The fix is in, Rittenhouse case...

[carmenjonze]

Did someone here actually say, in effect, that this premeditated slaying of two innocent people is OK?


Now you all see why I say the police will do nothing when they start killing us. WAtching RAchel anyone? You can threaten election officials and police will do nothing IF you are a con.

Watch these conservative whites make excuse after excuse after excuse for these murder-minded neonazis.

They do it for every story, every event, every insurrection, every mass murder.

[carmenjonze]

The Manslaughter charge still stands.

Not good enough.

[bradman]

The Manslaughter charge still stands.

As it should have.

Like Jeronimo Yanez, Noor should not have been an armed police officer.......

https://policetribune.com/officer-who-s ... hiatrists/
Officer Who Shot Justine Damond Concerned Training Officers And Psychiatrists

[ProfX]

There is no evidence I've seen to date that Rosenbaum or Huber were committing any crimes that day, looting, arson, or otherwise.

Somebody fired a gunshot during the first confrontation. Rittenhouse heard it. To date, though, I haven't seen it established who that person was, or what they were aiming at, or even if it was a shot fired at Rittenhouse, that missed, or into the air, or was taking place in some entirely different situation/confrontation.

Grosskreutz, who was only injured, AFAIK, was the only one with a (hand)gun. He pointed it at Rittenhouse. He did not fire it (AFAIK). But he was shot and wounded. BTW, I could see that being considered self defense.

Again, AFAIK, Rosenbaum had no weapons, and Huber had his skateboard, which he may have used as a weapon, but I don't think is normally considered one, and probably was not brought to the protests to be used as one.

Yes, both Rosenbaum and Huber struggled with Rittenhouse to disarm him, because he was pointing a heavy rifle at them. They feared for their lives. Weren't they standing their ground, trying to disarm someone who presented a lethal threat to themselves? I repeat: before struggling with Rittenhouse, neither had been nor was committing any crimes, and they struggled with him to take away a lethal danger to themselves.

So Balch says Rosenbaum earlier threatened to kill them. He might be telling the truth or he might not. Were there independent witnesses to that statement? Zimmerman claims when (supposedly) Trayvon jumped out and ambushed him he screamed "I will kill you mutha-f!" Of course he would say that, dead Trayvon can't contradict him. I can see why he might lie. And I will leave it at that. The only thing I will say is Rosenbaum had no gun or anything else with which to kill them, so I guess he was threatening use of a lethal karate chop.

[ProfX]

Bearing in mind state statutes vary,

What is necessary for lethal self defense?
https://criminaldefenseattorneytampa.co ... dly-force/

In Florida, deadly force is defined as force that is likely to cause great bodily harm or death. In order for the use of deadly force to be justified under Florida law, the defendant must have reasonably believed that the force was necessary to prevent imminent great bodily harm or death to himself or another while resisting one of the following:

the alleged victim’s attempt to commit a violent crime against him; or
the alleged victim’s attempt to kill him; or

[snip][end]

I guess I might agree a skateboard could cause lethal injury. We'll see what happens with Huber.

Rosenbaum did not have any weapons. All we have heard to date is he did struggle with Rittenhouse to get his weapon away from him. But did not use any other weapons or physical force against him. Maybe he said something earlier to him and Balch, maybe not, but that doesn't change the circumstances.

I still don't get what threat of death or great bodily harm Rosenbaum posed to Rittenhouse.

[Bludogdem]

There is no evidence I've seen to date that Rosenbaum or Huber were committing any crimes that day, looting, arson, or otherwise.

Somebody fired a gunshot during the first confrontation. Rittenhouse heard it. To date, though, I haven't seen it established who that person was, or what they were aiming at, or even if it was a shot fired at Rittenhouse, that missed, or into the air, or was taking place in some entirely different situation/confrontation.

Grosskreutz, who was only injured, AFAIK, was the only one with a (hand)gun. He pointed it at Rittenhouse. He did not fire it (AFAIK). But he was shot and wounded. BTW, I could see that being considered self defense.

Again, AFAIK, Rosenbaum had no weapons, and Huber had his skateboard, which he may have used as a weapon, but I don't think is normally considered one, and probably was not brought to the protests to be used as one.

