Rittenhouse Trial

How is there no discussion of the Rittenhouse trial? I just did a search on his name and nada. Bizarre.

I personally don't understand how a minor can bring a weapon he's not legally able to possess or carry into a situation that will predictably be prone to violence, and claim self-defense for all of the charges. Roaming the streets with an AR-15 in the middle of a civil rights riot. That's just walking into a powder keg with a match.

Watching the trial excerpts I've been a little shocked at the judge's demeanor. For a while I thought he was going to walk, but at this point I'm guessing some compromise verdict that lands him some jail time.

 

I would like to see the smug little shit get serious prison time. He could use some lessons in race relations.

It seems that at least one of the victims killed was being confrontational with an armed group earlier in the day. The news reports I'm hearing make it sound as though conviction on lesser charges are very likely.

 

I am hoping - based on my non lawyer knowledge - is that at least one of the most serious charges sticks, while some some essentially get reduced.

Then it comes to sentencing.

 

I don't know which is a better outcome for him. If he gets off, someone will probably shoot him in a drive-by and he will never be safe in public again. If he goes to jail, unless he is all alone, his life is in danger there too.

But this is all culture war now. The conservatives lost in the Charlottesville car case, but this one has more 2nd amendment/gun rights issues, plus the anti-BLM issue, and he is more popular as a right-wing media rebel.

 

I have herd very little about this.... So ill do some reading before i comment

 

The harsher his sentence the more he'll be seen as being persecuted. He'll become a martyr, a poster boy for the violent right.


The Aubrey murder is clearer, and more complicated. To my eye he was attacked (at minimum provoked into resisting a "citizen's arrest"), and murdered. Having three defendants will complicate things.
Edit: Is complicating things.

 

Seriously.

I know it's impossible to prove, but I can't imagine a black kid shooting a few guys at a MAGA rally and being viewed with this much leniency.

 

Can you imagine the white outrage if Ahmaud Aubery had been white and his killers black?

Impossible to prove? Maybe not, at least historically. I'm sure there are studies, reports, books, documentaries, etc that illustrate the racial inequality in our judicial system. FTR I mean nationwide, not just the Redneck Bubba south.

The black kid would have every charge remain so that he could be convicted on lesser charges should he be acquitted on the more serious charges.

I have seen way too many cases where the prosecutor appears to be putting on a show pretending to go for a conviction, when in fact they have intentionally over-charged the defendant(s) so that they won't be convicted.

Example: George Zimmerman, the guy in Florida who attacked Trayvon Martin, a black kid. Zimmerman harassed him, attacked him, and got his ass kicked. So he then shot and killed the kid. Anybody with a partially functioning brain could see the prosecution was overreaching with a second-degree murder charge. From what I can tell over-charging is a very common practice in cases involving LEOs.

Judges undermine cases. In the Derek Chauvin trial (George Floyd murder) the judge decided to let the jury hear about only one previous excessive force complaint. The prosecution wanted to introduce six complaints. Chauvin has 22 complaints over 19 years. Why did the prosecution only attempt to introduce six? Why did the judge only allow one? The answers might be legally sound...or not.

Look at the security in place at the BLM rally in DC on 28 Aug 2020. Nobody was against "the optics," in fact the show of force was wanted. Contrast that to the 06 Jan 2021 Capitol Building insurrection. The threat of violence was known days, possibly weeks, in advance. But no, we couldn't have the world seeing a show of force against a mostly white mob.

 

I don't think there should be any question about the statistics of bias in the judicial system. My point was that if you tried to make that statement with absolute certainty in this particular case, you'd get the pushback.

In fact, I would imagine that if a racial minority with an AR had showed up on January 6 and started shooting the MAGA demonstrators, he'd be carrying the weight of the entire situation. His presence would likely be used to justify the violence of the rioters

I don't think I've heard one person make the argument that the presence of people like Kyle Rittenhouse provided retroactive justification for the violence property damage of the rioters.

