Rittenhouse trial is over before it begins
- Thread starter Crazyhole
- Start date
I cannot understand the mentality that criminals that had never been convicted of violent crimes are somehow always going to be non-violent criminals. They're criminals who've proven that they won't abide by society's rules.
That's not how this country works, 'Murica-boy.
Ummm, the video shows exactly the opposite! Especially in 2 of the 3 cases!
BTW, all 3 were convicted felons, and the one who pointed the gun at Kyle, twice, and lost his arm -- yes, Kyle shot the arm with the gun in its hand** -- was guilty of weapons charges the second he carried it.
** This goes to all the anti-gunners who ask why can't someone shoot someone else in the arm? Well, Kyle did after a gun was pointed at him ... twice!
Watch the video people!!! It's been out there!!!
Last I checked, the Webster definition of victim is a person harmed, injured, or killed as a result of a crime, accident, or other event or action.
But the judge tells the prosecution that the term is "too loaded" to be used --- yet the terms, "rioters" and "looters" can? Yeah, this trial is going to be impartial.
Those of you who swear there's not racial bias in our judicial systems, tell me with a straight face that the judge would have said the same thing to the prosecution if the defendant was Black.
But the judge tells the prosecution that the term is "too loaded" to be used --- yet the terms, "rioters" and "looters" can? Yeah, this trial is going to be impartial.
Those of you who swear there's not racial bias in our judicial systems, tell me with a straight face that the judge would have said the same thing to the prosecution if the defendant was Black.
Are you disputing the assertion that the two people who were shot were participating in a riot and didn’t loot and that Rittenhouse was well aware that they were doing that?Last I checked, the Webster definition of victim is a person harmed, injured, or killed as a result of a crime, accident, or other event or action.
But the judge tells the prosecution that the term is "too loaded" to be used --- yet the terms, "rioters" and "looters" can? Yeah, this trial is going to be impartial.
Those of you who swear there's not racial bias in our judicial systems, tell me with a straight face that the judge would have said the same thing to the prosecution if the defendant was Black.
Why do our resident lovers of the Constitution tend to ignore it so hard in situations like these?
It doesn't matter what they were doing.
Rittenhouse isn't judge, jury, and executioner.
It doesn't matter what they were doing.
They weren't convicted of anything by a jury of their peers.
It doesn't matter what they were doing.
Rittenhouse isn't judge, jury, and executioner.
It doesn't matter what they were doing.
They weren't convicted of anything by a jury of their peers.
You're literally defending a previously convicted felon of pointing a firearm at Kyle. Yes, a felon with a gun! Sorry Mass and Social Media made you oblivious to that fact!
I.e., you do realize Kyle shot the arm of a previously convicted felony who not only pointed a gun at him once, but twice, while Kyle was on the ground ... correct?
Watch the video. It will open your eyes. It really makes anyone critizing what Kyle did, at least in the case of the last 2 people he shot, ignorant and stupid.
Because they were violent and actually attacking other people! It's all in the video!!!But the judge tells the prosecution that the term is "too loaded" to be used --- yet the terms, "rioters" and "looters" can? Yeah, this trial is going to be impartial.
Actually, if he was a responsible, gun owning, Black Panther ... yes. He'd have a great legal defense team too.
I'm sorry, but no. He shot 3 people, all convicted felons, 2 of which who drove farther distances than Kyle, and 1 of them not only had a gun, but pointed it.
Coincidentally, Kyle called the police the second he shot the first person too. That's all on video. There is also plenty of eyewitness testimony that he was being attacked by the first person, and it was self-defense.
The second and third people are utterly on video attacking him while he was running away. The third person had a gun and pointed it at him several times, including twice while Kyle was on the ground.
Again, all 3 were convicted felons, 2 had violent convictions.
WTF??? So a shooting victim is not really a victim if the shooter who shot him dead is a MAGA-hatted white boy??!?
