Rittenhouse trial

[Jim in CT]

Anyone following this?

The shooter and all three people he shot, were white. But somehow the media says he’s a white supremacist.

The prosecutions star witness ( the surviving person who he about) admitted in court that he first pointed a gun at Rittenhouses head from a few feet away, and then Rittenhouse shot him.

This kid is being tried for murder to placate the mob. There’s no conceivable case. This case, makes the Duke lacrosse case, look like an open and shut case of gang rape.

All to placate the woke mob. And sensing that things aren’t going their way, the woke mob is threatening the jury now.

It’s beyond stupid for a 17 year old to take a rifle to a riot ( where the hell were his parents). But there’s no case for murder, not even close.

Multiple prosecution witnesses are saying Rittenhouse was being attacked before he fired. And you’re allowed to do that in this country. Even white teenagers surrounded by black rioters, are entitled to defend themselves.

As usual, the media narrative bears zero resemblance to reality.

[Got Stripers]

I've been avoiding this forum due to the endless circular threads and stupidity, but thought I'd respond to this one, as I'm sure Jim will spin this into this poor youth being the innocent victim. So while this actually may have been self defense and maybe it's not premediated murder, do those people die if this idiot wasn't marching down to a riot with an illegal assault rifle he had no business possessing let along carrying. If you go marching into that situation with an assault rifle, you are just asking for trouble and while he may be able to get off on the most serious charges of premeditated murder, he should be charged at least to the same level as some drunk running down and killing an innocent pedestrian.

Spin on Jim, your the best at it.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

I've been avoiding this forum due to the endless circular threads and stupidity, but thought I'd respond to this one, as I'm sure Jim will spin this into this poor youth being the innocent victim. So while this actually may have been self defense and maybe it's not premediated murder, do those people die if this idiot wasn't marching down to a riot with an illegal assault rifle he had no business possessing let along carrying. If you go marching into that situation with an assault rifle, you are just asking for trouble and while he may be able to get off on the most serious charges of premeditated murder, he should be charged at least to the same level as some drunk running down and killing an innocent pedestrian.

Spin on Jim, your the best at it.

Would those people have died if they weren't marching down to a riot and attacking a well armed boy? Would Grosskreutz have been shot if he wasn't marching down to a riot with a gun for which his license to carry had expired?

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

But there’s no case for murder, not even close.

He's not on trial for murder.

[Got Stripers]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Would those people have died if they weren't marching down to a riot and attacking a well armed boy? Would Grosskreutz have been shot if he wasn't marching down to a riot with a gun for which his license to carry had expired?

Jim's discussing Wittenhouse, if you want to spin it to others breaking the law feel free, never said there wasn't blame to go around. Jim is ready to go on one of his quests and I wanted to give him a good running start. Wittenhouse shot and killed two people, carrying a weapon he wasn't able to buy for himself and was carrying illegally and he should be held accountable. That is up to the courts and a jury of his peers to decide, but Jim will paint him as an innocent victim and I'm sure he will bring a full barrage of whataboutism into it at some point.

Still trolling this site I see crappie fisherman from the midwest, running out of people to debate with on this forum.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Jim's discussing Wittenhouse, if you want to spin it to others breaking the law feel free,

Spinning your spin. Round and round we spin. Yup, others broke the law which doesn't seem to bother you. Spin, spin.


never said there wasn't blame to go around.

Would say it now? Do you blame Grosskreutz and the others who chased Rittenhouse?

Jim is ready to go on one of his quests and I wanted to give him a good running start. Wittenhouse shot and killed two people, carrying a weapon he wasn't able to buy for himself and was carrying illegally and he should be held accountable.

Is that what he's on trial for? Is Grosskreutz testifying that Rittenhouse was illegally carrying a gun?

That is up to the courts and a jury of his peers to decide, but Jim will paint him as an innocent victim and I'm sure he will bring a full barrage of whataboutism into it at some point.

Are you painting him as a guilty culprit before the jury decides?

Still trolling this site I see crappie fisherman from the midwest, running out of people to debate with on this forum.

Yup.

[Got Stripers]

Amazing you can read minds, such talent. Does it upset me others broke the law, certainly but this thread started about Rittenhouse and that was my focused response. Are others guilty of crimes, they probably are and if so, I hope they are charged and afforded due process as well. And yes I'm painting him as a guilty culprit, I'm not on the jury so I am entitled to my opinion, not saying he is guilty of murder, but he is a long, long, long way from being an innocent victim.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

I've been avoiding this forum due to the endless circular threads and stupidity, but thought I'd respond to this one, as I'm sure Jim will spin this into this poor youth being the innocent victim. So while this actually may have been self defense and maybe it's not premediated murder, do those people die if this idiot wasn't marching down to a riot with an illegal assault rifle he had no business possessing let along carrying. If you go marching into that situation with an assault rifle, you are just asking for trouble and while he may be able to get off on the most serious charges of premeditated murder, he should be charged at least to the same level as some drunk running down and killing an innocent pedestrian.

Spin on Jim, your the best at it.