 

I like the prosecutor's argument that
you can't claim self-defense
in a (volatile & dangerous) situation that you created.

Fear of backlash should Rittenhouse be convicted of murder, should not influence the judicial procedure. He killeded two people and wounded a third person; a slap on the wrist, even a hard one, would send a very wrong message.

TBF, OTOH I also think fear of backlash should not influence how law enforcement agencies handle violence and criminal activity by protestors.

 

I have purposelessly been trying to avoid the news on this case. My opinion on it won't matter, and it is necessary to take a break from some political stories every now and then.

 

FOUND NOT GUILTY ON ALL COUNTS.......?????

 

Yup.

Not guilty on all 5 charges.

I know I'm angry, but right now I'm just really sad.

I'm sad that we as a society, and as a person who owns and carries, can't or won't set better boundaries around acceptable behavior.

I guess vigilante justice is back on the table.

 

I'm so pissed off I need to not post.

But...

Why? Because he's "only 18" and was therefore open to suggestion, easily influenced? Was simply misguided?

Are there other charges than can be brought against him? Prison time he obviously deserves, and avoided. He needs a felony record that will follow him the rest of his life.

Can someone go to a NPD Trump rally,
find loudmouth smallbrain,
antagonize them,
then shoot and kill them,
and claim self-defense?
And get acquitted?

Edit--missing words

 

That's what I take away from this Chris. You can indeed go to a MAGA-type rally, provoke a reaction, and kill people in attendance and then claim self-defense.

I also think that the police who gave him and the other people who were out playing militia water bottles and encouragement instead of forcing them to leave might have culpability.

If the situation is dire enough that you need to declare curfews and have police out to maintain some sense of peace, you need to send people who will predictably only complicate the situation away.

I understand that he was being attacked and in confrontation with the people there. I still can't believe you can show up in the middle of an emotionally charged protest and not share culpability when it goes sideways on you.

 

I kinda feel like the justice system is broken.

 

Something was mentioned in the news that I had forgotten:
There were seven women on the jury.
I smell insincere prosecution.

Most certainly there are women who can be as hard assed as any man, just as there are men who can be as sensitive as any woman.

Rittenhouse is 18, he looks 14 year old kid. It would take some very convincing evidence to make me believe the prosecution had no choice but to allow seven women on the jury.

My view is politically incorrect, which means you probably won't hear the mainstream news media questioning why seven women were on the jury, and how that affected the jury's decision. I can't say a larger number of men would've made a difference.

The prosecution aided Ritten house.
The judge aided Rittenhouse.
The jury protected Rittenhouse.

Obviously there are other factors to consider. I think part of it is the jurors, all of them, were looking out for their own. Having a baby-faced defendant young enough to be unduly influenced certainly helped (this ties into seven women on the jury).

If a 17 year old black kid had killed two white men and shot a third white man under identical circumstances, and you had an identical trial with a black judge and a black jury, with the same actions taken by a black judge, and the acquittals, white people would be having fits. The kid would probably require police protection.

 

Not just women.

All white with one Hispanic juror.

And an ADA for one of the most public cases that might be tried in that jurisdiction.

They should have known that they couldn't stick the gun charge and either bolstered it or not predicated their prosectution on that narrative.

Once that fell away, I knew it was going straight to shit.

I hope the families sue Rittenhouse AND the police officers that enabled him.

 

ABC This Week did a very good analysis of the Rittenhouse trial. Many things were mentioned, two stand out to me.

The jury was protecting one of their own, like a brother or a son.

The judge was defense friendly.

Regarding the firearms charge being dropped, it was legal for 17 year old Rittenhouse to possess a "long gun." While I'm not defending the smug racist little shit, his AR platform rifle looks like an "assault weapon," but it's really just a semi-automatic rifle styled after a military rifle.

Maybe Rittenhouse really is remorseful. If yes, hopefully to the point of being suicidal.