1 minute ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

He was a part time lifeguard and he was also talking an online medics course that would enable him to attend university to study to become a full medic 

But he did shoot a real paramedic.

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/581230-paramedic-shot-by-rittenhouse-says-he-thought-teen-was-an-active-shooter

Paramedic shot by Rittenhouse says teen 'was an active shooter'

1 minute ago, Jeffr2 said:

Online medics course.   OMG.  Too funny.  Yeah, a candidate for medical school for sure! ????

What is funny about taking an online medic course ?

High school dropout.  Figures.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/10/us/kyle-rittenhouse-who-is.html

For much of his life, Mr. Rittenhouse had tried on identities infused with bravery and service, while exaggerating his accomplishments and eventually dropping out of high school.

 

He had idolized law enforcement since he was young, joining a cadet program for at-risk youths in his hometown, Antioch, Ill., and later decorating his social media pages with Blue Lives Matter images and praise for former President Donald J. Trump. At the time of the shootings, Mr. Rittenhouse was employed part-time as a lifeguard at a recreational complex in Pleasant Prairie, Wis., which borders Kenosha.

3 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Unarmed, apart from the gun the shot guy had who pointed the gun at Kyles heads , apart from the gun , they were unarmed 

Rittenhouse was standing in a group armed with high powered weapons and pointed the gun at the crowd of demonstrators FIRST. The deceased person with the pistol was more than justified at pulling the gun and pointing it at Rittenhouse, he acted in self defense.

2 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

But he did shoot a real paramedic.

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/581230-paramedic-shot-by-rittenhouse-says-he-thought-teen-was-an-active-shooter

Paramedic shot by Rittenhouse says teen 'was an active shooter'

Yes, Rittenhouse shot the medic because the medic got a gun out and pointed it at Kyles head and Kyle shot the medic because of the gun pointing at his own head, self defense . 

1 minute ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Yes, Rittenhouse shot the medic because the medic got a gun out and pointed it at Kyles head and Kyle shot the medic because of the gun pointing at his own head, self defense . 

So, if he points a gun at another person and that person pulls a gun on him and gets shot that's self defense?

3 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Rittenhouse was standing in a group armed with high powered weapons and pointed the gun at the crowd of demonstrators FIRST. The deceased person with the pistol was more than justified at pulling the gun and pointing it at Rittenhouse, he acted in self defense.

A group of 20-30 guys(with at least one of them carry a gun ) chasing one guy down the street , a guy who was trying to escape and clearly wasn't shooting , the shoot guy cannot claim self defence , as he clearly wasnt defending himself

1 minute ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

A group of 20-30 guys(with at least one of them carry a gun ) chasing one guy down the street , a guy who was trying to escape and clearly wasn't shooting , the shoot guy cannot claim self defence , as he clearly wasnt defending himself

Grosskreutz pointed a gun at Rittenhouse after he had already shot two people. Rittenhouse isn't acting in self defense at that point.

4 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Grosskreutz pointed a gun at Rittenhouse after he had already shot two people. Rittenhouse isn't acting in self defense at that point.

Kyle was acting in self defense at that point , whether you feel Grosskreutz pointing a gun at his head and killing Kyle would have been justified, is a different matter 

Just now, Mac Mickmanus said:

Kyle was acting in self defense at that point , whether you feel Grosskreutz pointing a gun at his head and killing Kyle would have been justified, is a different matter 

A mass shooter is acting in self defense after killing two people because someone tries to stop him with a gun? Is that your position?

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

A mass shooter is acting in self defense after killing two people because someone tries to stop him with a gun? Is that your position?

Two people had already attacked Kyle and he used self defence to protect himself from their attacks , a third person then produced  a gun as an attack weapon and Kyle once again had to defend himself from another  attacker .

   You are trying to portray Kyle as a person walking around shooting innocent people for no reason , not even his defense are trying that angle

1 minute ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Two people had already attacked Kyle and he used self defence to protect himself from their attacks , a third person then produced  a gun as an attack weapon and Kyle once again had to defend himself from another  attacker .

   You are trying to portray Kyle as a person walking around shooting innocent people for no reason , not even his defense are trying that angle

Those people tried to stop Rittenhouse because he pointed his rifle at the crowd. They were entitled to attack him in self defense and in fear of being shot. It is reasonable to presume that somebody who points a high powered rifle at a crowd is going to use it. This occurred BEFORE they chased him and is the reason they chased him.

On 11/14/2021 at 8:31 PM, Captain Monday said:

Acquittal (of any serious charge). People will riot again. Nothing will ever change to the rigged justice system, for generations. The "so called Judge" is a deeply biased racist who for the entire trial has kept his white thumb on the scale. He trolls the country with Lee Greenwood's  "God Bless the USA" Trump rally and supremacist anthem as his ringtone.

 

Yeah, maybe so. CNN's Jim Acosta Says Rittenhouse Judge Is 'Acting Like Archie Bunker'

Too funny.

 

1 hour ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

He was studying to be a medic , had intentions of going to univercity and becoming a medic , so, not a lie

He presented himself as a medic already. That was definitely a lie. 

12 minutes ago, fjb 24 said:

Yeah, maybe so. CNN's Jim Acosta Says Rittenhouse Judge Is 'Acting Like Archie Bunker'

Too funny.

 

In any case he's a bizarre character of questionable competence as a judge. On the other hand he helped make this trial must see t.v.

