Patterico's Pontifications

11/9/2021

Tough Day for the Prosecution in the Kyle Rittenhouse Case

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:29 am



New York Times on testimony in the Kyle Rittenhouse case:

Under cross-examination by a lawyer for Mr. Rittenhouse, Mr. Grosskreutz gave testimony that suggested his role in the events of Aug. 25, 2020, was complicated. Like Mr. Rittenhouse, Mr. Grosskreutz was armed that night, and he was asked why he had falsely told police detectives shortly after the shooting that his Glock pistol had fallen out of its holster that night — rather than saying he had pulled it out, as visual evidence showed. Under questioning, he also acknowledged that he was carrying the gun concealed without a valid permit to do so and that he had denied a request from the police in September 2020 to interview him about the shootings.

As Mr. Grosskreutz described the seconds before Mr. Rittenhouse shot him, he was shown photos that captured him pointing his gun at Mr. Rittenhouse.

“So when you were standing three to five feet from him with your arms up in the air, he never fired, right?” Corey Chirafisi, a defense lawyer, asked.

“Correct,” Mr. Grosskreutz answered.

“It wasn’t until you pointed your gun at him, advanced on him with your gun — now your hands down, pointed at him — that he fired, right?” Mr. Chirafisi said.

“Correct,” he said.

That’s . . . not good testimony for the prosecution.

209 Responses to “Tough Day for the Prosecution in the Kyle Rittenhouse Case”

  1. Not a lawyer, so maybe this is a stupid question: but how did the prosecution not see this coming?

    To quote Ron Burgundy: this escalated quickly. This really got out of hand fast.

    What does the prosecution do now?

    Hoi Polloi (7cefeb)

  2. There are the other people Kyle Rittenhouse shot. But this shows the shootings weren’t totally wanton.

    Now Rittenhouuse had reason not to shoot – a number of different people could open fire on him and kill him.

    He was spooked.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  3. Not a lawyer, so maybe this is a stupid question: but how did the prosecution not see this coming?

    Powerline and Legal Insurrection have been covering this case, with LI covering it extensively. They are chronicling the absolute disaster that the prosecution’s case is turning out to be, with the prosecution’s own witnesses continually helping the defense’s case with their testimony.

    Why, it’s almost as if the DA knows he has a turkey of a case, but was bullied into going forward with the prosecution either because he felt his own political career would be in jeopardy or that the streets of Kenosha would once again be the scene of massive rioting if he had declined to prosecute. Perhaps he is tanking it on purpose, and then can just insist to the radical activists that he tried.

    JVW (ee64e4)

  4. There are two dead people besides Grosskreutz. Those are the serious-serious, Jeffrey Dahmer serious, charges. Not a bullet in the shoulder of some vagabond.

    The question I have is why the prosecution called Grosskreutz as a witness at all when he should be under indictment for armed violence, mob action, and unlawful use of weapons. The guy is a habitual cop-hater, going around the country, armed, rioting against the police, for crying out loud! How likely is he to be a friendly witness, and does he even have the mental and emotional faculties to be prepped as a witness?

    nk (1d9030)

  5. I haven’t followed this trial as closely, but it’s interesting. I think the case that he’s guilty seems a lot weaker then I had thought.

    Be interesting to see what the Jury finds.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  6. “The question I have is why the prosecution called Grosskreutz as a witness at all when he should be under indictment for armed violence, mob action, and unlawful use of weapons. ”

    The prosecution is throwing the case.

    Davethulhu (d51add)

  7. The 2 central characters, apart from having Miles Teller (in pudge suit) and TJ Miller calling their agents, are nothing more than LARPers realizing how played they got.

    urbanleftbehind (c073c9)

  8. A cop would get high-5s for that kind of righteous shooting (but perhaps criticism for letting it go that far), which in my mind crosses the reasonable doubt threshold for a civilian.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  9. Why, it’s almost as if the DA knows he has a turkey of a case, but was bullied into going forward with the prosecution

    This. He’ll still get cancelled for the NG verdict. Since Ritenhouse **MUST** be guilty, the verdict is the DA’s fault.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  10. Be interesting to see what the Jury finds.

    The specter next to the jury box is called “reasonable doubt.”

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  11. The prosecution is throwing the case.

    See 10

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  12. What are the chances of a directed verdict?

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  13. One of the things here that ought to be pointed out is that all of these left-wing protesters they are calling to the stand don’t seem to have any desire to fry Rittenhouse, and just telling what they saw. Unlike the “media” folks who seem intent on grinding this axe.

    Such as this testimony snippet (via Powerline): https://twitter.com/jordylancaster/status/1456336920099885066

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  14. Common Sense 101: Avoid the guy with the gun, and don’t do anything remotely threatening.

    norcal (b9a35f)

  15. It figures to be a tough day for the prosecution when the defendant is not guilty of the charges, reasonable doubt at the very least.

    DN (181662)

  16. “There are two dead people besides Grosskreutz.”

    Yes, a pedophile and a serial domestic abuser. Please use their preferred criminal pronouns, especially if you were in the habit of appending ‘SERIAL LIAR’ to anything Trump said in the past 5 years.

    ” Those are the serious-serious, Jeffrey Dahmer serious, charges.”

    Fortunately they’re being brought by the winning combination of #Star Wars #Resistance D team and an Armenian occupied Wisconsin government.

    ” Not a bullet in the shoulder of some vagabond.

    He was AN ACLU LEGAL OBSERVER, nk! Typical of their caliber!

    “The question I have is why the prosecution called Grosskreutz as a witness at all when he should be under indictment for armed violence, mob action, and unlawful use of weapons.”

    They also never checked his mobile phone!

    “The guy is a habitual cop-hater, going around the country, armed, rioting against the police, for crying out loud!”

    He also posted lots of very incriminatingly useful stuff on Twitter!

    “How likely is he to be a friendly witness, and does he even have the mental and emotional faculties to be prepped as a witness?”

    What’s beautiful about the type of people Democrats promote for ANTIFA OPS is that not only are they habitual violent criminals but fully convinced of their own righteousness, a combination that works like dynamite for those advocating for patriots!

    The trial today is even more hilarious, more evidence than ever that the Wisconsin DA’s office is fully corrupt and fully in league with the Antiforces.

    Big Boy Binger (7c34eb)

  17. Justified.

    mg (8cbc69)

  18. What are the chances of a directed verdict?

    Only on the curfew violation apparently.

    nk (1d9030)

  19. On a motion for directed verdict, the judge must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution. To more fully understand what that means, read only the reporting from CNN on the trial so far. It’s like that.

    nk (1d9030)

  20. JVW wrote:

    Why, it’s almost as if the DA knows he has a turkey of a case, but was bullied into going forward with the prosecution either because he felt his own political career would be in jeopardy or that the streets of Kenosha would once again be the scene of massive rioting if he had declined to prosecute.

    Remember when local officials refused to charge George Zimmerman for killing Trayvon in self-defense? The left were aghast, so the state forced a prosecution, which failed, because they had no case. Local officials knew that there was no case, and were not stupid enough to pretend that there was, but politics pushed forward a doomed prosecution.

    The libertarian, but not Libertarian, Dana (61384a)

  21. Kyle Rittenhouse should have stayed home
    Instead of making his bones
    Now he’s on trial
    For killing the vile
    For that he had the stones!

    The Limerick Avenger (61384a)

  22. The state has sure fouled up
    Brains wouldn’t fill a teacup
    They knew all along
    This case was just wrong
    Get home in time for sup!

    The Limerick Avenger (61384a)

  23. Prosecution know
    That Kyle defended himself
    But they have no choice

    The Limerick Avenger (61384a)

  24. Prosecution got absolutely bodied today. It’s not often that you see a defense witness testify during the cross-examination that the pros tried to get him to change his statement.

    Factory Working Orphan (2775f0)

  25. This. He’ll still get cancelled for the NG verdict. Since Ritenhouse **MUST** be guilty, the verdict is the DA’s fault.

    He’ll go Gabbard and be one night a month sub for Jeanne Pirro.

    urbanleftbehind (6e0cf7)

  26. Mr Orphan wrote:

    Prosecution got absolutely bodied today. It’s not often that you see a defense witness testify during the cross-examination that the pros tried to get him to change his statement.

    Shouldn’t the judge, at this point, dismiss all of the charges against Mr Rittenhouse on the basis of prosecutorial misconduct?

    The libertarian, but not Libertarian, Dana (61384a)

  27. Is there any chance the prosecutors name is Hamilton Burger?

    The libertarian, but not Libertarian, Dana (61384a)

  28. Greatcross was a prosecution witness and is there a clip of him testifying on cross that the prosecution tried to get him to change his statement?

    nk (1d9030)

  29. Greatcross was a prosecution witness and is there a clip of him testifying on cross that the prosecution tried to get him to change his statement?

    nk (1d9030) — 11/9/2021 @ 5:30 pm

    Grosskreutz was yesterday. The defense started their case today; the photographer they called as a witness testified during cross that the DAs tried to get him to change his statement.

    The Rikieta YouTube channel has the whole session from today; the moment of truth starts around 6:55:45.

    Factory Working Orphan (2775f0)

  30. Is there any chance the prosecutors name is Hamilton Burger?

    Hamilton Burger had a dread of convicting an innocent person and that’s how Perry Mason got the slack he enjoyed. BTW, did you notice that Perry Mason’s clients were always “citizens”? His trick of fingering someone else for the crime his client was accused of would not have gone well, not for long anyway, with the underworld.

    nk (1d9030)

  31. Thank you, FWO.

    nk (1d9030)

  32. Pure insanity. Media and the government tried to destroy this young man. I hope he gets his full measure of justice and a pound of flesh from those who tried to unjustly destroy him.

    NJRob (bc4a07)

  33. 15. norcal (b9a35f) — 11/9/2021 @ 12:22 pm

    Common Sense 101: Avoid the guy with the gun, and don’t do anything remotely threatening.

    They treated him and all the others with him like they were policemen, whom you can count on (hopefully) to act with supreme restraint and carefully evaluate whether or not something was a threat.

    But Kyle Rittenhouse was a scared, inexperienced, 17-year old who was not wearing a bullet proof vest.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  34. If you want to see the big “holy shizz” part, skip to 6:57:00; the stuff around 6:55:45 has the setup.

    Factory Working Orphan (2775f0)

  35. They treated him and all the others with him like they were policemen, whom you can count on (hopefully) to act with supreme restraint and carefully evaluate whether or not something was a threat.

    But Kyle Rittenhouse was a scared, inexperienced, 17-year old who was not wearing a bullet proof vest.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738) — 11/9/2021 @ 6:08 pm

    That’s the thing, though–if you watch the whole, uncut videos from the various livestreams, Kyle is hardly Yosemite Sam; in every single instance, the people he fires at are people who directly engaged him, and he doesn’t shoot off any more rounds than required to neutralize those threats. In fact, he actually circled back to Rosenbaum to try and call 911, before he realized the mob was coming after him and he started high-tailing it over to the police to surrender.

    His actions were about as textbook a case of someone defending himself from harm, which doing his best to not hurt anyone else. In fact, while he did fire (and miss) at the guy who tried to kick him in the head, he immediately disengaged when the guy backed off. Grosskreutz only got clacked in the arm because he pulled his gun on Kyle (and put a round in the chamber), appeared to surrender, and then started swinging his arm back up before Kyle shot him.

    What apparently set Rosenbaum off was that Kyle put out the literal dumpster fire that Rosenbaum and his buddies started and had begun pushing towards the gas station. Huber didn’t get shot until he tried to smack Kyle in the head with his skateboard and grab his gun.

    This whole incident was basically what happens when a mob tries to attack an armed individual:
    Mob: “Get him! Beat his azz! Kill him!”
    Armed Individual: BANG BANG BANG
    Mob: ::screaming and crying::

    Factory Working Orphan (2775f0)

  36. Here’s the YouTube clip FWO referenced in his Comment 30. The prosecutor told the witness the name of a person in a video when the witness did not already know it, but it has nothing to do with Rittenhouse’s case, and I doubt that it even rises to the level of harmless error in the case against that other person.

    nk (1d9030)

  37. The prosecution is not throwing the case. There is no case, there never was.

    Hatari Somewhere on Ventura Highway (cad170)

  38. (Harry Carey) “When are you and Laredo Stevens going to get around to killing one another?”
    (John Wayne) “Laredo? Why, we water our horses outa the same trough.”
    (Harry Carey) “Well, I’m sure looking forward to hanging the survivor.”
    The Angel And The Badman (1947)

    The State is protective of its monopoly on violence and, like the Zimmerman case, it will not readily forego its opportunity for the twofer. That’s not politics. That’s law and order. We do want law and order, don’t we?

    nk (1d9030)

  39. “The State is protective of its monopoly on violence and, like the Zimmerman case, it will not readily forego its opportunity for the twofer.”

    What the hell is this pseudo-profound B.S. supposed to mean, Blue Boy? Is Binger “THE STATE” now? Is the Armenian Family Civil Service running the mayor’s and DA’s office an archetypal piece of Americana? Is it not a crappy little fiefdom under the protection of the Democrat National Committee whose time outside the spotlight has deservedly run out?

    Justified self-defense is a delegation and extension of the state’s monopoly on violence from the recognition that they cannot, in fact, be everywhere at once! (And also, by even wiser statesmen, a remembrance that there are laws older and more important for social order than those presently on the books.)

    “That’s not politics. That’s law and order.”

    Law And Order: The TV series That only Women, Leftists, and Leftist Women Watch, maybe. But middlebrow Aaron Sorkin monologues are no basis for a grown-up system of government, kid.

    “We do want law and order, don’t we?”

    Low ratings. Too many spinoffs chasing too few niches. Doesn’t serve a wide enough audience. Only notable for hilarious Ice T memes regarding fanciful drugs and their side effects. Sad!