Good grief, we're not talking about Rittenhouse's guilt or innocence here, this is simply about what makes somebody A VICTIM for crying out loud!!!
A convicted felon commiting a violent crime is not a victim ... especially in the case of one of them pointing a gun!
Are you pulling a Covington Kid? Seriously ...
Again, a convicted felon commiting a violent crime is not a victim.
Watch the ****ing video before saying more! You look like an ignorant fool.
For all the progressives that are literally arguing from an oblivious standpoint ...
The judge is not letting the prosecution paint the 3 previously convicted felons, all engaged in violent offenses, be called 'victims.' If you don't understand why, go watch the video! The judge was not going to have any part of that load of crock, when it's already been established the 3 were convicted felons engaged in violence ... not only against Kyle, but before he was even involved!
Kyle was not the aggressor in any of these! In fact, he ran from the second and third attackers, until he tripped. It's all on video! Especially the third with a gun who he pointed at Kyle twice before Kyle ever pointed at (and shot) him. The third attacker lost his arm ... the same arm he had the gun in.
As I understand it, he's was also charged for gun posession and assault, but he made a plea in exchange so he could testify. That's why the judge was having no part of that crock, the men testifying are still criminals! The prosecution is looking incompetent and this whole thing utterly political.
It's like calling 3 bulgars who break into a home, 1 of them with a gun who points it at the homeowner, 'victims' after the homeowner shoots them. Yes, it's the exact same thing! Seriously, you guys are brainwashed by the Mass Media and look utterly ignorant of the facts! Stop listening to the rhetoric, and watch the eyewitness video!
The judge is not letting the prosecution paint the 3 previously convicted felons, all engaged in violent offenses, be called 'victims.' If you don't understand why, go watch the video! The judge was not going to have any part of that load of crock, when it's already been established the 3 were convicted felons engaged in violence ... not only against Kyle, but before he was even involved!
Kyle was not the aggressor in any of these! In fact, he ran from the second and third attackers, until he tripped. It's all on video! Especially the third with a gun who he pointed at Kyle twice before Kyle ever pointed at (and shot) him. The third attacker lost his arm ... the same arm he had the gun in.
As I understand it, he's was also charged for gun posession and assault, but he made a plea in exchange so he could testify. That's why the judge was having no part of that crock, the men testifying are still criminals! The prosecution is looking incompetent and this whole thing utterly political.
It's like calling 3 bulgars who break into a home, 1 of them with a gun who points it at the homeowner, 'victims' after the homeowner shoots them. Yes, it's the exact same thing! Seriously, you guys are brainwashed by the Mass Media and look utterly ignorant of the facts! Stop listening to the rhetoric, and watch the eyewitness video!
Last edited:
Funny how the dead person in these murder cases are the ones who are guilty until proven innocent.
The 3 being convicted felons is irrelevant to this trial unless Rittenhouse knew this information. It couldn’t have played into his perception of threat. However, Rittenhouse knew that they were part of a mob that were rioting and looting, so that does play into his perception of threat. As such, the jury should hear that to make their decision. It would be a lie and unfair to paint them as innocent victims given the totality of the circumstances.
Agreed. However, they are repeat, violent offenders, including attacking others, and then Kyle. It's on video!
I watched more than 1 hour of that day. It's amazing what these guys are caught on video doing! They were beating up people. No one in the Mass Media is showing those videos. Why?! Because it makes Kyle look like the guy that did everything he could to avoid having to use his gun!
They stupidly ran after Kyle. They thought he wouldn't use his firearm. They were wrong! Idiots! Do not assault and batter a trained firearm expert with a gun!
They were doing more than rioting and looting!
The second and third even chased Kyle, attacking him. It wasn't until he tripped that he was under immediate threat.
The third one even pointed his gun at Kyle ... twice! I'm sure the only reason he didn't shoot Kyle is that he'd be on death row if he killed him.
Kyle didn't know that, so when he pointed it a second time, he shot his arm ... the one with the gun! He lost function of it as a result.
