Sandman vs Rittenhouse: Which one wins the most lawsuit money?

[struth]

Rittenhouse can't sue anybody. And he might end up paying out civil damages for wrongful death. You are assuming he will be found innocent. But what if he's not?

Because he pointed a gun at people which by law negates his claim of self defense.

1) Wisconsin is a comparative negligence state, he can certainly sue. Moreover he is innocent, until proven guilty, what makes you think the state has met that burden?

Using the firearm doesn’t negate self defense. A person is allowed to defend themselves with a gun

 

[struth]

And what can he sue them for? Reporting the news?

First person i would sue us xiden for defamation for calling him a racist

heck there are still dembot cultist saying he killed a black guy on this forum because of xiden’s lies

 

[22lcidw]

And what can he sue them for? Reporting the news?

Sue them for reporting their hating political agendas. Humans never learn. Time after time in history when liberties are a part of the tribe, they give it up for the snakes who put an enticement in front of them. Rittenhouse is a kid who may make a great soldier if given the opportunity. The tentacles of those who sold out for this are long and intertwined. There are people who I may watch on TV and agree with who can be questionable with their motives. Yours are more in the front as they are safer in their views. Many levels of protection before violence ever gets to them.

 

[Mac-7]

The democrat party in control of Kenosha should have to pay in every lawsuit filed

Libs caused the death of two people that night

 

[justoffal]

Rittenhouse can't sue anybody. And he might end up paying out civil damages for wrongful death. You are assuming he will be found innocent. But what if he's not?

Because he pointed a gun at people which by law negates his claim of self defense.

He can sue the media....so far at least three nationally syndicated lies have been exposed. He also wrongly faced jail time. Lin Wood is going to have a god-damned party with this one.

 

[Osiris-ODS]

And what can he sue them for? Reporting the news?

Libel and slander. Are you even paying attention? Reporting the news? Seriously?! LMFAO.

 

[Canon Shooter]

Libel and slander. Are you even paying attention? Reporting the news? Seriously?! LMFAO.

Libel and slander?

Give me an example of each...

 

[Osiris-ODS]

Libel and slander?

Give me an example of each...

They called him a white supremacist (false) and a murderer (a legal definition, while on trial). It was published in writing and verbalized on TV news. Any further questions?

 

[Canon Shooter]

Who the fuck is "they"?

Saying "they" did something isn't an example.

Who is said it, when was it said and what was said?

 

[Soupnazi630]

Rittenhouse can't sue anybody. And he might end up paying out civil damages for wrongful death. You are assuming he will be found innocent. But what if he's not?

Because he pointed a gun at people which by law negates his claim of self defense.

Yes he can sue and yes he can BE sued but there is no evidence he pointed a gun at anyone until they attacked him

 

[Soupnazi630]

The thing is that Rittenhouse pointed his gun first. He life was not threatened. People generally don't rush at people who are armed.

His life was threatened

He did not point his gun first and the word generally means it happened it was simply out of the ordinary

 

[Coyote]

We don't really know how much Sandman won from the fake news, other than that he won millions, but I bet Rittenhouse winds up winning more. Who do you think winds up with the biggest jackpot?

Rittenhouse has no grounds to sue. Sandmann had done nothing to deserve his notoriety, he had grounds.

 

[Coyote]

Yes he can sue and yes he can BE sued but there is no evidence he pointed a gun at anyone until they attacked him

He pointed a gun at Rosenbaum before Rosenbaum attacked him.

 

[Soupnazi630]

He pointed a gun at Rosenbaum before Rosenbaum attacked him.

No he did not

 

[Soupnazi630]

Rittenhouse has no grounds to sue. Sandmann had done nothing to deserve his notoriety, he had grounds.

Rittenhouse has grounds as well.

 

[Coyote]

No he did not

We will see.

 

[jknowgood]

The thing is that Rittenhouse pointed his gun first. He life was not threatened. People generally don't rush at people who are armed.

The other gun man makes you a liar. He said he pointed his gun first.

 

[jknowgood]

1) Wisconsin is a comparative negligence state, he can certainly sue. Moreover he is innocent, until proven guilty, what makes you think the state has met that burden?

Using the firearm doesn’t negate self defense. A person is allowed to defend themselves with a gun

 

[jknowgood]

Rittenhouse has no grounds to sue. Sandmann had done nothing to deserve his notoriety, he had grounds.

8

 

[EvMetro]

Rittenhouse has no grounds to sue. Sandmann had done nothing to deserve his notoriety, he had grounds.

Stop trying to derail this thread with this evasion. Which one do you think wins more?