The Kyle Rittenhouse trial:

[Subduction Zone]

Frankly it does not look good for the prosecution. When the one surviving victim looks more like a witness for the defense than for the prosecution I do not predict a guilty verdict:

The only person who survived being shot by Kyle Rittenhouse takes the stand

In cross-examination, they emphasized Grosskreutz's Glock pistol — which was in his hand at the moment Rittenhouse shot him — and proximity to Rittenhouse, just about 3 feet, at the time of the shooting. Grosskreutz said he was not intentionally pointing the weapon at Rittenhouse.

That does not sound good.

Grosskreutz was roughly a block away from Rittenhouse when he first heard the gunshots — the sound of Rittenhouse shooting and killing Joseph Rosenbaum. As a medic, Grosskreutz ran toward the sound, rather than away, he said.

This was not entirely accurate from NPR since the first shots were not from Rittenhouse.

As he approached, Rittenhouse was confronted by Anthony Huber, who struck him with a skateboard. Rittenhouse shot Huber in the chest, killing the-26 year-old.

Grosskreutz had drawn his gun, holding the pistol in his right hand and his cellphone in his left. He testified that he did not draw the gun "with the express intent of using it" but rather to be "ready" if he felt that it was necessary.

And right there he has justified two of the shootings. You do not run up on a person that has just apparently shot in self defense with a weapon in hand.

 

[Lain]

Frankly it does not look good for the prosecution. When the one surviving victim looks more like a witness for the defense than for the prosecution I do not predict a guilty verdict:

The only person who survived being shot by Kyle Rittenhouse takes the stand

In cross-examination, they emphasized Grosskreutz's Glock pistol — which was in his hand at the moment Rittenhouse shot him — and proximity to Rittenhouse, just about 3 feet, at the time of the shooting. Grosskreutz said he was not intentionally pointing the weapon at Rittenhouse.

That does not sound good.

Grosskreutz was roughly a block away from Rittenhouse when he first heard the gunshots — the sound of Rittenhouse shooting and killing Joseph Rosenbaum. As a medic, Grosskreutz ran toward the sound, rather than away, he said.

This was not entirely accurate from NPR since the first shots were not from Rittenhouse.

As he approached, Rittenhouse was confronted by Anthony Huber, who struck him with a skateboard. Rittenhouse shot Huber in the chest, killing the-26 year-old.

Grosskreutz had drawn his gun, holding the pistol in his right hand and his cellphone in his left. He testified that he did not draw the gun "with the express intent of using it" but rather to be "ready" if he felt that it was necessary.

And right there he has justified two of the shootings. You do not run up on a person that has just apparently shot in self defense with a weapon in hand.

From the videos I saw when this thing first came out of the shootings it sounds like how he describes it is in fact what happened (not the two shots thing but with him with the gun and the dude with the skateboard). I do not expect a guilty verdict at all, never did.

 

[Subduction Zone]

From the videos I saw when this thing first came out of the shootings it sounds like how he describes it is in fact what happened (not the two shots thing but with him with the gun and the dude with the skateboard). I do not expect a guilty verdict at all, never did.

There was quite a bit of political pressure that led to the charges in this trial. There may be lesser charges that he could be found guilty of, but they are making the mistake of going for the big win. Judges usually do not look to kindly at the prosecution if they try to suddenly decide to abandon murder charges and go for the lesser ones. I agree with you and there is a good chance that he will walk.

 

[Flankerl]

As a non-American I have only seen the videos available and I have no idea how anyone can tell themselves that it wasn't self-defence.

 

[Hold]

As a non-American I have only seen the videos available and I have no idea how anyone can tell themselves that it wasn't self-defence.

Rittenhouse is guilty of putting himself,while armed, where he did not belong. I don't believe Rittenhouse actually started the 'combat'. Often the dead pay the price for someone else's stupidity. An individual tried to disarm Rittenhouse(not smart). An individual tried to seriously injure another with a skateboard(a deadly weapon). I believe a dumb young man,in love with his rifle, who was effected by political rhetoric, defended himself. I use the word 'combat' because of deadly weapons being involved. To me,once a deadly confrontation starts, all bets are off as to should have or would have. We all have the right to protect ourselves. I am opining from memory and could be wrong.

 

[Flankerl]

Rittenhouse is guilty of putting himself,while armed, where he did not belong.

Well so did everyone else so that cancels itself out.

 

[Hold]

Well so did everyone else so that cancels itself out.

I put that sentence first,' while armed' because he may have broken a law concerning transporting the rifle across state lines. The protesters were legal as far as the right to demonstrate.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Rittenhouse is guilty of putting himself,while armed, where he did not belong. I don't believe Rittenhouse actually started the 'combat'. Often the dead pay the price for someone else's stupidity. An individual tried to disarm Rittenhouse(not smart). An individual tried to seriously injure another with a skateboard(a deadly weapon). I believe a dumb young man,in love with his rifle, who was effected by political rhetoric, defended himself. I use the word 'combat' because of deadly weapons being involved. To me,once a deadly confrontation starts, all bets are off as to should have or would have. We all have the right to protect ourselves. I am opining from memory and could be wrong.

I agree with that. But that does not make his acts "murder". There are other crimes that he should have been charged with, but now he is likely to get off.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I put that sentence first,' while armed' because he may have broken a law concerning transporting the rifle across state lines. The protesters were legal as far as the right to demonstrate.

I am not so sure about that. I have heard that a local supplied him with the weapon. That may open up a whole new can of worms.

 

[John53]

I have not heard about this incident but it sounds to me that if no one had a gun no one would be dead just someone clobbered by a skateboard which sounds painful but survivable.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I have not heard about this incident but it sounds to me that if no one had a gun no one would be dead just someone clobbered by a skate which sounds painful but survivable.

