Rittenhouse trial, jury is still out

[sjfellers]

But I suspect they won't be out long. The prosecutions case was garbage, so sayeth the defense attorney, Richards. This man is like the real Goliath. (Billy Bob Thornton's character).

This is an obvious case of self defense. Especially after the prosecution failed to understand the gun laws in their own state, and dropped the possession charge on Rittenhouse. In fact the prosecution sometimes didn't even understand basic law. As in when they tried to go after Kyle for not talking to the police right away, (after turning himself in) until he met with his attorney. The judge stopped the court, sent the jury to the back room and explained to Binger and the other guy about the "right to remain silent."
Then there's the Grosskreutz's phone issue. A warrant was created, but the state never executed that warrant. The prosecution never attempted to recover Grosskreutz's phone and enter it or it's contents into evidence. Since the search warrant was never executed, the defense never had a chance to go through Grosskreutz's phone.
Why did all this happen? Because Grosskreutz was the prosecutions star witness.
Grosskreutz was also in possession of a gun which he had no permit for. Being over the age of 18, he was required by law to get a permit for it. Nor was he charged with lying to police officers about the gun. Which is obstruction of justice.
Why? Because once again, Grosskreutz was the prosecutions star witness.

I'm hoping for a not guilty verdict on all charges, sometime today.

Be great to keep politics and personal preferences off this forum. There are plenty of other place to post such items. Thanks for your consideration.

 

[PTmowerMech]

The case is not as straight forward as some would seem. The kid is claiming seld defense because its all he can claim. He can not deny he shot three unarmed people at close range. And he can't deny he intended the kill them.

Thd jury must decide only one point to find him innocent or guilty. "Did he establish the conditions in which he had to kill thd two other men" (and shoot a third) or was it a turn of events.

The argument comes down to a simple (if simple were only that simple) - If he put himself in a position where he had no choice but to shoot, he's guilty.

Personally I don't believe that an underage kid had any business driving hundreds of miles across state lines, without a driver's license, with a semiautomatic rifle, thats illegal for him to own in Illinois, and injecting himself into a volatile situation with a loaded gun. The other men there who were assisting law enforcement, also felt he was too young and tried to keep a eye on him. Guiding and mentoring him.

I'm guessing that we'll find out, one way or another, later today.

What you're talking about is provocation. Some could say he provoked the first one to chase him because he was putting out a dumpster fire, that was started by the rioters. I have a crazy notion that being chased, and something thrown at you, is actually provoking, not being provoked. And knowing Kyle had an AR in his hand, and still chasing him to within feet, screaming threats, is also more provoking. Once he was close enough to Kyle to prove he wasn't going to stop, is only when Kyle fired.

Hundreds of miles? I'm not sure what map your reading, but the distance between Kyles home and Kenosha was like 20 miles. Not to mention, he worked in Kenosha, his dad lives in Kenosha and his friend lives in Kenosha.
Too much of this old info is still circulating around as if it were factual.
And too little information about Kyles attackers are being circulated.
As in Rosenbaums convictions of raping little boys. Or how Grosskreutz was proven to also be violent when he slapped his grandmother over his cell phone. And Huber hitting Kyle with the skate board. And the two others that also got their licks in, without Kyle firing a shot at them.

Should Kyle have been there? Well, there were business owners asking for people to help guard their property, and Kyle volunteered. I see nothing wrong with that. I do, however, see plenty wrong with people rioting over a know criminal, in which none of them actually knew. So if they didn't know Blake, then obviously they were rioting just for the fun of is.
So IMO, being there to help protect innocent peoples property and putting out fires, is way more necessary than being there just to destroy the property of innocent people who had nothing to do with Blake being shot by the cops.

 

[PTmowerMech]

Be great to keep politics and personal preferences off this forum. There are plenty of other place to post such items. Thanks for your consideration.

To me, this isn't a political issue. This is a legal one. I'm not going to bring politics here. But this is the "front porch." And no one is forcing anyone to click on this thread. There's enough information in the thread to know what it's about.
There are a lot of people, even on this forum, who understand the importance of owning and bearing a firearm, for the safety of themselves and their family. This case is important, because they are the Kyle Rittenhouse's of this country. God forbid some violent thug like Grosskreutz wants to burn down or loot their small engine shops. If Kyle is found guilty, when he's clearly innocent, that says something about their legal rights to protect themselves, their families and their small engine shops. Or what ever business they own.

We're all Kyles, whether we put ourselves in harms way or not. And until there's laws that restrict our freedom of movement, our ability to go and try to protect the innocent, we'll always be Kyle RIttenhouse's of this country.

As @bertsmobile1 pointed out, apparently in his country, a woman was being attacked by 3 or 4 guys. She managed to get the weapon away from one of them and kill him with it. In which she was charged with manslaughter for doing so. Do we really want that here?
You know, there's a reason why sooo many people are wrongly convicted. When DNA started becoming popular, there were people who had spent decades in prison, when they were actually innocent. Many times, false evidence was used against them, even when the prosecution knew it was false evidence. Or didn't bring evidence into the trial because he knew it would prove the suspect innocent.
There's a thousand important aspects coming to light with this trial. And none of it boils down to whether Kyle should've been there or not.

