Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,582 posts, read 12,535,636 times
Reputation: 10476
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by jertheber
From the article I linked:
"Could prosecutors show that Rittenhouse, 17, of Antioch, committed an unlawful act that provoked attacks on him? If so, the law holds that he would have to show he exhausted his chances to flee or otherwise avoid being harmed before shooting, attorneys said. And whomever was the aggressor, Rittenhouse would have to show he reasonably believed he had to shoot to prevent his death or serious injury."
This other consideration, his presence, armed and expecting trouble-- being something he went to some lengths to do, will most likely factor in whether he made "every attempt" to prevent those killings. Anyone who goes into a biker bar, armed with a rifle, and setting himself up as the law's little helper, will most likely be assaulted, and thus "need" to defend himself. It's really whether he was complicit by going there expressly to confront people, he was, and the prosecution will need to prove that.
"Several attorneys said the case could come down to whether Rittenhouse provoked attacks. The law states that a person who “engages in unlawful conduct (a minor carrying a weapon) of a type likely to provoke others to attack him or her” can’t make a valid claim of self-defense unless “the person reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm."
It looks like he will have some consideration from the court on the actual act of firing in self defense, but he might not prevail on the issues surrounding the fact that he went there deliberately armed, knowing the risks. The legal language can be, and usually is, up for interpretation.
In this one, your source is truncating the law , maybe as a way to make it appear that your source is correct? See the part I'd bolded in C, below which shows there is more to that particular law than your source would have you believe.
Quote:
(2) Provocation affects the privilege of self-defense as follows:
(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, except when the attack which ensues is of a type causing the person engaging in the unlawful conduct to reasonably believe that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. In such a case, the person engaging in the unlawful conduct is privileged to act in self-defense, but the person is not privileged to resort to the use of force intended or likely to cause death to the person's assailant unless the person reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm at the hands of his or her assailant.
From the bolded part on to the end. It does not matter if Kyle's actions were lawful or not, if he felt his life was in danger then his action of shooting the person he thought was a danger to him was lawful.
Quote:
(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.
Kyle ran away every chance he had. That is withdrawing.
After Kyle shot Rosenbaum, he fled. After shooting Rosenbaum, when asked by Grosskreutz where he was going he replied - 'to the cops'. That is withdrawing and giving adequate notice.
Quote:
(c) A person who provokes an attack, whether by lawful or unlawful conduct, with intent to use such an attack as an excuse to cause death or great bodily harm to his or her assailant is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense.
The DA would have to prove that Kyle had gone there with his gun just so that he could have an excuse to kill or injure someone. Seems Kyle has very little, that we know of, in his history that shows he provokes people into attacking him so that he can harm them. We will have to wait and see what the DA comes up with, but it's probably going to be very hard for him to prove it.
One way to convince a jury he wasn't a mass shooter is to show the videos. A mass shooter doesn't run away and not shoot anyone except people who attack him.
The video doesn't show what the intentions of the dead people were. They saw a mass shooter and behaved accordingly. How would they know that the gunman was not running but infract pursuing someone?
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,582 posts, read 12,535,636 times
Reputation: 10476
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber
No. He said Kyle pointed his rifle at him before the shooting took place. You don't know if that is a lie.
Either way, I will let the jury decide.
Jeremiah said in that article (snipped for brevity) ...
"... He decided the quickest path was to cut through a parking lot. .. As he made his way toward it, Jeremiah saw more armed white men. Two crouched on the roof of a building, sniper style. Two or three others stood guard over the lot. One of them, a babyface with a backward ball cap, raised an assault rifle and pointed it at him. .. When the kid started yelling, Jeremiah shouted back: .. A few minutes later, Jeremiah saw the same guy pointing his weapon at someone else. This time, Kyle Rittenhouse fired."
He claims, at the time of the shooting..
Kyle was "standing guard over the lot"
Then Kyle "pointed it [his gun] at him [Jeremia]"
Then Kyle was "pointing his weapon at someone else."
Then "Kyle Rittenhouse fired"
What a pack of lies, proven by the videos.
Just minutes before the shooting of Rosenbaum , Kyle was seen at another location, on video, and it wasn't the car lot.
Kyle was seen, on video, entering the car lot from the street at a full run with Rosenbaum chasing him. No time to just stand around lackadaisically hollering and pointing his weapon at people.
Idk, maybe you and Jeremiah think Kyle can be in two places at once, and, that Kyle can be at a dead run but appear to be just standing around hollering and pointing his weapon at people. LOL.
Jeremiah said in that article (snipped for brevity) ...
