Rittenhouse walks!

This is going to get ‘interesting’
Maybe Biden should start ‘Packing’ the Supreme Court benches soon.
 
It seems there are a lot of people on this thread with little or no knowledge of the case who have nevertheless concluded that there has been a travesty of justice. There hasn't, Rittenhouse was innocent and rightly acquitted.

Whether the same would have happened had Rittenhouse been black is a separate matter which needs addressing but has nothing to do with this verdict.
 

GazC_MFC said:
You can see why he got off, and it does seem he was acting in self defence under American law.
Click to expand...
I haven't seen the footage, but if someone pulls a gun on you (which is what I read happened) and you shoot him, then you could claim self defence anywhere, not just in the US.
 
Soutra said:


I haven't seen the footage, but if someone pulls a gun on you (which is what I read happened) and you shoot him, then you could claim self defence anywhere, not just in the US.
Click to expand...
Understand, but why was he out on the street with a gun in the first place?
 
Soutra said:


I haven't seen the footage, but if someone pulls a gun on you (which is what I read happened) and you shoot him, then you could claim self defence anywhere, not just in the US.
Click to expand...
I suppose you wouldn’t be carry a gun around with at a protest in the U.K.
 
BlindBoyGrunt said:
It seems there are a lot of people on this thread with little or no knowledge of the case who have nevertheless concluded that there has been a travesty of justice. There hasn't, Rittenhouse was innocent and rightly acquitted.

Whether the same would have happened had Rittenhouse been black is a separate matter which needs addressing but has nothing to do with this verdict.
Click to expand...
You must have followed the trial non-stop to reach that conclusion.
 
NorthumberlandBoro said:
Just watched coverage of the case on BBC news. No mention of the gun used by one of the assailants amongst other omissions. Not great reporting and little wonder many have drawn the wrong conclusions.
Click to expand...
Yep, also heard on 5 live that Trump had hailed him a hero.
And the protest were just civil unrest due to police brutality.

Never belive a word the BBC says.
 
BlindBoyGrunt said:
Can you tell me where the travesty of justice lies in this case?
Click to expand...
Who mentioned travesty of justice, it wasn't me?

I was merely stating that you must have invested a lot of your time in following the trial to state that other posters don't know what they're talking about 🤔
 
Br14 pretty much summed it up in his post. So yeah, I think its fair to say some posters don't know what they're talking about judging by their responses. Its almost as if they got their opinions of the guy, and what happened, straight from the mainstream media (surely not!).
 
br14 said:
Didn't anyone actually watch the trial overview? Here's what came out in court.

Rittenhouse was one of around 100 people that were asked to protect businesses after days of looting and burning, because the police failed to protect the streets. While Rittenhouse is not from Kenosha, his father does live in the city and evidently many of Rittenhouse's friends also live there. Rumour has it that the police were told to stand down by the Mayor, who was up for re-election. Rittenhouse was given the rifle while in Kenosha. In Wisconsin it is legal for a 17 year old to carry a long gun. Outside of cities rifles are standard in most rural areas in North America - where hunting as family groups is popular and guns are sometimes necessary to kill rabid coyotes for example.

Rittenhouse was somehow separated from his friends, and a convicted 5 times paedophile named Joseph Rosenbaum, a biopolar sufferer who had been released from a psychiatric institution the week earlier but wasn't taking his meds, attacked Rittenhouse shouting that he would kill him. Not that it's relevant but Rosenbaum forced one child to perform oral acts. After Rosenbaum attempted to grab Rittenhouse's gun the 17 year old fired three shots from his rifle killing Rosenbaum.

At this Rittenhouse was chased down the street by a mob of other people. One of these people caught Rittenhouse and started beating him, at which point he fired two more shots but hit no one. A moment later Rittenhouse is attacked by Anthony Huber and beaten over the head with a skateboard. In response Rittenhouse fired a single shot killing Anthony Huber. Huber also had a record of violence (he attacked his own grandmother).

Finally a fourth person, Gaige Grosskreutz, attacks Rittenhouse and lunges toward him pointing a pistol at him that Grosskreutz had concealed. Rittenhouse shot and wounded Grosskreutz, who also has a criminal record. Rittenhouse was not firing shots indiscriminately according to the evidence from witnesses.

As soon as he'd managed to clear the mob, Rittenhouse ran towards the police and handed himself in.

You can argue that Rittenhouse was an idiot for being present on the streets with a rifle. But there were many people on the streets with guns during that period. (In fact concealed carry laws apply in a number of states so you never know who has a gun). What is undeniable from the evidence is that Rittenhouse was attacked without provocation. There is little doubt he would have died or have been severely injured had he not opened fire, and a jury of 12 of his peers - not necessarily predisposed towards Rittenhouse - saw the evidence and acquitted.

You would know almost nothing of the above if you had only watched CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS or NBC. MSNBC had Rittenhouse as a White Supremacist (there's zero evidence for this) who killed dozens of black Americans (none of the victims was black).
Click to expand...
Great Post @br14
 
br14 said:
Didn't anyone actually watch the trial overview? Here's what came out in court.

Rittenhouse was one of around 100 people that were asked to protect businesses after days of looting and burning, because the police failed to protect the streets. While Rittenhouse is not from Kenosha, his father does live in the city and evidently many of Rittenhouse's friends also live there. Rumour has it that the police were told to stand down by the Mayor, who was up for re-election. Rittenhouse was given the rifle while in Kenosha. In Wisconsin it is legal for a 17 year old to carry a long gun. Outside of cities rifles are standard in most rural areas in North America - where hunting as family groups is popular and guns are sometimes necessary to kill rabid coyotes for example.

Rittenhouse was somehow separated from his friends, and a convicted 5 times paedophile named Joseph Rosenbaum, a biopolar sufferer who had been released from a psychiatric institution the week earlier but wasn't taking his meds, attacked Rittenhouse shouting that he would kill him. Not that it's relevant but Rosenbaum forced one child to perform oral acts. After Rosenbaum attempted to grab Rittenhouse's gun the 17 year old fired three shots from his rifle killing Rosenbaum.

At this Rittenhouse was chased down the street by a mob of other people. One of these people caught Rittenhouse and started beating him, at which point he fired two more shots but hit no one. A moment later Rittenhouse is attacked by Anthony Huber and beaten over the head with a skateboard. In response Rittenhouse fired a single shot killing Anthony Huber. Huber also had a record of violence (he attacked his own grandmother).

Finally a fourth person, Gaige Grosskreutz, attacks Rittenhouse and lunges toward him pointing a pistol at him that Grosskreutz had concealed. Rittenhouse shot and wounded Grosskreutz, who also has a criminal record. Rittenhouse was not firing shots indiscriminately according to the evidence from witnesses.

As soon as he'd managed to clear the mob, Rittenhouse ran towards the police and handed himself in.

You can argue that Rittenhouse was an idiot for being present on the streets with a rifle. But there were many people on the streets with guns during that period. (In fact concealed carry laws apply in a number of states so you never know who has a gun). What is undeniable from the evidence is that Rittenhouse was attacked without provocation. There is little doubt he would have died or have been severely injured had he not opened fire, and a jury of 12 of his peers - not necessarily predisposed towards Rittenhouse - saw the evidence and acquitted.

You would know almost nothing of the above if you had only watched CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS or NBC. MSNBC had Rittenhouse as a White Supremacist (there's zero evidence for this) who killed dozens of black Americans (none of the victims was black).
Click to expand...
Everything you said is true, however, the narrative he was there only to protect property is debatable. The details about how he stood over his first victim after killing him and never called for an ambulance or shouted for first aid, (I think he called his friend I believe but my memory is not firm on that) I also think is significant in that. He also had a history of violence there was a video of him beating up a (maybe a girl again my memory is a little hazy on the detail) just a few weeks prior to the shootings is significant to that.

I believe he went there in a misguided sense of patriotism to play soldier and gets what he wanted. Is he innocent, yes, I think it's clear he acted in self-defence in each of the respective cases. Was this what he wanted though? Did he go there for violence and did his very presence, an armed civilian with a rifle playing soldier down the street provoke people and make himself a target for this violence to an extent also? I believe yes, I think he in some regards lived out a fantasy that ended up being too real and too scary.

The boy sobbing in court yesterday though is going to get used and abused by the right in America. When it is all said and done he will be forgotten about by the GOP and left broken but he will get a year as a pseudo- hero for the alt-right, maybe even an internship with alleged trafficker Matt Gaetz. After that, though he will be hated by some and forgotten about by the rest, I don't envy his future and despite his not guilty verdict, I think what's ahead will be worse than any prison sentence he could have faced. I pity him in many ways if I am honest, it is horrific that a 17-year-old child life has an environment that has allowed him to act in this way and for these events to occur. America is broken.
 
Duffman said:
Sometimes I read threads on here and think - I don’t know enough about this to add a informed comment. This is one of them for me.
Click to expand...
Welcome to the internet, I regret to inform you that you are using it wrong.............

😜
 
Last edited:
WeeGord said:
Speaking of facts, aren’t you much more likely to be killed by a white police officer if you’re black in the US?
Click to expand...

But black peoples in USA make up 13% of the population but around 36% of the crimes committed, So per person are more likely to have run in’s with the law too.

I believe when you add up the statistics and ratio’s, there isn’t actually huge disparity between race and killed at the hands of police.

But this is the problem, People will cherry pick certain statistics and not actually look up the overall picture. People are looking at it per population, but you also have to look at it per crimes committed because the police aren’t doing drive-by shootings, They are at a crime scene.

How did it get on to race anyway? - Rittenhouse a white kid shot 3 white men in self defence and walked free, as he should because of their laws. I’m sure plenty of black and white people have probably been convicted under these circumstances and probably wrongly, according to the law.
 
BoroFur said:
Who mentioned travesty of justice, it wasn't me?

I was merely stating that you must have invested a lot of your time in following the trial to state that other posters don't know what they're talking about 🤔
Click to expand...
You may not have mentioned travesty of justice but there are some on this thread who's knee jerk reaction to the verdict is surprise. There are others who - using evidence that was actually presented in court - have concluded that of the charges against Rittenhouse, he was rightly cleared, and I take the latter view.
 
HiredGun123 said:
But black peoples in USA make up 13% of the population but around 36% of the crimes committed, So per person are more likely to have run in’s with the law too.

I believe when you add up the statistics and ratio’s, there isn’t actually huge disparity between race and killed at the hands of police.

But this is the problem, People will cherry pick certain statistics and not actually look up the overall picture.
Click to expand...
The picture is wider than this, institutional race bias in who the police target and how they treat white and black suspects on the street and in the courts is a huge factor in the prison population's apparent indication crime is committed more often by black people in America.

For context, a woman who was unsure if she was eligible to vote (recently paroled prisoner) went to the polling station and was told by the helper at the poll station that she should post a provisional ballot that way if she was not eligible to vote it wouldn't be counted. The vote was never counted and despite only doing what she was advised this woman was taken to court and sentenced to four years in prison for voter fraud. She was black.

A man recently used (either his dead mother of wife's) identity to cast 2 votes for Trump in the last election and was found guilty in court. He tried to use this prior to it being known it was him who cast the vote to tell the press that this was evidence of the so-called 'mas voter fraud' going on in America. The judge gave him a fine and some community service. He was white.

Statistics do not reliably tell you crime rates amongst various ethnicities and cultural groups in America, it shows you the bias and racism in America's institutions.
 
BlindBoyGrunt said:
You may not have mentioned travesty of justice but there are some on this thread who's knee jerk reaction to the verdict is surprise. There are others who - using evidence that was actually presented in court - have concluded that of the charges against Rittenhouse, he was rightly cleared, and I take the latter view.
Click to expand...
Never mind 'may not', I did not.
 
BoroFur said:
Never mind 'may not', I did not.
Click to expand...
But nobody accused you of introducing the term 'travesty of justice' to the discussion. That was me. The point I was making was that although Rittenhouse was innocent of the charges that the court were asked to consider, people seem to think that he has somehow gotten off lightly and that justice has somehow not been served.

You then challenged my conclusion that there was no travesty of justice.
 
BlindBoyGrunt said:
But nobody accused you of introducing the term 'travesty of justice' to the discussion. That was me. The point I was making was that although Rittenhouse was innocent of the charges that the court were asked to consider, people seem to think that he has somehow gotten off lightly and that justice has somehow not been served.

You then challenged my conclusion that there was no travesty of justice.
Click to expand...
I think you're getting yourself tied up in knots here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top