The Kyle Rittenhouse Trial: What Will Be the Outcome?

win231 said:
You can't be seriously suggesting that anyone who has a gun pointed at them should wait until it's fired at him before defending himself.
Click to expand...
I didn't say that..I started off by saying that the guy couldn't possibly have 'missed'' if he didn't even fire the gun... then it took feet...however, I do think it's crazy that a child takes a gun to a demonstration or protest , then kills someone in ''self defence''... he wouldn't have had another gun pulled on him in the first place if he hadn't gone there armed.. so it's nuts to think he should be found not guilty, he'd clearly gone there with the intention of shooting someone ..

However American Law is nuts, so I can't argue against that can I .... ?:ROFLMAO:
 
Murrmurr said:
Really no difference, win. A deadly weapon is a deadly weapon.
Click to expand...
WI defines Dangerous Weapon as such. Absent definition, to me, the "Dangerous" term would be the degree of "on the scene harm it could cause by infliction of" by minimal effort, etc. Meaning I would rather defend myself against a knife than a shotgun.

(10) “Dangerous weapon" means any firearm, whether loaded or unloaded; any device designed as a weapon and capable of producing death or great bodily harm; any ligature or other instrumentality used on the throat, neck, nose, or mouth of another person to impede, partially or completely, breathing or circulation of blood; any electric weapon, as defined in s. 941.295 (1c) (a); or any other device or instrumentality which, in the manner it is used or intended to be used, is calculated or likely to produce death or great bodily harm.
 
win231 said:
It sounds like you are reading things into my post that aren't there.
I do not support all of Rittenhouse's actions. Being at such a chaotic scene is stupid.
I support Rittenhouse's right to self defense.
Look up "Active Shooter." You obviously don't know what the term means.
Click to expand...
Listen up win231, your sophomoric comments are becoming tiresome, a 14 yr. old has more finesse than you..."obviously".
I support Rittenhouse's right to self defense.
Click to expand...
That is laughable, a guy that comes from out of state with an assault rifle (obviously looking for trouble) claiming self defense when up against those that are not armed in a similar fashion...yea sorry, the skateboard doesn't count.
The judge is a clown, as are those that share his attitudes.

The point where I have to begrudgingly agree with you is: yeah, don't try to be a hero, tuck your tail between your legs and turn and run, confronting a douchebag that has an AR-15 at the ready is just stupid.
 
ohioboy said:
That does not mean a charge of attempted murder exists for the person pointing it.
Click to expand...
The threat is there. That is enough when a criminal pulls one on the cops. It was a life threatening action. I dont know how that is translated into right to defend oneself. But I think it could be a sticky point.
 
Don M. said:
It appears that Wisconsin has put 500 members of the National Guard on Standby, in case the judge/jury doesn't hand down a severe sentence. I guess Wisconsin is gearing up for riots and protests.
Click to expand...
They should have called in the National Guard to stop the riots. This would have never happened.
 
hollydolly said:
I didn't say that..I started off by saying that the guy couldn't possibly have 'missed'' if he didn't even fire the gun... then it took feet...however, I do think it's crazy that a child takes a gun to a demonstration or protest , then kills someone in ''self defence''... he wouldn't have had another gun pulled on him in the first place if he hadn't gone there armed.. so it's nuts to think he should be found not guilty, he'd clearly gone there with the intention of shooting someone ..

However American Law is nuts, so I can't argue against that can I .... ?:ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
If you believe this then why didnt he shoot before this incident? Or was he waitingfor someones to point a gun at him?
 
Nathan said:
Listen up win231, your sophomoric comments are becoming tiresome, a 14 yr. old has more finesse than you..."obviously".

That is laughable, a guy that comes from out of state with an assault rifle (obviously looking for trouble) claiming self defense when up against those that are not armed in a similar fashion...yea sorry, the skateboard doesn't count.
The judge is a clown, as are those that share his attitudes.

The point where I have to begrudgingly agree with you is: yeah, don't try to be a hero, tuck your tail between your legs and turn and run, confronting a douchebag that has an AR-15 at the ready is just stupid.
Click to expand...
You are (of course) mistaken once again. Mr. Grosskruetz was armed with a Glock, which he pointed at Rittenhouse. And at that close range, it doesn't matter what type of gun or what caliber; it's whomever fires first.
And Grosskruetz was carrying a gun illegally, so....if Rittenhouse was looking for trouble, so was Grosskruetz.
 
