Kyle Rittenhouse's so-called victim just admitted under oath that KR shot him self-defense

my question is, just what criminal charges has this "victim", been charged with? such as a felon having possession of an illegal gun. threatening someone with a loaded gun, by pointing it at them.

originally posted by: tamusan
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

I saw it as self-defense from the beginning. I will be disappointed if the verdict doesn't go that way. Although, I'd rather deal with the repercussions of him being found guilty than not guilty. The left is going to riot and burn cities down if he is found not guilty. 

It's Wisconsin in November. If Antifa shows up to riot, a fire hose will ensure that they stick around until at least March.

So riots by Friday then?

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

I don't think the fallout will be contained to Michigan.

a reply to: Fryguy

He didn't shoot Rittenhouse because he got shot 1st. Solved that mystery for ya!

Or, he didn't shoot because he thought skateboard guy had him down, and then bang, bang!

I know in your fantasy world it isn't self defense unless you have a bullet in your brain but, fortunately, thats not how it works in reality.

Kyle had just put a couple of bullets in another guys brain.

I have no preconceived notion of whether or not this is a case of self defense. I just don't think this guys testimony, that he pointed a gun at Kyle, seals his self defense case. Especially when you have too many vigilantes, all chasing each other around, and they all think they're the good guys.

If you were a good guy with a gun, that just saw a gunman shoot a guy in the brain, would you go after him with your good guy gun? Would the gunman be justified in killing you?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

I haven't really been following the trial.
That being said, IDK if that this confession alone would sway me if I was on the jury. I mean, Rittenhouse did just shoot someone in the head. Then you had these guys, probably thinking they were the good guys, chasing him down. The guy with the gun didn't shoot Rittenhouse. Why not? Maybe he thought he could hold him at gun point till the cops came or to do a citizens' arrest.

Clearly, both parties thought they were the good guys with guns.

"Clearly"???

In what world do you hold a pistol on someone with an AR and think that your Mexican standoff actually makes sense? In the real world, raising your gun will get you shot. There is no debating that. If you raise your gun, its is a gesture of imminent harm.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

I just don't think this guys testimony that he pointed a gun seals the self defense case.

Ahem, Wisconsin self defense law.

 A person is privileged to threaten or intentionally use force against another for the purpose of preventing or terminating what the person reasonably believes to be an unlawful interference with his or her person by such other person. The actor may intentionally use only such force or threat thereof as the actor reasonably believes is necessary to prevent or terminate the interference. The actor may not intentionally use force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm unless the actor reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself

a reply to: Sookiechacha

I just don't think this guys testimony that he pointed a gun seals the self defense case.

Thank you.
That is what I was wondering about.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

In what world do you hold a pistol on someone with an AR and think that your Mexican standoff actually makes sense?

PFFFT. None if this makes sense.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

In what world do you hold a pistol on someone with an AR and think that your Mexican standoff actually makes sense?

PFFFT. None if this makes sense.

True!!!

I hope the evil left does riot.

They've become the ideology, the party of cowards, tyrants and bullies.

The more that people see that the left does not care about anything but their agenda, the better.

I also hope this starts a trend where violent people bent on killing, robbing others of their life's work and savings are shot.

They are not "protestors" they are criminal thugs who are using up good oxygen and are a waste of skin.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

I haven't really been following the trial.
That being said, IDK if that this confession alone would sway me if I was on the jury. I mean, Rittenhouse did just shoot someone in the head. Then you had these guys, probably thinking they were the good guys, chasing him down. The guy with the gun didn't shoot Rittenhouse. Why not? Maybe he thought he could hold him at gun point till the cops came or to do a citizens' arrest.

Clearly, both parties thought they were the good guys with guns.

I would agree, all involved thought they were in the right, except for Rosenbaum, all this carnage rests on him, hell, he may of committed suicide?