For all the anti-gunners who ask why can't gun owners shoot people in the arm instead of killing them, meet Kyle Rittenhouse! He does!
I believe all 3, or at least 2 of them, were (or would have been) charged with violent offenses, including attacking people, including the 1 for weapons charges (felon with felony posession), and that's why they aren't getting the 'victim' tags.
He lost his arm because he was a repeat, violent offender who still carried a gun, and stupidly pointed it at Kyle. If I'm the judge, I'm doing the same thing.
When they are caught on video? Yes!!!
And one guy survived! The convicted felon with a gun, who pointed it at Kyle first.
Just admit it ... you blame MAGA people, and refuse to believe anyone around them was violent first!
You guys need to watch all the videos out there! When I saw it, I was like, "WTF?! They are cruxifying the victim here, not the actual attackers!"
Watch the video!!!
Last edited:
And don't forget, BS told us that they "drove farther distances than Kyle"!!!!!!!!!!!!! THEY DESERVED IT!!!!!!!
This is why people see him as an IT janitor. Dude is unfit for humanity.
You see, if someone else came to this with absolute logical fallacies like "they drove farther distances" and "they were felons," this "Libertarian" (scare quotes for effect because he's not) would go off on a 5,000-word unhinged, suicidal manifesto. It really is amazing to see the lack of intelligence at play here from this idiot...
Last edited:
I guess it will be legal to go to a demonstration with a long-barreled gun. wait for somebody to come after you so you can kill him/her/them. I'll like to see how it plays out
Just make sure you drive a distance that’s shorter than the people you are shooting and everything will be AOK.
What about the guys chasing him and even pointing guns at him when he's on the ground?
Instead of speculating and avoiding watching the hours of video, you can actually listen to a lawyer cover the law, the sworn statements and the actual video of the event... from over a year ago.
13.4 minutes of fact and legal reality, with sworn statements and eye witness video and pictures, you'll never hear or see in the Mass Media... yes, from an actual lawyer who knows the law.
This is why your logic goes out the window and we cannot have freedom, let alone serious debate. You guys refuse to understand who are the real criminals with guns in this country. You're the type of people who are empowering criminals, which is why we're slowly becoming more like the UK.
We have people (existing felons who drive in farther than Kyle BTW, so that nixes the other arguments) committing felony assault, including with guns, and Kyle running and evading until he cannot, and only when he is being battered does he finally shoot.
13.4 minutes of fact and legal reality, with sworn statements and eye witness video and pictures, you'll never hear or see in the Mass Media... yes, from an actual lawyer who knows the law.
This is why your logic goes out the window and we cannot have freedom, let alone serious debate. You guys refuse to understand who are the real criminals with guns in this country. You're the type of people who are empowering criminals, which is why we're slowly becoming more like the UK.
We have people (existing felons who drive in farther than Kyle BTW, so that nixes the other arguments) committing felony assault, including with guns, and Kyle running and evading until he cannot, and only when he is being battered does he finally shoot.
Last edited:
They're just victims who couldn't control their animal instincts to attack someone. Let's blame the kid with the gun who wasn't committing crimes and attacking people and absolve the people who were attacking people. What kind of backwards logic is that?
Also, they weren't attacking him because they thought he was an active shooter. They were attacking him because they didn't like the political position that he espoused. The same people that call righties "brownshirts" are in full approval of them attacking Rittenhouse. SMDH.
The thing that is bothering me most is that NO ONE in the Mass Media talked about one of them having a gun as well!
The second (battery with a skateboard) and third (pointing a gun, repeatedly -- even went on social media to state he wishes he would have shot Kyle first) will claim Kyle had shot the first one.
The problem is even the first one was utterly running after him, attacking him, throwing things at him, on-video.
What wasn't on video, but was in sworn statements to police, is that when the first one finally grabbed the barrel of his gun and tried to yank it from him, that's when he was shot.
Anyone who attempts to grab the gun from someone is just chronically stupid.
