A tactical and legal analysis of the Kenosha shootings

a reply to: alldaylong

What's to stop a violent pedo rapist from using the gun he took on Rittenhouse?

If I were in his position I would shoot the guy too. Never give up control of your weapon to the guy trying to hurt you.

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: ontogeny55

the first felon he shot was trying to take the firearm from him. assault

Are you on another planet?

If someone was approaching me with a firearm, the first thing i would try and do was take the firearm from them. That is not " assault " as you call it, it is infact a case of one trying to protect themselves.

What a load of bollocks you speak.

all the remainder of GSW were not life threatening.

So that excuses Rittenhouse from actual hitting him with bullets.

Where are you people from?

Lol did you watch the video they were chasing Kyle victim # 1 threw something at him and continued to chase him around this time there were gunshots, not Kyle's, they ended up between two cars so you can't see what happened, but the witness said victim# 1 grabbed for the AR15 and that's when he got shot. If victim#1 didn't chase Kyle he would be alive today again victim#1 was the one who earlier was extremely pissed off ranting shoot me mother fu---- over and over. this was the account in the OP. Before I read this I was basically against the kid too. Read it all watch the videos victim# 1 was self-defense of a 17-year-old kid being chased by a pissed-off 26-year-old ex-con.

a reply to: alldaylong

Kyle was not approaching the first deceased felon with a firearm, Kyle was retreating.

the first deceased felon grabbed Kyles firearm twice.

The kill shot was from the back side of the first deceased felon, somewhat indicating that someone was behind the first deceased felon firing at Kyle. Kyles four rounds that hit the first deceased felon were all non life threatening.
The kill shot to the first deceased felon was from the rear.

BTW being hit in the liver is a painful and slow way to become room temperature.

originally posted by: knowledge4truth

originally posted by: jacobe001

originally posted by: Nyiah

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: JAGStorm

I think it’s more your belief that a dude being chased by an armed mob doesn’t have a right to defend himself when the mob catches him because he ignored a curfew order and had a gun he wasn’t supposed to have that might be what’s being called disgusting.

Could be wrong though.

And Bingo was his name-o. I find it disgusting that a FELON has more of a right to a weapon and a right to defend himself in her eyes, than Kyle does.

That is some Grade A Kool-Aid Hypocrisy right there, and it's not remotely defensible. WTF.

What is really going to blow your mind is how the cops at these dangerous and violent riots let armed men walk right past them, Both Antifa and Militia with guns out in the open.

How come Jacob Blake was gunned down for a possible weapon while the rioters walk right past the cops with guns?

Because Jacob Blake threatened arresting officers with said weapon, and went to get said weapon.

Funny how this repeated behavior keeps ending in the same result, doesn't it?

So the Antifa that are armed and causing riots are not a threat?

Not guilty

Here's some points:

He went to protect a building, don't know what building it is yet. Seems like he was doing a lot of walking around in the streets instead. Is there a building owner that hired him for armed security? Or can you legally volunteer at 17 to do that?

He was also offering medical services, not wearing a mask. Does he have CPR training? Is he certified in anything medical? Why was he not wearing his mask?

He shot someone, and fled the scene, yet he was offering medical services? Why did he run and not help the first person he shot?

In the moments before killing Anthony Huber, why did Kyle not lift up his hands like he eventually did? Why did he not fire a warning shot in the air?

a reply to: Shamrock6

Trump should pin a medal on the kid for taking out these POS ………..

originally posted by: odzeandennz
I’d say case closed then.

Next event. Same analysis hopefully.

Odd no other armed militia opened fire in the midst of all this.

Since nothing will stick, he should make another guest appearance in neighboring states where there’s unrest

Naw
He should market cardboard cutouts for security

They would be blm/antifa decoys

originally posted by: Shamrock6
A kind soul has written a thorough, detailed examination and analysis of the Kenosha shootings involving Kyle Rittenhouse. The author has done quite a bit of fact checking and makes it clear throughout the article when there are areas he/she is unsure or unclear of the exact fact in question. I really don’t have much to add to the article but am happy to discuss if anybody cares to, mostly I just wanted to share the information. Several videos have been compiled, and are slowed down, split up, etc. to illustrate certain points but do not appear to be otherwise edited. Furthermore, any video that is slowed down or snipped is also shown at regular speed and in its entirety at some point in the article. The author was able to obtain original HD video for most of the videos, as opposed to using recordings of live streams or recordings of recordings.

Bottom line: first degree intentional homicide is dead in the water and this kid is going to walk on everything but a possible misdemeanor weapons charge. Fortunately, from what I’ve seen on social media, several pro-2A lawyers have already offered their services to him.

