Kyle Rittenhouse - teen who shot three people in Kenosha

[Jono8]

Sure, but that's still vague... you've been asked already about this and you just ignore it or go into deflection mode - do you think he could have got into a fistfight with the muscly little mental case in the first instance after his rifle was grabbed? (keep in mind there is another psycho with a pistol who had just fired it behind them too and allegedly had just threatened him).

Or what about when the pistol was suddenly pointed at him in the final incident? If he (quite reasonably) believes he's about to be shot then how is shooting someone an excessive reaction?

And the third case, the guy didn't just attack him twice but had grabbed hold of his rifle, his only means of defence against this mob chasing him...

I dont think it was reasonable for him to believe he was going to be killed or seriously injured in all those instances, no. I think he may have thought that though, due to his immaturity and inability to deal with situation he put himself in.

No one else fired a firearm at him. Only Kyle showed no restraint in the use of firearms and that speaks volumes.

 

[Trusty]

I dont think it was reasonable for him to believe he was going to be killed or seriously injured in all those instances, no. I think he may have thought that though, due to his immaturity and inability to deal with situation he put himself in.

No one else fired a firearm at him. Only Kyle showed no restraint in the use of firearms and that speaks volumes.

OK, Rambo!

 

[Jono8]

No it doesn't come back to your earlier point, you've quite simply stated that kicking someone in the head or belting someone round the head with a block of wood doesn't run the risk of serious injury.

Runs the risk? Sure. Walking down the stairs runs the risk of serious injury if you mistep too.

I said "likely". I don't think , from watching the videos that he was likely to end up killed or seriously injured. A bit bruised/busted up from the scuffles? Probably.

 

[C Kent]

Runs the risk? Sure. Walking down the stairs runs the risk of serious injury if you mistep too.

I said "likely". I don't think , from watching the videos that he was likely to end up killed or seriously injured. A bit bruised/busted up from the scuffles? Probably.

Jesus Christ, do you read what you post sometimes? Equating walking down stairs with someone trying to rearrange a skull with a lump of wood.

 

[Jono8]

Jesus Christ, do you read what you post sometimes? Equating walking down stairs with someone trying to rearrange a skull with a lump of wood.

I think you missed what I was getting at.

I wasn't equating the two as such. I was demonstrating the risk aspect of things.

Also, did you watch the video of the skateboard incident? To say he tried to rearrange his skull with it is rather hyperbolic.

If you actually watch the incident he's holding it by one set of trucks with one hand and sort of clumsily falls on him whilst holding the skateboard. He was holding it in probably the least effective way to get any sort of purchase with it. It isnt like he held it both hands and took a massive swipe a Kyle's head with it!

It looks far more like he was trying to use it to press down Kyle to restrain him/prevent him using his weapon .

I implore you to watch it again.

 

[dowie]

I dont think it was reasonable for him to believe he was going to be killed or seriously injured in all those instances, no. I think he may have thought that though, due to his immaturity and inability to deal with situation he put himself in.

In which case how do you maintain the self defence claim if you don’t think those beliefs were reasonable.

You’re again keeping it vague here too, you’ve been asked which incidents and why but you don’t clarify, you just repeat the assertion but do so, again, devoid of any supporting argument or explanation.

No one else fired a firearm at him. Only Kyle showed no restraint in the use of firearms and that speaks volumes.

Well that's false too and has already been pointed out to you, in the first incident he was (he claims) threatened with a firearm and he didn't fire, he retreated, he was chased and he looked back and pointed his rifle but didn't use it, it's only when someone grabbed his gun.

Likewise, re: the skateboarder attacker, he attacked him first with the skateboard without being shot, it's only after a second attack and an attempt to grab the rifle that he's shot.

And again with the third instance, he aims but doesn't fire at the guy with the pistol, in fact, he then lowers his rifle it is only after the guy points his pistol at Kyle that he fires.

Further to that, in all those cases Kyle first retreats/tries to flee before he's attacked (or threatened with a gun) and eventually opens fire.

So to say he showed no restraint is bunk - he's fled/retreated in all cases and in the first and last case he's initially pointed and not fired, only firing when the threat to him increases.

As for no one else fired a firearm at him, one guy arguably almost did and Kyle was quick enough to prevent that another guy fired behind him (after allegedly threatening him) and for all he knew he had been fired at

Didn’t one of the people involved under cross examination by the defence, literally admit pointing a gun at Kyle and advanced towards him?

