Kyle Rittenhouse shooting breakdown: murder or self defense?

submitted by Chipit from youtube.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]AsInBeer 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (12 children)

The charges against him have been made public along with the prosecution event timeline.

https://www.breitbart.com/crime/2020/08/28/prosecutors-unveil-charges-against-kyle-rittenhouse-faces-life-in-prison/

The first shooting, at Rosenberg is the best case the prosecution has- and it stinks. Rosenberg is chasing him, catching him, when Rittenhouse finally fires what appears to be a warning shot. A male (likely Rosenberg) shouts "Fuck you!" and Rosenberg continues to approach Rittenhouse. Rittenhouse fires four times out of what is obviously desperate self defense.

That is by their own telling (desperate self defense descriptor is mine). Then he's mobbed and shoots people 1) aiming guns at him and 2) clobbering him on the head w skateboard (a deadly weapon) .

Moreover, Rosenberg is on video SCREAMING at him and threatening him earlier in the night, approaching him in a rage, menacing him ... It's transparent who the aggressor was... then there's Rosenberg's history of very very violent behavior in and out of prison and Rittenhouse's earnest attempts to help people who were injured at this very conflagaration.

Only a spiteful biased jury composed of 12 of Rosenberg's relatives is going to find this kid guilty. I truly have to believe he was over-charged just exactly to save him from prison.

[–]Klondike 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Rosenberg being aggressive does not give him the authority to shoot him. He has to argue he was in fear for his life. Which maybe he was, I can't really tell from the video. But people seem to think you can use a gun for whatever you want. That's not the case; carry pepper spray, people.

He flees the scene of the first shooting though--a mistake on his part. Presumably the crowd thought he was running from the scene of a crime and that's why they chased him. Also after the second and third victims were hit, which is after he got back up from the skateboard attack, he fires indiscriminately into the crowd, even though they were far away from him at this point. Also a no-no.

I doubt murder will stick but something lesser probably will. He was definitely not an ideal responsible gun owner here.

[–]AsInBeer 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

Nope wrong on all counts. IT's not about being aggressive, it's about physical menacing.

1) Rosenberg was a violentr felon pursuing Rittenberg who was retreating.

2) Rosenberg knew he was armed. This creates a reasonable fear that Rosenberg intended to procure the gun and use it against Rittenhouse.

3) Rittenberg fired a warning shot and Rosenberg continued ot advance.

4)In a rage, Rosenberg signalled his violent intent by throwing whatever he had at Rittenberg. Lots of experts will say it doesn't matter it was "just" a plastic bag- it's what he had and he hurtled it . See: domestic abuse cases. Again it goes to a rageful, violent mind intent on harm. There really is no doubt on this critical point.

5) Where is the video where fires indiscriminately into the crowd? I have not seen it and this is not asserted in the complaint- The video I saw showed he aimed and shot at an armed felon who was preparing to shoot him and a another who assualted him with a deadly weapon. Perfect self-defense.

6) A rioting mob is a mortal threat to everyone they focus on. That's a fact. The authorities have elected to let the mob destroy peopertry and murder people rather than use the power we grant them to protect people and property. Everyone has an inalienable right to protect themselves. Inalienable means "cannot be alienated from." If the government chooses to stand down from its promise to protect us against mobs, then it falls to the people to protect themselves, which is CLEARLY what he was doing against the individuals he shot and the lawless mob which was descending on the city.

As to pepper spray, it would not have stopped Rosenberg. I had bear spray go off on me once by accidnet while hiking and I was not truly incapacitated as such- I could still function towards a goal. Police will tell you that it does not incapacitate lots of people. Stun-guns - the same thing.

[–]Klondike 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Maybe this varies from state to state, but "menacing" is not sufficient; he has to be afraid for his LIFE.

1) irrelevant, Rittenberg did not know he was a felon at the time.

2) this doesn't make sense to me... Wouldn't anyone open-carrying be able to make the same argument?

3) Don't fire warning shots, people. It's stupid.

4) Where did you find this? In the video I've seen, this is not visible.

5) After getting up from the attack. I agree that those shots were self defense, but I'm talking about after he got up and the crowd dispersed. Although another Saidit user asserts that it was not him firing, so maybe that's the case.

6) Nothing I can really disagree with there, but just remember how we got on this situation: "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." - JFK

As for pepper spray, I'll keep that in mind...

[–]AsInBeer 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

1) Relevant- Goes ot character and motive as you'll see during the trial.

2) It would if people were routinely stupid enough to try to attack people carrying guns. Police use this same principle- my gun, if he gets it, will put me in mortal peril. A true statement.

3) But he did, which shows he was trying to stop the guy with less than lethal force.

4) cited from charging documents.

5) He shot two people. One with a pistol trained on him. The other had just assualted him with a deadly weapon. No law expects a reasonable citizen to infinitely parse the dynamic behavior of violent people in real time. One a reasonable fear for his life has been established, he's within his rights to protect himself, even with deadly force.

6) Fine you support he movment and see it as a neccessary reaction to some perceived injustice. That's another conversation, and I am glad to debate that too.

[–]Klondike 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

1) Rosenberg isn't the one on trial.

2) But you could just always say that. It sounds like the "it's coming right for us!" defense from South Park.

4) where did you find those? I wouldn't mind reading.

5) He didn't hit anyone spraying into the crowd, but even if you fear for your life you are not allowed to do that.

6) I mean, it's not like police brutality is anything new...

[–]AsInBeer 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

1) You just don't know how trials work, that's all . Who Rosenberg was, what his past behavior was like, what he was seen doing and saying all go straight to the heart of "reasonable fear your his life"

2) If you charge someone with any weapon, the person has a right to use it against you. Remember that, for your own protection.

4) My first post the first link

5) Show me the evidence he sprayed into the crowd.

