- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Looking at young Rittenhouse from another Angle
Posted on 8/27/20 at 12:41 pm to AggieHank86
Posted on 8/27/20 at 12:41 pm to AggieHank86
What’s going to hurt this kid is that he crossed state lines. Nonetheless, he still has a right to defend himself.
1
Posted on 8/27/20 at 12:42 pm to Bard
quote:
Rittenhouse had been fleeing
To turn himself into the police. This needs to be made clear. As soon as he shot Rosenbaum, he pulled out his cell phone and immediately called someone (we assume the police). While he was trying to describe to the cops what had just happened a second group of rioters/protestors happened upon him and started chasing him down the street. That's what led to the second and third shootings where he fell to the ground and killed Huber when he tried to snatch the gun away from him and wounded the other guy when he drew a pistol on him.
After all of that, he jogged to the end of the street and attempted to turn himself in but the police apparently had no idea what was going on and ignored him while they headed toward the scene of the shooting.
This post was edited on 8/27/20 at 12:44 pm
Posted on 8/27/20 at 12:44 pm to phutureisyic
quote:
What’s going to hurt this kid is that he crossed state lines
The two towns are on opposing sides of the state line. He works in Kenosha, WI and lives in Antioch, IL. This is not like Bonnie and Clyde driving all over the SW to rob banks.
Context matters.
ETA: not checking on google maps, but I read the towns were separated by apprx. 10 miles.
This post was edited on 8/27/20 at 12:46 pm
Posted on 8/27/20 at 12:50 pm to LNCHBOX
Is there any video of the first shooting?
I am Asking.
I am Asking.
Posted on 8/27/20 at 12:55 pm to SammyTiger
quote:
you’re not worth talking to.
Funny, I was thinking the same thing.
You don't even know the laws you're attempting to cite. Go away, vermin.
Posted on 8/27/20 at 1:14 pm to Barstools
Anyone got video do the first shooting?
Everyone seems so sure about how this happened. I feel Like I’m missing something.
Everyone seems so sure about how this happened. I feel Like I’m missing something.
This post was edited on 8/27/20 at 1:17 pm
Posted on 8/27/20 at 1:25 pm to Barstools
quote:Yes. All of that was addressed in the OP. Perhaps you did not read it closely.
Pretty sure in any state you can use deadly force to defend yourself from being attacked with a skateboard and a hand gun. You should know that as an attorney.
Posted on 8/27/20 at 2:25 pm to Jorts R Us
quote:We reached the magical 250!
189 downvotes minimum
Posted on 8/27/20 at 2:25 pm to SammyTiger
quote:
Anyone got video do the first shooting?
Everyone seems so sure about how this happened. I feel Like I’m missing something.
Car Lot Shooting
You can clearly see Rittenhouse being chased by Rosenbaum. Rosenbaum throws a fiery object (Molotov cocktail?) at the retreating Rittenhouse and continues to chase after him until Rittenhouse finally turns around and shoots him in the head.
This post was edited on 8/27/20 at 2:29 pm
Posted on 8/27/20 at 2:25 pm to SammyTiger
quote:
Is there any video of the first shooting?
quote:
Good thing we have videos of all the incidents and don't have to imagine possible scenarios.
Posted on 8/27/20 at 2:36 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
We reached the magical 250!
I stand corrected.
Posted on 8/27/20 at 2:42 pm to Vacherie Saint
quote:Sometimes I wonder whether you are CAPABLE of setting aside your emotions and conducting a rational, factual analysis. Frankly, I doubt it.
This entire premise is stupid. It relies on wild suppositions and has no bearing on what actually happened... You are literally concocting a scenario where this kid is illegally pointing his weapon at innocent people for shits and gigs and you are asking us to discuss that scenario, after we all saw video of a mob trying to kill him.
FACT: Young Kyle traveled from Illinois to Kenosha SPECIFICALLY to protect a car dealership from further property damage. He says this in several videos, all of which have been linked on this site.
FACT: Young Kyle did not own that car dealership and was thus NOT protecting his own property.
FACT: Wisconsin laws would NOT have allowed young Kyle to use OR threaten the use of force to protect someone ELSE's property, because it did not belong to his family or to his employer (so far as we know).
quote:Now, we do not know whether young Kyle pointed his weapon at anyone or made any threatening gestures, but that is part of the ISSUE that this thread was created to address. Under Wisconsin statute 939.40(2), however, it is clear that any such action would NOT have been legally justified ... which would make him the initial aggressor (legally, though perhaps not morally).
939.49 Defense of property...
(1) A person is privileged to threaten or intentionally use force against another for the purpose of preventing ... an unlawful interference with the person's property.... It is not reasonable to intentionally use force intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm for the sole purpose of defense of one's property.
(2) A person is privileged to defend a 3rd person's property ..., provided that ... the 3rd person whose property the person is protecting is a member of his or her immediate family or household or a person whose property the person has a legal duty to protect, or is a merchant and the actor is the merchant's employee or agent.
As has been addressed extensively, if young Kyle were the initial aggressor (legally), he would NOT be entitled to rely upon the defense of "self-defense" ... UNLESS he is able to establish that he disengaged from the original confrontation.
Now, there certainly exists a strong argument that he DID attempt to disengage, but it was also clearly a "fighting retreat." Does a "fighting retreat" constitute an adequate "disengagement" to restore access to "self-defense" as a legal defense at trial?
These are questions that will need to be answered BOTH by Kyle's legal team AND by the prosecutor. They are NOT made "irrelevant" by the fact that you do not WANT to consider them.
This post was edited on 8/27/20 at 2:50 pm
Posted on 8/27/20 at 2:59 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
After all of that, he jogged to the end of the street and attempted to turn himself in
That was the funniest part...dude with an AR comes running at the cops with his hands up...cops roll right past him
Posted on 8/27/20 at 3:00 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
FACT: Wisconsin laws would NOT have allowed young Kyle to use OR threaten the use of force to protect someone ELSE's property, because it did not belong to his family or to his employer (so far as we know).
FACT: He did not use force to protect a car dealership.
Posted on 8/27/20 at 3:09 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
As has been addressed extensively, if young Kyle were the initial aggressor (legally), he would NOT be entitled to rely upon the defense of "self-defense" ... UNLESS he is able to establish that he disengaged from the original confrontation.
quote:
Now, there certainly exists a strong argument that he DID attempt to disengage, but it was also clearly a "fighting retreat." Does a "fighting retreat" constitute an adequate "disengagement" to restore access to "self-defense" as a legal defense at trial?
Can you legally describe what a "fighting retreat" is and how Rittenhouse clearly fits that description? You'll need to rack that big brain of yours and detail the specifics of the law to answer that question. Wisconsin law would be most appropriate.
Posted on 8/27/20 at 3:13 pm to subotic
Posted on 8/27/20 at 3:15 pm to Crawdaddy
Does "fighting retreat" mean self-defense?
We solved Hank's case!
We solved Hank's case!
Posted on 8/27/20 at 3:24 pm to IceTiger
quote:Good Lord.
FACT: He did not use force to protect a car dealership.
If you don't even understand the issue, you should probably not even speak.
Page 13 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News