    More seriously, the DA deserves to hang for this abuse of prosecutorial discretion and open collusion with the Democrat party’s objectives to the detriment of his duties, and simpering about how WHEN YOU MAKE THE PROSECUTOR LOOK BAD, YOU’RE ATTACKING THE VERY FOUNDATION OF OUR DEMOCRACY isn’t winning you any friends, although it is showing us all exactly what you’re about.

    Big Boy Binger (541331)

  40. Since everyone else seems to be in a mincing mood, I will not mince words:

    The video evidence made available this week (‘lost’ by the scumbag FBI and hidden by the scumbag Soros DA wearing Star Wars pins which are as good as gang signs for corrupt lefties in government) made it thoroughly and abundantly clear that Kyle Rittenhouse was both a hero and an All-American role model for citizens and police alike, an exemplar for the ideal use of justified self-defense who should be in every basic criminal law textbook in America, and would remain so even if somehow all the women on the jury got swayed by the moral browbeating repetition of CROSSED STATE LINES or SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN THERE or WAS THE ONLY ONE WHO KILLED THAT NIGHT.

    All Republicans who denounce him should be removed immediately. All Republicans who fail to praise him ahead of the verdict should be regarded with utter suspicion, if not outright hostility.

    Any hilariously unsourced objections from the lefties in the peanut gallery?

    Big Boy Binger (9af117)

  41. While I understand the need for “qualified immunity”, there should be some recourse for a defendant who is only brought to court to satisfy a political need. I think that show trials should be massively discouraged.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  42. @39. nk- (Harry Carey) “When are you and Laredo Stevens going to get around to killing one another?”
    (John Wayne) “Laredo? Why, we water our horses outa the same trough.”
    (Harry Carey) “Well, I’m sure looking forward to hanging the survivor.”
    The Angel And The Badman (1947)

    Shorter:

    ““Out here, due process is a bullet.” — Col. Mike Kirby [John Wayne, aka Marion Morrison] ‘The Green Berets’ 1968 😉

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  43. Big Boy Binger – 🏆🍻

    mg (8cbc69)

  44. Mention MY Name!

    Mention my name in Kenosha,
    It’s the greatest little town in the world!
    Just tell them all you’re a good friend of mine,
    And everyone will put up a big “welcome” sign.

    Mention my name in Kenosha,
    And if you ever get in a jam,
    Just mention my name, I say, mention my name,
    But please don’t tell’em where I am!

    felipe (484255)

  45. They treated him and all the others with him like they were policemen, whom you can count on (hopefully) to act with supreme restraint and carefully evaluate whether or not something was a threat.

    But Kyle Rittenhouse was a scared, inexperienced, 17-year old who was not wearing a bullet proof vest.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738) — 11/9/2021 @ 6:08 pm

    There’s something to this. A lot of these professional rioter protestors have a lot of fun trying to goad cops into mistakes on camera during their protests. Even if a use of force was justified, if they trigger it, there will often be a lawsuit and the event will be used to amplify the protest/riot.

    Try that with a 17 year old kid with a rifle, for example by pushing a dumpster fire to a building, and maybe he doesn’t have training or equipment or experience to navigate that as well as 50 cops with pepperballs and tasers would.

    The young man found himself in a bad situation, and from there, as far as I can tell, he was just trying to survive, and a lot of the partisan claims that he shouldn’t have been armed or shouldn’t have been there in the first place apply far better to the people who were attacking him.

    Dustin (150498)

  46. Sometimes a trial is the only way to cut through the media bullsh!t. We now know that the kid was never the initial aggressor. He did not fire any shots until after the mob caught up with him.

    The initial aggressor was the late, unlamented, convicted child molester, who attacked the kid on the pretext that the kid had put out the dumpster fire the child molester was pushing towards a gas station. A fire! A gas station! The kid had not put the fire. Someone else had. Just as someone else had fired the alleged first shot as the dumpster was burning.

    Flight for safety and self-defense all the way is now a lot clearer to a lot more people.

    nk (1d9030)

  47. Per Captain Ed, the defense is calling Rittenhouse to the stand. This doesn’t appear to be a sound strategy if the prosecution failed to prove its case.

    Paul Montagu (5de684)

  48. You can watch here, I guess.

    nk (1d9030)

  49. The reason that this case is the industrial strength disaster that it is is because the smear/narrative was pushed 50 times harder than the actual facts, just like the Steele Dossier and Jan 6.

    Obudman (ff876c)

  50. #51

    January 6 is a smear?

    Seems like you have a narrative of your own going.

    Appalled (1a17de)

  51. The young man found himself in a bad situation, and from there, as far as I can tell, he was just trying to survive, and a lot of the partisan claims that he shouldn’t have been armed or shouldn’t have been there in the first place apply far better to the people who were attacking him.

    Dustin, he didn’t find himself there. He sought out that bad situation on purpose. He may not have committed a crime that night. That looks more likely based on what I’ve seen in the trial so far. But he armed himself, went there on purpose, killed a man, fled the scene, shot others on his way out, and did not turn himself into the police. The fact that the rioters are also bad people is besides the point.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  52. @52, you spelled. “Lie” wrong.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  53. Kyle Rittenhouse is testifying (something that people who stand to be acquitted don’t do nearly often enough because the lawyers don’t want it)

    https://twitter.com/RekietaMedia/status/1458472304938299401

    Rekieta Media
    @RekietaMedia

    Kyle broke down on stand. Heartbreaking. Court took a break but will return in a few minutes.

    This is REAL TV, not reality TV. The real show starts on cross exam.

    youtube.com
    Kyle Rittenhouse Trial LIVE Wednesday Day 8 – Defense Case Continues

    Day 8 of the trial (including jury selection) continues with the Defense working through its case in chief. Who will they call to the stand today? Will we …

    10:31 AM · Nov 10, 2021·Twitter Web App

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  54. Time123 (9f42ee) — 11/10/2021 @ 8:56 am

    Dustin, he didn’t find himself there. He sought out that bad situation on purpose.

    He didn’t know what situation he was going to find himself in. He assumed that the people who called for volunteers knew what they were doing. He didn’t get instructions. Nobody was in command.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  55. “January 6 is a smear?”

    It is when you talk about it.

    “Seems like you have a narrative of your own going.”

    Do you deny that the majority of the actual violence on that day was instigated and organized by Democrat party Zoom meetings, FBI operatives, and GrossKreutz-level antifans on the ground, including a ‘bombing’ that never actually went off and whose perpetrator was, against all precedent, somehow never found or charged, in WASHINGTON DC, despite being caught on video? Do you even acknowledge it?

    The FBI withheld exculpatory video evidence in the Rittenhouse case, and has a long history of instigating and whole-cloth organizing ‘terrorists’ of all types. Neither them nor your inflation-adjusted congressmen deserve any defense or deflection to ‘deplorables’ for variously permitting, instigating, and capitalizing on the worst violence of January 6th.

    Booooomer (99c1a0)

  56. They wentt there to prevent looting (with the idea they coulc prevent it simply by standing there with a firearm) nly to discover, when they got there, that most of the stores had already been looted. I think they decided there was still a gas station here to protect.

    https://nypost.com/2020/08/25/armed-civilians-defend-kenosha-gas-station-from-arsonists

    Within a few days of the August 25 shootings, on Friday August 28, 2020 the law firm that was hired to defend him, of Pierce Bainbridge,released a statement, that said in part:

    https://www.wkow.com/archive/attorneys-say-accused-kenosha-shooter-acted-in-self-defense/article_ed4b1f63-5b9d-5ded-aacd-872e69dd32ab.html

    Upon arrival, Kyle and others stood guard at the mechanic’s shop across from the auto dealership to prevent further damage or destruction. Later that night, substantially after the city’s 8:00 p.m. curfew expired [? sic] without consequence, the police finally started to attempt to disperse a group of rioters. In doing so, they maneuvered a mass of individuals down the street towards the auto shops. Kyle and others on the premises were verbally threatened and taunted multiple times as the rioters passed by, but Kyle never reacted. His intent was not to incite violence, but simply to deter property damage and use his training to provide first aid to injured community members.

    After the crowd passed the premises and Kyle believed the threat of further destruction had passed, he became increasingly concerned with the injured protestors and bystanders congregating at a nearby gas station with no immediate access to medical assistance or help from law enforcement. Kyle headed in that direction with a first aid kit. He sought out injured persons, rendered aid, and tried to guide people to others who could assist to the extent he could do so amid the chaos. By the final time Kyle returned to the gas station and confirmed there were no more injured individuals who needed assistance, police had advanced their formation and blocked what would have been his path back to the mechanic’s shop. Kyle then complied with the police instructions not to go back there. Kyle returned to the gas station until he learned of a need to help protect the second mechanic’s shop further down the street where property destruction was imminent with no police were nearby.

    As Kyle proceeded towards the second mechanic’s shop, he was accosted by multiple rioters who recognized that he had been attempting to protect a business the mob wanted to destroy. This outraged the rioters and created a mob now determined to hurt Kyle. They began chasing him down. Kyle attempted to get away, but he could not do so quickly enough. Upon the sound of a gunshot behind him, Kyle turned and was immediately faced with an attacker lunging towards him and reaching for his rifle. He reacted instantaneously and justifiably with his weapon to protect himself, firing and striking the attacker.

    Kyle stopped to ensure care for the wounded attacker but faced a growing mob gesturing towards him. He realized he needed to flee for his safety and his survival. Another attacker struck Kyle from behind as he fled down the street. Kyle turned as the mob pressed in on him and he fell to the ground. One attacker kicked Kyle on the ground while he was on the ground. Yet another bashed him over the head with a skateboard. Several rioters tried to disarm Kyle. In fear for his life and concerned the crowd would either continue to shoot at him or even use his own weapon against him, Kyle had no choice but to fire multiple rounds towards his immediate attackers, striking two, including one armed attacker. The rest of the mob began to disperse upon hearing the additional gunshots.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  57. Prosector trying to provoke a mistrial, needs to be threatened with a directed verdict, currently getting reamed by the judge, seems that Kyle’s about to have some more victims.

    Little Boy Binger (c76820)

  58. Mr Finkelman wrote:

    Dustin, he didn’t find himself there. He sought out that bad situation on purpose. (Mr 123)

    He didn’t know what situation he was going to find himself in. He assumed that the people who called for volunteers knew what they were doing. He didn’t get instructions. Nobody was in command.

    Young Mr Rittenhouse helped to create the situation by traveling to Kenosha and appearing on the scene with a firearm. That does not mean it wasn’t self-defense; it seems pretty clear that it was. But he should never have gone there, certainly not armed.

    This is a George Zimmerman case: if he hadn’t gone to Kenosha, just like if Mr Zimmerman hadn’t followed Trayvon Martin, there’d be no case.

    Contributory stupidity is not a crime, but if it was, Mr Rittenhouse would be guilty of it.

    The libertarian, but not Libertarian, Dana (61384a)

  59. Appalled @52,

    They’re only paid to put lipstick on the Trump pig and to denigrate the Covid vaccines. If a thread is not about Trump or the vaccines, they’ll do their best to make it about Trump or the vaccines.

    The Canadian mentally ill VPN is merely begging for attention.

    nk (1d9030)

  60. 57. Booooomer (99c1a0) — 11/10/2021 @ 9:25 am

    To someone else:

    Do you deny that the majority of the actual violence on that day was instigated and organized by Democrat party Zoom meetings, FBI operatives, and GrossKreutz-level antifans on the ground….

    Where do you get that?

    I think the Jan 6 committee ought to be ding, but isn’t, is find out who indeed organized all that, but their chief suspect seems to be Donald Trump (or possibly Steve Bannon) when Trump, even if he somewhat condoned it while it was going on, had every reason not to do that since he had a different, quite separate, game plan to be continued in office.

    And actually the upshot of it was that it caused him to drop all of his efforts to say he was re-elected..

    Now I think the people who did plan it, made an attempt to use Donald Trump into helping them and perhaps they could be traced that way.

    Trump was actually supposed to appear and speak (he said, “O will be there with you” – not on the march, but at the Capitol that is) and Alex Jones with Ali Alexander standing beside him,said at the Capitol that Trump was going to speak..(a rally actually was held, somewhat in contravention of what the permits said, and mostly anti-vaxxers spoke)

    including a ‘bombing’ that never actually went off and whose perpetrator was, against all precedent, somehow never found or charged, in WASHINGTON DC, despite being caught on video? Do you even acknowledge it?

    The FBI withheld exculpatory video evidence in the Rittenhouse case, and has a long history of instigating and whole-cloth organizing ‘terrorists’ of all types. Neither them nor your inflation-adjusted congressmen deserve any defense or deflection to ‘deplorables’ for variously permitting, instigating, and capitalizing on the worst violence of January 6th.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  61. including a ‘bombing’ that never actually went off and whose perpetrator was, against all precedent, somehow never found or charged, in WASHINGTON DC, despite being caught on video? Do you even acknowledge it?

    There were two pseudo bombs – one by DNC HQ and one by RNC HQ. It has been theorized the intention was to draw away or limit police at the Capitol. This would show a very intelligent conspiracy.

    The FBI withheld exculpatory video evidence in the Rittenhouse case, and has a long history of instigating and whole-cloth organizing ‘terrorists’ of all types.

    Yes it’s true they create cases — but never let things proceed to actual violence. Entrapment is a defense that is hard to meet, and they choose their targets.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  62. The trial just took an hour break for lunch. From the few minutes I watched the prosecutor questioning Rittenhouse on the ammunition used went beyond asking questions. The prosecutor was testifying. The Judge addressed it before taking the lunch break. Why didn’t the defense object?

    Mattsky (55d339)

  63. “Young Mr Rittenhouse helped to create the situation by traveling to Kenosha and appearing on the scene with a firearm.”

    REASONING LEVEL: POOR
    IMPLICATIONS FOR EVERYDAY SECURITY WORK: POOR
    CLASSICAL SUPPORT FOR POSITION: POOR
    PRECEDENTIAL SUPPORT FOR POSITION: POOR
    RESTATING YOUR ENEMY’S CASE FOR THEM: VERY POOR

    “That does not mean it wasn’t self-defense; it seems pretty clear that it was. But he should never have gone there, certainly not armed.”