Yes, both Rosenbaum and Huber struggled with Rittenhouse to disarm him, because he was pointing a heavy rifle at them. They feared for their lives. Weren't they standing their ground, trying to disarm someone who presented a lethal threat to themselves? I repeat: before struggling with Rittenhouse, neither had been nor was committing any crimes, and they struggled with him to take away a lethal danger to themselves.

So Balch says Rosenbaum earlier threatened to kill them. He might be telling the truth or he might not. Were there independent witnesses to that statement? Zimmerman claims when (supposedly) Trayvon jumped out and ambushed him he screamed "I will kill you mutha-f!" Of course he would say that, dead Trayvon can't contradict him. I can see why he might lie. And I will leave it at that. The only thing I will say is Rosenbaum had no gun or anything else with which to kill them, so I guess he was threatening use of a lethal karate chop.

Look, no way should a 17 year old be roaming the the streets at night with an assault weapon during a protest. He may be found guilty of that.

And I’ll grant that if he acted first and started shooting people there’s no self defense and right minded people would be trying to disarm him. That’s not what happened. Someone tried to take away the weapon. He didn’t know what a stranger would do if they took away his gun. And Rosenbaum chased him and Rittenhouse ran away. It wasn’t until he fell and Rosenbaum caught up and tried to take his while being clocked in the head with a skateboard that Rittenhouse fired again. Someone points a gun at him. Fires again. Some jurors are going to see self defense.

Also keep in mind the jury is confined to the evidence presented. Balch was a prosecution witness. And Rosenbaum apparently with some mental issues. Tough to not believe Balch.

And finally the prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt there is no self defense claim. That’s a real tough sell given the testimony and evidence. It’ll be a hung jury for eternity.

[Bludogdem]

Bearing in mind state statutes vary,

What is necessary for lethal self defense?
https://criminaldefenseattorneytampa.co ... dly-force/

In Florida, deadly force is defined as force that is likely to cause great bodily harm or death. In order for the use of deadly force to be justified under Florida law, the defendant must have reasonably believed that the force was necessary to prevent imminent great bodily harm or death to himself or another while resisting one of the following:

the alleged victim’s attempt to commit a violent crime against him; or
the alleged victim’s attempt to kill him; or

[snip][end]



I guess I might agree a skateboard could cause lethal injury. We'll see what happens with Huber.

Rosenbaum did not have any weapons. All we have heard to date is he did struggle with Rittenhouse to get his weapon away from him. But did not use any other weapons or physical force against him. Maybe he said something earlier to him and Balch, maybe not, but that doesn't change the circumstances.

I still don't get what threat of death or great bodily harm Rosenbaum posed to Rittenhouse.

A previous threat from Rosenbaum that he would kill him. And not knowing what Rosenbaum would with the gun if he got it away from Rittenhouse. Rittenhouse was being assaulted by two people at the time. He may have feared for his life.

Again, a jury bound by beyond a reasonable doubt.

[carmenjonze]

He may have feared for his life.

QED.

[bradman]

There is no evidence I've seen to date that Rosenbaum or Huber were committing any crimes that day, looting, arson, or otherwise.

Somebody fired a gunshot during the first confrontation. Rittenhouse heard it. To date, though, I haven't seen it established who that person was, or what they were aiming at, or even if it was a shot fired at Rittenhouse, that missed, or into the air, or was taking place in some entirely different situation/confrontation.

Grosskreutz, who was only injured, AFAIK, was the only one with a (hand)gun. He pointed it at Rittenhouse. He did not fire it (AFAIK). But he was shot and wounded. BTW, I could see that being considered self defense.

Again, AFAIK, Rosenbaum had no weapons, and Huber had his skateboard, which he may have used as a weapon, but I don't think is normally considered one, and probably was not brought to the protests to be used as one.

Yes, both Rosenbaum and Huber struggled with Rittenhouse to disarm him, because he was pointing a heavy rifle at them. They feared for their lives. Weren't they standing their ground, trying to disarm someone who presented a lethal threat to themselves? I repeat: before struggling with Rittenhouse, neither had been nor was committing any crimes, and they struggled with him to take away a lethal danger to themselves.

