Teen arrested for defending him self against the mob!

[Faun]

he worked in the town and the property owner asked them for help,,,

Link please.

I really wish you mother fuckers would educate yourself before commenting,,,

Kyle Rittenhouse Defended Himself, ‘Did Nothing Wrong,' Attorney Says

The attorneys representing Kyle Rittenhouse, the Antioch 17-year-old charged with the shooting deaths of two protesters in Kenosha, released a statement Friday night, saying the teen “did nothing wrong” and acted in self-defense. Earlier in the day, a judge agreed to delay for a month a decision...

www.nbcchicago.com

LOLOL

Wut?? The teen murderer's attorney is claiming is client is innocent? The nerve.

 

[BothWings]

When the rioting, violence and vandalism came to our city I brought some more firepower than my usual single stack 9mm too. Some anti-white threats actually did appear in our company's customer bathroom the day it started.

Our sheriff also started issuing concealed carry permits like candy. Law abiding citizens were gearing up to deal with the mob and the police were behind them.

 

[Faun]

At the 1:22 mark on the video...Colin Noir is a lawyer...

He doesn't sound very optimistic about it.

I expect him to be in violation of this law.

Could be, and they may hang him on that since they are likely going to fail on the murder charges.

Seems pretty clear to me that he was in violation of that law. Not much wiggle room there. "Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor."

They're going to try to get him on the pre-meditated thing, which I believe is likely true, but will be extremely difficult for the prosecutors to actually prove. Personally, I don't see the murder charges sticking.

I don't see how they get Pre-meditated since in each case he was the one being attacked by the mob.....the reporter was an eye witness to the first provocation, and we have video of the mob attacking him while he was on the ground.

Well he went out of his way to defend a car dealership that he had no connection with. And it can at least be debated how much of a threat the first guy was. Initial claims were that he threw a Molotov cocktail, but I don't think that was the case.

I would argue that he was looking for a fight. He wanted an excuse to use deadly force in self-defense. Kind of like the Florida shooter at the convenient store.

But, even though I believe that may very well be true, I don't think it can be proven. So I think they'll try that, but I don't expect it to stick.

You think he was the one looking for a fight? Not the guy who kept coming at him on multiple videos, the guy who kept aggressing towards armed people? And then chased him?
You think the kid was the one who was there looking to start trouble?

Seriously...… wtf is wrong with you?

It's not an either/or.

The ones who got shot were definitely looking for a fight. No question about that.

I've done security work for a large part of my life, nearly all of it if you count the military...… is a bouncer in a nighclub "looking for a fight"? Yes.
Is he ready willing and able to deal with one? Yes.
Is he there to "instigate" one? No.

There is a fundamental difference here between the rioters who showed up intending to do damage and cause carnage, and the folks who showed up ready and willing to prevent them from doing so.

Does the bouncer of the night club travel across state lines to defend a club he has no connection with just for fun?

How does that distinction make a difference?

He shows up heavily armed in a different state to defend a car lot he has no connection to. Looks like an excuse to me. That's my opinion.

You're entitled to your opinion, no matter how wrong-headed it is.

Carry on, and please avoid jury duty...… don't need you sending some innocent to gaol.

Your entitled to your opinions as well.

I was on a jury not long ago, just some minor case. If I were on this jury, I don't think there would be enough evidence to convict him on murder, so I wouldn't. What I think and what I can prove are different, at least for now unless more evidence rolls in.

I expect him just to get 9 months misdemeanor charge.

I disagree. I believe there's enough evidence to convict him. At least for the first killing. You are legally allowed to use lethal force to prevent an imminent attack you reasonably believe will result in death or great bodily harm.

He did that with the first shot he took, which took Rosenbaum down. Rosenbaum was no longer a threat at that point. The next 3 shots were intended to kill him. Including a shot to the back.

 

[progressive hunter]

he worked in the town and the property owner asked them for help,,,

Link please.

I really wish you mother fuckers would educate yourself before commenting,,,

Kyle Rittenhouse Defended Himself, ‘Did Nothing Wrong,' Attorney Says

The attorneys representing Kyle Rittenhouse, the Antioch 17-year-old charged with the shooting deaths of two protesters in Kenosha, released a statement Friday night, saying the teen “did nothing wrong” and acted in self-defense. Earlier in the day, a judge agreed to delay for a month a decision...

www.nbcchicago.com

LOLOL

Wut?? The teen murderer's attorney is claiming is client is innocent? The nerve.

wheres that proof he was convicted of murder???