    IMPLICIT SUPPORT OF LAWLESSNESS: POOR
    IMPLICIT SUPPORT OF THE RIGHT OF THE STATE TO ALLOW RIOTS: VERY POOR
    IMPLICIT SUPPORT FOR CRIMINAL MISCHIEF TOWARD PUBLIC AND PRIVATE PROPERTY ON NEBULOUS JUSTIFICATION: EXTREMELY POOR

    “This is a George Zimmerman case: if he hadn’t gone to Kenosha, just like if Mr Zimmerman hadn’t followed Trayvon Martin, there’d be no case.”

    LETTING UNHINGED LEFTISTS LAWYERS DEFINE WHAT ‘REASONABLE ACTIONS’ ARE TO LAW-ABIDING PEOPLE: POOR
    GUTTING COMMUNITY COHESION BY REMOVING THE MOST BASIC PROTECTIONS FOR PERFORMING “NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH”: VERY POOR
    TEACHING PEOPLE THAT SUSPICIOUS AND ERRATIC PEOPLE SHOULD JUST BE IGNORED UNTIL THEY ATTACK SOMEONE: EXTREMELY POOR

    “Contributory stupidity is not a crime, but if it was, Mr Rittenhouse would be guilty of it.”

    AT LEAST YOU’RE EARNING THE “LIBERTARIAN” LABEL, BECAUSE EVERY JUSTIFICATION YOU MADE JUST SHAT ALL OVER THE VERY NOTION OF “COMMUNITY” OR “PUBLIC SAFETY” AND EMPOWERED LIBERAL JURISPRUDENCE.

    Little Boy Binger (4026b7)

  64. It’s another tough day for the prosecution. The judge was pretty irate at the guy.

    Paul Montagu (1888f5)

  65. Hamilton Burger had a dread of convicting an innocent person and that’s how Perry Mason got the slack he enjoyed. BTW, did you notice that Perry Mason’s clients were always “citizens”? His trick of fingering someone else for the crime his client was accused of would not have gone well, not for long anyway, with the underworld.

    The whole Perry Mason series (and stream it if you can — it holds up very well) was about the danger of executing an innocent person. Even though CA rarely executed murderers even then (about half a dozen executions a year), Perry was always talking about his clients “going to the gas chamber.” And they were ALL innocent, save one. I think it is no coincidence that the abolition movement had such success in that era.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  66. On a motion for directed verdict, the judge must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution. To more fully understand what that means, read only the reporting from CNN on the trial so far. It’s like that.

    Today they are running another hit job on the judge.

    https://edition.cnn.com/us/live-news/kyle-rittenhouse-trial-11-10-21/index.html

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  67. Do you deny that the majority of the actual violence on that day was instigated and organized by Democrat party Zoom meetings, FBI operatives, and GrossKreutz-level antifans on the ground

    Emphatically.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  68. Young Mr Rittenhouse helped to create the situation by traveling to Kenosha and appearing on the scene with a firearm. That does not mean it wasn’t self-defense; it seems pretty clear that it was. But he should never have gone there, certainly not armed.

    Would any fact of this case be different if Rittenhouse was living in Kenosha?

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  69. FWO:

    Prosecution got absolutely bodied today. It’s not often that you see a defense witness testify during the cross-examination that the pros tried to get him to change his statement.

    They tried to get him to add something to his statement,

    Wa=hat they waned him to do was identify someone he didn’t know as the person in a picture – this person was being prosecuted in another case.

    He was shown a picture, and asked if he knew who it was/ He said no. He was told this person is so and so. Then he showed him the picture again and asked if he knew who it was. He gave the name he was given. Then he was asked if he wanted to put that in his statement.

    The prosecutor was trying to take shortcuts. It was apparently one of his pictures and they wanted him to say who it was by name.

    He said that at that point he decided he needed to get a lawyer.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  70. Ritenhouse’s explanation of how he got there in the statement of Aug 28, 2020:

    After Kyle finished his work that day as a community lifeguard in Kenosha, he wanted to help clean up some of the damage, so he and a friend went to the local public high school to remove graffiti by rioters.

    Later in the day, they received information about a call for help from a local business owner, whose downtown Kenosha auto dealership was largely destroyed by mob violence. The business owner needed help to protect what he had left of his life’s work, including two nearby mechanic’s shops.

    Kyle and a friend armed themselves with rifles due to the deadly violence gripping Kenosha and many other American cities, and headed to the business premises. The weapons were in Wisconsin and never crossed state lines.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  71. Kyle Rittenhouse worked in Kenosha.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  72. More wonderment abounds:

    “Why didn’t the defense object?”

    Because Hipster Q. Starwars proved yesterday that he’ll gladly run his mouth right into a mistrial with prejudice without their help.

    “Today they are running another hit job on the judge.”

    They were doing that long ago, the fact that these high-profile trials are now mainly tried via lib media jury tampering long beforehand(amount of complaints heard from anti-Trumpers here about that? Near-zero) means that everything that happens gets an immediate spin, and only ACTUALLY WATCHING THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED DURING THE TRIAL matters.

    The corporate news media are enemies of the people, they are not there to inform, they believe in nothing but their own power and position. They (from the funders to the editors to the beat reporter) deserve to be arrested, imprisoned, and to be locked in a room for 12 hours a day while every public comment ever made on their ‘stories’ is read back to them in a 100-decibel robot voice.

    Rebel Prosecutor (1dae6f)

  73. I have been paying scant attention but did see Rittenhouse break down on the stand. I think the tears were real and whatever he ends up charged with, he’ll have to live with these 2 deaths and it won’t be easy. He seems like a decent young dude and I do feel for him though I do think he was at least partly looking for trouble. When you’re that young it’s hard to distinguish excitement from trouble. Personally if I were his parent I’d have told him to stay home. Also, if you’re really going into a situation to help, you don’t bring along that kind of firearm, imo. I know I’m not saying anything new or in anyway close to expert. Just my very armchair-ish opinion.

    JRH (52aed3)

  74. Judge to Rittenhouse prosecutor:

    “I was astonished when you began his examination by commenting on the defendant’s post arrest silence. That’s basic law. It’s been basic law in this country for 40 years, 50 years.”

    Obudman (ff876c)

  75. Yes, it looks like things have not gone well for the prosecution and Rittenhouse may not be guilty of murder. Query for those who have been following this more closely: has he been charged with any lesser-included offenses, like manslaughter, and if so what is the likely verdict on them? If the jury finds that he acted in self-defense, will that or should that defeat all the other charges?

    But you have to wonder, what was a 17-year-old doing carrying a gun on the streets of Kenosha that night — where were Rittenhouse’s parents? And the same questions for the protestors, some of whom were also armed — where were the people (if any) in their families or communities who should have restrained them from wanton destruction?

    I like to reduce everything to politics and Our Tribe v. Their Tribe as much as the next person, but maybe this a case of not enough parental involvement coupled with a bunch of young men looking for an outlet for their built-up aggressive impulses that resulted in the tragedy of two deaths and a number of lives changed forever.

    RL formerly in Glendale (fda61c)

  76. Dustin, he didn’t find himself there. He sought out that bad situation on purpose. He may not have committed a crime that night. That looks more likely based on what I’ve seen in the trial so far. But he armed himself, went there on purpose, killed a man, fled the scene, shot others on his way out, and did not turn himself into the police. The fact that the rioters are also bad people is besides the point.

    Time123 (9f42ee) — 11/10/2021 @ 8:56 am

    I guess I understand Kyle. If I had good reason to believe someone might set fire to a business in an area where I worked, and I doubted anyone would try to deter it, I would really feel an urge to go there. I’m not saying that to be macho. I think all of us have that in our heart to some extent.

    Yeah this man was young, inexperienced, and went in like it was a warzone. But he didn’t set the fire or attack people, so it’s kinda like saying ‘she was wearing a short skirt’.

    I don’t think it’s beside the point that the rioters were bad people, if specifically we mean they were kicking Kyle in the head, hitting him in the head with a skateboard, or pointing a gun at his head. I think they wanted trouble more than Kyle did, fueled by poorly framed current events.

    That’s just my opinion. There’s a trial on, and I’m OK with that trial happening (unlike many on the right). Let the evidence be presented and let the jury decide.

    Dustin (150498)

  77. “I have been paying scant attention but did see Rittenhouse break down on the stand.”

    Oh, that was the only thing you caught, what, were you just scrolling through left-antifa Twitter feeds with CRY MORE GET RAPED IN PRISON captions being added to it and remembered you needed to check in with your buddies?

    Why are you bothering to comment on it like your admittedly uninformed opinion is valuable when the live video of everything leading up to this been available online for the past week, with multiple commentators, and multiple blog postings on multiple sites summarizing the trial?

    Do you like advertising your laziness?

    Do you feel shame when being wrong about easily verifiable material facts?

    Is doing your homework less important than letting your homies know you have poorly sourced opinions?

    “I think the tears were real and whatever he ends up charged with,”

    “No opinions here, dude, burn him, free him, whatever, man, I don’t give a FUUU”

    ” he’ll have to live with these 2 deaths and it won’t be easy.”

    Yes, living in or near a county with a justice system as corrupt and left-dependent as Kenosha’s will be hard when you embarrass their prosecutors that badly.

    “He seems like a decent young dude and I do feel for him though I do think he was at least partly looking for trouble.”

    Every not-so-secret lefty coming into the year-old Rittenhouse case with HEY GUYS I JUST CAUGHT THIS THING TODAY AND WHOA…DUDE HE MIGHT STILL BE GUILTY ANYWAY I’M COOL WITH WHATEVER PEACE OUT DAWG

    On what grounds? Are you just voicing this opinion to be all buddy-buddy with your liberal pals? Here’s an opinion for you: The prosecution looks and acts like the left-NeverTrump Republican alliance, with Tom Homan and Stephen Miller look-alikes on the righteous defense for True Conservative America.

    Commie Persecutor (cd9596)

  78. Rebel Prosecutor (1dae6f) — 11/10/2021 @ 10:53 am

    Because Hipster Q. Starwars proved yesterday that he’ll gladly run his mouth right into a mistrial with prejudice without their help.

    I don;t think they want a mistrial. They want an acquittal. They do hope for errors in case of an appeal, but they already made their objections known.

    Kyle Rittenhouse had a directed verdict if acquittal on one count (violating the curfew, because there may not have been a legally valid curfew in place or at least the prosecution didn’t bother to show it) and one count he is all but certain to be convicted for (minor in possession of a firearm, but they can argue for no jail in return for not appealing)

    only ACTUALLY WATCHING THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED DURING THE TRIAL matters.

    Differences between things reported, and what you would think after actually seeing what was said are hardly confined to things relevant to politics. This is very, very common.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  79. 80. Seems like you have several axes to grind. Unlike lots of people I didn’t make up my mind about this case when it happened. You clearly have your mind made up, and it doesn’t seem like your certainty is giving you anything resembling satisfaction. Quite the opposite.

    JRH (52aed3)

  80. Yeah this man was young, inexperienced, and went in like it was a warzone. But he didn’t set the fire or attack people, so it’s kinda like saying ‘she was wearing a short skirt’.

    I’ve seen the short skirt analogy before. I think it breaks down because Kyle wasn’t just walking down the street. He went heavily armed to a dangerous situation with the intent of ‘maintaining order’. He was’t out for coffee with his gun.

    I don’t know if he’s guilty or not. I’ll accept the verdict either way. But I see similarities to a couple of dudes who get into a fight in the middle of the street beat each other half to death. Sure someone threw the first punch but that doesn’t mean the other person is completely free of blame.

    I don’t think it’s beside the point that the rioters were bad people, if specifically we mean they were kicking Kyle in the head, hitting him in the head with a skateboard, or pointing a gun at his head. I think they wanted trouble more than Kyle did, fueled by poorly framed current events.

    This was after he’d already shot someone and was trying to flee the scene. He’d called his mom, not 911. Maybe this was also self defense, but I don’t have much sympathy just because they’re a@@holes.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  81. And yet MORE people feel the need to demonstrate incapacity to judge, it seems:

    “Kyle Rittenhouse had a directed verdict if acquittal on one count (violating the curfew, because there may not have been a legally valid curfew in place or at least the prosecution didn’t bother to show it) and one count he is all but certain to be convicted for (minor in possession of a firearm, but they can argue for no jail in return for not appealing)”

    Kyle deserves much more than that. The state failed to prosecute known criminals involved in the shootings, search their mobile devices, or take DNA evidence from relevant weapons in a manner that suggests mens rea. Mistrial with prejudice is the kindest offer the state deserves, especially to head off the inevitable Fedgov retaliation in legal and less-than-legal methods.

    “Differences between things reported, and what you would think after actually seeing what was said are hardly confined to things relevant to politics. This is very, very common.”

    Whatever, as long as “this case was lost during jury selection” is a valid and predictive statement for high-profile cases, the availability of the facts and the proceedings is going to be highly relevant for determining things like “should we take this case as precedent-setting?” or “Is this result really a good example to follow?” or “Was this individual railroaded by the state or a heavily biased jurisdiction?”

    America is in what’s currently known as a leadership vacuum thanks in no small part to people like our host, so every current interest and pressure group is flailing in their exercise of power and attempting to prey upon whatever soft targets they can find. Defaulting to the ‘result of the process’ in such an uncertain and poisoned environment is a poor substitute for publicly and constantly challenging any such corporate opportunism at the first opportunity.

    “Seems like you have several axes to grind.”

    Yes, on the hides of like you.

    “Unlike lots of people I didn’t make up my mind about this case when it happened.”

    Ah, the proudly ignorant simpleton has an opinion he hasn’t studied up on. Go back and educate yourself on the facts of the case and bring some support for it and I might take your posturing seriously.

    “You clearly have your mind made up, and it doesn’t seem like your certainty is giving you anything resembling satisfaction. Quite the opposite.”