"I'm sure Jim will spin this into this poor youth being the innocent victim."

An interesting conclusion, since I said this...

"It’s beyond stupid for a 17 year old to take a rifle to a riot"

With the exception of rockhound, you guys are all identical. When faced with a compelling argument (believe it or not, conservatives stumble upon those once in awhile), you all resort to the identical practice of pretending that I said something which I never even came close to saying. Every single time. What's in that Kool-Aid, I wonder, which makes you think that it's OK to ignore what I actually said, and respond instead to nonsensical gibberish?

"So while this actually may have been self defense"

It was obviously self-defense. If this wasn't self-defense, there's no such thing as self-defense.

"do those people die if this idiot wasn't marching down to a riot with an illegal assault rifle he had no business possessing let along carrying"

They'd also be alive, had they not given Rittenhouse reasonable cause to fear for his life. And that's what matters here.

And where's the "white supremacy" angle here, which the entire media stirred up? Everyone involved is white.

In the future, if you can respond to what I actually say, rather than pretend that I said something I never said, we will get along better, and you'll look much less foolish.

"I've been avoiding this forum"

If you're going to lie about what I say, you should have stuck with your instinct.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

He's not on trial for murder.

no case for intentional homicide. The prosecution witness admitted he was only shot after he pointed a gun at Rittenhouse.

Does the right to self-defense get waived, when a white person attends a BLM riot?

[Pete F.]

Someone has been watching Tucker again

We will be way better off when the current SCOTUS says the 2nd amendment is without limits, probably could really defund the police then since vigilantism is now ok
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

We will be way better off when the current SCOTUS says the 2nd amendment is without limits, probably could really defund the police then since vigilantism is now ok
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Sounds like a good idea. Trump should tweet about that. Recommend it. Wait . . . Trump packed the Court. Aha . . . I see where you're coming from. His selected bootlickers on the Court will do exactly that. Be afraid, "our democracy" is in deep trouble. Trump is going to destroy it. Trump, Trump, Trump . . . .

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Amazing you can read minds, such talent.

I asked some questions. Asking questions is the opposite of reading minds.

Does it upset me others broke the law, certainly but this thread started about Rittenhouse and that was my focused response.

But you brought into the discussion the others that Rittenhouse shot and questioned if they would have died if he had not been there with his weapon. That makes it fair to ask if they would have died if they had not been there and not chased Rittenhouse.

Are others guilty of crimes, they probably are and if so, I hope they are charged and afforded due process as well. And yes I'm painting him as a guilty culprit, I'm not on the jury so I am entitled to my opinion, not saying he is guilty of murder, but he is a long, long, long way from being an innocent victim.

By the same token, if Jim believes, as you're sure he does, that Rittenhouse is a "poor youth being the innocent victim", he is entitled to his opinion. So what's the point of throwing what appears to be a zinger at him.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by detbuch

By the same token, if Jim believes, as you're sure he does, that Rittenhouse is a "poor youth being the innocent victim", he is entitled to his opinion. So what's the point of throwing what appears to be a zinger at him.

i’d really like to know where Rittenhouses parents were that night.

The judge tore the prosecutor a new azzhole in court today, my god he tore into him.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

He's not on trial for murder.

Do you ever get tired of being wrong?

https://www.usnews.com/news/us/artic...ttenhouse-face

FIRST-DEGREE RECKLESS HOMICIDE, USE OF A DANGEROUS WEAPON
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Someone has been watching Tucker again

We will be way better off when the current SCOTUS says the 2nd amendment is without limits, probably could really defund the police then since vigilantism is now ok
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

As always, when the facts aren't on your side, invent some new facts, respond to something that nobody is saying.

[spence]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Do you ever get tired of being wrong?

https://www.usnews.com/news/us/artic...ttenhouse-face

FIRST-DEGREE RECKLESS HOMICIDE, USE OF A DANGEROUS WEAPON
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'm not wrong, they changed the definition.

[spence]

The video in this article does a nice job of a reconstruction.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...s-down-crying/

So an underage kid carrying illegally is marching down the street like he's the boss, a guy with mental health issues throws a bag at him and even though he's armed with a semi automatic rifle he's so afraid he shoots him several times and then sprints away. The other people think he's an active shooter and try to intervene so he take them out as well.

This is lunacy, not self defense. Immature kid making very bad decisions needs to have some consequences.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

I'm not wrong, they changed the definition.

No they didn’t
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

The video in this article does a nice job of a reconstruction.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...s-down-crying/

So an underage kid carrying illegally is marching down the street like he's the boss, a guy with mental health issues throws a bag at him and even though he's armed with a semi automatic rifle he's so afraid he shoots him several times and then sprints away. The other people think he's an active shooter and try to intervene so he take them out as well.

This is lunacy, not self defense. Immature kid making very bad decisions needs to have some consequences.

Funny how you left this part out

“Richard McGinnis, a reporter who was trailing Rittenhouse, told investigators that Rosenbaum tried to grab Rittenhouse's gun, according to the criminal complaint.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

No they didn’t
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

For a murder charge they would have to show Rittenhouse came there with intent to hurt or kill people.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

For a murder charge they would have to show Rittenhouse came there with intent to hurt or kill people.