 

[progressive hunter]

At the 1:22 mark on the video...Colin Noir is a lawyer...

He doesn't sound very optimistic about it.

I expect him to be in violation of this law.

Could be, and they may hang him on that since they are likely going to fail on the murder charges.

Seems pretty clear to me that he was in violation of that law. Not much wiggle room there. "Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor."

They're going to try to get him on the pre-meditated thing, which I believe is likely true, but will be extremely difficult for the prosecutors to actually prove. Personally, I don't see the murder charges sticking.

I don't see how they get Pre-meditated since in each case he was the one being attacked by the mob.....the reporter was an eye witness to the first provocation, and we have video of the mob attacking him while he was on the ground.

Well he went out of his way to defend a car dealership that he had no connection with. And it can at least be debated how much of a threat the first guy was. Initial claims were that he threw a Molotov cocktail, but I don't think that was the case.

I would argue that he was looking for a fight. He wanted an excuse to use deadly force in self-defense. Kind of like the Florida shooter at the convenient store.

But, even though I believe that may very well be true, I don't think it can be proven. So I think they'll try that, but I don't expect it to stick.

You think he was the one looking for a fight? Not the guy who kept coming at him on multiple videos, the guy who kept aggressing towards armed people? And then chased him?
You think the kid was the one who was there looking to start trouble?

Seriously...… wtf is wrong with you?

It's not an either/or.

The ones who got shot were definitely looking for a fight. No question about that.

I've done security work for a large part of my life, nearly all of it if you count the military...… is a bouncer in a nighclub "looking for a fight"? Yes.
Is he ready willing and able to deal with one? Yes.
Is he there to "instigate" one? No.

There is a fundamental difference here between the rioters who showed up intending to do damage and cause carnage, and the folks who showed up ready and willing to prevent them from doing so.

Does the bouncer of the night club travel across state lines to defend a club he has no connection with just for fun?

How does that distinction make a difference?

He shows up heavily armed in a different state to defend a car lot he has no connection to. Looks like an excuse to me. That's my opinion.

You're entitled to your opinion, no matter how wrong-headed it is.

Carry on, and please avoid jury duty...… don't need you sending some innocent to gaol.

Your entitled to your opinions as well.

I was on a jury not long ago, just some minor case. If I were on this jury, I don't think there would be enough evidence to convict him on murder, so I wouldn't. What I think and what I can prove are different, at least for now unless more evidence rolls in.

I expect him just to get 9 months misdemeanor charge.

I disagree. I believe there's enough evidence to convict him. At least for the first killing. You are legally allowed to use lethal force to prevent an imminent attack you reasonably believe will result in death or great bodily harm.

He did that with the first shot he took, which took Rosenbaum down. Rosenbaum was no longer a threat at that point. The next 3 shots were intended to kill him. Including a shot to the back.

its turning out he didnt kill the first guy,,,still waiting for the investigation,,arent you??

 

[elektra]

to bad nothing you just said happened in this case,,,

No? How did a 17 year old end up in the middle of a riot with an AR-15? It just formed around him while he was picking roses?

 

[RodISHI]

Kyle was busy asking if anyone needed medical. The first interviews done prior to the shooting he talks about his medical kit. The rifle was merely a means for him to protect himself against the mob.

 

[Faun]

Slobbers the USMB fucking moron.

It all on video ... Rosenbaum chased across the front of a boarded up auto shop. The teen murderer ran in between 2 cars where Rosenbaum followed and got shot as he got near the teen murderer. It was then the teen murderer shot Rosenbaum and then continued walking between those same two cars, emerging past them and then circling around the car on the left. That shows he was not cornered. He just stopped running.

You can't tell that from the video. It's too shaky and too distant.

LOLOLOL

Fucking moron ... even the charging document that's been released describes what I just described is in the video....

The video shows that as they cross the parking lot, Rosenbaum appears to throw an object at the defendant. The object does not hit the defendant and a second video shows, based on where the object landed, that it was a plastic bag. Rosenbaum appears to be unarmed for the duration of this video. A review of the second video shows that the defendant and Rosenbaum continue to move across the parking lot and approach the front of a black car parked in the lot. A loud bang is heard on the video, then a male shouts, “Fuck you!”, then Rosenbaum appears to continue to approach the defendant and gets in near proximity to the defendant when 4 more loud bangs are heard. Rosenbaum then falls to the ground. The defendant then circles behind the black car and approaches Rosenbaum. Rosenbaum remains on the ground. McGinnis also approaches, removes his shirt, and attempts to render aid to Rosenbaum. The defendant appears to get on his cell phone and place a call. Another male approaches, and the defendant turns and begins to run away from the scene. As the defendant is running away, he can be heard saying on the phone, “I just killed somebody.” ​

​

https://heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Complaint-Criminal_1-Rittenhouse-Kyle-H-2020CF000983-Rittenhouse-Kyle-H._3753097_1.pdf

There is something seriously wrong with your deformed brain that you deny what you see with your own eyes.