    JRH, would you say that you’re an underachiever and…proud of it? In a way very unlike Kyle Rittenhouse, who conducted himself with exemplary patriotic distinction above and beyond the call of duty, and certainly doesn’t deserve to have ignorant people talk confident nonsense about his mental state?

    Majority Whip (1174c7)

  82. Mr M wrote:

    Young Mr Rittenhouse helped to create the situation by traveling to Kenosha and appearing on the scene with a firearm. That does not mean it wasn’t self-defense; it seems pretty clear that it was. But he should never have gone there, certainly not armed.

    Would any fact of this case be different if Rittenhouse was living in Kenosha?

    Of the case? Probably not. But Mr Rittenhouse traveling to another city is, in a way, looking for trouble, not simply defending his neighbors. He broke the law by appearing in the city as a minor in possession of a firearm.

    Yes, I’d like to see him acquitted of all charges, just as I wanted to see George Zimmerman acquitted. But we shouldn’t pretend that Mr Rittenhouse contributed to the situation by being there in the first place.

    The libertarian, but not Libertarian, Dana (61384a)

  83. Mr Persecutor wrote:

    On what grounds? Are you just voicing this opinion to be all buddy-buddy with your liberal pals? Here’s an opinion for you: The prosecution looks and acts like the left-NeverTrump Republican alliance, with Tom Homan and Stephen Miller look-alikes on the righteous defense for True Conservative America.

    This is an intentional parody, right?

    The libertarian, but not Libertarian, Dana (61384a)

  84. I think it breaks down because Kyle wasn’t just walking down the street. He went heavily armed to a dangerous situation with the intent of ‘maintaining order’. He was’t out for coffee with his gun.

    I think young guy detering looting and burning with a rifle is somewhat logically similar to a drunk woman in a sexy outfit stumbling through a dark alley near frat houses. She wasn’t just out for coffee. She went into a dangerous situation with the intent on having a good time.

    I see similarities to a couple of dudes who get into a fight in the middle of the street beat each other half to death. Sure someone threw the first punch but that doesn’t mean the other person is completely free of blame.

    I roll my eyes a lot at civilians showing up open carrying with tacti-cool crap on, behaving like soldiers. I wouldn’t do it and I would tell anyone doing it it’s unwise. However, given the month, given all the burning and looting, I think the guy may have been hoping to deter violence by putting up a front of strength. Silly? Maybe. But the fire would have been lit without him. The chaos was already there. He showed up to the chaos to try to be the hero. It’s not his fault that someone attacked him for trying to stop horrible events (and yeah, burning a gas station is horrible).

    Dustin (150498)

  85. Would any fact of this case be different if Rittenhouse was living in Kenosha?

    Maybe the illegal possession charge. He testified that he knew he couldn’t purchase the firearm until his 18th birthday. He was also careful in testifying that he only shot guns at a range or on private property before 8/25/2020, so he seemed to have some knowledge of Wisconsin law.
    Before the trial, I said I’d reserve judgment, but now I’d be surprised if the verdict was anything other than “not guilty”.

    Paul Montagu (1888f5)

  86. amount of complaints heard from anti-Trumpers here about that? Near-zero

    Except the guy you are responding to, and several others. But otherwise, zero?

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  87. R.I.P. Dean Stockwell

    Icy (6abb50)

  88. “This is an intentional parody, right?”

    Seems to be someone justifiably giving mealy-mouthed posters a small taste of what true hostile cross-examination feels like.

    “Mr Rittenhouse traveling to another city is, in a way, looking for trouble,”

    Looking to stop trouble along with friends and his friends’ business associates, if you had listened to his trial testimony. Volunteer and/or paid security depending on his party’s previous arrangement with the Indian not-so-gentlemen running the place. Why do you insist on acting like protecting people and property in any state is somehow illegitimate or unprecedented? Why don’t you laugh in the face of anyone who says ‘HE CROSSED STATE LINES LOOKING FOR TROUBLE’ as though the typical people who make that argument ever actually believe in borders or

    “not simply defending his neighbors. He broke the law by appearing in the city as a minor in possession of a firearm.”

    He appeared in a team with his friends and neighbors in one of his common communities, performing services that could have easily been construed as ‘networking’ or ‘community-building’ in any other context. And for libertarians the Second Amendment is clear and correct.

    Why do you insist on repeating these poorly sourced arguments rather than rejecting them out of hand? Why do you insist on ceding territory to an Enemy with a capital E? Why do you, in short, talk losertalk?

    Majority Whip (90b93b)

  89. Dana,

    It is not illegal for a 17 year old to ha e possession of a long gun if he didn’t bring it across state lines.

    NJRob (945a51)

  90. As Sammy points out, Rittenhouse WORKED in Kinosha (and likely paid taxes there). In many communities that means he’s not an “outsider.”

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  91. It is not illegal for a 17 year old to ha e possession of a long gun if he didn’t bring it across state lines.

    It is in some states.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  92. Before the trial, I said I’d reserve judgment, but now I’d be surprised if the verdict was anything other than “not guilty”.

    I expect the prosecutor to hammer on the gun charge, and then to ask for the maximum penalty on that provable charge (and not get it).

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  93. BTW, the defense has tried multiple times to get the possession charge dropped, to no avail. The link refers to this section of WI law.

    Paul Montagu (1888f5)

  94. Off-topic: Inflation takes off. CPI +6.2%. Yellen says not to worry, it won’t last. And if it does the Fed will crush the life out of it (and the economy) like they did in 1980, so it’s all good.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  95. “I think young guy detering looting and burning with a rifle is somewhat logically similar to a drunk woman in a sexy outfit stumbling through a dark alley near frat houses. She wasn’t just out for coffee. She went into a dangerous situation with the intent on having a good time.”

    Go vent your sick fantasies in support of a lawless guilty verdict somewhere else.

    “I roll my eyes a lot at civilians showing up open carrying with tacti-cool crap on, behaving like soldiers.”

    Not to their faces, but you’ll LIGHT THEM UP online!

    “I wouldn’t do it and I would tell anyone doing it it’s unwise. However, given the month, given all the burning and looting, I think the guy may have been hoping to deter violence by putting up a front of strength.”

    Yes. It quite often works, especially when the consequences for doing so are properly tolerated by a sensible local government who isn’t actually working with the rioters and their funders.

    “Silly? Maybe.”

    Common practice worldwide? YES.

    “But the fire would have been lit without him. The chaos was already there.”

    Speculation, and poorly sourced speculation at that. Cite specifics in support.

    “He showed up to the chaos to try to be the hero.”

    Speculation, and poor speculation at that. He was there with friends and following orders, what’s known among normal people as ‘doing your duty.’

    “It’s not his fault that someone attacked him for trying to stop horrible events (and yeah, burning a gas station is horrible).”

    Of course, it’s in fact entirely the fault of the Democrats and the Black Lives Matter movement, along with their corporate sponsors and Soros DA fellow-travelers. Please keep their names IN your mouth when you denounce, as it seems that you miss them a bit too often.

    Majority Whip (553bf3)

  96. Kevin M (ab1c11) — 11/10/2021 @ 12:25 pm

    As Sammy points out, Rittenhouse WORKED in Kinosha (and likely paid taxes there). In many communities that means he’s not an “outsider.”

    Wisconsin has both a sales and an income tax, although Kyle Rittenhouse might not have made enough money from his job as a community lifeguard (this would have been a summer job) to have taxes withheld.

    He didn’t go home from work that day. He lived about 15 miles away (in Illinois) so maybe 30 to 45 minutes, say.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  97. I think young guy detering looting and burning with a rifle is somewhat logically similar to a drunk woman in a sexy outfit stumbling through a dark alley near frat houses. She wasn’t just out for coffee. She went into a dangerous situation with the intent on having a good time.

    Dustin, I think people have a right to be secure in their persons regardless of what they’re wearing. I think taking a gun to a volatile situation as part of an unorganized group and trying to maintain order through threat of force is a very different thing.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  98. Dustin (150498) — 11/10/2021 @ 12:19 pm

    However, given the month, given all the burning and looting, I think the guy may have been hoping to deter violence by putting up a front of strength.

    That was probably what was behind the whole idea of carrying a weapon. He also wanted to act as a medic.

    According to the statement issued by his lawyers three days later, he first went, with a friend, to a local public high school to remove graffiti put there by rioters. There, they found out about a call for help from a local business owner, whose downtown Kenosha auto dealership was largely destroyed by mob violence, who wanted help to protect what he had left of his business, including two nearby mechanic’s shops. Somebody must have been recruiting volunteers and they joined in and obtained or were given rifles.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  99. Why is that different?

    Both are provocative to bad guys who bear responsibility for assaulting someone, right?

    Dustin (150498)

  100. Majority Whip (553bf3) — 11/10/2021 @ 12:56 pm

    He was there with friends and following orders, what’s known among normal people as ‘doing your duty.’

    Nobody was giving any orders, and there wasn’t that much in the way of suggestions. Kyle was mostly on his own, trying to figure out what good he could do..

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  101. Mr Whip wrote:

    “I think young guy detering looting and burning with a rifle is somewhat logically similar to a drunk woman in a sexy outfit stumbling through a dark alley near frat houses. She wasn’t just out for coffee. She went into a dangerous situation with the intent on having a good time.” (Dustin)

    Go vent your sick fantasies in support of a lawless guilty verdict somewhere else.

    “I roll my eyes a lot at civilians showing up open carrying with tacti-cool crap on, behaving like soldiers.” (Dustin)

    Not to their faces, but you’ll LIGHT THEM UP online!

    Not wanting “civilians showing up open carrying with tacti-cool crap on, behaving like soldiers” to shoot him, yeah, Dustin might keep his mouth shut in person. Real soldiers and police are actually trained as to when they can, and cannot, use deadly force, but how can anyone know what judgement and restraint a ‘volunteer militiaman’ might have?

    I’d guess that he faced “civilians showing up open carrying with tacti-cool crap on, behaving like soldiers” with the outrage you have exhibited here, fearing that they might not be all that disciplined would be a justifiable concern.

    The libertarian, but not Libertarian, Dana (61384a)

  102. @102, He had no legal right to take a gun to the streets to enforce order. In fact, he traveled across state lines and across 2 counties to do so.

    I have the right to walk through a bar and not be assaulted. I do not have a right to walk into that bar with a gun and use that gun to demand they comply with health codes or other laws.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  103. Mr 123 wrote:

    I think young guy detering looting and burning with a rifle is somewhat logically similar to a drunk woman in a sexy outfit stumbling through a dark alley near frat houses. She wasn’t just out for coffee. She went into a dangerous situation with the intent on having a good time.

    Dustin, I think people have a right to be secure in their persons regardless of what they’re wearing. I think taking a gun to a volatile situation as part of an unorganized group and trying to maintain order through threat of force is a very different thing.

    And that very different thing is just what the charges against Mr Rittenhouse demonstrate: if you are going to try to “maintain order through threat of force,” you had damned well be right on everything.

    The libertarian, but not Libertarian, Dana (61384a)

  104. Both are provocative to bad guys who bear responsibility for assaulting someone, right?

    In the Rittenhouse case he was threatening violence with the gun, so it should be no surprise when he had to use it. In the drunk woman near frat houses case that could describe a lot of situations on a campus. She might live near there.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  105. you had damned well be right on everything.

    No, you just have to be as right as far as circumstances allowed. Had some in the crowd, noticing him only when he fired, actually grabbed hold of him and kick the everloving stuff out of him, they might have been wrong about the situation but they might have been right within their knowledge (he shot people).

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  106. He had no legal right to take a gun to the streets to enforce order.

    I guess my point isn’t that I think this is a great idea. It’s that this doesn’t mean he lost his right to defend himself, nor does it really change who is at fault (one way or the other).

    Dustin (150498)

  107. Time123 (9f42ee) — 11/10/2021 @ 1:27 pm

    I have the right to walk through a bar and not be assaulted. I do not have a right to walk into that bar with a gun and use that gun to demand they comply with health codes or other laws.

    You’ve talked yourself into a hypothetical that has little to do with this situation.

    He didn’t walk around using a gun to demand anything. In this case he put out a dumpster fire and went to the gun when he was threatened.

    Using your example, he had every right to go there and not be assaulted. When he was assaulted he had every right to defend himself.

    frosty (f27e97)

  108. Dustin, I agree he had a right to defend himself. But from what I saw the facts of this case were not so clear a trial was unwarranted. There are questions about his actions and choices and how they might impact his claims of self defense that aren’t analogous to those of a rape victim. Personally I had a lot of questions about his use of force while fleeing the scene.

    But like you I’ll accept the verdict.

    Time123 (a416d0)

  109. He had no legal right to take a gun to the streets to enforce order.

    Because the militia is well-regulated? Would a business owner in the area have this right? An employee? I agree that he should not have been there, but he was NOT the craziest or least justified person on the street.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  110. Off topic but tangential; the first defendant charged with a serious crime (assaulting a police officer) has been sentenced to 41 months after a tearful confession and acceptance of responsibility.

    Looks like the prosecutors are getting the easy cases out of the way as quickly as they can to clear the way for the defendants who want a trial.

    https://www.fox6now.com/news/capitol-rioter-scott-fairlamb-sentenced-to-41-months-for-assaulting-police-officer

    Time123 (a416d0)

  111. I have the right to walk through a bar and not be assaulted. I do not have a right to walk into that bar with a gun and use that gun to demand they comply with health codes or other laws.

    I might have the right to demand they stop serving children, particularly my own. Although the gun might be a bit over the top unless I was convinced going into that place (e.g. a biker bar) might require special help. Sure, call the cops, but they might be paid off.