That’s first degree murder, there are other degrees of murder that don’t require intent

“ Typically, second-degree murder is defined as murder that is not premeditated, or murder that is caused by the offender's reckless conduct that displays an obvious lack of concern for human life.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Funny how you left this part out

“Richard McGinnis, a reporter who was trailing Rittenhouse, told investigators that Rosenbaum tried to grab Rittenhouse's gun, according to the criminal complaint.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If a vigilante is pushing a gun in your face don't you have a right to self defense?

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

As always, when the facts aren't on your side, invent some new facts, respond to something that nobody is saying.

You have no facts
It’s a trial to establish the facts
Your supposition assumes that teenage vigilantes are a good thing for our society.
I will vehemently disagree
Any reasonable human would
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

If a vigilante is pushing a gun in your face don't you have a right to self defense?

Sure, but that’s not what happened

“Bystander video shows Rosenbaum chasing Rittenhouse through a parking lot and throwing a plastic bag at him. Rittenhouse flees behind a car and Rosenbaum follows.”

“Richard McGinnis, a reporter who was trailing Rittenhouse, told investigators that Rosenbaum tried to grab Rittenhouse's gun, according to the criminal complaint.”

If a mentally unstable man chases you and tries to take your gun away, you’re well within your rights to shoot him
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

If a vigilante is pushing a gun in your face don't you have a right to self defense?

you chose to leave that out, and got caught. what are you afraid would happen exactly, if you stopped putting a pro-liberal spin on every single thing you post? Seriously, what are you afraid of?

Rittenhouse didn’t go on a crazy shooting spree. the guy he shot who survived, testifies ( with supporting photo evidence) that rittenhouse had his rifle in his hands, but didn’t shoot the guy until
he pointed his gun at Rittenhouses face.

It was beyond stupid for Rittenhouse to go there with a rifle ( was he carrying illegally? is he charged with that?).

it’s also very dangerous to engage in violent riots for no good reason. that created the situation. maybe, just maybe, if prominent liberals
told the rioters to stand down instead of encouraging them, we also wouldn’t be having this conversation. if liberal
mayors and governors cared enough about public safety and less about political optics, they’d have called in the national guard to quell those riots, and vigilante wannabes wouldn’t have felt any need to step up.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Sure, but that’s not what happened

“Bystander video shows Rosenbaum chasing Rittenhouse through a parking lot and throwing a plastic bag at him. Rittenhouse flees behind a car and Rosenbaum follows.”

“Richard McGinnis, a reporter who was trailing Rittenhouse, told investigators that Rosenbaum tried to grab Rittenhouse's gun, according to the criminal complaint.”

If a mentally unstable man chases you and tries to take your gun away, you’re well within your rights to shoot him
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

this prosecution is a joke. a politically motivated joke. and they already saw someone taking photos of jurors, that’s not any kind of bad sign. they should dismiss the jurors and drop the charges.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

You have no facts
It’s a trial to establish the facts
Your supposition assumes that teenage vigilantes are a good thing for our society.
I will vehemently disagree
Any reasonable human would
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

in this case, I have all the facts. the reality of what happened bears no resemblance to how the media covered this. you guys are also desperately and laughably trying to spin this.

fact: a prosecution witness admitted that he pointed his gun at rittenhouse BEFORE Rittenhouse fired. If that’s not self defense, nothing is.

don’t you get tired of hitting yourself in the face with eggs?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

in this case, I have all the facts. the reality of what happened bears no resemblance to how the media covered this. you guys are also desperately and laughably trying to spin this.

fact: a prosecution witness admitted that he pointed his gun at rittenhouse BEFORE Rittenhouse fired. If that’s not self defense, nothing is.

don’t you get tired of hitting yourself in the face with eggs?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Let’s be clear
If a black teenager had crossed state lines, armed himself with an illegally acquired assault rifle, attended a MAGA rally, ignored the curfew, picked a fight and killed two people.
The trial would be a formality and he’d be heading for prison for life.
Oh yeah, he was a vigilante
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Rosenbaum had also threatened to
kill Rittenhouse, then later tried to grab his gun. Self defense.

again, this was all made possible by elected officials who did nothing to stop the riots.

Joe Biden, naturally, called him a white supremacist. because he #^&#^&#^&#^& three white people. And biden gets a pass for lying. as always.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Rosenbaum had also threatened to
kill Rittenhouse, then later tried to grab his gun. Self defense.

again, this was all made possible by elected officials who did nothing to stop the riots.

Joe Biden, naturally, called him a white supremacist. because he #^&#^&#^&#^& three white people. And biden gets a pass for lying. as always.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Your little heroes mother drove him across state lines with a gun.

When Kyle told the cops he had just shot someone, the officer ultimately tells him to “Go home! Go home! Go home!”

He did.

Is that what it’s like for people like KyleRittenhouse in America?
Explain further how white privilege doesn’t exist
Clown
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device