Kyle Rittenhouse - teen who shot three people in Kenosha

Caporegime
OP
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
58,912
My bad, I thought that's what the Police are for, I didn't realize heavily armed teenagers were the answer.

Thats what they should be for, but when you've got political control of them at a local level and the people in charge decide to hold them back and/or not call in the national guard then you leave things wide open for plenty of civil disorder/rioting./.. ergo some business owners took matters into their own hands and asked people to help protect their property.

Shootings happened, state/county/city looks v.bad... those in power go after the Kyle, so determined to get him that a rioter who had an illegal gun on him isn't charged for that, doensn't have his phone searched despite a search warrant being available... seemingly all so he can be a key witness in the prosecution's case.

christ i hope the jury hurries up

Presumably a reasonable chance of them not wanting to drag it out over the weekend so they'll maybe reach some consensus/compromise verdict today. Would be so frustrating to be waiting for a jury verdict if it actually affected your life... damn it's a Friday and they really want to go home so the holdouts finally decide to compromise on the lesser charge with a 12 year sentence, even though they think you're not guilty, as they're getting bored now and don't want more of this nonsense next week, it's Thanksgiving next week and they have plans, need to just go with it now....

Edit - actually if there is a mistrial (unlikely in trials in general but very plausible here) and it is based on the prosecution questioning Kyle's silence (a constitutional right) then it could be with prejudice even. Drone video stuff wouldn't be though and so would prompt a second trial next year if prosecutors wanted to go again (which seems likely). Of course, he hasn't ruled and there might not be a mistrial at all, or at least not at this point.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
12 Dec 2006
Posts
5,137
That Rittenhouse felt he had to rock up with a gun for self defense. Just shows how broken US society is. Rittenhouse is a product of that. He's not a cause of it.
 
Caporegime
Joined
20 May 2007
Posts
39,701
Location
Surrey
He tried to shot kyle then he saw Kyle's gun pointing at him so moved his right arm to the right.
THEN. The pistol guy started to point his gun at Kyle.
Kyle was quick to see this and fired. It's that simple.

With pistol guys intention to move his gun to Kyles head. He would have killed kyle.

All purely conjecture with very little basis in reality.

The only person to have shot and killed people in this whole scenario is Kyle.
 
Caporegime
Joined
20 May 2007
Posts
39,701
Location
Surrey
Tell me why the pistol guy.
Turned his gun away...but then seeing Kyle look away...pointed it back to kyles head?

Well he testified under oath that he didn't intentionally point it.

But even if he lied and he did, probably to get him to surrender/disarm because he thought he was an active shooter/murderer.

Like I said, the premise that Grosskreutz's intention was just to go up to him and execute him is rather absurd.

This speaks volumes actually (about how you and others think Kyle's actions were reasonable). It's quite interesting.
 
Caporegime
OP
Joined
29 Jan 2008
Posts
58,912
I can see it now, guilty of some minor weapons charges but not guilty of Murder or something.

Come on, at least familiarise yourself with the basics before comenting, you did this yesterday too. There isn't a weapons charge for him to answer, it was legal for him to open carry a long-barreled rifle aged 17.
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Jul 2007
Posts
24,529
Location
Solihull-Florida
Well he testified under oath that he didn't intentionally point it.

But even if he lied and he did, probably to get him to surrender/disarm because he thought he was an active shooter/murderer.

Like I said, the premise that Grosskreutz's intention was just to go up to him and execute him is rather absurd.

This speaks volumes actually (about how you and others think Kyle's actions were reasonable). It's quite interesting.


He did "intentionally point" his illegal gun...it's in the video I linked.
He lied in court until the defence showed pictures of him pointing his illegal gun at Kyle.
Why else would one turn a gun towards someone?

I'll leave you to your dreams....
 
Soldato
Joined
20 May 2011
Posts
5,997
Location
Aberdeen, Scotland
If I turn the argument around; essentially, you're saying it's reasonable to shoot somebody who kicks you, or hits you with a skateboard, merely on the basis of what might or might not come afterwards.

I don't think that's a solid or reasonable argument to use lethal force.

Dude, you really need to stop watching movies and basing them on real life. Getting clocked in the head is a perfectly reasonable grounds for lethal force.
 
Soldato
Joined
22 Oct 2002
Posts
8,270
Location
Near Cheltenham
They're defending a white guy who used racist language, can anyone explain that to me?

It's the same logic we are seeing from some obvious troll in this thread except in real life.

It's so funny to see the Woke/Left reasoning put them in an untenable ambivalent position where you have to make up some extremely flawed logic that makes you have to pin the blame on Rittenhouse, even if it means siding with the violent paedophile racist who was only there to cause trouble (with plenty of video evidence to show his rioting and confrontations with others).. I find it hilarious.. they will eat themselves alive and that will make the world a better place!
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Jan 2009
Posts
6,563
My bad, I thought that's what the Police are for, I didn't realize heavily armed teenagers were the answer.

I have considerable doubt in the implied suggestion that would have been much more at ease with the situation if the only difference was that Kyle Rittenhouse was an older adult rather than a 17-year old teenager.

It's much like the 'crossing state lines' and 'wearing gloves' stuff which appears just to be noise to get away from the key facts.
 
Back
Top Bottom