    This is the problem with extreme scenarios — I can always make my own.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  112. If Trump is re-elected, I suspect there will be a blanket pardon. If another Republican is elected, it might happen anyway. Trump was self-serving (if you believe his rhetoric now) in not supporting his minions before he left office — a giant FU — but he might have been convicted had he done so.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  113. Thankfully, Wisconsin has already answered the question with criminal statutes and pattern jury instructions.

    nk (1d9030)

  114. The Judge Schroeder has certainly been entertaining. A regular Ito. Though he might try decaf for a day or two.

    Judge in Rittenhouse says that CNN’s Jeffrey Toobin is clueless

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/judge-in-rittenhouse-says-that-cnn-e2-80-99s-jeffrey-toobin-is-clueless/

    Clueless… perhaps pantsless, too.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  115. The thing is, had Rittenhouse followed the law and not had an AR15 on his person, I’d say he would’ve made a whole different set of decisions that night, one of those decisions being to stay away from too-confrontational situations. The protesters/rioters would likely have reacted to him differently as well.
    If the firearm stayed at his buddy’s house that night, two citizens’ lives would not been cut short (although I have mixed feelings about the convicted rapist) and Rittenhouse (even if he is acquitted) would not have experienced the trauma of ending the lives of two human beings, which will stay on his conscience the rest of his life.
    Is my comment hypothetical? Yes, but I don’t believe it’s unreasonable.

    Paul Montagu (5de684)

  116. If Trump is re-elected, I suspect there will be a blanket pardon.

    How? Rittenhouse wasn’t charged with any federal crimes, no? Maybe if a Republican governor is elected?

    Paul Montagu (5de684)

  117. Paul Montagu (5de684) — 11/10/2021 @ 4:16 pm

    This is basically the argument for doing nothing at all.

    If the rioters would have stayed at home, hadn’t tried to set a gas station on fire, hadn’t decided to attack someone, hadn’t decided to point a gun at someone, etc. None of those are unreasonable either. And none of those were provoked or done in self defense. All of those actions were done with malicious intent.

    For Rittenhouse we’ve got to imagine some malicious intent. And it’s a stretch.

    frosty (f27e97)

  118. This is basically the argument for doing nothing at all.

    No, because I didn’t say it was either-or thing, frosty.

    Paul Montagu (5de684)

  119. In retrospect there are any number of decisions made that night that went very bad.
    Two bad decisionmakers are dead, one is missing a bicep, another is going to be tried for felon in posession of firearm, discharging said firearm at the scene of the Rosenbaum shooting.
    All should have stayed out of the arena.
    Rittenhouse worked in Kenosha, has uncles, aunts and cousins there, his Dad lived there and he should have left after the grafitti clean up at the high school and gone home. Instead Rittenhouse chose poorly.

    That said I’ve got no problem with Rittenhouse shooting Rosenbaum. Not buying the Prosecutors theory that Rittenhouse was chasing Rosenbaum and even if that were true, the tables turned and Rittenhouse was cornered in close quarters by Rosenbaum. I don’t think Rittenhouse had the duty to retreat any further.

    I’m not a fan of people hitting others with skateboards. Those thing hurt and the edge of a skateboard can do serious damage. That Huber guy got one free whack in and got greedy. No way I’m putting up with getting hit about my head with a skate twice. Rittenhouse can’t really retreat any further because he’s on his butt in the street and his shot in real time is a reaction shot.

    Then we have “he vaporized my bicep” guy who is suing Kenosha for $10M even though he had no valid CCP, was out past curfew etc. Rittenhouse could not retreat, he’s still on his butt, he lowers his muzzle when the hands go up, then reaction vaporizes arm holding gun when gun is aimed at him.

    The ADA’s are not that good, and I find them both unlikeable. They may win on the law on the gun charge, but that won’t be because they did a good job.

    steveg (e81d76)

  120. The ADA’s are not that good,

    The DA should have borrowed a team of gang prosecutors who know how to try a case where there are no good guys, but from where? They already have their own caseloads.

    nk (1d9030)

  121. I laughed out loud when I watched Judge yell “Don’t you be brazen with me”. What is the consequence of brazeness by an ADA? More vocabulary? Whats next”impertinent” or *gasp* “impudent”? “Let my vocabulary be a lesson young whippensnapper”

    steveg (e81d76)

  122. I’ll own up to being swayed in favor of aquittal. Rittenhouse must be getting good coaching i.e. don’t come across as Nick Sandmann and stop hanging out with Proud Boys Not that it should matter when this is “mutual combat” (a dodge used by Cook County’s States Atty to not press charges on manslaughter) gone awry.

    urbanleftbehind (c073c9)

  123. “The DA should have borrowed a team of gang prosecutors who know how to try a case where there are no good guys”

    The rotund ADA Kruas attacked his own witness… the most likeable witness yet… when he should have just said thanks for your opinions and goodbye. The witness is a photography geek, seemed to have a bit of Asperbers or Autism and the chubby ADA decides to die on that hill, and did.
    I don’t like Kraus, but even I was yelling at my monitor “for the sake of your family Kraus, stop”
    Last thing the ADA should do is look like a fat, mean high school bully thrashing about with the cheeky autistic kid. Bow out gracefully.

    steveg (e81d76)

  124. “I think taking a gun to a volatile situation as part of an unorganized group and trying to maintain order through threat of force is a very different thing.”

    Please outline how defending a single small of structures with an organized group matches anything you said above, which intimates that they were trying to TAKE BACK THE CITY SINGLE-HANDED.

    “The DA should have borrowed a team of gang prosecutors who know how to try a case where there are no good guys, but from where? They already have their own caseloads.”

    NK, did you misplace your statement that said ‘the DA should never have pressed charges against such an obviously good guy’? Do you have strong arguments against the proposition that Kyle was, in fact, a good guy with good motives, as the testimony of the past three days has demonstrated in manifest detail?

    “had Rittenhouse followed the law and not had an AR15 on his person,”

    Kyle was within his constitutional, legal, and tactical rights.

    “I’d say he would’ve made a whole different set of decisions that night, one of those decisions being to stay away from too-confrontational situations.”

    There are two sides to every confrontation and absolutely no guarantee that the other will respect yours.

    “The protesters/rioters would likely have reacted to him differently as well.”

    Yes, you might never have had the honor of hearing Kyle Rittenhouse’s name and catching his sterling reputation, because he might have just gotten murdered and raped by a Rosenbaum-type.

    “If the firearm stayed at his buddy’s house that night, two citizens’ lives would not been cut short (although I have mixed feelings about the convicted rapist)”

    SO YOU DECIDED TO SAY THAT. HERE’S WHY YOU SHOULDN’T HAVE:

    “and Rittenhouse (even if he is acquitted) would not have experienced the trauma of ending the lives of two human beings, which will stay on his conscience the rest of his life.”

    He hasn’t killed anyone human by my count.

    “Is my comment hypothetical? Yes, but I don’t believe it’s unreasonable.”

    The sort of person who describes a convicted pedophile and domestic abuser actively engaging in arson and mayhem as ‘citizens’ who you have ‘mixed feelings’ about inhabits no moral or intellectual universe I wish to share.

    “The ADA’s are not that good, and I find them both unlikeable.”

    In a civilized country, they would both be found dead in ditches shortly after this trial for their brazen assaults on the very concept and practice of justified self-defense. But we have to make do with procedure and the people who worship it above any other God.

    Xexaminator (d67121)

  125. What is the consequence of brazen[n]ess by an ADA?

    In a Cook County Criminal Court calendar, an extra dollar in the chambers coffee kitty. Each courtroom has its own permanent teams of two prosecutors and two public defenders, along with a sheriff’s deputy, a court reporter, and a court clerk. They form a cozy little group. I don’t know how they do things in Kenosha.

    nk (1d9030)

  126. If the rioters would have stayed at home, hadn’t tried to set a gas station on fire, hadn’t decided to attack someone, hadn’t decided to point a gun at someone, etc. None of those are unreasonable either. And none of those were provoked or done in self defense. All of those actions were done with malicious intent.

    For Rittenhouse we’ve got to imagine some malicious intent. And it’s a stretch.

    frosty (f27e97) — 11/10/2021 @ 4:29 pm

    The “he shouldn’t have been there” argument is really just a red herring, anyway. Leaving aside the fact that he has family there, including his dad, the three idiots that he shot shouldn’t have been there, either.

    All that matters here is whether he thought his life was in legitimate danger, and what actions he took in response to that perception.

    Factory Working Orphan (2775f0)

  127. “ “You could have been carrying a hand gun instead of this long rifle.”

    “I would have had it been legal for me to carry a hand gun.”

    And then the prosecutor moved on.”

    Obudman (ff876c)

  128. The ADA Binger seems to think, or to be trying to infer .223 FMJ is magic ammo.
    He should just ask if it over penetrates and can endanger people behind the intended recipient.
    The whole “hollow point” vs FMJ side show without context just sounds ignorant.
    If you use .223 FMJ then you are endangering bystander, if you use hollow points in a rifle in a war, you are a war criminal per the Hague Convention in 1899.

    The problem for ADA Binger is no one else got shot by a Rittenhouse after a through and through, with the most likely being Richie McGinnis (he is lucky). The bullets either stayed in the bodies, ricochet into the night or his misses landed harmlessly a couple miles or more away

    steveg (e81d76)

  129. Kyle was within his constitutional, legal, and tactical rights.

    False.

    He hasn’t killed anyone human by my count.

    Well, there’s your problem, denying the humanity of people you don’t like.

    Paul Montagu (5de684)

  130. The best thing that happened to the defense team was eleven months ago, when Lin Wood decided to leave the case and go on his psycho QAnon journey of proving that Trump really won. It’s only too bad a state bar association hasn’t yet yanked his license.

    Paul Montagu (5de684)

  131. Vippy Ann McFapperson spewing his dog vomit again, Paul? I’ve taken to reading the comments from the bottom up so I can scroll right though his.

    nk (1d9030)

  132. I mostly ignore Socko, but I may throw a bone if the mood strikes.

    Paul Montagu (5de684)

  133. “In a civilized country, they would both be found dead in ditches shortly after this trial for their brazen assaults on the very concept and practice of justified self-defense. But we have to make do with procedure and the people who worship it above any other God.”

    Seems a bit harsh of an outcome for a sentence that starts with: “In a civilized country”

    steveg (e81d76)

  134. “Seems a bit harsh of an outcome for a sentence that starts with: “In a civilized country””

    We are not. But rest assured that every argument the leftists make here, if actually taken seriously, would make this country that much less civilized.

    “Well, there’s your problem, denying the humanity of people you don’t like.”

    I don’t like violent pedophiles, violent domestic abusers, and the liberals who make a big show of using words like ‘fellow human’ or ‘area man’ or ‘Child of God’ if they’re feeling especially self-righteous to defend them using the vaguest of possible terms when they prey on law-abiding citizens. They show no concern for these terms until they get an opportunity to style on the Trump supporting proles, much like the Open Borders crowd suddenly makes a big show of whining about STATE LINES when somebody kills one of their beloved pet rioters.

    Such people have made a conscious decision to dehumanize and desocialize themselves from normal everyday traditional social definitions and fellow-feeling in favor of their own sinful appetites, and then spend the rest of their lives trying to normalize their deviant behavior and maliciously limited definitions unless saved by the cross. Without that, it’s all a familiar refrain of “it’s not pedophilia, it’s ephebophilia, and what if the child consents though…”

    Xexaminator (c03605)

  135. If you want to be taken seriously, you will stop with the VPN games. Idiot!

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  136. People replying = being taken seriously. You, Kevvy, also seem to be restating strong arguments that you hadn’t come up with in weaker formats, which I suppose appeals to some people, or just to your own pride. But you are nowhere near the strongest poster on either side of the spectrum and should probably defer to those with more experience and motivation.

    “Nobody was giving any orders, and there wasn’t that much in the way of suggestions. Kyle was mostly on his own, trying to figure out what good he could do.”

    It’s called ‘patrol‘, one of the most basic civic duties imaginable, and guards, cops, and soldiers do it every day. The small group he was with generally kept to the area in and around the building, with Kyle patrolling in the same general area till he was ambushed. Not the best of plans, not the worst.

    “And that very different thing is just what the charges against Mr Rittenhouse demonstrate: if you are going to try to “maintain order through threat of force,” you had damned well be right on everything.”

    More conflation of MAINTAIN ORDER versus ‘defend a single location’. Can you make a single argument that doesn’t dishonestly restate the facts in a frame favorable to the enemy, or is this just your ‘libertarian’ training coming through?

    In any case, Rittenhouse was, in fact, “right on everything,” and not a single argument advanced from the armies of Captain Hypotheticals has impeached that fact.

    “Real soldiers and police are actually trained as to when they can, and cannot, use deadly force, but how can anyone know what judgement and restraint a ‘volunteer militiaman’ might have?”

    Oh, now the libertarian is advancing the infallibility of state credentialism, is he? The answer to your question usually is “much more than the police and military!” Because Rittenhouse actually was in his community and had an interest in protecting his community, he wasn’t part of a jittery deployed outside force of police or rioters that was there to either punch a clock for hazard pay or burn down gas stations for giggles and a rent-a-mob check. So he could go out, talk to most of the non-violent, non-imported people, show the proper amount of force versus communication, escort reporters through…really the kid’s a role model for how to handle an unfamiliar and unpredictable situation by performing roles that SHOULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN BY THE ADULTS IN THE COMMUNITY!

    “Not wanting “civilians showing up open carrying with tacti-cool crap on, behaving like soldiers” to shoot him, yeah, Dustin might keep his mouth shut in person.”

    He should consider doing so online as well, his prejudice on the matter seems almost entirely manufactured by urban lefty TV-watching that relies on the same 3 or four stock sets of BAD GUY MILITIA members.

    “I’d guess that he faced “civilians showing up open carrying with tacti-cool crap on, behaving like soldiers” with the outrage you have exhibited here, fearing that they might not be all that disciplined would be a justifiable concern.””

    Kyle tried to surrender to every policeman he ran into. One of them maced him when he walked toward his squad car with his hands up. Most of them were hunkered down in their vehicles and only operating in force. Terrible optics, not very ‘community’ of them!

    Xexyzzer (962e73)

  137. Kyle Rittenhouse’s parents are divorced (they married in 2000 and the oldest child is a daughter now aged 20( and his father lives in Kenosha.

