Rittenhouse trial is being set up for unrest

originally posted by: JIMC5499

originally posted by: game over man
But, the fact is Kyle was underage, wrongfully in possession, breaking curfew, not an EMT, and protecting businesses is the militia dudes cover to play civil war.

Doesn't have a damn thing to do with self-defense.

True, this case reminds me of business law classes in college where the professor would come up with some unique scenario to quiz us on the law. Willfully going into a riot doesn't seem reasonable if you wanted to keep yourself safe, but at the same time self defense laws would still have to apply within a riot.

Kyle fleeing the scene makes him seem really guilty if we're ignoring he's a wannabe boogaloo boy wanting to follow Trump's tweets to wage war against Antifa terrorists.

Also the footage where Gaige is running along side of him and they're talking....seemed like a reasonable time for Kyle to stop and make himself out to everyone around that he's not a threat.

a reply to: game over man

self defense laws would still have to apply within a riot

They do.

Kyle fleeing the scene

As officers testified, when he attempted to approach them with his hands in the air they issued verbal commands to stop and then sprayed him with OC.

wannabe boogaloo boy wanting to follow Trump's tweets

Cite your source.

Mere opinion that has zero bearing on the actions of his attackers.

Also the footage where Gaige is running along side of him and they're talking....seemed like a reasonable time for Kyle to stop and make himself out to everyone around that he's not a threat.

You mean when the video shows the hyper aggressive overly emotional mob of violent loud mouths chasing after him?

a reply to: game over man

what you call "fleeing the scene" is actually "de-escalation of" or "disengaging from" a situation.

what evidence do you have that he was involved with or interested in any sort of radical group?

yes, the time when Gaige is jogging beside him is the perfect time to try to reason with a violent mob determined to hurt/kill you. wasn't he taken to the ground shortly after that?

you can't reason with a mob. you can't rationalize someone out of a position they arrived at emotionally. you remind me of Vaush when he debated Destiny about this particular case. needless to say, it was eyerolling-ly cringeworthy.

a reply to: JBurns

get out of my head!! lolol

a reply to: seckua

You literally forgot about all the civil war threads made by maga people on here last year? You forgot about Trump's tweets?

Also this is really the only argument the Prosecutor's could use.

Under Wisconsin Law:

A person who provokes an attack, whether by lawful or unlawful conduct, with intent to use such an attack as an excuse to cause death or great bodily harm to his or her assailant is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense.

That's what the militia guys were there for. To kill Antifa claiming self defense in a riot.

a reply to: JBurns

Fleeing the scene when he killed Rosenbaum and calling his friend, not when he was walking towards their tanks, his earlier fleeing.

a reply to: game over man

i'm so glad you brought this up, because *GUESS WHAT* you're wrong.

Rittenhouse fled the situation in an attempt to disengage, even if he started the encounter, and is thus able to claim self defense.

(2) Provocation affects the privilege of self-defense as follows:
(a) 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.
(b) The privilege lost by provocation may be regained if the actor in good faith withdraws from the fight and gives adequate notice thereof to his or her assailant.
(c) A person who provokes an attack, whether by lawful or unlawful conduct, with intent to use such an attack as an excuse to cause death or great bodily harm to his or her assailant is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense.

a reply to: game over man

You forgot to quote the entire law. I'll fix it.

939.48(2)(a) (a) 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.

939.48(2)(b) (b) The privilege lost by provocation may be regained if the actor in good faith withdraws from the fight and gives adequate notice thereof to his or her assailant.

939.48(2)(c) (c) A person who provokes an attack, whether by lawful or unlawful conduct, with intent to use such an attack as an excuse to cause death or great bodily harm to his or her assailant is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense.

Since Kyle did not in fact provoke the attack, that doesn't apply. The video shows clearly who provoked the attack (ie: the people chasing and subsequently attacking him). They were screaming "Get him" and encouraging the rioters illegally carrying firearms to shoot him in his head.

You could try and make the claim he wanted to provoke others to attack him, even though the evidence does not support this conclusion and no one had the audacity to even insinuate it at trial, that all went out the window when he attempted to withdraw and his attackers pursued him.

That's what the militia guys were there for. To kill Antifa claiming self defense in a riot.

So you assume. Fortunately the prosecutor actually cares about maintaining whatever semblance of credibility he has left and has not made this asinine and frankly hysterical insinuation.

a reply to: seckua

What is your argument? People were supposed to hug Kyle for killing Rosenbaum at that moment? Kyle fan base is extremely cringy.

Why do you think the mob didn't think Kyle used self defense?

a reply to: seckua

We are really on a roll tonight seckua

Glad to see some folks haven't forgot how to look up the actual law instead of spewing the crap they hear on television.

a reply to: game over man

Why do you think the mob didn't think Kyle used self defense?

Because they are horribly biased.

See above.

You literally forgot about all the civil war threads made by maga people on here last year? You forgot about Trump's tweets?

Totally and absolutely irrelevant.

a reply to: JBurns

Actually it was going to be a big part of their case, the Facebook page, his social media and the CVS video and the judge dismissed it.

You literally forgot about all the civil war threads made by maga people on here last year? You forgot about Trump's tweets?

That's what the militia guys were there for. To kill Antifa claiming self defense in a riot.

i didn't "literally forget", i never paid attention in the first place. i don't rock with those types, i don't "back the blue", and i despise career politicians.

that's the thing about killing antifa.... communists aren't people; they're property of the state.

a reply to: game over man

He wasn't fleeing, he was withdrawing.

If the scene isn't safe, you withdraw. There are years to handle the legal aspects, what's your rush?

What you really mean is he didn't submit to the mob justice that was about to play out in the streets of Kenosha.

a reply to: game over man

Actually it was going to be a big part of their case, the Facebook page, his social media and the CVS video and the judge dismissed it.

The Judge dismissed it because he found it was irrelevant. Much like all your efforts to muddy the waters due to your personal biases.

originally posted by: game over man
a reply to: seckua

What is your argument? People were supposed to hug Kyle for killing Rosenbaum at that moment? Kyle fan base is extremely cringy.

Why do you think the mob didn't think Kyle used self defense?

yes, horribly biased and likely not very smart overall AND overly confident in their greater numbers.

i'm not a "fan" of kyle, i can just zoom out and see what this # is really about. it's about self defense, more or less.

a reply to: JBurns

Biased to what? A hero?

You guys are the ones making all the pro civil war threads last year in response to BLM. There was even a thread about using their car to run over protestors.

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: game over man

He wasn't fleeing, he was withdrawing.

If the scene isn't safe, you withdraw. There are years to handle the legal aspects, what's your rush?

What you really mean is he didn't submit to the mob justice that was about to play out in the streets of Kenosha.

and that's exactly what Vaush said he should have done. he should have submitted to the mercy of the mob that night.

how about #ing no.

a reply to: seckua

Do you not think a riot is a good setting to hurt/kill Antifa and get away with it?