So Balch says Rosenbaum earlier threatened to kill them. He might be telling the truth or he might not. Were there independent witnesses to that statement? Zimmerman claims when (supposedly) Trayvon jumped out and ambushed him he screamed "I will kill you mutha-f!" Of course he would say that, dead Trayvon can't contradict him. I can see why he might lie. And I will leave it at that. The only thing I will say is Rosenbaum had no gun or anything else with which to kill them, so I guess he was threatening use of a lethal karate chop.

[ bold] 14:10......
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBM9Ke_JI1Q
Could that be considered arson?

[carmenjonze]

[ bold] 14:10......
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBM9Ke_JI1Q
Could that be considered arson?

I get that you guys are eager and anxious for this WN vigilante to be exonerated. But could WHAT be considered arson?

[carmenjonze]

And the Daytime Emmy goes to...
__________

Aaron Rupar
@atrupar

Kyle Rittenhouse cries while testifying

[VIDEO]

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1458470454713257991

[carmenjonze]

How many of you dumb conservative whites around here are going to once again fall for this Brett Kavanaugh act?

[gounion]

Brad, let me ask you something.

Say you have a gun. But you come up to me, I haven't done anything to you. But you attack me with your fists. But I fight back, and pretty soon I'm kicking your ass.

Do you then have the right to pull out your gun and shoot me in "self-defense"?

[bradman]

Brad, let me ask you something.

Say you have a gun. But you come up to me, I haven't done anything to you. But you attack me with your fists. But I fight back, and pretty soon I'm kicking your ass.

Do you then have the right to pull out your gun and shoot me in "self-defense"?

In your scenario, i would expect to spend the rest of my life in jail.

In Rittenhouse's scenario.....Prior to the shootings, i don't remember any footage of Rittenhouse attacking Rosenbaum. Or anyone for that matter.

[carmenjonze]

In your scenario, i would expect to spend the rest of my life in jail.

In Rittenhouse's scenario.....Prior to the shootings, i don't remember any footage of Rittenhouse attacking Rosenbaum. Or anyone for that matter.

Ya boy was blubbering on the stand for the cameras, today.

[Drak]

There is no evidence I've seen to date that Rosenbaum or Huber were committing any crimes that day, looting, arson, or otherwise.

Somebody fired a gunshot during the first confrontation. Rittenhouse heard it. To date, though, I haven't seen it established who that person was, or what they were aiming at, or even if it was a shot fired at Rittenhouse, that missed, or into the air, or was taking place in some entirely different situation/confrontation.

Grosskreutz, who was only injured, AFAIK, was the only one with a (hand)gun. He pointed it at Rittenhouse. He did not fire it (AFAIK). But he was shot and wounded. BTW, I could see that being considered self defense.

Again, AFAIK, Rosenbaum had no weapons, and Huber had his skateboard, which he may have used as a weapon, but I don't think is normally considered one, and probably was not brought to the protests to be used as one.

Yes, both Rosenbaum and Huber struggled with Rittenhouse to disarm him, because he was pointing a heavy rifle at them. They feared for their lives. Weren't they standing their ground, trying to disarm someone who presented a lethal threat to themselves? I repeat: before struggling with Rittenhouse, neither had been nor was committing any crimes, and they struggled with him to take away a lethal danger to themselves.

So Balch says Rosenbaum earlier threatened to kill them. He might be telling the truth or he might not. Were there independent witnesses to that statement? Zimmerman claims when (supposedly) Trayvon jumped out and ambushed him he screamed "I will kill you mutha-f!" Of course he would say that, dead Trayvon can't contradict him. I can see why he might lie. And I will leave it at that. The only thing I will say is Rosenbaum had no gun or anything else with which to kill them, so I guess he was threatening use of a lethal karate chop.

I have to add, even if they were committing arson or looting, that's not license for a cop to kill them, let alone some kid from out of town carrying a firearm.

[carmenjonze]

I have to add, even if they were committing arson or looting, that's not license for a cop to kill them, let alone some kid from out of town carrying a firearm.

It is, to insurrectionists and other confederates, including the Rittenhouse advocates around here.

Self-deputization and cop sanction of white vigilantes has a deep history in this country. The cops also did this with Weepy Boy of Kenosha. Karen does it every other day. It's just that it's just now making the news.