6) Nope it's not but police brutality is dealt with in a court of law. Some cases which should be will not be won. That is actually a preferential outcome since sending innocent people to jail is a horror we must avoid, even at high cost I think you will agree. The proves the world is imperfect. That the world is imperfect is no reason to burn down cities and kill people.

BTW FBI stats prove beyond all doubt that unarmed Black men are not killed by the police disproportionately to their numbers. It's just a myth BLM invented out of whole cloth.

I remember some overpaid NBA star asking to be shown even ONE video of the same thing happening to a White man. What a joke. Did you just check in, sir?

That someone could think this doesn't happen in unarmed White men just shows that the people involved with BLM just don't care about looking, or don't know how to look, for evidence which would contradict their preferred narrative.

Look at the date:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Ooa7wOKHhg

https://nypost.com/2017/12/08/ex-cop-acquitted-in-fatal-shooting-of-unarmed-man-at-hotel/

Also, it has to be said that if any of these poeple gave an actual shit about Black men dying they would be talking about Black on Black crime in these Democrat-run cities. They would be upset about the Black men shot in CHAZ.

The police station they attacked and defunded in Seattle? The one run by the Black female police chief whose pay was cut by 40%? Yeah that was fought for by the Black community who lived there because they wanted more law and order.

These Marxists are full bore psychopaths and the celebs and athelete and SV elite who are raising their fists are attention whores who feel guilty about being over-compensated for contributing nearly nothing of value to society. They have a hole in their souls where a meaningful life would have been.

Now that they "have it all" , whoa... new vistas open up to them ! Their idea of being successful changes and they realize, actually, they contributed nothing inducing Black kids to buy $200.00 sneakers made by Uyguher slave labor in China.

So they hop on whatever Angry Train they can so they can feel like Their Lives Matter.

But, Black or White, their lives don't matter. And they know it.

Joining a cause premised on a false narrative is essentially them buying a luxury moral good.

They like its halo around them the same way they liked the Lamborghini halo they bought when they were 20. They look good in this....

[–]Klondike 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

1) there's no way Rittenberg knew any of that at the time. You can't just shoot people and then after the fact go "good thing he was kinda a dirtbag." The only way it would be relevant is if the defense were to argue "Rosenberg never would've done such a thing!" which seems unlikely.

2) I'm having a hard time buying that. I admit I'm no expert on laws pertaining to open carry (because doing so is fucking dumb, you are pre-escalating the situation before it's even begun, why advertise that you are armed?), but if you can claim a fear for your life because someone is running toward you, that seems simply ridiculous.

5) There's a video out there somewhere (I can no longer find the link on Reddit) that's a compilation of people's cell phone videos. It shows him getting up after the attack with the crowd running from him. He turns toward the crowd and appears to be aiming in their direction (his back is to the camera). There's the sound of quite a few gunshots. So like I said, someone else said it wasn't him shooting, and maybe that's the case. But I guess it's up to investigators and the justice system now.

6)

Nope it's not but police brutality is dealt with in a court of law.

Ok but that's like the point, it's NOT. How many times have we heard that the cops simply got reprimanded with paid leave? How many get fired but then later reinstated quietly? How many times do we have to hear "oops, lost the bodycam footage"? When a cop actually gets charged, it's an outlier, and nevermind an actual conviction. For some reason, the "good cops" are all too eager to protect "bad cops".

The system is corrupt to it's core and needs major reform. Police need to be held accountable for their actions. Should they have to hesitate before pulling the trigger and think "Is what I'm doing illegal?" Abso-fucking-lutely.

[–]AsInBeer 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

1) It goes to Rosenberg's intent. It's not about what Rittenberg knew, it's about whether or not the attacking individual was known to be the sort of person who was confrontational, aggressive and prone to violence because that makes it more likely he was displaying those some behaviors at the time.

(In fact, we know he was. We have him approaching Rittenberg in an apoplectic rage earlier in the night.)

But we dont' need that. We have his extensive violent criminal record.

2) This is not how criminals and open carry advocates see it. What criminals see is an unmanageable number of people around them who have guns. What open carry advocates believe is criminals like easy vicitims who can't fight back. Conceal carry states are even better because , yeah, criminals really have no idea who is packing.

6) all the things your referencing are problems. But it's not an epidemic of police violence towards innocent people or criminal suspects who pose no threat to them. All those things are problems that happen in the world, but if you look at the words you used, you might get an idea that it's not how often it happens, it's how often you hear about it. You hear about it every single time it happens. You hear about every single officer involved shooting of any Black suspect. How many is that? What % of the time does it happen? Whatr are the details around the case? Are the cops White or Black? How many times does it happen to White suspects?

When you look into answering these questions, it becomes clear- there is no epidemic of White cops shooting Black suspects.

https://www.npr.org/2019/07/26/745731839/new-study-says-white-police-officers-are-not-more-likely-to-shoot-minority-suspe

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/07/white-cops-dont-commit-more-shootings/

https://www.dailywire.com/news/cops-shoot-white-guy-fresno-nobody-pays-attention-hank-berrien

[–]bald-janitor 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I hope he gets freed

[–]iraelmossadreddit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

which is after he got back up from the skateboard attack, he fires indiscriminately into the crowd,

no he doesn't. that was pistol boy trying to shoot him from far away...

he already got shot in the right arm so I guess he was trying to shoot him with the left lol.,,

[–]Klondike 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Did pistol guy shoot? I read that he had a pistol on his person, but haven't heard that he actually fired it.

The sounds of gunshots are after Rittenberg gets up and turns to face the retreating crowd.

[–]iraelmossadreddit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

there is a video somewhere of him kneeling on the ground shooting that pistol then grabbing his arm and screaming more. I can't find it though...