I wouldn’t want to be on the jury, since it’s a complicated jury.

 

There’s a good chance the jury won’t agree on a verdict. If I were a juror, I would convict on a lesser charge, reckless endangerment. I wouldn’t want to send a message by letting this guy go free.

13 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Those people tried to stop Rittenhouse because he pointed his rifle at the crowd. They were entitled to attack him in self defense and in fear of being shot. It is reasonable to presume that somebody who points a high powered rifle at a crowd is going to use it. This occurred BEFORE they chased him and is the reason they chased him.

It isnt they chased him because he shot the first guy and the mob wanted revenge .

   He didn't point his gun at the mob who chased him , well he only pointed his gun at them to get them to leave him alone and to back off and he fired his gun when they attacked him . 

   Chasing people down the road isnt considered to be self defence , its considered to be an attack 

6 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

It isnt they chased him because he shot the first guy and the mob wanted revenge .

   He didn't point his gun at the mob who chased him , well he only pointed his gun at them to get them to leave him alone and to back off and he fired his gun when they attacked him . 

   Chasing people down the road isnt considered to be self defence , its considered to be an attack 

You are wrong,

Quote

Mr Binger repeatedly showed the jury drone video that he said depicted Mr Rittenhouse pointing the AR-style weapon at demonstrators. "This is the provocation. This is what starts this incident," the prosecutor declared.

 

2 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

You are wrong,

 

That was when the demonstrators were threatening to kill Kyle , they were saying that they were going to kill him and so he shot him dead 

3 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

That was when the demonstrators were threatening to kill Kyle , they were saying that they were going to kill him and so he shot him dead 

Rittenhouse knew the first person was unarmed. He also wasn't within arms length and therefore not capable of grabbing Rittenhouse' gun. Rittenhouse then shot the victim 4 times after he fell to the ground, delivering the kill shot into the victim's back. Is it then any wonder why the others chased him? He was an active shooter. Those who chased him shouted that he was the shooter.

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

delivering the kill shot into the victim's back.

Did the autopsy confirm it was the final shot that killed him?

Just now, BangkokReady said:

Did the autopsy confirm it was the final shot that killed him?

shot in the back with an AR15? What do you think?

 

Quote

Mr Rittenhouse kept firing, delivering what the prosecutor called the "kill shot" to Rosenbaum's back.

https://www.9news.com.au/world/kyle-rittenhouse-provoked-the-bloodshed-in-kenosha/abbea6a1-4aca-4956-bfcd-ddbdc456d03c

43 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Kyle was acting in self defense at that point , whether you feel Grosskreutz pointing a gun at his head and killing Kyle would have been justified, is a different matter 

Stunning how some support a murderer. Doesn't matter the circumstances. He came armed and ready for war. And killed 2 people. Horrible person.

On 11/15/2021 at 5:00 AM, KhunLA said:

Not guilty, as it was self defense.  Obvious from the testimony given.

I thought for a while that there might be merit to the self-defense argument for Rittenhouse, but the summation by the prosecution persuaded me otherwise.  If you are the one who initiates violence you no longer have any basis to claim self-defense.  Rittenhouse initiated violence when he pointed his gun at one of his victims thereby committing felony assault with a deadly weapon.  (Assault means merely menacing.  Causing actual physical injury is the separate crime of battery.)

 

It's probably unlikely that the WI jury will see it that way though.

6 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Rittenhouse knew the first person was unarmed. He also wasn't within arms length and therefore not capable of grabbing Rittenhouse' gun. Rittenhouse then shot the victim 4 times after he fell to the ground, delivering the kill shot into the victim's back. Is it then any wonder why the others chased him? He was an active shooter. Those who chased him shouted that he was the shooter.

What a coward. Shoot someone in the back. One reason we don't want vigilantes like this armed and on the streets. Sad the police didn't unarm them and make them respect the curfew.

4 hours ago, ozimoron said:

They should let an active shooter escape?

They probably should have let the police handle the "active shooter" because it is safer that way. Just ask the two dead and the guy with half his arm missing.

2 minutes ago, fjb 24 said:

They probably should have let the police handle the active shooter because it is safer that way. Just ask the two dead and the guy with half his arm missing.

Maybe they were in immediate fear of their lives? Are you suggesting that people shouldn't react to a person they perceive as about to commit a mass shooting?  Do you then concede that Rittenhouse should have let the police handle the crowd and was therefore a vigilante?

10 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

Stunning how some support a murderer. Doesn't matter the circumstances. He came armed and ready for war. And killed 2 people. Horrible person.

Well, he isnt yet a murderer because the Court haven't yet delivered their verdict , but don't let facts or reality get in the way of your hatred .

   

5 minutes ago, fjb 24 said:

They probably should have let the police handle the "active shooter" because it is safer that way. Just ask the two dead and the guy with half his arm missing.

Agreed. Make the armed vigilantes go home. They shot 3 people. Killing 2.

5 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Maybe they were in immediate fear of their lives? Are you suggesting that people shouldn't react to a person they perceive as about to commit a mass shooting?  Do you then concede that Rittenhouse should have let the police handle the crowd and was therefore a vigilante?

Well, my initial thoughts are that if someone is "fleeing" "running away" from something it's likely they are not in an "active shooter role" and that there are ways and means for the police to handle this. If not, then by all means defend ones self, but not when someone is running away and was not actively shooting or posing a threat as in this case.