Actually, it wasn't even that.
They were screaming for Kyle to shoot them, among other things. The entire group of armed people (not just Kyle) were avoiding them, purposely so, walking away. Eventually they went after Kyle, who ran away, along with others.
But Kyle was weighed down with medical equipment, as well as his rifle, and they caught up with him. That's all on video. Once he was cornered, which couldn't be seen on video, the person who grabbed his barrel was shot.
Yep. People wanted violence. They mistook the armed, medical personnel who ran away as not being willing to use their weapons. Once they were cornered, like Kyle was, and they were trying to disarm them, the first one was shot.
The second one, among his friends, just looking to beat up Kyle, and in the case of the third one, he wish he would have shot Kyle with his own gun he had pointed at Kyle. He lost an arm as a result.
Other than the actual grabbing of the barrel by the first one when Kyle was cornered, this is all on video -- including the extensive lengths Kyle went to avoid and even run, among others. Kyle wasn't the only one.
He was just the only one who was cornered.
I don't understand this statement at all. You do understand, and it's all on video, that Kyle retreated, repeatedly, and they chased after him, and battered him, even one pointing a gun ... before they were shot.
The statements about them being felons or how far they drove was just to refute the fact that they were not locals and not peaceful, with no history of being peaceful, but violence. They were on video commiting violence, not just rioting let alone not merely protesting.
They wanted a fight. They were doing it to others, not just Kyle. Kyle was just the one that got cornered.
You're taking this pretty literally so I'm going to say something you should probably realize. He was making fun of you because you made an implication towards the media making a big deal about Rittenhouse coming from another state as if he was some zealot who was going out of his way to hunt down innocent protestors. He doesn't care about any of that and just wants to make fun of you at this point.
Yep, he hasn't cared about any facts. He wants to talk to everyone like a 3rd grader.
you're right, in today's America we fabricate rape stories and try to slam the court of public opinion's gavel down on facial expressions
Sadly, that was very much the case of all of Kavanaugh's accusers -- and the Mass Media failed to cover all those who recanted -- short of Dr. Ford herself, which was already 35 years old, and she never once said it was Kavanaugh ... not even during her 'very suggestive' therapy after 30 years. The fact the years/ages don't even line-up well is in the csae of Dr. Ford, let alone not one single person collaborated her story, even the ones she named.
Quite ironic as Kavanaugh has been one of the most Liberal Justices of the alleged Conservative Justices. Not a shocker though, because he's a Federalist (Libertaran).
Having trouble confirming it. I didn't see/hear any shots fired at him in the videos. But that doesn't mean it wasn't before the 1st person, or with the 3rd who had a gun, or in between segments, and why Kyle was running away. I just haven't seen/hear it myself.
But ... it is kinda sad the Mass Media is still making execuses, even after they confirmed Kyle avoided conflict, even as others were taunting (e.g., "Shoot me!"), just like others armed and providing medical care, was chased, at things thrown at him, cornered, beaten with a bat and finally shot the guy in the front, then the back after he 'swung.'
At some point, the 'vigilante' argument really applies to the assaliants, not Kyle. But for some reason, because they were using bats, skateboards (ever been hit with one? it's like getting hit with thick, heavy plywood) and even handguns, while Kyle had an AR-15 style, Kyle is the 'vigilante,' despite the evidence. This is going to be a mess.
Oh, on the 'race card' ... everyone shot was white. But because they were allegedly 'protesting' for Black Lives Matter, Kyle is a racist. Ummm, yeah, about that ... I guess the white people looting TVs and burning buildings and even assaulting people ...
Just like during Rodney King too, were actually 'doing things for black lives,' right?
^^^ That right there is the problem, especially when they come armed with bats and even handguns!
What? Was this ever a real trial?
During jury selection, it was reported (link below):
"When one man began explaining that his support for the Second Amendment was so fervent that he did not believe he could serve as an impartial juror, Judge Schroeder stopped him.