[carmenjonze]

For the J.D. Vance hillbilly elegy jobsandtheeconomy dupes around here...
__________

J.D. Vance
@JDVance1

I am not a criminal lawyer. I am sure people are right that it's risky for him to testify. But our leaders abandoned this kid's community to lawless thug rioters, and he did something about it, and now a lawless thug prosecutor is trying to destroy his life.

https://twitter.com/JDVance1/status/1458469989426601988

[carmenjonze]

Fidel Martinez
@fidmart85

Kyle Rittenhouse is going to walk away free, and then a lot of people will yell "this is not who we are!" as if that has ever meant anything beyond a deflection of accountability and the world will keep on spinning.

https://twitter.com/fidmart85/status/14 ... 3173914625
__________

Blue Grass, Sam Lefthand, glennfs, JoeMemphis, bradman...their entire identites revolve around the violence of the Kyle Rittenhouses of the world, and its sanction by the cops/state. It's exactly who they are.

[JoeMemphis]

I have to add, even if they were committing arson or looting, that's not license for a cop to kill them, let alone some kid from out of town carrying a firearm.

I believe the standard for use of deadly force is that the attacker has to be an imminent threat. So to your point, if it is the act of lighting a car on fire or damage to property, I do not believe that meets the standard for use of deadly force. Not in the State of TN. I highly doubt WI is any different.

I don’t think the standard is different for the police. I don’t think they can use deadly force either unless there is an imminent threat.

[Libertas]

Fidel Martinez
@fidmart85

Kyle Rittenhouse is going to walk away free, and then a lot of people will yell "this is not who we are!" as if that has ever meant anything beyond a deflection of accountability and the world will keep on spinning.

https://twitter.com/fidmart85/status/14 ... 3173914625
__________

Blue Grass, Sam Lefthand, glennfs, JoeMemphis, bradman...their entire identites revolve around the violence of the Kyle Rittenhouses of the world, and its sanction by the cops/state. It's exactly who they are.

Same folks who thought Michael Brown deserved to be gunned down in the street for jaywalking. Or if only Jordan Davis had not had his music so loud or if Trayvon Martin had just not gone into a neighborhood. Any neighborhood.

[gounion]

In your scenario, i would expect to spend the rest of my life in jail.

In Rittenhouse's scenario.....Prior to the shootings, i don't remember any footage of Rittenhouse attacking Rosenbaum. Or anyone for that matter.

So, if you’re threatening people with an AR-15 it’s just fine.

Wonder how you’d feel if you were working in a liquor store with a guy with an AR-15.

And if a black man had an AR-15 at that event, he wouldn’t be alive to stand trial. The cops would have shot him as soon as he showed up. After all, gun rights are just for white people.

[carmenjonze]

I believe the standard for use of deadly force is that the attacker has to be an imminent threat. So to your point, if it is the act of lighting a car on fire or damage to property, I do not believe that meets the standard for use of deadly force. Not in the State of TN. I highly doubt WI is any different.

I don’t think the standard is different for the police. I don’t think they can use deadly force either unless there is an imminent threat.

This is exactly how so many conservative whites and other cons become dupes for the five magic words, "I feared for my life."

I mean, he was unarmed, running away, and I shot him in the back, but yeah I feared for my life.

And you guys promptly fall right into the trap and defend the indefensible.

[sam lefthand]

Blue Grass, Sam Lefthand, glennfs, JoeMemphis, bradman...their entire identites revolve around the violence of the Kyle Rittenhouses of the world, and its sanction by the cops/state. It's exactly who they are.

You make it up as you go. You don't know what I think. You don't know what my identity is. What you say it is, is a gross misrepresentation.

In other words you lie.

[ProfX]

A 17 year old kid who, let's be honest, is unlikely to have the proper maturity or training to be toting around an assault rifle (we can talk about what his actual background and experience was, but nobody that night necessarily knew it), is walking around a protest pointing it at people.

Didn't Huber and Rosenbaum have reason to fear for their life from Rittenhouse? Couldn't they have had a reasonable expectation he might use that rifle against them? Weren't they standing their ground?

People afraid of 17 year olds toting around assault weapons might try and disarm him. One hit him with a skateboard, the other AFAIK didn't do anything but try and take the rifle from his grasp.

Notice I am not making excuses for the guy who pointed a handgun at him back in return (Grosskreutz). He only wounded that guy. But I could see a self defense claim there.

BTW, no, I don't think pushing a flaming dumpster is arson.