Canadian Money Forum banner
1 - 20 of 345 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,178 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
I have followed most of the trial live on Youtube, and have to say it was a rather bizarre trial.

Without going into the ultimate verdict that the jury renders......some points of interest.

Wisconsin gun laws are rather strange and the "self defense" laws are really complex but wide ranging.

The charge against Rittenhouse being underage to possess a weapon were dismissed by the judge because the barrel was longer than the statute stated.

So if the gun barrel was shorter than an AR15 the charge would have remained. I don't get that part at all.

Examples of their legal system are:

They have 18 jurors but only 12 will make the jury panel that decides the case. All 18 jurors attend the trial and have their names put into a "bingo hall" type of drum from which 12 names are drawn. The jury could end up being mostly women, mostly men, or a any combination possible from 18 jurors. The verdict could well be decided by the names that are pulled out of the drum to make up the final jury.

Rittenhouse was 17 and unable to purchase or own a gun. He crossed state lines with the AR15 that he had a friend purchase and hold for him.
He loaded the gun with full metal jacket bullets, and went to Kenosha falsely claiming he was an EMT and was there to provide medical help and protect businesses. But as noted above......the gun barrel was longer than prohibited by statute, so that charge was dismissed.

The judge in this case is a different sort of fellow, and his instructions to the jury were so muddled that lawyers and legal analysts said he confused even them.
I think they said his charge to the jury was 36 pages long and took hours of complex wording and situations.

It just seems strange to me that a kid can carry a loaded AR15 full of full metal jacket ammunition, parade around waving his gun at unarmed people, and then end up killing 2 people, badly wounding a 3rd person who was armed, and shooting but missing other people.....and they are disputing if it is legal.

I wonder what the next protest in Kenosha will look like. Will both sides come armed to the teeth and ready to do battle ?

It will be interesting to see what the jury decides.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,178 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
This trial, combined with everything else going on......Trump insiders refusing to testify, armed militias marching around in cities, political leaders fanning the flames, both parties trying to change election laws so they can win, defund the police nonsense....the US is heading down the path of armed civil war.

Whatever the jury decides in Kenosha, there will be anger spilling into the streets. The US is a nation divided.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,178 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Some more facts that make a person wonder where the US is heading.

Rittenhouse's mother drove her armed 17 year old son to the protest, which she knew would be violent because his goal was to "protect businesses" in Kenosha.....in another state.

Today she says her son is a hero for saving businesses and lives, but her son was the only person who shot anyone and took lives.
Tthe owners of the used car business testified that they had already removed all the vehicles and emptied out the building.

The owners didn't request protection from the armed militia and they left the scene and went home.

The militia group set up camp there and put snipers on the roof. They were protecting an empty building.

This whole tragic event and all the shootings started with someone saying there was a fire in a dumpster set by a protestor.

Rittenhouse and his mother are heroes to a lot of people and criminals to a lot of other people.

The protestors are heroes to a lot of people and an angry mob of criminals to a lot of other people.

This trial is an insight into the deep troubles brewing in the US, and we must be diligent not to allow it to spread to Canada.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,178 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Wisconsin has deployed 500 National guardsmen near Kenosha, to wait for the verdict.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
469 Posts
The charge against Rittenhouse being underage to possess a weapon were dismissed by the judge because the barrel was longer than the statute stated.

So if the gun barrel was shorter than an AR15 the charge would have remained. I don't get that part at all.
I have no doubt that the original bill was a lot harsher and direct. But with the usual partisanship and NRA lobbying, the bill was compromised for it to pass.


The judge in this case is a different sort of fellow, and his instructions to the jury were so muddled that lawyers and legal analysts said he confused even them.
I have seen headlines where the defence was trying to have the trial declared a mistrial. I would have thought it's be the prosecutor trying to call it a mistrial as the judge sermed to be on Rittenhouse's side.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,537 Posts
Under the existing law, the trial was essentially done without defense having to said a word. A testimony from the guy who was shot in a bicep was enough to sink the prosecution.
Of course there will be riots as a result but that is basically a tradition already. With rising prices an opportunity to loot can't be missed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,178 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
There is a video tape of Rittenhouse saying he wanted to take his AR15 to Kenosha and wouldn't hesitate to use it on protestors.

The judge ruled the tape was too prejudicial and the prosecution couldn't use it or show it to the jury.

I wouldn't say the judge was on either side......but offered a glimpse that he may not be the most competent judge in the US.

I guess he is local and you get what you get.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,537 Posts
The entire defense argument is that when using his weapon he was under impression that his life or health was in immediate danger. What was done days, weeks, or hours before is completely inconsequential when it comes to feeling immediate threat.
Was he stupid for doing what he did - yes. Is stupidity illegal? No, it is not. Only reason why Canadian government still exists.

That's the standard under existing law.
The prosecution witness literally said his gun was pointed at Kyle while he was shot in a hand.
Another prosecution witness stated that the AR-15 was touched by rioter.
There are wounds on a head from the skateboard.
There is plenty of video evidence.
Prosecution literally sunk its own case.