You can't see from the video that Kyle shot Rosenbaum. The police description doesn't say that because they couldn't tell either. It says four shots rang out, and then Rosenbaum then falls to the ground. It doesn't say Kyle shot Rosenbaum four times.

Once again, you lie.

Fucking moron, the teen murderer confessed on the spot...

"I just killed somebody." ~ Kyle Rittenhouse​

Killing is one thing. Murder is another.

Shooting someone 4 times, including a shot in the back, is murder, not self defense, fucking moron.

got a link to that court conviction???

Don't need one. Again, what part of "opinion" is beyond your first grade reading level?

 

[progressive hunter]

to bad nothing you just said happened in this case,,,

No? How did a 17 year old end up in the middle of a riot with an AR-15? It just formed around him while he was picking roses?

why did you pull my comment out of context???

 

[XponentialChaos]

I disagree. I believe there's enough evidence to convict him. At least for the first killing. You are legally allowed to use lethal force to prevent an imminent attack you reasonably believe will result in death or great bodily harm.

He did that with the first shot he took, which took Rosenbaum down. Rosenbaum was no longer a threat at that point. The next 3 shots were intended to kill him. Including a shot to the back.

I can see how that will be used in the trial. Personally, I don't think it will work.

We'll see though.

 

[progressive hunter]

Slobbers the USMB fucking moron.

It all on video ... Rosenbaum chased across the front of a boarded up auto shop. The teen murderer ran in between 2 cars where Rosenbaum followed and got shot as he got near the teen murderer. It was then the teen murderer shot Rosenbaum and then continued walking between those same two cars, emerging past them and then circling around the car on the left. That shows he was not cornered. He just stopped running.

You can't tell that from the video. It's too shaky and too distant.

LOLOLOL

Fucking moron ... even the charging document that's been released describes what I just described is in the video....

The video shows that as they cross the parking lot, Rosenbaum appears to throw an object at the defendant. The object does not hit the defendant and a second video shows, based on where the object landed, that it was a plastic bag. Rosenbaum appears to be unarmed for the duration of this video. A review of the second video shows that the defendant and Rosenbaum continue to move across the parking lot and approach the front of a black car parked in the lot. A loud bang is heard on the video, then a male shouts, “Fuck you!”, then Rosenbaum appears to continue to approach the defendant and gets in near proximity to the defendant when 4 more loud bangs are heard. Rosenbaum then falls to the ground. The defendant then circles behind the black car and approaches Rosenbaum. Rosenbaum remains on the ground. McGinnis also approaches, removes his shirt, and attempts to render aid to Rosenbaum. The defendant appears to get on his cell phone and place a call. Another male approaches, and the defendant turns and begins to run away from the scene. As the defendant is running away, he can be heard saying on the phone, “I just killed somebody.” ​

​

https://heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Complaint-Criminal_1-Rittenhouse-Kyle-H-2020CF000983-Rittenhouse-Kyle-H._3753097_1.pdf

There is something seriously wrong with your deformed brain that you deny what you see with your own eyes.

You can't see from the video that Kyle shot Rosenbaum. The police description doesn't say that because they couldn't tell either. It says four shots rang out, and then Rosenbaum then falls to the ground. It doesn't say Kyle shot Rosenbaum four times.

Once again, you lie.

Fucking moron, the teen murderer confessed on the spot...

"I just killed somebody." ~ Kyle Rittenhouse​

Killing is one thing. Murder is another.

Shooting someone 4 times, including a shot in the back, is murder, not self defense, fucking moron.

got a link to that court conviction???

Don't need one. Again, what part of "opinion" is beyond your first grade reading level?

so youre revising your claim from what youve been saying all day,,

 

[progressive hunter]

I disagree. I believe there's enough evidence to convict him. At least for the first killing. You are legally allowed to use lethal force to prevent an imminent attack you reasonably believe will result in death or great bodily harm.

He did that with the first shot he took, which took Rosenbaum down. Rosenbaum was no longer a threat at that point. The next 3 shots were intended to kill him. Including a shot to the back.