Lin k

This is an excruciatingly sloppy, biased analysis of the Kenosha murders, by someone exercising little common sense, or understanding of how solid legal defenses are built.

EXTREMELY hard to believe the author is a lawyer or practices criminal defense. Perhaps he's a real estate lawyer?

There is not a SINGLE reasonable argument for self defense, in the murder of Rosenbaum.

Having a plastic bag with a water bottle hurled toward you does not constitute imminent death or great bodily harm.

Having an unarmed individual run toward you in the midst of a riot does NOT constitute imminent death or great bodily harm.

MOST IMPORTANTLY:

Rittenhouse was NEVER cornered (a requirement for self defense killings), but was rather married to defending the car lot, and had plenty of avenues to escape, which HE WOULD HAVE, had he ACTUALLY been under threat of imminent death or great bodily harm by the so-called mob.

Instead he circles back around, surveys his work, and calls a friend to brag.

Rittenhouse as well, makes a huge mistake by admitting to putting himself "in harm's way."

This statement in itself COMPLETELY NULLIFIES any argument for self-defense, as in legitimate self defense, one must instead PROVE the killer was first doing everything he possibly could to take himself OUT of harm's way.

In fact going on to the second and third shootings, had the victims both disarmed and killed Rittenhouse, THEY would have in fact had a legitimate self defense argument with Kyle, the active shooter presenting a CLEAR CASE of threat of imminent death or great bodily harm to others.


This is simply more twisted CLOWN WORLD logic by the right wing contingent.

Kyle Rittenhouse was a typical spree shooter/mass murderer. A gun obsessed, law enforcement obsessed loner who was ruthlessly bullied throughout his youth.

FIRST DEGREE MURDER.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
From the probable cause filing, the moments leading up to the first shooting:

McGinnis stated that as the defendant was walking Rosenbaum was trying to get closer to the defendant. When Rosenbaum advanced, the defendant did a “juke” move and started running. McGinnis stated that there were other people that were moving very quickly. McGinnis stated that they were moving towards the defendant. McGinnis said that according to what he saw the defendant was trying to evade these individuals.

This was, of course, after Kyle had been asking the “protestors” if any of them needed medical attention. For a guy who’s motive for being there was to kill protestors, seems an odd thing to ask.

What's even odder?

For an EMT to shoot someone, and then instead of administering aid, stand there while the person dies, and call a friend to brag.

Clown world.

originally posted by: Muninn
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

I do believe that he will beat most of the charges but he will be found guilty of a class A misdemeanor which comes with a 9 month sentence and up to 10000 dollar fine.

LOL. The kids on video murdering several unarmed people. You think he's going to walk because your favorite YouTuber told you so?

HAHAHAHA

a reply to: Ththema
Haha
You are an idiot
The kid called the cops

originally posted by: projectvxn

What's to stop a violent pedo rapist from using the gun he took on Rittenhouse?

If I were in his position I would shoot the guy too. Never give up control of your weapon to the guy trying to hurt you.

One can safely assume that if a person is trying to take your gun they are doing so to either use it back on you or put you in a positions that they can hurt you at a minimum.

originally posted by: ontogeny55
a reply to: dragonridr

His carrying a firearm did not cause two felons to die.
The felons aggressive assaults caused Kyle to use defensive fire to protect his life and health.

THIS! An incredibly good point! If Rosenbaum the pedo had stopped chasing him things would have ended very different but just like in other videos he singles out Rittenhouse because he is smaller and wanted to get his weapon.

A weapon strapped to Rittenhouse and would be near impossible to just strip off of him...

a reply to: Ththema

shame multiple lawyers have already commented (in the real world) and say you are wrong, unless you have some magical crystal ball that provides a lot more information.

a reply to: Ththema

Rittenhouse was NEVER cornered (a requirement for self defense killings), but was rather married to defending the car lot, and had plenty of avenues to escape, which HE WOULD HAVE, had he ACTUALLY been under threat of imminent death or great bodily harm by the so-called mob.

No, it’s not.

If an actor intentionally used force that was intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm, the court may not consider whether the actor had an opportunity to flee or retreat before he or she used force and shall presume that the actor reasonably believed that the force was necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself if the actor makes such a claim under sub. (1) and either of the following applies:

And:

A person who engages in unlawful conduct of a type likely to provoke others to attack him or her and thereby does provoke an attack is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense against such attack, except when the attack which ensues is of a type causing the person engaging in the unlawful conduct to reasonably believe that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. In such a case, the person engaging in the unlawful conduct is privileged to act in self-defense, but the person is not privileged to resort to the use of force intended or likely to cause death to the person's assailant unless the person reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm at the hands of his or her assailant.