    On August 25, 2020, after getting off work, Kyle Rittenhouse first went to a friend’s house before they both went to the school to clean up graffiti.

    https://heavy.com/news/michael-mike-rittenhouse-kyle-father

    Kyle Rittenhouse was part of the Grayslake-Lindenhurst-Hainesville Public Safety Cadet Program in 2017 and also one for the Antioch Fire Department and has worked as a YMCA lifeguard. He dropped out of high school.

    His father was an alcoholic (now sober) and he was charged with domestic violence which was resolved without prosecution.

    His mother was at one point evicted, and also went to court in 2014 seeking child support money for their three children. The youngest turns 17 in December..

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  138. Mr g wrote:

    “In a civilized country, they would both be found dead in ditches shortly after this trial for their brazen assaults on the very concept and practice of justified self-defense. But we have to make do with procedure and the people who worship it above any other God.”

    Seems a bit harsh of an outcome for a sentence that starts with: “In a civilized country”

    “Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing.” ― Robert E. Howard, The Tower of the Elephant.

    The libertarian, but not Libertarian, Dana (61384a)

  139. Paul Montagu (5de684) — 11/10/2021 @ 5:16 pm

    No, because I didn’t say it was either-or thing, frosty.

    One of the issues in this situation is whether a person has a right to defend themselves and their community. For the left the answer is “not from us”. For many on the right the answer is “yes, but” with the list of exceptions swallowing the rule. For many on the right the real answer is that cowardice is the better part of valor, this isn’t the hill to die on, this isn’t the “right” way to respond, this isn’t the “right” person to respond, etc. The list has become very long and complete.

    So, yes, you didn’t make it an either-or thing. You’ve left open all sorts of alternatives that might involve defending himself some other unspecified way.

    frosty (f27e97)

  140. The original comment (not steveg’s response) is probably a crime in Canada. On this Veterans Day, let us also remember the soldiers of George Washington who immunized this site from Writs of Assistance issued by the Ontario Crown Attorneys’ Offices.

    nk (1d9030)

  141. @139, Kevin, it doesn’t want to be taken seriously. It wants to upset you.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  142. Sammy Finkelman (c49738) — 11/11/2021 @ 3:18 am

    Kyle Rittenhouse’s parents are divorced (they married in 2000 and the oldest child is a daughter now aged 20( and his father lives in Kenosha.

    His father was an alcoholic (now sober) and he was charged with domestic violence which was resolved without prosecution.

    His mother was at one point evicted, and also went to court in 2014 seeking child support money for their three children. The youngest turns 17 in December..

    He dropped out of high school.

    White privileged at it’s best.

    On August 25, 2020, after getting off work, Kyle Rittenhouse first went to a friend’s house before they both went to the school to clean up graffiti.

    Kyle Rittenhouse was part of the Grayslake-Lindenhurst-Hainesville Public Safety Cadet Program in 2017 and also one for the Antioch Fire Department and has worked as a YMCA lifeguard.

    Doesn’t sound like a bad kid.

    I look at this and at people complaining about a 17yo with a gun trying to be a vigilante and wonder where were all of the 18-45yo’s? Where were the people who should have been defending the community? Maybe we failed him by playing along with the left and letting them get their riot on.

    frosty (f27e97)

  143. @114, Kevin, that was intended to illustrate my point that use of force, and the response to it, depends in part upon my rights employ that force.

    IMO the Rittenhouse case is complicated by the fact he put himself into that situation and then used force again while trying to flee the scene of the first shooting. But I do think it’s complicated and depends on facts i don’t fully understand, which is why I’ve been saying I’ll accept the verdict however it comes down.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  144. If you ask me, the kid used his gun more prudently and judiciously than “the trained professional” who started the whole thing.

    nk (1d9030)

  145. “Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing.” ― Robert E. Howard, The Tower of the Elephant.

    The libertarian, but not Libertarian, Dana (61384a) — 11/11/2021 @ 4:33 am

    A highly romanticized version that assumes parity in the ability to effectively use force and ignores retribution by allies / relatives. When I look at how cultures that still have elements of this (urban street gangs or tribal lands in Central Asia) I see little to admire. As you look at more advanced version so this (less primitive Central Asian tribes and more organized crime) you see systems put in place to limit how force used.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  146. Other Dana, I thought of a pithier response;

    “Everyone thinks how much better it would be if they could use righteous force against the jerks who richly deserve it, no one considers that it really means have to take a bunch of crap from a large thug with poor impulse control and a tooth ache.”

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  147. “A highly romanticized version that assumes parity in the ability to effectively use force and ignores retribution by allies / relatives. When I look at how cultures that still have elements of this (urban street gangs or tribal lands in Central Asia) I see little to admire. As you look at more advanced version so this (less primitive Central Asian tribes and more organized crime) you see systems put in place to limit how force used.”

    Middlebrow thinking. The real question is: “Why are you trying to wishfully look at this as two different worlds rather than 2 different phases in the same civilizational cycle, in a ‘weak men create hard times’ framework?”

    Especially when both systems coexist in the same country, and feed off of each other!

    In any case, do you think a prosecutor whose cross-examination’s subtext YOU HAVE A DUTY TO SUBMIT TO RIOTERS’ DEMANDS, LAY DOWN YOUR LOADED WEAPONS IN THEIR PRESENCE, AVOID THEIR AREAS, AND RESPECT THEIR BODILY AUTONOMY AS THEY RUSH YOU DOWN is on the side of Team Civilization?

    Does he deserve Team Civilization protections for himself as he methodically works to remove them for everyone else?

    Should we look the other way at sudden and unexpected barbarity the way he looked the other way at Gaige Grosskreutz’s crimes in favor of his personal “greater good” of weakening self-defense protections for Americans across the board via a highly publicized and lied-about sacrificial lamb whose only fault was assuming the rules of the system he grew up under still applied?

    Team Conan (1e4bee)

  148. Our Cook County constituent wrote:

    If you ask me, the kid used his gun more prudently and judiciously than “the trained professional” who started the whole thing.

    As Robert Stacy McCain has noted:

    What are the odds that a guy opens fire at a mass gathering and all three of the people he shoots turn out to have criminal records? Doesn’t this tell you something about who is engaging in these “mostly peaceful” protests?

    The libertarian, but not Libertarian, Dana (61384a)

  149. There is something to that, Dana. At least one of them traveled farther and had less of a connection to the community, and they seemed like rioters as far as I can tell.

    Taking Kyle’s innocence or guilt out of the conversation, it’s apparent these riots were full of terrible people who wanted to burn our communities to the ground. They weren’t protesting for better police or for justice. They hate us, they are basically just crazy enemies.

    It’s pretty hard for anybody to handle them, which is why the left is so upset a 17 tried. Obviously that was a recipe for disaster. As far as why someone would arm themselves to try to take on these nuts… I at least think we all understand why someone would make that specific choice. Wise? No. But he’s on trial for murder, not on trial for national merit scholar.

    Anybody know what that red pin on the persecutor was?

    Dustin (a145cf)

  150. “The prosecution’s case consists of accusing Rittenhouse of rendering aid and putting out fires in order to purposely provoke an attack, so that he could flee for his life, and, finally, at the last moment, w/a gun pointed at his head, execute his grand plan to kill protesters.”

    Obudman (ff876c)

  151. Owen Wister was 25 years ahead of REH, BTW.

    Therefore Trampas spoke. “Your bet, you son-of-a—.”

    The Virginian’s pistol came out, and his hand lay on the table, holding it unaimed. And with a voice as gentle as ever, the voice that sounded almost like a caress, but drawling a very little more than usual, so that there was almost a space between each word, he issued his orders to the man Trampas: “When you call me that, SMILE.” And he looked at Trampas across the table.

    Owen Wister, The Virginian: A Horseman of the Plains 1902.

    nk (1d9030)

  152. Judge, call this a mistrial stat! Kyle’s official hometown needs him:

    https://abc7chicago.com/antioch-illinois-kunes-ford-car-dealership-burglary-il/11223907/

    urbanleftbehind (c073c9)

  153. “Judge, call this a mistrial stat!”

    NEGATIVE ATTENTION IS BEING DRAWN TO PEOPLE ON MY SIDE!

    Nah, we need to let this prosecutor continue to show exactly why liberal prosecutors shouldn’t be trusted, and exactly how terribly prosecutors as a profession do at, shall we say, “policing their own communities.”

    Binger is the absolutely perfect encapsulation of the Urban Partisan Legal Liberal and every minute he speaks reminds a whole lot of people new to this exactly why these Democrat party operatives deserve far more constant and consistent hatred and political attention paid than the people here are willing to give them.

    They are yet another Enemy of the People, and if I hear a single person use the words ‘public servant’ concerning his person, I guarantee you’ll never hear the end of it from me.

    Prosecutors who choose to prosecute these obvious cases of justified self-defense are like doctors who choose to perform abortions-absolute moral reprobates who should be shunned for their decision whatever the law is at the time. Also, they tend to be incompetents who mainly do it for the money and political status. “Binger” should be uttered in the same vein as “Gosnell”.

    Team Conan (22d53f)

  154. “‘Binger’ should be uttered in the same vein as ‘Gosnell.'”

    Agreed.

    DN (181662)

  155. “The prosecution’s case consists of accusing Rittenhouse of rendering aid and putting out fires in order to purposely provoke an attack, so that he could flee for his life, and, finally, at the last moment, w/a gun pointed at his head, execute his grand plan to kill protesters.”

    Obudman (ff876c) — 11/11/2021 @ 7:00 am

    heh

    I realize it’s not so black and white, but this isn’t too far from the state’s case.

    I think the young man was both goofing up to do this and impressive in how he handled the chaos.

    This reminds me of the armed Koreans during the Rodney King riots. Perhaps the greatest problem Kyle faced is that there weren’t a hundred people like him insisting the fires not spread and burn the town down? If this happened near my home, I would really rather all the men go down there and keep the peace, than let the rioters have carte blanche. Not just the specific business owners, but the whole community should refuse to let it happen.

    We keep being pushed into conflict. it’s very concerning.

    Dustin (a145cf)

  156. “‘Binger’ should be uttered in the same vein as ‘Gosnell.’”

    Agreed.

    DN (181662) — 11/11/2021 @ 9:06 am

    Well, a defense witness just testified that there were police cars “with officers and human beings” in them (towards where Rosenbaum was pushing the burning dumpster) so I’ll score your slur of the prosecutor only a 5.0 out of 10.0.

    nk (1d9030)

  157. I would agree with you, ViPeNza, on the prosecutor, but it’s also possible Binger and central casting Wiskaaansn fatty drew the short straws of a well scripted kayfabe and know he’s innocent as hell

    urbanleftbehind (c073c9)

  158. “Well, a defense witness just testified that there were police cars “with officers and human beings” in them (towards where Rosenbaum was pushing the burning dumpster) I’ll score your slur of the prosecutor only a 5.0 out of 10.0.”

    How does the second statement follow from the first? Your willingness to employ non sequiter and nonresponses as serious replies is positively…Bingerian. Are you protecting your perogative to Binger witnesses in the future?

    “but it’s also possible Binger and central casting Wiskaaansn fatty drew the short straws of a well scripted kayfabe and know he’s innocent as hell”

    Not a chance in hell. Do you know what’s an even better way to demonstrate this than ‘kayfabe’? REFUSING TO TAKE THE CASE ON PRINCIPLE! As I strongly suspect most other state prosecutors did! The fact that they know Kyle is innocent makes their actions WORSE!

    “I was poor and I needed the money” or “I’m in a career rut and I need to curry favor with the Democrat party” or “I’m only making 63k a year as a lawyer and super replaceable so I’d better do this to help my career!” is not an EXCUSE for advancing leftist causes, refusing to prosecute violent criminals, and hiding evidence. If anything it’s an extra epitaph to chisel on your tombstone! HERE LIES BINGER: POOR SAP WHO COULDN’T HACK IT AND NEEDED THE MONEY, SOLD HIS SOUL TO THE DEVIL, GOT BROKEN ON THE STAND WHEN HIS USEFULNESS ENDED.

    NKanon is demonstrating exactly the utter lack of morality and leftside TRUST-THE-PLAN excuses that all corrupt officeholders make to excuse wrongdoers in their own profession and I absolutely will not stand for it.

    Witness Bingerer (fdb350)

  159. Dustin, Part of what’s breaking down is faith the legitimate use of force. You’re saying (I think) that A’s use of force is justified because the state wasn’t doing their job properly. I understand what you’re saying, and I agree with it on a gut level. But other parts of the polity will agree with the principle and say some of their lawlessness is justified by the same principle. I’m not advocating that they’re correct. I’m saying that the best solution is in process reforms, even if there’s emotional satisfaction with other solutions. Because of that it’s not just valid but necessary that Rittenhouse’s killings be scrutinized, he not be given much benefit of the doubt, and prove what he did was necessary.

    Does that make sense?

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  160. “Dustin, Part of what’s breaking down is faith the legitimate use of force.”

    The only people attempting to break it are people like you: liberal activist prosecutors, activist liberal lawyers, and the criminals they represent and use as easy forced labor. They lie freely, damnably, and unashamedly in this purpose.

    “You’re saying (I think) that A’s use of force is justified because the state wasn’t doing their job properly. I understand what you’re saying, and I agree with it on a gut level.”

    Do you? Every single other post you made could have fooled me.

    “But other parts of the polity will agree with the principle and say some of their lawlessness is justified by the same principle.”

    Who? Who specifically? Name them and shame them right here and right now.

    “I’m not advocating that they’re correct. I’m saying that the best solution is in process reforms,”

    I’m not saying that they’re right, but we should totally just enact the anti-self-defense policies and bureaucratic roadblocks they and their handlers want because….uhh…bad stuff will happen, bro!

    “even if there’s emotional satisfaction with other solutions.”

    Even if you yourself and your allies hate the traditional solutions and slander those who employ them because they fail to make your ability to use criminals as activists easy and straightforward, yes.