I disagree with the low bar for use of lethal force that Wisconsin has, but under existing law the verdict will be not-guilty.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,178 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 · (Edited)
That only deals with a couple of the shootings.

There is the first shooting where the guy was unarmed and Rittenhouse first shot destroyed the guy's pelvis and then was shot 3 more times while falling down.

There is also shots Rittenhouse took at protestors that missed and the guy with the skateboard that he killed.

It is hard to believe he will not be convicted of something, given all the charges and all the shooting he was doing.

Rittenhouse was literally spraying bullets all over the place.

But it depends on the makeup of the jury, and if they throw everything into one lump and find not guilty on all charges.

Personally, I feel sorry for the kid. His mother.........what was she thinking ? He appears to almost not understand the trouble he is in.

He broke down on the stand and while some say it was crocodile tears, my experience is that he was breaking down, feeling alone and afraid.

My goodness.......he is just a kid and his life is forever changed regardless of the verdict.

I would hope that even with a finding of guilt on some charges, he isn't sent to adult prison. That would accomplish nothing.

He needs help that his mother is obviously not giving him. Maybe a long period of probation and some mental help would be the best outcome.

But, the victims had families too and they likely wouldn't agree.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,537 Posts
The first one is the guy who chased him and touched his weapon.
Second one is the guy who hit him with a skateboard
Third one is they guy with a gun aimed at Kyle.

Since weapon charge has now been thrown out, I don't know if there are any charges that can stick.
Unless misrepresenting himself as qualified EMT to the media is a chargeable offense.

Watching the trial one has to wonder if prosecution was hired by Kyle because they did terrific job in defending him
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,178 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 · (Edited)
I don't think the first guy got close enough to Rittenhouse to touch his weapon. He was still several feet behind Rittenhouse when he was shot 4 times.

He was also unarmed, so that may be the most troublesome for the jury to accept self defense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
469 Posts
So my take-away from this discussion is
1) pre-meditated no longer applies so this trial can set a precedence for future murder trials;
2) if someone aims a gun at you, don't be a hero and take the bullet. If you act in any way, it may be used against you as an act of aggression.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,178 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Gun advocates are following this case closely, because it challenges their claim that "good" people with guns provide safety against the bad guys.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,178 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
The gun holder is the only one who shot anyone.

What if another gun holder had shot and killed Rittenhouse because he feared for his life ?

Remember the law applies to everyone, so next time it might be the protestors doing the shooting and claiming self defense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,326 Posts
I have followed most of the trial live on Youtube, and have to say it was a rather bizarre trial.
You missed a few key points

Without going into the ultimate verdict that the jury renders......some points of interest.

Wisconsin gun laws are rather strange and the "self defense" laws are really complex but wide ranging.

The charge against Rittenhouse being underage to possess a weapon were dismissed by the judge because the barrel was longer than the statute stated.

So if the gun barrel was shorter than an AR15 the charge would have remained. I don't get that part at all.

Examples of their legal system are:

They have 18 jurors but only 12 will make the jury panel that decides the case. All 18 jurors attend the trial and have their names put into a "bingo hall" type of drum from which 12 names are drawn. The jury could end up being mostly women, mostly men, or a any combination possible from 18 jurors. The verdict could well be decided by the names that are pulled out of the drum to make up the final jury.
The extra 6 are just spares. Good idea.

Rittenhouse was 17 and unable to purchase or own a gun. He crossed state lines with the AR15 that he had a friend purchase and hold for him.
No he didn't cross state lines with the firearm.


It just seems strange to me that a kid can carry a loaded AR15 full of full metal jacket ammunition, parade around waving his gun at unarmed people, and then end up killing 2 people, badly wounding a 3rd person who was armed, and shooting but missing other people.....and they are disputing if it is legal.
For someone who "watched the trial" you miss a few things.
1. He loaded his gun with the appropriate ammuntion. You say FMJ like it's special, it isn't.
2. He wasn't waving his gun at unarmed people. Care to show the video.
3. Apparently the first person attacked him, and tried to take his gun.
4. The other 2 people were attacking him, the one that survived even pointed an loaded handgun at him before he was shot.

The video of the second 2 attackers being shot is clear cut self defence.
Kyle was running and they attacked him with weapons. They were chasing him, they were not in fear of their life.
He wasn't shooting and and he posed no threat, beyond simply being a guy with a gun.

I am stunned that they didn't charge the guy with the handgun for his crimes.
There is ABSOLUTELY no reason to be chasing someone down the street with a gun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,326 Posts
Just another thing to add, some claim he had no business being in Kenosha.

His job was in Kenosha.

This case was totally political from the beginning, but the amount of misinformation is astonishing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,537 Posts
The gun holder is the only one who shot anyone.

What if another gun holder had shot and killed Rittenhouse because he feared for his life ?

Remember the law applies to everyone, so next time it might be the protestors doing the shooting and claiming self defense.
Yeah, including another gun holder who had a gun aimed at him.

And you are right. The law applies to everyone. if protestors do the shooting then it will be up to prosecutors to prove it wasn't in self-defense
 
1 - 20 of 345 Posts
Top