“I want this case to reflect the greatness of Kenosha and the fairness of Kenosha, and I don’t want it to get sidetracked into other issues,” Judge Schroeder said. “I don’t care about your opinions on the Second Amendment.”
Yeeeeeeeeeeah, that certainly doesn't play into this case at all.
www.nytimes.com
During jury selection, it was reported (link below):
"When one man began explaining that his support for the Second Amendment was so fervent that he did not believe he could serve as an impartial juror, Judge Schroeder stopped him.
“I want this case to reflect the greatness of Kenosha and the fairness of Kenosha, and I don’t want it to get sidetracked into other issues,” Judge Schroeder said. “I don’t care about your opinions on the Second Amendment.”
Yeeeeeeeeeeah, that certainly doesn't play into this case at all.
Jurors for Kyle Rittenhouse Trial Are Swiftly Selected (Published 2021)
The judge pushed back against comments from potential jurors who said they had read and talked too much about the shootings that took place during unrest in Kenosha County, Wis.
You can hear shots fired, but it sounded like they were in the distance. Regardless, if the investigators testify that it happened then the trial is over. Its self defense at that point no matter what on the first count, and the following two are clear based on the video.
What a joke. This psychotic kid should be locked up just like psycho Zimmerman.What? Was this ever a real trial?
During jury selection, it was reported (link below):
"When one man began explaining that his support for the Second Amendment was so fervent that he did not believe he could serve as an impartial juror, Judge Schroeder stopped him.
“I want this case to reflect the greatness of Kenosha and the fairness of Kenosha, and I don’t want it to get sidetracked into other issues,” Judge Schroeder said. “I don’t care about your opinions on the Second Amendment.”
Yeeeeeeeeeeah, that certainly doesn't play into this case at all.
Jurors for Kyle Rittenhouse Trial Are Swiftly Selected (Published 2021)
The judge pushed back against comments from potential jurors who said they had read and talked too much about the shootings that took place during unrest in Kenosha County, Wis.
Martin didn't bring a gun, or baseball bat, or even hit someone with a skateboard. Martin also wasn't the one chasing someone to start either. Martin did come back later and confronted Zimmerman. But we still don't know who hit who first.
Zimmerman was not an open'n shut case. In fact, one could strongly argue it was prosecutorial misconduct that cost them the manslaughter conviction. It also didn't help that Martin's girlfriend lied on the stand, and they really got her bad.
But in this case ...
These 3 people were assaliants from the get-go, unlike Martin. We have eyewitness testimony, video and many other things. And we have assault'n battery on Kyle, with a bat, with a skateboard, and a pointed gun. That's the thing.
This is an open'n shut case ... period! Right now I've seen no evidence to the contrary! The prosecution has no case, unless they are hiding something. But there's a lot of issues!
People had bats and guns ... the rioters, the assaulters, the batters! These people attacked Kyle and others. But only Kyle is being charged. Why? Because of the narrative.
A guy lost his arm because he chose to drive 40 miles, bring a gun and point it at Kyle while he was on the ground, not once, but twice. Then he got his arm shot off. I mean, that's all on video too!
I really want to see what the prosecution is going to do. Because right now, it's nothing like Zimmerman. Most of us wanted Zimmerman convicted of manslaughter. In this case ...
We want the 2 people killed to be convicted of many felonies, as well as the guy with the handgun who chased Kyle and pointed it at him, and lost his arm, to be also charged. But nope, we won't. Why? Collaborating witnesses, even though the video shows they were felons commiting -- at best -- vigilante acts and -- at worst -- felony assult, battery and even attempted murder.
Funny, I could have sworn it was because Rittenhouse shot three people and killed two.
Yep, the case revolved around Zimmerman's testimony. The Black kid Fat George was stalking didn't have a say because the neighborhood's gun-toting, self-appointed Barney Fife shot Martin dead.
Unlike the Floyd murder case, we didn't have videotape to show everybody what happened that night.