    “Because of that it’s not just valid but necessary that Rittenhouse’s killings be scrutinized, he not be given much benefit of the doubt, and prove what he did was necessary.”

    Absolutely not. “The process is the punishment!” It’s also an obvious deterrent to others doing it, and a morally and legally unacceptable practice for activist judges and lawyers to play ‘expert’ and advocate for nefarious anti-national and anti-social forces with cash to burn and creative ways of getting what they want.

    “Well he might be innocent, but could you please normalize and institutionalize raking any other cases of justified self-defense over the coals so that our auxilaries in the media can destroy their lives, pretty please!”

    NO, NO, AND HELL NO!

    Witness Bingerer (93ddf2)

  161. I’m not really taking it out to that level of abstraction.

    I do think the state failed to keep a safe community, and I think it’s natural for people to want to stop looters from burning down any community.

    But I don’t think that’s really relevant to a self defense claim. I don’t think it’s fair to keep putting it on Kyle that he entered this situation with a weapon, in a way that must’ve contributed to the chaos. That has nothing to do with it, and it’s unfair, since the rioters brought weapons and were… rioting.

    What matters to me is that, no matter how unwise it was to try to be the tacti-cool hero badass fantasy, no matter how lawful it was to break curfew, the issue is whether or not Kyle really did sincerely need to protect himself from attacks. I think he did need to protect himself from the guy saying he was going to kill Kyle, the guy kicking him in the head or hitting him in the head or pointing a gun at his head. So that wasnt murder.

    I think you do make sense that this kind of force demands close scrutiny. And under that scrutiny, I don’t think the state is making a great case. I think it’s terrible a witness said the state told him to change his story, another witness said Kyle didn’t fire until he pointed a gun at him, and that the state made an issue of Kyle remaining silent until he testified. Kyle, on the other hand, had the backbone to get on that stand and face the scrutiny you call for. I think that was a good choice, even though it probably was a net negative to his case, because the public thinks he’s a white supremacist murderer (even Joe Biden seems to say a lot of that). He did take life, and he’s answering every question an experienced adversary has for him.

    I do not really think standing by a looter’s target with a gun is lawlessness, but lawlessness obviously invites vigilantism. That’s what this case is actually about. The state needs to protect its monopoly on patroling and stopping crime or everything will fall apart. I get that just as I get Kyle’s impulse to stand there and not take the rioting.

    Dustin (a145cf)

  162. Dustin, I get what you’re saying and I agree with you about how the trial has been going. What I’ve seen so far has answered some of the questions and concerns that I had, enjoyed talking it through with you, thank you for taking the time.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  163. @165 Sock Puppet Troll, I noticed you had a bunch of questions and comments for me. I stopped reading your comments closely a while ago because you rarely had anything interesting to say and didn’t seem to understand the conversations you were replying to. I think part if it’s an act because it’s hard to be that stupid but either way i don’t plan on responding. Feel free to keep trolling if it makes you happy, it’s easy to ignore you.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  164. “I think you do make sense that this kind of force demands close scrutiny.”

    It did not and it does not, most of these cases are dismissed on the strength of an initial police review, the scrutiny that is now being brought to bear and that you would now normalize is absolutely far in excess of any previous case on far less evidence. It is routine for people not to be arrested in such cases, precisely because such crimes and their conclusions are absolutely nonproblematic….for anyone who isn’t depending on a force of criminals to do dirty work without their specific fingerprints on it.

    “But if you let civilians (in who’s war? Who declared it?) just shoot people who steal, assault, and burn, how will our plan to drive out the people and buy the land at fire sale prices go?”

    “That’s what this case is actually about. The state needs to protect its monopoly on patroling and stopping crime or everything will fall apart.

    THE STATE MUST DETER PEOPLE FROM ORGANIZING TO PROTECT THEIR LIVES AND PROPERTY FROM FAILED STATE PROJECTS OF THEIR OWN VOLITION! Thank you for demonstrating that you are the exact opposite of ‘conservative’ or ‘principled’ and instead an advocate for corrupt state power at every level, in a constant undeclared war on the freedoms and privileges of ordinary American citizens, and a snake whom no one should trust. I look forward to Bingering you constantly in the days to come.

    Roadblock Mcgee (e728c8)

  165. What the liberal posters all here have demonstrated very precisely is the reason that there can absolutely be no common ground between conservatives and liberals-any time the liberals make a pretense of agreeing with someone it’s just to push for their own policies again under a different set of labels. There is no peaceable coexistence with this ideology with the soul of a multi-level-marketer, you don’t even get the Amway products as consolation prizes.

    And of course, any “conservative” taking the time to criticize Kyle Rittenhouse’s actions when he was faced with the most insane situation imaginable, essentially mass terrorism supported by the media, NGOs, and the current President, is an Enemy and should be rooted out of their position.

    Roadblock Mcgee (0f607d)

  166. “Binger” should also be uttered in the save vein as “Nifong.”

    For months in 2006 Nifong was hailed as a hero by the same people who want Kyle Rittenhouse convicted.

    DN (181662)

  167. Time123 (9f42ee) — 11/11/2021 @ 11:15 am

    No sarcasm and with as little offense as I can achieve; what did you learn differently over the last few days that you didn’t know before?

    I’ve seen you make some comments that seem inconsistent with the facts of the case as we knew them even before the trial. Do you think you had good information going into the trial?

    frosty (f27e97)

  168. “I’ve seen you make some comments that seem inconsistent with the facts of the case as we knew them even before the trial. Do you think you had good information going into the trial?”

    Liberals really don’t care about being internally consistent, they just care about ‘getting the talking points out there,’ and don’t really see anything wrong with wildly reversing yourself a few posts later. Since liberals naturally recruit from asocial burnouts, druggies, and has-beens like Binger such reversals and ‘failures to update priors’ are quite common.

    They were just doing it for the cause, man!

    Though he could also be one of those common ‘five posters on the same account’ (I suspect the same for nk) gimmicks that liberals love to use to launder identity and advocacy and is in fact one of the dangers of thinking that requiring REAL NAME VERIFICATION will somehow stop these fakeposter shenanigans and Make Opinions Civil Again.

    Roadblock Mcgee (f5e29b)

  169. >>If Trump is re-elected, I suspect there will be a blanket pardon.

    How? Rittenhouse wasn’t charged with any federal crimes, no? Maybe if a Republican governor is elected?

    Sorry, my referent was unclear. I was speaking of the Jan 6th rioters.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  170. If this happened near my home, I would really rather all the men go down there and keep the peace, than let the rioters have carte blanche. Not just the specific business owners, but the whole community should refuse to let it happen.

    We keep being pushed into conflict. it’s very concerning.

    The problem is, of course, that the chaos agents don’t give a crap about what is lawful (pretty much by definition). The people in the community are disorganized and reluctant to intervene in any case, and the police are too few to do much except limit/contain the damage. In the Rodney King riots they basically just stayed out of it as there were far too many rioters to do anything effective.

    The best lack all conviction, while the worst
    Are full of passionate intensity.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  171. Same to you time 123.

    I am surprised people are engaging this poor mentally ill guy. It’s causing him obvious distress, and I think it’s better to ignore him.

    Dustin (f82272)

  172. “the chaos agents don’t give a crap about what is lawful (pretty much by definition).”

    Yes, I hate the liberal prosecutors and judges too. None of this would have happened if the state had not failed to do its most basic duty and stopped the rioting and arson by force. This was, of course, not negligence or incompetence but a conscious decision by local and state officials at the highest level to allow a mob of violent strangers to burn and loot their city, for reasons which benefited the Democrat party bosses.

    “In the Rodney King riots they basically just stayed out of it as there were far too many rioters to do anything effective.”

    I don’t know, the National Guard and Rooftop Koreans proved surprisingly effective at both deterrence and eventually restoring order. The Rittenhouse and Co. mainly appeared to be following the second option.

    “I am surprised people are engaging this poor mentally ill guy. It’s causing him obvious distress, and I think it’s better to ignore him.”

    SIGNS YOU’RE WINNING AN ARGUMENT WITH A LIBERAL: PIVOT FROM ‘BAD FOR MY MENTAL HEALTH’ TO ‘BAD FOR YOUR MENTAL HEALTH.’

    Roadblock Mcgee (07e55e)

  173. DM wrote:

    “‘Binger’ should be uttered in the same vein as ‘Gosnell.’”

    Agreed.

    I’m thinking your comparison should be to Mike Nifong, not Kermit Gosnell, although I suppose you could have meant that the ADSs performed an abortion on the prosecution’s case.

    The libertarian, but not Libertarian, Dana (61384a)

  174. How much of this is the prosecution simply bringing to trial a case that they knew was junk, but no one in the DA’s office was willing to dismiss the charges, because that would put their names out in public for it? By bringing this case to trial, if Mr Rittenhouse is acquitted, they can blame it on twelve (supposedly) anonymous jurors.

    The libertarian, but not Libertarian, Dana (61384a)

  175. Frosty, I wasn’t confident about the following

    -Circumstances that lead him to the parking lot.
    -Was his use of force there reasonable, or did he panic and escalate prematurely. The fact that he put himself in that situation puts the onus on him to not be panicked and make good decisions about use of force in my mind.
    -details around his use of force while fleeing the scene. That was the most concerning to me as I wasn’t clear what the motivation of the people who attacked him was. I’m skeptical of the right to use lethal force while fleeing a crime scene.
    -If his use of force while fleeing the scene was reasonable. Did he use force when warranted or was he reacting from panic. Again, the fact he put himself into the situation makes him more responsible in my mind.

    The reporting on this was highly biased (both for and against him) with what looked like a lot of motivated reasoning and I wasn’t sure what had actually happened. Seemed like everyone was overly confident the facts clearly supported their priors and angry people might question them.

    One thing I specifically didn’t know was if the people attacking him thought they were trying to stop a killer, and I had seen video that would support that. The fact that he didn’t turn himself in after he got away counted against him in my mind. I figured testimony under oath with cross examination would be the best way to get to the bottom of that.

    Happy to answer your question btw.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  176. Frosty, wanted to add your question seemed completely fair and didn’t take any offense at all.

    Time123 (9f42ee)

  177. THIS…IS…TIME JEAPORDY!

    I wasn’t clear what the motivation of the people who attacked him was.”

    “A GROUP OF ORGANIZED LEFTIST PARAMILITARIES EMBEDDED WITH ‘PEACEFUL’ DEMONSTRATORS WORKING AS DISTRACTIONS, SUPPORT, AND LYING WITNESSES FOR CRIMINAL ACTS COMMITTED BY THOSE PARAMILITARIES AGAINST POLITICAL ENEMIES, REAL OR IMAGINED, IN THEIR VICINITY”

    3….2…1

    The answer is ‘What is Antifa’, Time.

    I’m skeptical of the right to use lethal force while fleeing a crime scene.

    “A POSTER WHO FEIGNS NICENESS AND A DESIRE FOR DISCUSSION WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY ANSWERING EVERY WELL-SUPPORTED ARGUMENT AGAINST HIS POSITION WITH A NEWER AND EVEN MORE PRESUMPTUOUSLY INDEFENSIBLE POSITION SUPPORTED BY ABSOLUTELY NO PREVIOUS JURISPRUDENCE, WHICH HE HOPES TO GET ACCEPTED INTO THE CONVERSATION BY DROPPING IN NEUTRAL SECTIONS”

    3…2…1

    The answer is ‘What is a liberal disinformation and distraction agent such as Time123 or Prosecutor Binger?’, frosty.

    “Happy to answer your question btw.”

    DO NOT ENGAGE. HE HAS NOT AND IS NOT ANSWERING YOUR QUESTIONS. HE IS HERE TO WASTE YOUR TIME WITH ENDLESS POINTLESS QUESTIONS AND TANGENTS BEFORE PUSHING HIS TIRED ANTI-SELF-DEFENSE ADVOCACY LIES AGAIN. MOST OF THE INFORMATION PRESENTED AT TRIAL WAS IN FACT AVAILABLE FOR MONTHS BEFOREHAND, AND MOST LEFTIST COMMENTATORS DIDN’T EVEN PRETEND TO DEPEND ON THE FACTS WHEN MAKING THEIR ALLEGATIONS AGAINST RITTENHOUSE. THERE IS NO ‘BOTH-SIDESING’ THIS ISSUE-IF HE WANTS INFORMATION, HE CAN WATCH THE TRIAL OR ANY OF THE HUNDREDS OF RECAPS AVAILABLE ONLINE PRIOR TO ENGAGING IN PURPORTEDLY ILL-INFORMED CONVERSATION ABOUT IT.

    Swole Trebek (3fb3ca)

  178. Time123 (9f42ee) — 11/11/2021 @ 1:55 pm

    You have said some version of “flee the scene” in a number of comments. He didn’t “flee the scene”. What are you referring to when you say that?

    That was the most concerning to me as I wasn’t clear what the motivation of the people who attacked him was.

    The people who attacked him had a clear motivation. We knew that before trial. From the evidence given at trial some of the witnesses should be the ones on trial. That they are witnesses tells you that police took their statements and the DA interviewed them. One of them has lied on the stand so they may have lied in their interviews. But none of this is new information.

    The fact that he didn’t turn himself in after he got away counted against him in my mind.

    This did not happen. He absolutely turned himself him. The fact that he tried to turn himself in at the scene and later turned himself in at a police station should tell you he didn’t go there to shoot anyone.

    I’ve seen some of the highly biased reporting you’re talking about. Some of it is outright lies.

    One thing I specifically didn’t know was if the people attacking him thought they were trying to stop a killer

    I’m not sure how this is an idea you took seriously. Everyone is critical of him defending himself but on the other hand people who were previously rioting, looting, and burning buildings get a presumption of defending others? Not defending themselves but instead taking on the very vigilante role Rittenhouse is being criticized for. You don’t see any contradiction there?

    frosty (f27e97)

  179. Mr Snowman wrote:

    One thing I specifically didn’t know was if the people attacking him thought they were trying to stop a killer

    I’m not sure how this is an idea you took seriously. Everyone is critical of him defending himself but on the other hand people who were previously rioting, looting, and burning buildings get a presumption of defending others? Not defending themselves but instead taking on the very vigilante role Rittenhouse is being criticized for. You don’t see any contradiction there?