Yes, the last incident, pretty clear falsification of the claim being made above - Kyle lowers his rifle and doesn't immediately shoot that guy, it is only when the pistol is raised and pointed at him that he fires. In fact they had an earlier confrontation further back along the road in which Kyle obviously didn't shoot him either.

The only people who were shot that night were people who chased after Kyle and then attacked him & apparently tried to take his rifle off him or directly threatened him with a gun!

 

[Jono8]

In which case how do you maintain the self defence claim if you don’t think those beliefs were reasonable.

You’re again keeping it vague here too, you’ve been asked which incidents and why but you don’t clarify.



Well that's false too and has already been pointed out to you, in the first incident he was (he claims) threatened with a firearm and he didn't fire, he retreated, he was chased and he looked back and pointed his rifle but didn't use it, it's only when someone grabbed his gun.

Likewise, re: the skateboarder attacker, he attacked him first with the skateboard without being shot, it's only after a second attack and an attempt to grab the rifle that he's shot.

And again with the third instance, he aims but doesn't fire at the guy with the pistol, in fact, he then lowers his rifle it is only after the guy points his pistol at Kyle that he fires.

Further to that, in all those cases Kyle first retreats/tries to flee before he's attacked (or threatened with a gun) and eventually opens fire.

So to say he showed no restraint is bunk - he's fled/retreated in all cases and in the first and last case he's initially pointed and not fired, onyl firing when the threat to him increases.

A. They could be reasonable to Kyle, but not reasonable to others/in the eyes of the law.

Just because someone thinks something is reasonable to them, doesn't give them a get out of jail free card.

You seem to be struggling with this concept quite a bit and I'm not sure why because it's the main concept behind the entire case.

B. By restraint I meant actually using it in a deadly manner (which only Kyle did).

 

[dowie]

A. They could be reasonable to Kyle, but not reasonable to others/in the eyes of the law.

Just because someone thinks something is reasonable to them, doesn't give them a get out of jail free card.

Yes, exactly that's part of my point - this is the conflict here with you supporting the self-defence claim... how can you do that while simultaneously claiming that he's used excessive force and hold a belief that none of them posed a serious threat to his life or threat of injury.

You've still not giving any clarification there re: the incidents you think were excessive and why...

You seem to be struggling with this concept quite a bit and I'm not sure why because it's the main concept behind the entire case.

B. By restraint I meant actually using it in a deadly manner (which only Kyle did).

Nope not at all, you seem to be struggling to come up with any explanation/justification though.. I mean you've just avoided it again and kept things vague, what a surprise.

Kyle did show restraint in that sense as already explained, he didn't use it in a deadly manner on several occasions but simply pointed it in an attempt to get others to back off (first guy and third guy) and simply retreated in the very first instance with a guy with a gun, he only did so when attackers tried to grab the rifle from him, stomp his head or seemingly make a move to actually shoot him.

 

[Lord-Jaffa]

I dont think it was reasonable for him to believe he was going to be killed or seriously injured in all those instances, no. I think he may have thought that though, due to his immaturity and inability to deal with situation he put himself in.

No one else fired a firearm at him. Only Kyle showed no restraint in the use of firearms and that speaks volumes.

Hahah, alright John Wick.

 

[Skunkworks]

I suspect Jono8 gets all his opinions from TYT.

 

[OspreyO]

In law its doesn't matter if no one shot at him.

 

[OspreyO]

This is a matter of perspective. I would not say it looked like a typical firing position. In fact having watched the footage and stills, i am inclined to believe Grosskreutz's testimony (in that he didn't intentionally aim at Rittenhouse, rather that the gun was in his hand and he clumsily moved it towards him as he moved closer)

Not intentionally aiming, is still aiming.

If anyone did that at cop, if he even flinched, they'd empty everything they had on him. This is well known, its not in question. Look what started the riot.

Like i have said before, i do appreciate the self defense argument BUT i think Kyle showed little understanding of the situation he found himself in after the first shooting, and in all instances showed very little restraint in carrying out the ultimate retaliation to perceived threats.

There again, the facts don't support your argument. You seem to think firing at all shows no restraint. Legally thats not the case. If you know otherwise quote the law.

I assume you think he should never shoot. How far would this need to escalate before he should shoot. In your opinion.

It's ok to have a difference of opinion on this. The professional legal commentary on it isn't entirely in agreement on whether he should or will escape some of the lesser second degree/reckless charges either. The intentional first degree homicide is a stupid charge though and i'd be stunned if he got found guilty of that.

I'm curious to see what they get to stick. There laws make this very hard to prosecute.

