acting like an enforcer / protector. This was a very bad decision. If you have children you have to agree that this is insane. I would 10000000x never let my teenage child show up to a riot with a firearm.

Once again, it doesn't matter how you feel, it's about the law. Unless he can get out of the possession of a deadly weapon charge he's screwed. Akin to claiming self-defense when you're robbing a store when the owner pulls a gun on you. You were already committing a crime and you can't claim self-defense. Obviously not the same thing but same principle and this will be a major factor the prosecution will highlight.

If I were a betting man I'd venture to guess that he will not get off clean with this. I would say he'll take a guilty plea bargain and he might get a bargain sentence since he's not 18.

I'm stating the facts here not my feelings. We will see how it plays out, but I don't think it looks good for him.

Be advised. You can, and I have successfully argued, that self-defense is legal despite being a prohibited person.

Necesssity/duress is usually the defense. Some states have language written into their statute.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I forgot that’s what normal 17 year old kids do for fun.

Just put a 17 year old on the bus to learn to do this at Lost in the Woods.

The standard is not "normal 17 year olds". Whatever those are, but the reasonable person under those circumstances.

 

[BigRed]

No crime comitted....at least by the Kenosha Kid.

 

[actaeon277]

About the claim, "What if he didn't have a rifle", Matt brings up the question, "What if there was no rioting?"

 

[minigunjake]

This whole thing is an exercise in insanity. There are actually people who think open carry makes people want to attack you, so open carry negates any claims of self defense because YOU are implicitly the aggressor.

 

[actaeon277]

 

[BigRed]

God, I would love to be on this jury.

 

[actaeon277]

God, I would love to be on this jury.

Which is why they probably wouldn't want you

 

[BigRed]

Which is why they probably wouldn't want you

Don't I know it.

******* would probably dismiss me for singing this song during selection.

 

[Amishman44]

He did not bring the rifle with him. He got it from a friend close by where this happened.
Tell you what......get me in a heated situation that has me on full tilt and lunge your butt at me. See what happens. Seriously man you really do not get it.
He was being shot at, assailed assaulted and shot at some more. Holy mother of god people.

Yes this really twists me up.

And this is why some things have gone so awry in this country...because no one sticks to the truth (proper perspective) that the 'big picture', aka, the 'facts'...as evidenced, in this case, by video... provides!
The child-molester guy was chasing Rittenhouse because he (presumably) thought he was someone else because of the color of shirt Rittenhouse was wearing...and Rittenhouse shot him in self-defense.whrn Rittenhouse was bringing attacked!
Others, then, pursued Rittenhouse, as he was heading back to a 'safer' place where he could speak with law enforcement regarding the shooting he had just been involved in.
During that process, he was pursued and attacked, repeatedly, by several individuals (rioter, mobsters, etc.) including having a skateboard swung at his head (with contact made) and another individual jumped him and was in the process of attempting to 'shoot him in the head' with a subcompact Glock pistol (as seen in a still photograph of the incident) when Rittenhouse shot him in the upper arm that was holding the Glock pistol...most-likely saving his own life!
There may have been a misdemeanor violation involved with his possession of the AR rifle...but don't lose sight of the fact that he was not using it offensively but rather was using it to protect and save his own life, while under aggressive and violent attack by rioters and mobsters, cannot be overlooked!
Stay in the 'bigger picture' folks...don't get hung up on the lessor details, avoiding the bigger picture and overall issues...and stick to the facts, not some twisted version of reality that tries to make the bad guys look like the good guys and vice-versa!

 

[DadSmith]

All my reading I still do not see anything they can prosecute him on other than some minor offense or lowly city ordinance. It is clear self defense and being assaulted/shot at by felons to boot.

 

[tackdriver]

... I don't see how you can just blow that off as irrelevant.

Don't know enough about this case, but I've been saying ^^^ multiple times a day since we moved to the Animal Farm in 1984.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

All my reading I still do not see anything they can prosecute him on other than some minor offense or lowly city ordinance. It is clear self defense and being assaulted/shot at by felons to boot.

...and yet there are many here who will repeat the mantra "if it's a good shoot, it's a good shoot" and ignore the role that narrative building can play in these decisions.

 

[KLB]

...and yet there are many here who will repeat the mantra "if it's a good shoot, it's a good shoot" and ignore the role that narrative building can play in these decisions.

True. The prosecutors in this case should be disbarred. They are doing everything they can to prosecute the case in the media, throwing out false accusations and information that will never make it into the trial.

 

[DadSmith]

 

[Ark]

Rittenhouse really won the lottery with that trial judge. I still think runaway jury is totally on the table with the near-universal awareness of this case, but that judge has poured cold water all over the prosecution.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Because they weren't victims. They were the aggressors.

 

[actaeon277]

Well, and "victims" implies that he is guilty.