 

[vol1954]

he could've Baldwin'd them...?

And just why is this being discussed on a lawn mower forum? And why is the moderator allowing it to be posted? Not that this is not an important topic, but it has no business on this site.

 

[PTmowerMech]

FWIW, down here it is being portraied as yet another self appointed right wing white vigilante finding a reason to shoot people.
Apparently there are 5 such cases running in various US courts right now .
I have no opinions on this case .

Some media outlets here are portraying him that way also. And since the prosecution really doesn't have a legit case, the media is now blaming the judge.

US citizens have time & time again proven they want the right to go shoot each other .

Our decent citizens only want the right to have the ability to defend ourselves, our loved ones and our property. Somehow the decent citizens get lumped in with the violent thugs. Fact: The rioting was over a guy who got shot by the cops. Blake already had assaulted the ex wife, who was the one that called the cops to start with. But Blake refused to even stop to discuss anything with the police. He was wanted on a federal warrant and armed with a knife when the police shot him.
The media, some of them, like to portray our police officers as all being trigger happy and just looking for people to shoot. Which is not even true in 99.999999% of the cases.
And the decent gun owners of our country, aren't trigger happy either.

In that last video which I did watch the defence lawyer just used an image taken after the person was shot to badger the witness into stating he was pointing his pistol at the defendent before the rifle was fired .
What is needed is the 10 previous frames which have been overlooked

Those 10 frames had been played over and over in court. And it showed Grosskreuts stopping, then lunging forward at Kyle, with gun in hand. And his gun in the direction of Kyle, when Kyle shot. Simple self defense. If Kyle just wanted to shoot Gorsskreutz, he could've done it before he lunged towards him.

The dramatic very much delayed reconsructions inside a court room and the actual real time occurences can be quite different when you have things changing in milliseconds then are examining them with several minutes to think about what happened in the blink of an eye .
This is one of the problems with prosecuting the military as well .
In real life a lot of what happens is a reaction to what your brain thinks it is seeing and what it thinks is going to happen which is often a long way from reality.

The video's from all angles have been played, over and over. And from every angle, at every speed, it boils down to Kyle defending himself from people who were hellbent on attacking him. And it all started with him trying to put out a garbage can fire, started by rioters.

the classic example is swerving because you thought you saw something you were going to drive into that was either not there , was not moving at the time or was actually coming to a stop ?
We have all been there , although not with a fire arm in our hands.

There were many instances where Kyle could've shot others. Even Grosskreutz. Standing just feet in front of him, not coming at him (in that split second), Kyle could've shot him. But Grosskreutz was just standing there. And so Kyle didn't shoot. It wasn't until after he lunged towards Kyle, that Kyle fired. Point is, IMO, Kyle carefully calculated the dangers, and managed to not get overly excited when he wasn't in any danger (in that split second) But once the danger was there, as in Grosskreutz lunging, that's a different story. There was real danger, especially since Grosskreutz was now visibly armed with a glock.

 

[GEARHEAD3]

WTF This is a lawn mower forum for God sake

 

[purse]

I must say for the people who are saying Rittenhouse shouldn’t have been there,either should have the other low life scum bags destroying burning property Apparently Rittenhouse’s ,father lives there, he has friends and apparently has a job there. I say put the blame on the Democrat politicians of Wisconsin telling the police to stand down. If the police have been allowed to do there job, this crap would have never happened. This is far from a Peaceful protest, destroying property and thief. It was totally self defense all the way. That state prosecutor doesn’t even know the Wisconsin law. Never point a gun at anyone, even if it’s not loaded. Apparently state prosecutor doesn’t even know that .

 

[reel mower freak]

Keep your race wars off this site. This is no place for this garbage. It’s bad enough I have to read and see all the racist crap going down on a daily basis. I don’t need to read it here.

 

[MowManMow]

I only care about tractors, nobody shot them did they?

 

[marinusdees]

But I suspect they won't be out long. The prosecutions case was garbage, so sayeth the defense attorney, Richards. This man is like the real Goliath. (Billy Bob Thornton's character).

This is an obvious case of self defense. Especially after the prosecution failed to understand the gun laws in their own state, and dropped the possession charge on Rittenhouse. In fact the prosecution sometimes didn't even understand basic law. As in when they tried to go after Kyle for not talking to the police right away, (after turning himself in) until he met with his attorney. The judge stopped the court, sent the jury to the back room and explained to Binger and the other guy about the "right to remain silent."
Then there's the Grosskreutz's phone issue. A warrant was created, but the state never executed that warrant. The prosecution never attempted to recover Grosskreutz's phone and enter it or it's contents into evidence. Since the search warrant was never executed, the defense never had a chance to go through Grosskreutz's phone.
Why did all this happen? Because Grosskreutz was the prosecutions star witness.
Grosskreutz was also in possession of a gun which he had no permit for. Being over the age of 18, he was required by law to get a permit for it. Nor was he charged with lying to police officers about the gun. Which is obstruction of justice.
Why? Because once again, Grosskreutz was the prosecutions star witness.

I'm hoping for a not guilty verdict on all charges, sometime today.

A lawnmower forum is not the place for this (mis) information and argument.