 

[Rroff]

I dont think it was reasonable for him to believe he was going to be killed or seriously injured in all those instances, no. I think he may have thought that though, due to his immaturity and inability to deal with situation he put himself in.

No one else fired a firearm at him. Only Kyle showed no restraint in the use of firearms and that speaks volumes.

There is more to it than the immediate danger (something you and the prosecutor seem intent to try and minimise) - those instances could have made him vulnerable amongst an unfriendly crowd who may have taken advantage of or been encouraged by him being down turning into a mob. Some in the crowd had accosted Kyle and others who were acting similar to Kyle earlier on in a less than friendly manner and/or threatened them.

I'm still at a loss though as to why the **** he put himself in or somehow ended up in that situation.

 

[Jono8]

I suspect Jono8 gets all his opinions from TYT.

A.I dont even know what that is.

B. My opinion isn't exactly odd. The difference of opinion is why there is a case. I also bet that the defense is not 100% confident they will get a complete aquital.

 

[Jono8]

There is more to it than the immediate danger (something you and the prosecutor seem intent to try and minimise) - those instances could have made him vulnerable amongst an unfriendly crowd who may have taken advantage of or been encouraged by him being down turning into a mob. Some in the crowd had accosted Kyle and others who were acting similar to Kyle earlier on in a less than friendly manner and/or threatened them.

I'm still at a loss though as to why the **** he put himself in or somehow ended up in that situation.

You know what potentially makes you even more vulnerable to an unfriendly crowd/mob? Shooting at them

 

[Jono8]

Yes, exactly that's part of my point - this is the conflict here with you supporting the self-defence claim... how can you do that while simultaneously claiming that he's used excessive force and hold a belief that none of them posed a serious threat to his life or threat of injury.

You've still not giving any clarification there re: the incidents you think were excessive and why...



Nope not at all, you seem to be struggling to come up with any explanation/justification though.. I mean you've just avoided it again and kept things vague, what a surprise.

Kyle did show restraint in that sense as already explained, he didn't use it in a deadly manner on several occasions but simply pointed it in an attempt to get others to back off (first guy and third guy) and simply retreated in the very first instance with a guy with a gun, he only did so when attackers tried to grab the rifle from him, stomp his head or seemingly make a move to actually shoot him.

Hm, you clearly still don't understand the entire concept of this.

I'm not sure there is much point trying to explain it to you for the millionth time either.

 

[Rroff]

You know what potentially makes you even more vulnerable to an unfriendly crowd/mob? Shooting at them

Not sure your point - he only shot at them after potentially being put in a vulnerable position - when others had made his choices for him in the context of the situation.

Even if he seemingly put himself in a dangerous situation to start with though I'm still not clear how that came to be.

 

[Jono8]

Not sure your point - he only shot at them after potentially being put in a vulnerable position - when others had made his choices for him in the context of the situation.

I was just being flippant in this case

 

[C Kent]

You know what potentially makes you even more vulnerable to an unfriendly crowd/mob? Shooting at them

He didn't shoot at an unfriendly crowd though, he was attacked by 5 people, and shot at 4 of them completely missing the dude that kicked him in the head (to be fair that was blind luck and he should thank his lucky stars as given how that one guy was black and we all know how ******* crazy the US is when race is involved).

And skaterboy clearly swings at this head, he is then overbalanced and tries to use his skateboard to push down and is subsequently shot in the chest. Guy number 3 comes rushing in and stops when Rittenhouse is in the process of sitting up and his weapon is pointed, realises Rittenhouse isn't going to shoot then moves in again and clearly moves his gun toward Rittenhouse and then gets his bicep (byecep ) obliterated. You'll note there's another guy about 6 foot away that raises his hands to indicate he isn't a threat and is left alone.

 

[Jono8]

He didn't shoot at an unfriendly crowd though, he was attacked by 5 people, and shot at 4 of them completely missing the dude that kicked him in the head (to be fair that was blind luck and he should thank his lucky stars as given how that one guy was black and we all know how ******* crazy the US is when race is involved).

And skaterboy clearly swings at this head, he is then overbalanced and tries to use his skateboard to push down and is subsequently shot in the chest. Guy number 3 comes rushing in and stops when Rittenhouse is in the process of sitting up and his weapon is pointed, realises Rittenhouse isn't going to shoot then moves in again and clearly moves his gun toward Rittenhouse and then gets his bicep (byecep ) obliterated. You'll note there's another guy about 6 foot away that raises his hands to indicate he isn't a threat and is left alone.

Like I said, I was being flippant (hence the emoji)