Kyle Rittenhouse a hero? (update - not guilty on all charges)

[twofbyc]

Had a friend do a year in prison for vehicular manslaughter. His BA was right at the limit; a drunk priest (in Boston) staggered out into the street in front of him and was killed. Priests BA was .2, and witnesses said it was his fault - didn’t matter.
Same here. Guy was shot in hand, groin and thigh and once in the back. No video evidence shows him actually attacking someone who was already breaking the law at that point. On this charge, he’s guilty. I dunno if being hit by a skateboard would make him guilty in the other murder, but he is in this one. Shooting anyone unarmed in the back, nevermind you’ve already shot them three times, isn’t self defense.

 

[TIDE-HSV]

Sure, he had every right to be there. The kicker is: assault rifle.

Actually, he didn't. There was a whole area curfew and everyone was supposedly prohibited from being there. The prosecution failed to introduce that. AFAIK, they also failed to highlight that he was not there at the invitation of anyone...

 

[MikeInBama]

Is there a reason my one word post was deleted?

 

[81usaf92]

Actually, he didn't. There was a whole area curfew and everyone was supposedly prohibited from being there. The prosecution failed to introduce that. AFAIK, they also failed to highlight that he was not there at the invitation of anyone...

I think they know they have a losing case, and that the fact that he wasn’t supposed to be there isn’t going to sway a jury.

 

[crimsonaudio]

Sure, he had every right to be there. The kicker is: assault rifle.

Yeah, he's charged with being underage and open-carrying a rifle. It's one of the misdemeanors.

 

[crimsonaudio]

He was breaking the open carry law having the gun in the first place.

Incorrect, open carrying a rifle is legal in WI. He was breaking the law by being under 18, but it's otherwise legal, hence the misdemeanor charge.

I thought the guy I was talking about was shot twice; now I’m reading he was shot four times, and the fourth shot - in the back- killed him.
shooting someone in the back is self defense? Not in my world.

I'm guessing you didn't read the report - the first two shots were to his leg / groin area, thus he was falling when the second two shots hit him. All four were fired with 0.76 seconds, so good luck making this a 'shot him in the back' argument wt self defense.

 

[crimsonaudio]

The murderer's defense and supporters have done a great job in the media.

Actually, the facts being presented are making this one pretty clear if you follow what the law says.

I understand this is an emotional situation, but the facts are what they are, and when you follow what the laws of WI state, it looks very likely he'll be acquitted.

 

[crimsonaudio]

IDK. If someone barely over the legal BAC limit and is in an accident caused by the other driver and that driver dies, they get charged with manslaughter even though the other driver caused the accident. This kids kills a bunch of people with a gun he wasn't supposed to have. What is the difference? The argument that is would have been legal in a few months is dumb. That's like saying if the driver blew a 0.05 vs a 0.09 they wouldn't be at fault.

And this he's being charged for that. And will likely be found guilty - that one is pretty cut and dried.

 

[MikeInBama]

I think he should be commended for his trigger discipline and accuracy.

 

[crimsonaudio]

Is there a reason my one word post was deleted?

I can't see where any posts have been deleted.

 

[MikeInBama]

I can't see where any posts have been deleted.

It's possible I'm losing my mind but I definitely made a post and then it definitely wasn't there.

Is there a minimum character limit?

 

[81usaf92]

Incorrect, open carrying a rifle is legal in WI. He was breaking the law by being under 18, but it's otherwise legal, hence the misdemeanor charge.


I'm guessing you didn't read the report - the first two shots were to his leg / groin area, thus he was falling when the second two shots hit him. All four were fired with 0.76 seconds, so good luck making this a 'shot him in the back' argument wt self defense.

I really don’t like KR, and I do think he was looking to kill or get in a fire fight, but the simple fact that people are reaching for “how many shots” and the fact that it was an AR-15 shows you where this trial is going.

4 rounds can go a hell of alot faster than what some here think. It’s clearly not an excessive number of rounds in the time span we are talking about.

 

[twofbyc]

Incorrect, open carrying a rifle is legal in WI. He was breaking the law by being under 18, but it's otherwise legal, hence the misdemeanor charge.


I'm guessing you didn't read the report - the first two shots were to his leg / groin area, thus he was falling when the second two shots hit him. All four were fired with 0.76 seconds, so good luck making this a 'shot him in the back' argument wt self defense.

He was breaking the law because he was underage; I didn’t say otherwise.
So he’s falling and he’s shot twice more. You and I disagree on self defense so we need to end this. Nothing you say will convince me four shots were necessary in any self defense capacity. Look at the video.

 

[MikeInBama]

I really don’t like KR, and I do think he was looking to kill or get in a fire fight, but the simple fact that people are reaching for “how many shots” and the fact that it was an AR-15 shows you where this trial is going.

4 rounds can go a hell of alot faster than what some here think. It’s clearly not an excessive number of rounds in the time span we are talking about.

Had KR been out to murder or get in a gun fight, he wouldn't have waited until the guy that got his bicep blown apart was raising a gun at him to shoot.

 

[NationalTitles18]

Had KR been out to murder or get in a gun fight, he wouldn't have waited until the guy that got his bicep blown apart was raising a gun at him to shoot.

wasn’t that the last guy shot?

 

[NationalTitles18]

He was breaking the law because he was underage; I didn’t say otherwise.
So he’s falling and he’s shot twice more. You and I disagree on self defense so we need to end this. Nothing you say will convince me four shots were necessary in any self defense capacity. Look at the video.

You just can’t control your emotions is why you see it like that. Blue font

 

[crimsonaudio]

It's possible I'm losing my mind but I definitely made a post and then it definitely wasn't there.

Is there a minimum character limit?

Not that I'm aware of - if there is it would tell you without posting.

 

[crimsonaudio]

He was breaking the law because he was underage; I didn’t say otherwise.
So he’s falling and he’s shot twice more. You and I disagree on self defense so we need to end this. Nothing you say will convince me four shots were necessary in any self defense capacity. Look at the video.

Yes, we agree to disagree - thankfully the law isn't based on emotion but rather facts.

 

[crimsonaudio]

You just can’t control your emotions is why you see it like that. Blue font

The facts of the case will determine his guilt or innocence.

The reality is it appears some here have never researched what constitutes legal self-defense in most states.

 

[81usaf92]

Had KR been out to murder or get in a gun fight, he wouldn't have waited until the guy that got his bicep blown apart was raising a gun at him to shoot.

We can argue all day what his intent was using his rifle against humans by going and make compelling cases for each side of the debate.
But I think it’s beyond obvious that he should have never been there, and was looking for trouble by going.