I can see how that will be used in the trial. Personally, I don't think it will work.

We'll see though.

if it even goes to trial,,,and if its the case he didnt kill the first guy likes being presented it wont,,

 

[XponentialChaos]

if it even goes to trial,,,and if its the case he didnt kill the first guy likes being presented it wont,,

I would guess that it goes to trial and that he only gets hit with the misdemeanor for being a minor with a gun, resulting in 9 months in prison.

That's my prediction. Book it. I could be wrong obviously. Especially as more evidence rolls in.

 

[dblack]

I disagree. I believe there's enough evidence to convict him. At least for the first killing. You are legally allowed to use lethal force to prevent an imminent attack you reasonably believe will result in death or great bodily harm.

He did that with the first shot he took, which took Rosenbaum down. Rosenbaum was no longer a threat at that point. The next 3 shots were intended to kill him. Including a shot to the back.

Rittenhouse was a pawn. An impressionable nerd who liked the idea of toting an assault rifle and feeling important. The fuckers who should go to jail are the militia goons and the cops who enlisted them to do their dirty work. They knew better and destroyed this kid's life for their political goals.

 

[progressive hunter]

if it even goes to trial,,,and if its the case he didnt kill the first guy likes being presented it wont,,

I would guess that it goes to trial and that he only gets hit with the misdemeanor for being a minor with a gun, resulting in 9 months in prison.

That's my prediction. Book it. I could be wrong obviously. Especially as more evidence rolls in.

it will be a small fine at best,,,cpl hundred bucks,,

 

[dblack]

if it even goes to trial,,,and if its the case he didnt kill the first guy likes being presented it wont,,

I would guess that it goes to trial and that he only gets hit with the misdemeanor for being a minor with a gun, resulting in 9 months in prison.

That's my prediction. Book it. I could be wrong obviously. Especially as more evidence rolls in.

it will be a small fine at best,,,cpl hundred bucks,,

If that happens, I'll join the rioters. You demented assholes need to be put down.

 

[BlueGin]

LOL

Your idea of what men do is sucking cock in prison?? Thst's what that little terrorist is gonna be doing for the rest of his life.

You wish to see a 17 year old boy forced to suck cocks.
There are words I could use to describe what you promote and the loathing I feel, but I cannot use them here.

You must an imbecile if you don't know that's what goes on in prisons.

I'm not the one promoting the rape of children, here.

You are.

More nonsense. He'll be an adult when he goes to prison.

He's not going dear----------

The DA and cops in Illinois are protecting him and the charges are only meant to do so at this point.

secondly, do you really think Trump or the trumpers and soccer moms would allow the beasts to lock up this sweet boy who cleans up graffetti and carries around a med kit and wears patriotic clogs. HUn, the boy signals you goofy anti american communists/anarchists end----he is a rallying point now.

He killed people. And one of those people was a citizen trying to disarm a shooter, someone you normally support.

Creates an ethical dilemma a doesnt it? One person, wh would be considered an shooter shooting in self defense and another citizen trying to disarm an active shooter, gets killed.

If the politics were reversed, you would defend the citizen trying to take down a shooter. At the time no one could he wasnt just some militant nut.

The guy with the gun that had his arm shot up admitted on social media that he was “sorry he didn’t get the chance to kill him“. He was not trying to “ disarm” him. Again you are lying.

 

[BothWings]

to bad nothing you just said happened in this case,,,

No? How did a 17 year old end up in the middle of a riot with an AR-15? It just formed around him while he was picking roses?

why did you pull my comment out of context???

Because they can't win by being straight and to the point without calling people names.

 

[XponentialChaos]

if it even goes to trial,,,and if its the case he didnt kill the first guy likes being presented it wont,,

I would guess that it goes to trial and that he only gets hit with the misdemeanor for being a minor with a gun, resulting in 9 months in prison.

That's my prediction. Book it. I could be wrong obviously. Especially as more evidence rolls in.

it will be a small fine at best,,,cpl hundred bucks,,

Well I think it will be more than that. He's definitely guilty of 948.60. The penalty is up to $10,000 and 9 months in prison. I think he'll be on the upper end of that since I don't expect them to get him on murder.

"(a) Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor."

"(a) For a Class A misdemeanor, a fine not to exceed $10,000 or imprisonment not to exceed 9 months, or both."

Wisconsin Legislature: 948.55

docs.legis.wisconsin.gov

Wisconsin Legislature: 939.51

docs.legis.wisconsin.gov

 

[elektra]

why did you pull my comment out of context???

I did not pull your comment out of context.