People have died from skateboard assaults. But without his gun he probably would have avoided the protesters altogether.

And unfortunately the ability to carry guns openly is a bit too free in our country. Both sides were armed here. If you check into the story Rittenhouse did not even fire the first shots, One can hear shots ring out before he shot his first victim. They were probably "warning shots". Which is actually a misnomer in a case like this because they are apt to get both sides to shoot. I have no idea how Rittenhouse found himself surrounded by protesters. But unfortunately it does look as if he was being attacked when one looks at the videos available. The first person he shot was trying to take his gun away from him. That is an insane thing to do. I could probably dig up some video if you want to see it.

 

[John53]

People have died from skateboard assaults. But without his gun he probably would have avoided the protesters altogether.

And unfortunately the ability to carry guns openly is a bit too free in our country. Both sides were armed here. If you check into the story Rittenhouse did not even fire the first shots, One can hear shots ring out before he shot his first victim. They were probably "warning shots". Which is actually a misnomer in a case like this because they are apt to get both sides to shoot. I have no idea how Rittenhouse found himself surrounded by protesters. But unfortunately it does look as if he was being attacked when one looks at the videos available. The first person he shot was trying to take his gun away from him. That is an insane thing to do. I could probably dig up some video if you want to see it.

I'll check youtube in a bit, lying down for an old man nap right now

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'll check youtube in a bit, lying down for an old man nap right now

Old? Who are you kidding junior? Okay, I napped a bit today too.
But I have a birthday coming up. Perhaps you could join me in my annual birthday ritual. I started it when I turned 60.

 

[F1fan]

My problem, along with the Martin/Zimmerman murder, is that these killers put themselves in a situation where they were a threat to others. They were doing something they were not trained or authorized to do. In this case that others were in the street and causing a ruckus is an irrelevant point SINCE the Rittenhouse knew the risks and possibilities, yet decided to put himself in the middle of it. I see this as similar as the Artery murder, where armed men approached Arbery and he defended himself not knowing the intent of these men. These three me are also being tried for acts they were no authorized to do.

Rittenhouse even claimed to be in the city to defend businesses. If so, then be in front of businesses and defend them. There are no businesses in the middle of a street. That is where he was videoed walking, and he got into conflict with other people. The kid is accountable for the deaths.

 

[Subduction Zone]

My problem, along with the Martin/Zimmerman murder, is that these killers put themselves in a situation where they were a threat to others. They were doing something they were not trained or authorized to do. In this case that others were in the street and causing a ruckus is an irrelevant point SINCE the Rittenhouse knew the risks and possibilities, yet decided to put himself in the middle of it. I see this as similar as the Artery murder, where armed men approached Arbery and he defended himself not knowing the intent of these men. These three me are also being tried for acts they were no authorized to do.

Rittenhouse even claimed to be in the city to defend businesses. If so, then be in front of businesses and defend them. There are no businesses in the middle of a street. That is where he was videoed walking, and he got into conflict with other people. The kid is accountable for the deaths.

I would say that the Arberry murder is quite different. That was a case of looking for trouble. In the other two the people put themselves in a place where trouble could find them. It is not quite the same. That is why I think that a murder charge in either of those cases is inappropriate and I am betting that it fails this time around too. But I would like to see some sort of punishment for Rittenhouse and there should have been some sort of punishment for Zimmerman too. (Dang, I keep thinking about Bob Dylan).

 

[John53]

OK, just watched video of it. If I was a juror he'd be guilty on 2 counts of murder. I can't believe the stupidity of people being out on the streets armed.

 

[Suave]

Frankly it does not look good for the prosecution. When the one surviving victim looks more like a witness for the defense than for the prosecution I do not predict a guilty verdict:

The only person who survived being shot by Kyle Rittenhouse takes the stand

In cross-examination, they emphasized Grosskreutz's Glock pistol — which was in his hand at the moment Rittenhouse shot him — and proximity to Rittenhouse, just about 3 feet, at the time of the shooting. Grosskreutz said he was not intentionally pointing the weapon at Rittenhouse.

That does not sound good.

Grosskreutz was roughly a block away from Rittenhouse when he first heard the gunshots — the sound of Rittenhouse shooting and killing Joseph Rosenbaum. As a medic, Grosskreutz ran toward the sound, rather than away, he said.

This was not entirely accurate from NPR since the first shots were not from Rittenhouse.

As he approached, Rittenhouse was confronted by Anthony Huber, who struck him with a skateboard. Rittenhouse shot Huber in the chest, killing the-26 year-old.

Grosskreutz had drawn his gun, holding the pistol in his right hand and his cellphone in his left. He testified that he did not draw the gun "with the express intent of using it" but rather to be "ready" if he felt that it was necessary.

And right there he has justified two of the shootings. You do not run up on a person that has just apparently shot in self defense with a weapon in hand.

Even if Rittenhouse rightfully acted in self-defense, I'd like him prosecuted for illegally having an assault rifle.

 

[Subduction Zone]

OK, just watched video of it. If I was a juror he'd be guilty on 2 counts of murder. I can't believe the stupidity of people being out on the streets armed.

Really? How would you justify that verdict?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Even if Rittenhouse rightfully acted in self-defense, I'd like him prosecuted for illegally having an assault rifle.

"Assault rifles" are legal. There are other more appropriate charges.

 

[Suave]

"Assault rifles" are legal. There are other more appropriate charges.

Since Rittenhouse is 17 years old, he would not qualify for a concealed carry permit in Illinois. Also, it is against Wisconsin law for someone younger than 18 to possess “a dangerous weapon.