Rittenhouse trial

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

I get a kick out of the whole “he shouldn’t have been there, therefore he’s guilty” angle

Yes it was immensely stupid for him to be there, but last time I checked, stupidity isn’t illegal (although it should be) It also isn’t illegal for him to be there. It’s a moot point on whether it was self defense or not.

The events as they unfolded in regards to the actions he took are all that matter in the context of this trial

My 2 cents
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

HE WENT THERE WITH A SEMI AUTOMATIC ASSULT RIFLE. HE WAS NOT OLD ENOUGH TO OWN ONE!!!! Wtf dude…..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Nebe

HE WENT THERE WITH A SEMI AUTOMATIC ASSULT RIFLE. HE WAS NOT OLD ENOUGH TO OWN ONE!!!! Wtf dude…..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And he will probably be found guilty on that charge, Dude

The self defense is a different set of circumstances and charges, Dude
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Got Stripers]

He is guilty of the worst fake tears and emotion I’ve ever seen, do stupid things you might do stupid time, there is no cure for stupid.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

He is guilty of the worst fake tears and emotion I’ve ever seen, do stupid things you might do stupid time, there is no cure for stupid.

WHo knows what he was feeling. Not hard to imagine an 18 year-old in that situation would be overwhelmed, is it?

Anyway, he shot three people.

One of them, had a gun pointed at the kids head from a few feet away.

A second one, was smashing him in the head and neck with a skateboard.

Third one told Rittenhouse he was going to kill him, then tried wrestling the gun from his hands.

Which of those 3, can be presumed to not be self defense beyond any reasonable doubt? Come on.

He was very stupid, and he probably went looking for trouble and found it. His parents are also at fault, what awful parents they must be. This is reason number 100,000 why violent riots are not a good idea, and why states should not ignore violent riots.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Anyway, he shot three people.

One of them, had a gun pointed at the kids head from a few feet away.

A second one, was smashing him in the head and neck with a skateboard.

Third one told Rittenhouse he was going to kill him, then tried wrestling the gun from his hands.

Which of those 3, can be presumed to not be self defense beyond any reasonable doubt? Come on.

.

yes, a kid who wasn't bothering anyone who happened to be armed shot a few "adults" who were attacking, threatening him and had a gun pointed at him and it's the fault of the kid who wasn't bothering anyone...

so sick and twisted..

if you want to read how upside down and twisted the left and media and snopes is read their account and characterization of the "evidence"

https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/09/...ctims-records/

“Everybody was there exercising their right to protest. And there were some people who were exercising their right to bear arms, including myself.” Grosskreutz said...

Grosskreutz was found guilty in 2016 of breaking Wisconsin’s law governing the use of dangerous weapons “armed while intoxicated” per Milwaukee County court records.

Additionally, Grosskreutz at various points received tickets for minor offenses including disobeying police officers and making loud noises, the court records showed. However, no evidence showed he had indeed committed burglary, though he had been arrested on suspicion of the crime in 2012. The felony charge was later dismissed, per Wisconsin Department of Justice’s criminal data.

Rosenbaum was sentenced to prison for sexually abusing five children — all boys between the ages of 9 and 11 — in Arizona’s Pima County in early 2002, according to his case file obtained via a public records request by Snopes.

The documents said Rosenbaum was temporarily living with the boys’ parents after his mother had kicked him out for disobeying her rules about one month earlier. Over the course of his weeks-long stay, Rosenbaum molested the boys, showed them porn, and performed oral sex on them, among other offenses, the documents showed. He was sentenced to prison for roughly 15 years, and authorities believed at the time “his risk to recidivate being of great concern to the community” considering the victims’ gender and age.


Huber, who was 18 years old at the time, threatened his brother and grandmother at their home with a knife, choked the brother, and demanded that they follow his orders. The complaint said the brother wanted to take Huber to a hospital, apparently for emergency mental health help, but Huber resisted. In the end, he was charged with strangulation and suffocation and false imprisonment, both of which are felony crimes.


snopes is #$cked....the left is twisted, amazing how they will continue to make heroes out of the most screwed up, whacked out miscreants and attack viciously anyone that they think opposed their world view...you need to read the snopes entire article to see how they desperately characterize each bit of info to turn the kid into a monster and the criminals into saints...it's pretty remarkable

[Got Stripers]

Originally Posted by scottw

yes, a kid who wasn't bothering anyone who happened to be armed shot a few "adults" who were attacking, threatening him and had a gun pointed at him and it's the fault of the kid who wasn't bothering anyone...

First I have to say this goes above and beyond the typical one line snarky post, but this is the only part I’d respond to. You ar3 the one who needs help with that fu*cked up perspective. So a teen carrying a weapon he couldn’t purchase and was illegally carrying goes across state lines to a two day running riot and he is there to not bother anyone, you clearly are wired directly into the far right news machine.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

First I have to say this goes above and beyond the typical one line snarky post, but this is the only part I’d respond to. You ar3 the one who needs help with that fu*cked up perspective. So a teen carrying a weapon he couldn’t purchase and was illegally carrying goes across state lines to a two day running riot and he is there to not bother anyone, you clearly are wired directly into the far right news machine.

he was there to help. he didn’t go there and start shooting.

if you put every dime you had into a business that was being destroyed over an event you had absolutely nothing to do with, and your elected officials refused to protect you for political reasons, what would you do?

if he had the gun illegally, he’ll get charged for that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

First I have to say this goes above and beyond the typical one line snarky post, but this is the only part I’d respond to. You ar3 the one who needs help with that fu*cked up perspective. So a teen carrying a weapon he couldn’t purchase and was illegally carrying goes across state lines to a two day running riot and he is there to not bother anyone, you clearly are wired directly into the far right news machine.

Yes. He still wasn’t bothering anyone and there is no evidence that he threatened anyone. Didn’t he encounter some police during the time he was there helping? You’d think if he was doing something illegal or threatening people with a weapon he’d have been arrested….
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

He is guilty of the worst fake tears and emotion I’ve ever seen, do stupid things you might do stupid time, there is no cure for stupid.

wow...I wonder what the punishment is for fake tears and emotion....you need help too