Kyle Rittenhouse - teen who shot three people in Kenosha

ANDREW GREEN said:
He wasn't chased down. One man walked towards his person space and maybe reached towards his weapon. Whether that's self defense or not will be a contentious argument.

And oh okay, it's okay to shoot a random person because you heard a shot somewhere
Click to expand...

Joseph Rosenbaum wanted a fight (see footage of him squaring up to the armed guys earlier in the evening) and tried to take his weapon, very very stupid. And the world has lost nothing of value.

 
Dis86 said:
Incorrect. Suggest you read the eyewitness reports or view the footage of the incident.

Here's a wiki extract to show how wrong you are though;

"As Rittenhouse was running from Rosenbaum, two shots can be heard, one from an unknown third party, fired for an unknown reason, and one from Joshua Ziminski, who fired a self-described "warning shot" into the air,[36] causing Rittenhouse to stop running and turn towards the sound of Ziminski's shot.[5] On-the-scene reporter Richie McGinniss has since stated that the sound of the shot was the moment Rittenhouse “went from running away to aiming his weapon”."
Click to expand...

The gunshots are all completely irrelevant to any self defense claim because A) He wasn't shot at B) He didn't return fire at the shooter C) the party that was killed wasn't shooting at him
 
steve45 said:
He had every right to defend himself, he was in real danger of being physically assaulted.
Click to expand...

He has every right to defend himself within reasonable force for the force.

I don't believe shooting someone 4 times because they get into your personal space and reach to your gun is using reasonable force and I don't believe there is enough iminent danger to warrant shooting
 
ANDREW GREEN said:
The gunshots are all completely irrelevant to any self defense claim because A) He wasn't shot at B) He didn't return fire at the shooter C) the party that was killed wasn't shooting at him
Click to expand...

You said he the guy walked over and maybe tried to take his gun. You were wrong. You said he wasn't chased down. You were wrong.
He didn't know he wasn't shot at. He didn't know who the shooter was. The party he killed had already attacked him previously.
 
Dis86 said:
You said he the guy walked over and tried to take his gun. You were wrong.
He didn't know he wasn't shot at. He didn't know who the shooter was. The party he killed had already attacked him previously.
Click to expand...

He got a empty plastic bag. If you seriously think throwing a a bag at someone warrants 4 deadly shots I don't know what you're smoking.
 
SpeedFreak said:
If he lost his gun to the other individual then would it not be fair to say that from his perspective his life would have been in danger ?
Click to expand...

Arguably. However the witness behind him said the Rittenhouse had manouvered the gun away from Rosenbaum before then shooting. He needs to prove that both a reasonable fear for his life and threat of grevious bodily harm alongside that shooting a man 4 times was necessary to stop the threat of bodily harm.

Apparently the self defense argument also depends if Rittenhouse was guilty of a crime at the exact time. If it's against state law for a minor to carry a gun or if it's against state law to cross state lines with a gun, self defense isn't a valid excuse from my understanding.
 
ANDREW GREEN said:
He wasn't chased down. One man walked towards his person space and maybe reached towards his weapon. Whether that's self defense or not will be a contentious argument.

And oh okay, it's okay to shoot a random person because you heard a shot somewhere
Click to expand...

That's just pure nonsense, it was on camera and there was a witnees statement from the journalist who was right behind him and nearly shot himself too!

ANDREW GREEN said:
Apparently the self defense argument also depends if Rittenhouse was guilty of a crime at the exact time. If it's against state law for a minor to carry a gun or if it's against state law to cross state lines with a gun, self defense isn't a valid excuse from my understanding.
Click to expand...

You should probably familiarise yourself with the facts of the case first before posting more nonsense. When did he cross state lines with a gun?

There are potential legal issues relating to the purchase of that firearm and his posession of it, that doesn't negate the self defence aspect here. The fact that he was chased, attacked and he'd tried to flee are strong arguments for a self defence case... he only fired once the guy chasing him had him caught up and was trying to attack.
 
dowie said:
That's just pure nonsense, it was on camera and there was a witnees statement from the journalist who was right behind him and nearly shot himself too!

You should probably familiarise yourself with the facts of the case first before posting more nonsense. When did he cross state lines with a gun?

There are potential legal issues relating to the purchase of that firearm and his posession of it, that doesn't negate the self defence aspect here. The fact that he was chased, attacked and he'd tried to flee are strong arguments for a self defence case... he only fired once the guy chasing him had him caught up and was trying to attack.
Click to expand...

I've seen all the footage and I don't think you have. He wasn't chased and attacked until he'd already killed someone. I believe I've given an accurate depiction of the first killing. Have you seen all the footage including the first killing? I doubt it. I've repeated the witness statement from a video posted, which supposedly contradicted my post, it didn't contradict me.

Rittenhouse isn't from Wisconsin, he crossed state lines with a gun to get to Wisconsin. Whether he's pretending he got the gun in Wisconsin or not, doesn't change the fact he's a minor who is illegally carrying a gun. The legal issue is:

'he could not assert self-defense if he committed a crime that was "directly and immediately related" to his confrontation'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom