U.S. Topic -- Predictions for the Kyle Rittenhouse Trial?

[ozimoron]

Just now, Mac Mickmanus said:

I have knowledge of reading about the case online 

then why won't you provide those links here?

[fjb 24]

3 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

try reading the links I provide

Oh I have, says NOTHING about "changing a story"

You are attempting to portray an alternate scenario which is deceptive.

Try this: "He said that the defense would have approached things differently if it had received the better footage earlier and that it is now asking for “a level, fair playing field.”

 

https://apnews.com/article/kyle-rittenhouse-wisconsin-shootings-kenosha-ac4ff9ba75f00884ce6cd5e5932d5543

Edited November 18, 2021 by fjb 24

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, fjb 24 said:

Oh I have, says NOTHING about "changing a story"

 

[Mac Mickmanus]

2 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

then why won't you provide those links here?

I didn't keep the links 

[BuckAurelius]

1 hour ago, ozimoron said:

Such a friendly person was set upon by a angry mob of killers for no apparent reason or provocation? Nobody believes that except apologists for domestic terrorists and fascist vigilantes.

If you watch the video footage the whole tragedy came about when Rosenbaum started chasing Rittenhouse through a car dealership. It's important to note that for months mainstream media was peddling the outright lie that it was Rittenhouse chasing Rosenbaum, which all video evidence clearly shows is false. At some point a man who was with Rosenbaum fires a warning shot from a pistol right as Rittenhouse gets boxed in a bunch of cars. Now, Rittenhouse had his back turned to his pursuer and so had no way of knowing that the warning shot was just that, a warning shot. When he gets boxed in, and Rosenbaum is within just feet of him, he turns and fires on Rosenbaum several times. Everybody then scatters. Rittenhouse checks on the condition of Rosenbaum and then makes a call from his cellphone (I presume to 911?). He lingers for a while. Then the mob pursuit begins with the mob chanting "get his @ss". The rest is more clearly on video and most people have seen it. 

 

Now, why Rosenbaum was chasing Rittenhouse in the first place is hard to say. People are claiming, with zero credible evidence, that it was due to Rittenhouse pointing his gun at protesters. Again, not one witness has testified to that. Not one. They only have a garbage drone capture to support this. Prior to this chase, witnesses have testified that Rosenbaum threatened Rittenhouse, that "If I see you again, you're dead," or something to that effect. This Rosenbaum just got out of a mental hospital. Video demonstrates that he was behaving in an extremely aggressive manner that night. This is not a man who needs a good reason to hurt people. He's a serial child rapist. 

 

So there you have your reason as to why an angry mob was chasing Rittenhouse down the street. It wasn't for "no reason." I was, I think, a tragic case of mistaken presumption on the part of his pursuers, coupled with a desire for vengeance and mob-mentality. 

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

I didn't keep the links 

the dog ate my homework

[ozimoron]

Just now, BuckAurelius said:

If you watch the video footage the whole tragedy came about when Rosenbaum started chasing Rittenhouse through a car dealership. It's important to note that for months mainstream media was peddling the outright lie that it was Rittenhouse chasing Rosenbaum, which all video evidence clearly shows is false.

 

Please provide a plausible explanation as to why Rosenbaum started chasing Rittenhouse, with evidence.

[Mac Mickmanus]

6 minutes ago, BuckAurelius said:

If you watch the video footage the whole tragedy came about when Rosenbaum started chasing Rittenhouse through a car dealership. It's important to note that for months mainstream media was peddling the outright lie that it was Rittenhouse chasing Rosenbaum, which all video evidence clearly shows is false. At some point a man who was with Rosenbaum fires a warning shot from a pistol right as Rittenhouse gets boxed in a bunch of cars. Now, Rittenhouse had his back turned to his pursuer and so had no way of knowing that the warning shot was just that, a warning shot. When he gets boxed in, and Rosenbaum is within just feet of him, he turns and fires on Rosenbaum several times. Everybody then scatters. Rittenhouse checks on the condition of Rosenbaum and then makes a call from his cellphone (I presume to 911?). He lingers for a while. Then the mob pursuit begins with the mob chanting "get his @ss". The rest is more clearly on video and most people have seen it. 

 

Now, why Rosenbaum was chasing Rittenhouse in the first place is hard to say. People are claiming, with zero credible evidence, that it was due to Rittenhouse pointing his gun at protesters. Again, not one witness has testified to that. Not one. They only have a garbage drone capture to support this. Prior to this chase, witnesses have testified that Rosenbaum threatened Rittenhouse, that "If I see you again, you're dead," or something to that effect. This Rosenbaum just got out of a mental hospital. Video demonstrates that he was behaving in an extremely aggressive manner that night. This is not a man who needs a good reason to hurt people. He's a serial child rapist. 

 

So there you have your reason as to why an angry mob was chasing Rittenhouse down the street. It wasn't for "no reason." I was, I think, a tragic case of mistaken presumption on the part of his pursuers, coupled with a desire for vengeance and mob-mentality. 

Also , Rosenbaum had just that day been released from a mental hospital after a failed suicide attempt , it could be that possibly Rosenbaum wanted to die and that he was deliberately trying to get someone to shoot him .

[ozimoron]

Just now, Mac Mickmanus said:

Also , Rosenbaum had just that day been released from a mental hospital after a failed suicide attempt , it could be that possibly Rosenbaum wanted to die and that he was deliberately trying to get someone to shoot him .

unsubstantiated speculation not even proposed by the defense that I'm aware of.

[Mac Mickmanus]

2 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

unsubstantiated speculation not even proposed by the defense that I'm aware of.

That came from Rosenbaums girlfriend , she had no idea why he went to the area that day , because he didnt usually get involved in demonstrations or protests .

  He went straight from the mental hospital to the protests for no apparent reason 

Edited November 18, 2021 by Mac Mickmanus

[connda]

Prediction? 

Riots throughout the US condoned by the US MSM as well as the US government. 
Burn Baby Burn!

The verdict?  Irrelevant.

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

That came from Rosenbaums girlfriend , she had no idea why he went to the area that day , because he didnt usually get involved in demonstrations or protests .

  He went straight from the mental hospital to the protests for no apparent reason 

Rosenbaum had never attended a protest, and seemed caught up in this one almost by accident. He carried a clear plastic bag containing a deodorant stick, underwear and socks that the hospital had given him upon discharge following his suicide attempt. In the seconds before he was shot, Rosenbaum threw the plastic bag at Rittenhouse and chased him behind some parked cars.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/10/03/kenosha-shooting-victims/

[ozimoron]

3 minutes ago, BuckAurelius said:

Didn't I just do that? Or did I just waste my time writing that long detailed post? Let me give you the cliff notes: 1. Rosenbaum was a violent criminal of the worst sort and was a repeat offender prone to violent attacks especially on children. This is not in dispute. 2. Witnesses testified that he had already made a death threat against Rittenhouse. This is part of court record. 3. Video of him has him screaming the N-word at people and asking to be shot. Not exactly the behavior of a man in full possession of his wits or his obvious anger-management problem. Does Rittenhouse have a similar criminal history. Not at all. Is there any video footage showing Rittenhouse behaving in an aggressive manner prior to the actual shooting? Nope. Contrast their respective behaviors prior to the shooting and you might agree it's striking. You have a dopy, moon-eyed kid on the one hand, and a seething red-faced psycho on other. I wonder which one was most likely the aggressor. Hmm. . . 

no, far from it. You gave a speculative story which not even the defense put forward and no evidence to substantiate it. The question is how did it all start? Answer, Rittenhouse pointed a gun at the demonstrators as shown in the video. I don't want to know about the third minute, I want to know about the first minute, or less.

Edited November 18, 2021 by ozimoron

[fjb 24]

There is trial testimony given by an eyewitness named Drew Hernandez detailing this Rosenbaum's aggression.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/rittenhouse-trial-never-before-seen-fbi-video-shows-key-moments-before-shooting

[ozimoron]

Just now, fjb 24 said:

There is trial testimony given by an eyewitness named Drew Hernandez detailing this Rosenbaum's aggression.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/rittenhouse-trial-never-before-seen-fbi-video-shows-key-moments-before-shooting

The aggression was a response to provocation. It was not random.

[BuckAurelius]

Just now, ozimoron said:

no, far from it. You gave a speculative story which not even the defense put forward and no evidence to substantiate it.

The defense was barred from exposing Rosenbaum's wonderful history as a serial child rapist. Also barred from exposing his mental issues. How is witness testimony "speculative"? It's part of court record (i.e., "evidence"). As is the video evidence showing Rosenbaum behaving like a lunatic prior to the shooting. I haven't "speculated" any of this. You just don't want to accept it. 

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, BuckAurelius said:

The defense was barred from exposing Rosenbaum's wonderful history as a serial child rapist. Also barred from exposing his mental issues. How is witness testimony "speculative"? It's part of court record (i.e., "evidence"). As is the video evidence showing Rosenbaum behaving like a lunatic prior to the shooting. I haven't "speculated" any of this. You just don't want to accept it. 

The video shows Rittenhouse pointing his gun at demonstrators. Presumably that triggered Rosenbaum who would have had good reason to believe he was about to be shot. Rosenbaum's history was clearly irrelevant to those first seconds.

Edited November 18, 2021 by ozimoron

[fjb 24]

COUNT 5: ATTEMPTED FIRST-DEGREE INTENTIONAL HOMICIDE, USE OF A DANGEROUS WEAPON

This is the charge for Rittenhouse shooting Gaige Grosskreutz in the arm seconds after he shot Huber, and as Grosskreutz came toward him holding a pistol. Grosskreutz survived. Video shows Rittenhouse pointing his gun at Grosskreutz and firing a single round.

The charge carries a maximum sentence of 60 years. The weapons modifier would add up to five more years.

The jury has also been given the option of considering second-degree attempted intentional homicide and first-degree reckless endangerment charges.

There should be an acquittal on this charge and should not have been filed by the state.

Edited November 18, 2021 by fjb 24

[fjb 24]

5 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

video shows Rittenhouse pointing his gun at demonstrators

Where, show us this video. Only times he only points his weapon is when he discharged it.

[BuckAurelius]

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

The video shows Rittenhouse pointing his gun at demonstrators. Presumably that triggered Rosenbaum who would have had good reason to believe he was about to be shot. Rosenbaum's history was clearly irrelevant to those first seconds.

What video is that? I think I know which one you're referring to--which I've already addressed in other posts--but can you post a link? Have you actually watched it yourself? Or are you just getting summaries of it from certain websites? 

 

So let me get this logic straight: Rosenbaum, believing that he had a "good reason to believe he was about to be shot," decides to chase down the guy with the AR-15, and then gets shot. A normal person would have run away from the guy with the gun, if he didn't want to be shot, not try to chase him down. Clearly, Rosenbaum's problem was that he didn't fear getting shot enough. 

[Mac Mickmanus]

7 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

The video shows Rittenhouse pointing his gun at demonstrators. 

Can you post that video up ?

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, fjb 24 said:

Where, show us this video. Only times he only points his weapon is when he discharged it.The defense

The defense knows it exists. They know what it shows. They would have "changed their story" if they had seen the better version of it earlier they said. The defense has not disputed that it shows Rittenhouse pointing his gun at the demonstrators.

[fjb 24]

This rioter pointed a glock at KR.

https://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/national-international/shooting-victim-says-he-was-pointing-his-gun-at-rittenhouse/3038852/

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, BuckAurelius said:

What video is that? I think I know which one you're referring to--which I've already addressed in other posts--but can you post a link? Have you actually watched it yourself? Or are you just getting summaries of it from certain websites? 

 

So let me get this logic straight: Rosenbaum, believing that he had a "good reason to believe he was about to be shot," decides to chase down the guy with the AR-15, and then gets shot. A normal person would have run away from the guy with the gun, if he didn't want to be shot, not try to chase him down. Clearly, Rosenbaum's problem was that he didn't fear getting shot enough. 

Again, if the defense isn't contesting it why should I? Or you?

[ozimoron]

Just now, fjb 24 said:

This rioter pointed a glock at KR.

https://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/national-international/shooting-victim-says-he-was-pointing-his-gun-at-rittenhouse/3038852/

yeah, why?

[fjb 24]

Just now, ozimoron said:

The defense knows it exists. They know what it shows. They would have "changed their story" if they had seen the better version of it earlier they said. The defense has not disputed that it shows Rittenhouse pointing his gun at the demonstrators.

555, ok

[BuckAurelius]

Just now, ozimoron said:

Again, if the defense isn't contesting it why should I? Or you?

Ah, so you haven't actually seen the video yourself, have you? I suspected as much. 

[ozimoron]

Just now, BuckAurelius said:

Ah, so you haven't actually seen the video yourself, have you? I suspected as much. 

So the defense believes it but you don't?

[BuckAurelius]

Just now, ozimoron said:

So the defense believes it but you don't?

Are you suggesting that the defense believes this video shows what the prosecution is claiming it shows? I.e., that Rittenhouse pointed his gun at demonstrators? They do not, I assure you. 

[Mac Mickmanus]

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

The defense knows it exists. They know what it shows. They would have "changed their story" if they had seen the better version of it earlier they said. The defense has not disputed that it shows Rittenhouse pointing his gun at the demonstrators.

No, you are giving a false story , what the defence stated is that they would have approached their defence differently if they had the full video , they didn't say that they would have *changed their story*.

   They would have used the video as exhibit number 1 to prove Kyles innocence .

   You are trying to make it appear that the defrence would have lied and changed their story .

  What they actually stated is that they would have approached their defence in a different manner .