    It doesn’t even matter. Even if the people who assaulted Mr Rittenhouse did think they were trying to stop a killer, the defendant had no way of knowing that; all he knew was that he was being chased and assaulted.

    The libertarian, but not Libertarian, Dana (61384a)

  180. The prosecution’s case basically boiled down to, “Why didn’t you lay down and let the peaceful mob try to kill you?”

    Factory Working Orphan (2775f0)

  181. “Why didn’t you lay down and let the peaceful mob try to kill you?”

    Instead Rittenhouse had the audacity to carry the magic rifle, with magic FMJ ammo.

    I was wrong about a few things yesterday (shock waves roll through the blog. Hold on you will get through this..) and looked up the ammo that was used in the rifle Rittenhouse had that night.
    As near as I can tell, that particular round fragments and does not overpenetrate. Binger would argue either side, overpenetration = reckless endangerment. Frangible = ghoulish.
    Its his job in an adversarial process, but he and Kraus seem like dicks in real life who play at being attorneys

    steveg (e81d76)

  182. Sometimes the bosses stick you with the brown end of the stick. That they don’t seem to be particularly capable might mean that more senior folks had to wash their hair that week.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  183. Prosecutor: “Your videos that you have captured of these incidents that you call ‘riots’, they’re very slanted against the people who are rioting.”

    Obudman (bdc76b)

  184. Binger would argue either side, overpenetration = reckless endangerment. Frangible = ghoulish.

    I think most of this was just that Binger was underprepared for crossing the defendant, so he just kept going and going and this was something that came to him. He wasn’t really asking Kyle about the science of ammunition. He was testifying nonsensically. I think it was smart of the defense to let him. The jury knows he’s not supposed to do the testifying. It looked unfair, and that’s one theme of this defense.

    Dustin (a145cf)

  185. Nothing so focuses the mind as the prospect of being hanged. — Mark Twain

    But the kid was a good witness all around even without that. He had his narrative and he wasn’t going to be shook from it.

    nk (1d9030)

  186. To the libertarian but not libertarian, I did make the comparison to Nifong at 171. And his supporters.

    DN (181662)

  187. > the issue is whether or not Kyle really did sincerely need to protect himself from attacks

    i wouldn’t even go that far. the issue is whether he had a reasonable belief that he needed to protect himself from attacks. if he had no need but it was reasonable for him to believe he had a need, he’s still not guilty.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  188. Nothing so focuses the mind as the prospect of being hanged. — Mark Twain

    When a man knows he is to be hanged in a fortnight, it concentrates his mind wonderfully. — Samuel Johnson, 1777

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  189. i wouldn’t even go that far. the issue is whether he had a reasonable belief that he needed to protect himself from attacks. if he had no need but it was reasonable for him to believe he had a need, he’s still not guilty.

    I wouldn’t even go THAT far. If it is reasonable to believe that he might have thought he had a need, he’s still not guilty. Reasonable doubt.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  190. i’m pretty sure the standard for belief that one is under imminent threat of severe bodily injury is objective, not subjective. but it’s been a decade, i might be wrong. 🙂

    aphrael (4c4719)

  191. Slick’s friend: Hey, Slick! I heard you was hung!

    Slick: And they was right!

    felipe (484255)

  192. Opps, forgot to credit Richard Pryer’s writing in “Blazing Saddles.”

    felipe (484255)

  193. (720 ILCS 5/7-1) (from Ch. 38, par. 7-1)
    Sec. 7-1. Use of force in defense of person.
    (a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or another against such other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or another, or the commission of a forcible felony.

    It’s pretty much the law generally.

    nk (1d9030)

  194. nk (1d9030) — 11/12/2021 @ 5:03 am

    It’s worth pointing out that doesn’t apply to past events. There is no self defense claim for beating and trying to kill someone because you thought they killed someone else and were getting away.

    Rittenhouse’s attackers never had a lawful position. Yet they’re lying on the stand and to the media without repercussion.

    frosty (470cf8)

  195. i’m pretty sure the standard for belief that one is under imminent threat of severe bodily injury is objective, not subjective. but it’s been a decade, i might be wrong

    Yes, but “reasonable doubt” as to that determination is all you need for acquittal. The defense does NOT have to prove its case; all they need is for the State to fail.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  196. “Sometimes the bosses stick you with the brown end of the stick.”

    ‘Your bosses asking you to do morally depraved things against a normal person’s conscience is a routine and everyday occurence that you should expect to comply with!’

    “That they don’t seem to be particularly capable might mean that more senior folks had to wash their hair that week.”

    Are you suggesting that there existed professional prosecutors who are just as reprehensible as Binger but more qualified to do a nepotistic corrupt local government’s job of sending him to prison on specious, trumped up charges, thereby setting a horrific example for all other law-abiding citizens? Are you DEFENDING Binger by saying that Every Prosecutor Does It Or Gets Away With It?

    Kevin, your entire characterization of the decision to prosecute someone you know for a fact is innocent on any and all justification you can think of for no reason other than helping your own career as something MORALLY NEUTRAL is simply an example of your own abject moral cowardice.

    A reasonable person can only conclude that you’ve either done something just as bad yourself, or failed to stand up to your colleagues doing it. Therefore, when you hear other people being denounced for it, you frantically try to demoralize the audience with distractions and empty slogans, again much like Binger tries to mischaracterize testimony or the letter of the law.

    Fortunately, you’re just as transparently incompetent at it as Binger, so it’s easy to catch, and therefore admonish you to correct yourself before you condemn yourself. “Protecting the reputation of my profession” is NOT the highest virtue, and even if it was, the right way to do it would be to start taking concrete action to get people like Binger disbarred at minimum.

    Moral police (7a4235)

  197. Kyle Rittenhouse’s close friend in Kenosha was his near brother in law – his sister’s boyfriend. His sister is now 20 (both between Nov 2001 and Nov 2002, and the boyfriend was 18 in May 2020 – in other words born between May 2001 and May 2002 if all the facts I read are correct. Kyle was very close to the family. He had paid for a gun, which was bought far away in northwest Wisconsin..

    The family’s gun were normally stored in a safe in the garage, but because of the disturbances, the friend’s father had taken them into the house.

    When they decided to go to the school, Kyle took the rifle with him, and two first aid kits. He didn’t ask whether he should take the gun but his friend had also taken one.

    At the disturbances Kyle told everyone who asked that he was an EMT (maybe so that he would be allowed to stay there or so that people would not be afraid) which he wasn’t.

    Kyle Rittenhouse didn’t work precisely in Kenosha ,but in Pleasant Prairie, Wisconsin, which borders Kenosha. It’s closer to his home in Antioch, Ill. He was employed part-time as a lifeguard at a recreational complex. Antioch is right by the Illinois-Wisconsin border and about 15 miles west of Lake Michigan.

    Kyle dropped out of high school but has started (as of Oct 13) taking an online course in nursing for which you don’t have to enroll. There is probably a way to get credit for the knowledge gained by testing later – every nursing program is different and credits are not transferrable. Of course this would only be the medically related knowledge, not the skills.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  198. The other FDana @60.

    Young Mr Rittenhouse helped to create the situation by traveling to Kenosha and appearing on the scene with a firearm.

    This is very true.

    Rosenbaum saw them all together and said that if saw one of them alone, he’d kill him. He had just gotten out of a psychiatric hospital where he’d been put in for suicide prevention.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  199. When a man knows he is to be hanged in a fortnight, it concentrates his mind wonderfully. — Samuel Johnson, 1777

    Kevin M (ab1c11) — 11/11/2021 @ 10:23 pm

    Except Samuel Johnson was lying. He’d ghosturitten the man’s words. It’s still a true observation maybe. But it doesn’t make someone into a good writer,

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  200. Bones about to be thrown (link verbiage below is misleading):

    https://abc7chicago.com/kyle-rittenhouse-trial-ritenhouse-livestream-mistrial/11228293/

    urbanleftbehind (94d2ca)

  201. Sammy,#202 dang, I sometimes go to the famous Rec-Plex.

    urbanleftbehind (94d2ca)

  202. The final word on Rittenhouse: whether he walks free or the dumb cheeseheads submit to the liberal and media mob, the entire history of how the media is now and has been treating him is a demonstration that the Anti-Trump Media Machine was never going away without Trump.

    It is a machine made up of permanent compromised personnel and institutions, it is made to destroy people, it does not care about facts, it does not care about guilt or innocence, it can slot anyone, even pedophiles, into ‘citizen hero’ roles, while casting good kids in the role of premediated violent murderers on not even a shred of evidence.

    And yes, it is primarily the Anti-Trump Hate Machine that’s fighting Kyle, as the tactics, personnel, and ideology animating those opposing him are almost exactly the same.

    If this gives anyone still possessing a conscience pause, it’s mainly shown here by all of the career anti-Trumpers constantly making excuses and asides for mustache-twirling villain level prosecutorial misconduct, undoubtedly because those opposing Trump used all of the same tactics, motivating ideology, and probably personnel.

    Those who cry foul about principles have none shown here. Not a single liberal here has objected to running a maximally adversarial campaign against an obviously innocent and justified individual on principle. Not a single ‘carcereal state’ proponent has jumped in saying “Hey, look, an obviously overreaching prosecution that could easily demonstrate the problems in other areas! My time to shine!” The few liberals that are repenting wholeheartedly are not liberal thought leaders, pundits, or opinionmakers, they’re simply things like hedge fund managers who happen to be liberals but were mugged by watching the reality transcript.

    This utter and complete failure to take principled opportunities is precisely why liberals and their causes can never be trusted, why no one on the right should attempt to make common cause with them, and especially why opposing Trump, who for any of his faults has always stood against the liberals and their lies (his admin was banning CRT long before it was cool, his admin pushed and developed the vaccine without any plans to make in mandatory, primarily in the interest of getting America back to work, his admin pushed punishing prosecutorial misconduct of the type we see here even against his own party,) and Biden, whatever his alleged positives, is a lawyer himself and has shown no inclination to do any of this.

    Kulak liquidator (856ffc)

  203. Kulak liquidator (856ffc) — 11/13/2021 @ 10:21 am

    that the Anti-Trump Media Machine was never going away without Trump.

    There is what can be more or less be called a Trump media machine, even though it is not Trump and well predated him. It is repetitive – the exact same often half erroroneous or pointless argument made over many different shows – and includes most of talk radio. Trump got elected that way, by agreeing with that sand making it his most important issue. And the ant-Trump machine is not quote just anti-Trump (except for comedians) and is somewhat more varied, but there are some consistent errors..

    The bad thing would be is if you could only hear one or the other.

    Sammy Finkelman (c49738)

  204. “There is what can be more or less be called a Trump media machine, even though it is not Trump and well predated him.”

    There were generalized Republican media machines-in the form of, say Sean Hannity or Mark Levin or Ben Shapiro or Steve Deace. Most were simply trying to caboose off the Rush Limbaugh train. They did not become party line Republican/pro-Trump auxilaries without massive pressure by advertisers and viewers.

    They’ve moved to a more pro-Trump position, but this is often a right-opposite to what the liberals do-instead of using Trump-hate to justify extreme liberal positions, they use Trump-love to try to sell old unpopular donor-supported bromides like capital gains tax cuts, more overseas wars, and anything else that enriches a small circle of grifters but doesn’t actually harm our enemies or empower the average American.

    “And the anti-Trump machine is not quote just anti-Trump (except for comedians) and is somewhat more varied, but there are some consistent errors.”

    Yes, the corporate anti-Trump line is usually just a precursor to give them wind for popularizing more niche and extreme leftist positions by association, like anti-white, anti middle-class, anti-family, anti-small business, anti-American, and other anti-normal people prejudices mainly held by the ruling corporate class.

    But this is simply a demonstration of the adage: Every time you oppose Trump, in word or deed, you are indeed helping the left, indeed inviting them to fight harder for more extreme positions, because they know you’re already weak and vulnerable to taking the first step to more demoralization. What sort of ‘conservative’ comes here and posts absolutely unsupported liberal agitprop like HE CROSSED STATE LINES WITH A DEADLY WEAPON or HE HAD A LEGAL DUTY TO AVOID ALL VIOLENT SITUATIONS FOREVER or THIS PROSECUTOR IS OBVIOUSLY TRYING TO HELP KYLE BY THROWING THE CASE AND NOT AN AMORAL MERCENARY, TRUST THE PLAN! Certainly not someone who’s been consuming even one iota of adversarial media!

    “Trump got elected that way, by agreeing with that sand making it his most important issue.”

    Now THAT is an erroneous, ‘wishful thinking’ argument. Trump absolutely did not “get elected that way.” Trump’s hot-button populist issues that propelled him to primary and electoral success-immigration, manufacturing, law and order, onshoring, and openly and shamelessly mocking lobbyists and journalists while on stage-were primarily issues that the Republican party bosses of the time was doing its best to either distance itself from discussion on or accept in theory but huffily oppose in practice.

    And Trump’s position on most of the standard conservative template was indifferent box-checking acceptance. I assure you that nobody voted for Trump because he added “And I support abortion restrictions and capital gains tax cuts” to a long, boring position speech.

    “The bad thing would be is if you could only hear one or the other.”

    I typically hear neither by general practice, my filters can generally find better primary sources or entertaining fact-gatherers with the shortest of searches. But the leftover mainstream media is certainly working overtime with the various tech overlords to ensure that only one voice is heard, and the liberals here obviously weren’t and aren’t lifting a finger to conserve anything resembling an even-handed discourse or the tiniest effort to verify fishy stories from the prosecution, despite being far more than qualified to do so by their own admission!

    Golf BaG Nationalist (a7aaa7)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 1.2805 secs.