Illinois teen arrested in fatal shooting at Kenosha protest, police say

Remember:
The state has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it was not.

No. Both sets of shootings are seperate events.
Even if he murdered the 1st guy, he still has the right to self-dense against the mob that, some moments later, chased him with intent to do harm.

 

Nope, he would lose his right to claim self defense after murdering the first. Keep in mind that these videos are a minute apart at best, he had managed to run a city block between them.

 

I understand peoples confusion or unwillingness to admit that killing another human can be justified. What I don't understand is the concerted media effort to label the Rittenhouse attackers as "Protesters". There still isn't any evidence that these guys showed up to protest for the BLM movement. The media's use of the phrase, "protesters shot" is misleading at best, and an incitement to violence at worst.

 

WI law says otherwise.

Under WI law, provoking a fight removes your ability to claim self-defense.
938.48 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

HOWever, that ability to claim self-defense resets once you withdraw:
938.48 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.
https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/939/iii/48

Once the first guy is killed, that event ends. He may have murdered him, but the event is over.

A few moments after that, he is chased by a mob. He did nothing to that mob, he did not provoke violence, and even if he did, he ran away, de-escalating the situation and re-setting his right to SD under 938.42 2 (b). The mob, even if threatened, has a duty to retreat , and has no right whatsoever to give chase with intent to harm.

 

That was, however, a word used by one of the other parties involved (the same one that previously molested children) in the encounter.

 

Child molester (Rosenbaum) and domestic abuser (Huber). They defiled their own names long before they were known to any of us.

https://www.wisconsinrightnow.com/2020/08/28/kenosha-shooting/

 

BTW, even vaguely honest leftists know that Kyle acted in self defense:

Column: Here’s why Kyle Rittenhouse, the teen shooting suspect in Kenosha killings, is likely to get off

https://www.chicagotribune.com/colu...5yndn7pb67l42ywnzn4-story.html?outputType=amp

 

According to an interview conducted by aChicago Sun Times reporter with a white supremacist Boogaloo Boie military vet Ryan Balch says he and 32 other Boogaloo Boies were in Kenosha on the Tuesday when Rittenhouse shot and killed two and seriously wounded a third. He claims he spent the day with Rittenhouse and other far right white supremacists and they are by no means pro police having killled at least five of them including two San Fran.Bay area law officers, a Federal security officer in Oakland and a Santa Cruz county sherrif sargeant.

 

Quick someone should report this to the authorities if true! Seriously, nothing that's not in the docket should be considered.

We already have one case where a judge has improperly introduced outside elements to the court.

 

I would love to read this story! Link?

 

After the publicity of this and the political focus, I wouldn't put much faith in stories that come out without something verifiable. His social media apparently had no ties to any organization. I'm sure they'll get his phone records as they do their due diligence and if there are any links they'll be found there.

 

Nope:

(b) The presumption described in par. (ar) does not apply if any of the following applies:

1. THE ACTOR WAS ENGAGED IN CRIMINAL ACTIVITY or was using his or her dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business to further a criminal activity at the time.

He would still be considered to be engaged in criminal activity as he fled the scene of a crime

 

That would certainly be a novel theory for the prosecution to try. Two complicating factors:

1) he was fleeing towards the cops, where he tried to turn himself in.

2) his life was endangered by the angry mob. Had he remained at the first scene, he could have been killed and / or forced to kill even more commies.

 

I don't believe it would matter, if a jury convicted him of the first, he'd likely be convicted of the rest. To be fair, I don't believe any of them were murder.

 

Does the Left have any martyrs:

 

Which will be used as evidence that the guy was spoiling for a fight that night.

 

How surprising is it that the police would be more favorably disposed to someone who was supportive and not throwing things at them:

 

Your interpretation of this clause necessitates that someone who allegedly commits a crime can -never- act in self-defense.
That absurdity, alone, undermines your interpretation.

 

Right. When a 7-11 clerk pulls a gun on a fleeing robber and the robber shoots him that's always the defense, "He was going to shoot me, clear self defense." Why do these guys keep getting life or the needle?

The child will plead not guilty but insane. He has no ability to tell right from wrong and being a police groupie he thought it was OK for him to shoot people. His idea of self defense is absurd. Even in his initial encounter when he was threatened by a plastic bag. The fatal shot was in the back. Self defense when you shoot someone in the back is a hard sell. But then his lawyer is the guy that defended Rudi Giuliani when he was being investigated.

A good timeline including the complaint filed
https://www.fox13memphis.com/news/t...otesters-killings/DF3G3T5U65FQVCORO5XZPTR57Y/

 

"McGinnis said that the unarmed guy (Rosenbaum) was trying to get the defendant’s gun."

Kyle was running away from an assailant, not robbing a 7-11. Clear-cut self-defense. He'll walk, and by now the DA knows it too. He's only being held to try to appease the mob. He's a modern-day political prisoner right here in America.

 

The Kenosha DA won't touch this as he already has enough on his plate, the people of Kenosha won't allow it. They're trying to take prosecution of police out of his hands. 10 years ago he "investigated" a police shooting where the victim, while being held against a car hood was killed when a 4th officer put his gun to his temple and shot him. Because he did such a piss poor job investigating no charges were filed but later investigations found that the police version of events could not have happened. Even still he failed to prosecute. New laws are pending to take prosecution away from him as well. If he screwed this up he'll be writing wills for a living.
FYI The whole quote

He went for the gun after being shot at. He must have retreated after being shot because the fatal shot was IN HIS BACK.
Even his fellow militiamen

 

From your propaganda outfit posing as a news source:

Another man stopped a couple of feet away, a handgun and a cellphone in his raised hands. A moment later, he moved toward the gunman again, without raising the gun. He was shot in the arm.



Compare what the "reporter" described to what you see in the picture above. Is it accurate? This is why we call the MSM fake news and an enemy of the people. This was not an opinion piece but a straight "news" story. They clearly misrepresented the truth. In the photo above, Kyle is clearly less than one second from death. Also not included in the article was the context of the man with the handgun stating to his friend that he intended to shoot the kid to death.

There were other lies in your "news article" but this one was the most egregious. The kid is going to walk and many people will be surprised. When the MSM lies about the facts and Silicon Valley works hard to ban the video/photo evidence of what happens, that is understandable. We aren't at the point where the government can block clear and unambiguous exonerating evidence from trial but that day is clearly coming. We have already reached the point where the only truth tellers are the alt media and they are being censored and deplatformed at an alarming rate.

 

If his intention was to shoot the child he would not have gone for the gun. He would have shot while the boy had the gun down instead of lunging in like he did.

 

Right....so when he said his intention was to "empty his entire mag into him", he was lying. Great mind reading skills you have there. With skills like those, I can see why evidence can have no relevance to your opinion.

 

"so when he said his intention was to" NO, THAT IS NOT WHAT HE SAID NOR TRIED TO DO

After the fact, he wishes he had done so. Not a surprising position given that he has suffered enormous pain and worry about losing an arm and has had to listen to people glorify his assailant including the *******ned president of the US.