As for Gaige, his gun was lower, he never got shot, when he directed it to Kyle, he got shot..was he going to shoot Kyle? we'll never know for sure, but if you point it, all bets are off. To be fair, Kyle had his rifle pointed as well, important to note..he only fired when Gaige directed his gun.

a reply to: JinMI

A person is privileged to threaten or intentionally use force against another for the purpose of preventing or terminating what the person reasonably believes to be an unlawful interference with his or her person by such other person. The actor may intentionally use only such force or threat thereof as the actor reasonably believes is necessary to prevent or terminate the interference. The actor may not intentionally use force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm unless the actor reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself

Would a shoplifter be entitled to claim self defense if some do gooder tried to apprehend them in the parking lot, and the shoplifter killed them?

Rittenhouse had just shot a man, and was fleeing the scene. That's why I think "self defense" is still dependent on whether he was a criminal fleeing the murder scene, or a righteous guy with a gun, trying to find a safe place and/or a cop.

originally posted by: generik
my question is, just what criminal charges has this "victim", been charged with? such as a felon having possession of an illegal gun. threatening someone with a loaded gun, by pointing it at them.

I'm not sure about that felon stuff, he had a CC, but it had expired, and if he was, I imagine defence would of brought it up.

a reply to: vonclod

..he only fired when Gaige directed his gun.

I don't know about that. He shot skateboard guy first. Skateboard guy was actually attacking him.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: vonclod

..he only fired when Gaige directed his gun.

I don't know about that. He shot skateboard guy first. Skateboard guy was actually attacking him.

I think Gaige is maybe the most clear cut self defence..no question his weapon was lethal, had a round in the chamber too(not that Kyle knew)

I have been watching a lot of the youtube law/legal channels, they all pretty much think the same, many question some of the charges. I haven't seen any that think it's going the prosecutors way.

Even far lefties are having to back track yet again... Here is Ana Kasparian from TYT admitting she was wrong about Rittenhouse. I suspect the media is afraid they are going to get sued so now they are trying to correct the record.



but what is hilarious... is here is their critique earlier of Kyles attorney open statement saying it was insane because he was "blaming the victim". Welp, that didn't age well.



If you listen to the first video, Ana does what most leftist do... claim no knowledge of some fact or information when the information has been available from the start. There is really nothing new revealed in this trial, but the lefties try to plead their ignorance of facts.

originally posted by: Edumakated
Even far lefties are having to back track yet again... Here is Ana Kasparian from TYT admitting she was wrong about Rittenhouse. I suspect the media is afraid they are going to get sued so now they are trying to correct the record.

but what is hilarious... is here is their critique earlier of Kyles attorney open statement saying it was insane because he was "blaming the victim". Welp, that didn't age well.

If you listen to the first video, Ana does what most leftist do... claim no knowledge of some fact or information when the information has been available from the start. There is really nothing new revealed in this trial, but the lefties try to plead their ignorance of facts.

I wanted to watch that clip, she is so disingenuous about "not knowing" it was plain to see..if you want to objectively find the truth.

originally posted by: vonclod

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

I haven't really been following the trial.
That being said, IDK if that this confession alone would sway me if I was on the jury. I mean, Rittenhouse did just shoot someone in the head. Then you had these guys, probably thinking they were the good guys, chasing him down. The guy with the gun didn't shoot Rittenhouse. Why not? Maybe he thought he could hold him at gun point till the cops came or to do a citizens' arrest.

Clearly, both parties thought they were the good guys with guns.

I would agree, all involved thought they were in the right, except for Rosenbaum, all this carnage rests on him, hell, he may of committed suicide?

As for Gaige, his gun was lower, he never got shot, when he directed it to Kyle, he got shot..was he going to shoot Kyle? we'll never know for sure, but if you point it, all bets are off. To be fair, Kyle had his rifle pointed as well, important to note..he only fired when Gaige directed his gun.

first rule of gun safety, all guns are loaded until you verify they aren't.
Second rule is never point your weapon at something you don't intend to kill.

a reply to: TzarChasm

Have you ever served as a juror? I have 5 times. Once case lasted the whole summer. Its curtains for this case. Kyle will walk. He will be a free man, and a very popular person with those who have moral values.