So you are categorically, unequivocally, inarguably flat out wrong. But please do rant some more about “sloppy, biased analysis.”

a reply to: shooterbrody

The affidavit says he called a friend. Aside from that, the rest is made up.

originally posted by: Nyiah
a reply to: dragonridr
No, evidence patently says otherwise. He MAY end up with a weapons misdemeanor and that's IT.
You clearly are not bothering to view a damn thing from any legal perspectives yourself and are running on your feelz. Your feelz don't make the laws. If this is how you're going to debate, you're not worth debating with in the first place.

originally posted by: SecretKnowledge
Would everyone here feel the same way if the kid was black?

Shooting four people

What if the kid was black, theres no way he would get the same treatment as this white kid.

And theres the problem

You're damn right I'd feel the same way if he'd been black. Clearly provable self defense is clearly provable self defense. Only a racist jackass would fathom suggesting it's a race privilege to protect ones own life. Enough, GTFOOH.

LOL. Most hilarious post of the day!

So a black kid shows up at a Trump rally with a Glock 9mm. He's pointing it at random people at the rally. He's got a BLM shirt and his pants at his knees.

He says he's there to keep the Trumpers off the residents private property.

White guy in a MAGA hat throws a water bottle at him, then run towards him unarmed.

Blam! Blam! Blam! Blam!

Justified homicide!

Then the crowd yells, "that guy just killed someone!" Several former military men run toward him to disarm him. One of them throws a bike at him.

That's deadly force!

He shoots the veteran in the heart killing him instantly. That bike could have killed him for sure! Thank GOD he shot that veteran in time!

Then he gets thrown in jail.

And you're telling us that the right-wing contingent is setting up a GoFundMe to bail him out?


Hahahahahahahahahaha

a reply to: Ththema

from the eye witness that rendered aid to old pedo pervert baldy the first one shot. you do know a reporter that was walking with rittenhouse.

Detective Cepress interviews McGinnis and indicates the following: Before the shooting, McGinnis was interviewing the defendant. The defendant told McGinnis that he was a trained medic. McGinnis stated that he (McGinnis) has handled many ARs and that the defendant was not handling the weapon very well. McGinnis said that as they were walking south another armed male who appeared to be in his 30s joined them and said he was there to protect the defendant. McGinnis stated that before the defendant reached the parking lot and ran across it, the defendant had moved from the middle of Sheridan Road to the sidewalk and that is when McGinnis saw a male (Rosenbaum) initially try to engage the defendant. ]McGinnis stated that the defendant was walking, Rosenbaum was trying to get closer to the defendant. When Rosenbaum advanced, the defendant did a “juke” move and started running. McGinnis stated that there were other people that were moving very quickly. McGinnis stated that they were moving towards the defendant. McGinnis said that according to what he saw, the defendant was trying to evade these individuals. [/size

so he was walking down on the street with a reporter then crossed over to the sidewalk when baldy started going after him, then he did a juke and jive move and started running from him.

sounds to me he was trying to get away from baldy. the reporter then said others started moving towards him. and what he saw he was evading them.

McGinnis described the point where the defendant had reached the car. McGinnis described that the defendant had the gun in a low ready position. Meaning that he had the gun raised but pointed downward. The butt of the gun would have been at an angle downards from the shoulder. McGinnis stated that the defendant brought the gun up. McGinnis stated that he stepped back and he thinks the defendant fired 3 round in rapid succession. McGinnis said when the first round went off, he though it hit the pavement. McGinnis felt something on his leg and his first thought was wondering whether he had gotten shot. McGinnis was behind and slightly to the right of Rosenbaum, in the line of fire, when the defendant shot.

McGinnis stated that the first round went into the ground and when the second shot went off, the defendant actually had the gun aimed at Rosenbaum. McGinnis stated he did not hear the two exchange any words. McGinnis said that the unarmed guy (Rosenbaum) was trying to get the defendant’s gun. McGinnis demonstrated by extending both of his hands in a quick grabbing motion and did that as a visual on how Rosenbaum tried to reach for the defendant’s gun. Detective Cepress indicates that he asked McGinnis if Rosenbaum had his hands on the gun when the defendant shot. McGinnis said that he definitely made a motion that he was trying to grab the barrel of the gun. McGinnis stated that the defendant pulled it away and then raised it. McGinnis stated that right as they came together, the defendant fired. McGinnis said that when Rosenbaum was shot, he had leaned in (towards the defendant).

he was trying to get rittenhouse's weapon, after he and others started chasing him and having it pointed at him.

Criminal Complaint: State of Wisconsin Plaintiff vs. Kyle H. Rittenhouse Defendant Accused of Shooting 3 Protester/Rioters — Killing 2 in Kenosha