"... He decided the quickest path was to cut through a parking lot. .. As he made his way toward it, Jeremiah saw more armed white men. Two crouched on the roof of a building, sniper style. Two or three others stood guard over the lot. One of them, a babyface with a backward ball cap, raised an assault rifle and pointed it at him. .. When the kid started yelling, Jeremiah shouted back: .. A few minutes later, Jeremiah saw the same guy pointing his weapon at someone else. This time, Kyle Rittenhouse fired."
He claims, at the time of the shooting..
Kyle was "standing guard over the lot"
Then Kyle "pointed it [his gun] at him [Jeremia]"
Then Kyle was "pointing his weapon at someone else."
Then "Kyle Rittenhouse fired"
What a pack of lies, proven by the videos.
You insist he is lying, but can't prove it. Its very much possible he pointed his rifle at Jeremiah before killing Rosenbaum.
Ok. I get it, you have a political side to defend here.
How about we let the jury see the evidence and hear the arguments and let them decide. Deal? There is no need for us to agree on anything.
The video doesn't show what the intentions of the dead people were. They saw a mass shooter and behaved accordingly. How would they know that the gunman was not running but infract pursuing someone?
Kicking and beating Kyle doesn't show intentions? Really? If it were happening to you, you would assume that your attackers mean you no harm? Yeah Ill have to call BS on that.
The videos clearly show Kyle trying to avoid confrontation by running from the rioting thugs. They refused to allow his escape. It's like watching a scene from Lord of the Flies.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,582 posts, read 12,535,636 times
Reputation: 10476
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber
You insist he is lying, but can't prove it. Its very much possible he pointed his rifle at Jeremiah before killing Rosenbaum.
Watch . the . videos.
Nothing happened the way Jeremiah claimed.
Watch the videos.
Kyle was far too busy with Rosenbaum, running from him and then shooting him, to care about some guy standing around picking his nose.
Watch the videos.
Quote:
Ok. I get it, you have a political side to defend here.
How about we let the jury see the evidence and hear the arguments and let them decide. Deal? There is no need for us to agree on anything.
No you don't get it. The only "political side to defend" is coming from you. Watch.the.videos instead of continually proving ignorance of the actual events.
Watch the video.
Kicking and beating Kyle doesn't show intentions? Really? If it were happening to you, you would assume that your attackers mean you no harm? Yeah Ill have to call BS on that.
The videos clearly show Kyle trying to avoid confrontation by running from the rioting thugs. They refused to allow his escape. It's like watching a scene from Lord of the Flies.
Some mass shooters have been pursued and killed by would be victims. They were going to hold him for the police.
Watch . the . videos.
Nothing happened the way Jeremiah claimed.
Watch the videos.
I have seen them. You are trying to argue that if its not on tape, then it didn't happen, which comes across pretty naive.
Like I said I get it that you have a political side to defend here, while I am willing to let the jury see the evidence and hear the arguments and let them decide. I am ok with whatever they decide. I am not insisting guilt or innocence. Murder, manslaughter, self-defence, etc, I'm ok with it. I am simply showing what Kyle is facing in court when claiming self defence, and what I am saying is based on past cases where the defendant pled self-defence. Maybe it will work for him and maybe it won't. No need to get all emotional about it.
Some mass shooters have been pursued and killed by would be victims. They were going to hold him for the police.
Nope. There is far more evidence they were going to kill him. It's what BLM/Pantifa thugs do. Drop kick to the head was a potentially fatal blow. "Sucker punch" from behind. And of course the fool that hit him in the head with a plank. To say nothing about the one that attacked him with a handgun. BLM/Pantifa usually only pick defenseless victims to attack and assault. This particular bunch of vicious savages was too stupid to even figure that much out.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,582 posts, read 12,535,636 times
Reputation: 10476
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber
I have seen them.
Since you don't seem to know what had happened I would disagree that you'd seen them.
Quote:
You are trying to argue that if its not on tape, then it didn't happen, which comes across pretty naive.
Like I said I get it that you have a political side to defend here, while I am willing to let the jury see the evidence and hear the arguments and let them decide. I am ok with whatever they decide. I am not insisting guilt or innocence. Murder, manslaughter, self-defence, etc, I'm ok with it. I am simply showing what Kyle is facing in court when claiming self defence, and what I am saying is based on past cases where the defendant pled self-defence. Maybe it will work for him and maybe it won't. No need to get all emotional about it.
Hey, if you want to believe that Kyle can be in two places at the same time then that's on you. How do you think Kyle can do that? Pretty talented on his part to be able to be in two places at once, don't you think?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yeah Ill have to call BS on that.