Last edited:
Pauline1954 said:
The threat is there. That is enough when a criminal pulls one on the cops. It was a life threatening action. I dont know how that is translated into right to defend oneself. But I think it could be a sticky point.
Click to expand...
Under WI law it is illegal to simply point a firearm at a person, without cause that is, but if you read my prior post 88 about ATTEMPT, simply doing so does not support an attempted murder charge.
 
The air seems a little thick in here so I hope what I think will not add to the thickness. Personally I am on the side of Justice. What is not acceptable to me in this case is the fact that jurors are being threatened. How can anyone make an honest judgement in a murder trial if they fear their verdict might very well cause harm to them and their families and trigger riots and burning in there own city? This trial needs to be ruled a mistrial for justice to be served as it should be. IMO
 
Threatening officials is no new societal element. When the SC decided Roe v. Wade, the Justices received numerous ones.
 
dobielvr said:
just jumping in here......where did Rittenhouse get an AK47 rifle in the first place? He's just a kid!

Aren't those illegal?
Click to expand...
AKs are Russian rifles. What Rittenhouse has is an AR-15 style rifle, which is the civilian version of an M-16 — the American automatic military rifle, or one of them, anyway. AK-47s are what terrorists and African tribes often use. They're cheap and reliable, but not very accurate.
 
ohioboy said:
Under WI law it is illegal to simply point a firearm at a person, without cause that is, but if you read my prior post 88 about ATTEMPT, simply doing so does not support an attempted murder charge.
Click to expand...

Lots of things being said. I said it could be a sticky point.
oldpop said:
The air seems a little thick in here so I hope what I think will not add to the thickness. Personally I am on the side of Justice. What is not acceptable to me in this case is the fact that jurors are being threatened. How can anyone make an honest judgement in a murder trial if they fear their verdict might very well cause harm to them and their families and trigger riots and burning in there own city? This trial needs to be ruled a mistrial for justice to be served as it should be. IMO
Click to expand...

Theres no way a trail can be fair if the jurors are threatened. I think doing threats like this is a crime. I hope those threats can be stopped.
 
I do not see how the killing of Mr. Rosenbaum can be characterized as self defense. Rosenbaum was unarmed and allegedly threw a plastic bag of personal items at Rittenhouse. Rttenhouse fired at Rosenbaum and the first shot shattered his hip, effectively incapacitating him and he started to fall to the ground. Rittenhouse then shot Rosenbaum three more times, including a shot to the back.

I do not think self defense allows Rittenhouse to continue shooting Rosenbaum after he was incapacitated and until he was dead, and I do not see how a shot to the back can ever be considered self defense. Self defense says you can stop the imminent threat to yourself, It doesn't say you can keep firing bullets into an incapacitated man until he is dead.

Also, I don't think the threat of a plastic hospital bag containing small personal items tossed at Rittenhouse is enough to allow Rittehouse's use of deadly force in retaliation. Rittenhouse could have just walked away; videos of the event showed that he had plenty of room to get away, rather than continuing to shoot.
 
We weren't there,
we would not have been there,
we had better sense.

The defense confused the jury-that's his job.
The judge assisted...
 
Last edited:
Butterfly said:
Exactly who is threateniong the jurors? Have they received specific threats? Or is there a perception of threat because the jury might be worried about the effect whatever verdict they render might have on the community?
Click to expand...
My suggestion would be to Google it if you are really interested. Depending on what source you read the jurists are living in high cotton or being threatened with death.
 
oldpop said:
My suggestion would be to Google it if you are really interested. Depending on what source you read the jurists are living in high cotton or being threatened with death.
Click to expand...
Speaking of death, that's one thing Kyle can not get if convicted of 1st degree murder, the death penalty.
 
oldpop said:
What is not acceptable to me in this case is the fact that jurors are being threatened. How can anyone make an honest judgement in a murder trial if they fear their verdict might very well cause harm to them and their families and trigger riots and burning in there own city?
Click to expand...
That mob outside the court house with their signs declaring their personal verdict are so disgusting to me.

There's a jury inside who have listened to every minute of this trial, plus some rather outrageous closing arguments, and now they are sitting down with all that information and testimony and trying to apply that long piece of Wisconsin law that Ohioboy provided for us. I have nothing but respect for them.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top