It always does. But, the prosecution has as much to play with as the defense. That generally doesn't bode well for the defense. Most of the folks who get off, do so because the prosecution has a thin case... not because the defense just dominated. Kid is lucky that this is high profile enough, like Zimmerman, and not just some one off random occurrence, because he'd be smoked. So since he's facing prison time, regardless, unlike Zimmerman, I think his lawyers are looking to deal, not trial.
Somewhat Philosophical..feel like i have to announce it for a couple who always get upset at out of the box stuff and go on an insult tirade The white dude who was calling the other guy a "n.." isnt racist, or is since he uses the word? Arent most people ok if a white dude calling someone a "n.." and chasing after them to assault is shot on the spot? Just sayin. And imo, if mr blake obeys cops orders like 99% of us do, hes alive and a panicky cop cant [uck fay] it up. Shoulda clipped his feet in way to car imo. Hustle a little
Belligerent dude threatening him and chasing him may be enough, alone, to prove the kid felt he was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. They have video of the guy from before the incident, and he definitely comes across as a threatening figure. Add in the chase, and I'm not even sure you need the gun shot. But from reading the above, the shooter just has to "believe" he is in imminent danger. From reading that, I'm not really sure how the gun shot can be viewed as immaterial. The defense just has to show, from the timing of the events, that the shooter could reasonably believe the gun shot came from the guy chasing him. The NYT article already kind of does that.
There are a lot of variables that go into that first question. I'm not sure I would ever actively chase down a fleeing gunman, if I wasn't armed myself. Even if I catch him, what am I going to be able to do to him? Then there's the question of whether I feel he's a threat to kill someone else. How much of the initial incident did I see? Do I think that he has intentions of killing someone else? Has he done anything to suggest that? In hindsight, every time he fired his weapon, it was in response to someone else chasing/attacking him. I don't think the 3 people he shot felt fear for bodily harm, at least not until right before being shot. I'm assuming you saw the video of the second shooting. There were TONS of people chasing after him. That's not something you do out of fear of bodily harm. Not without thinking, entirely. Obviously he knew he was being pursued.
The tough test is the second portion: "the force used was necessary to defend the endangered person" Was the force necessary, or was there something else he could have done? Defense now has to prove that the reason he stopped, was because he had to. Why? Because he heard a gunshot? Unless the shot was fired by the guy he shot... its unequal force. That guy was just CHASING him. There was no force against him by the guy he shot. Being chased, and having no physical contact between the two is going to be a hard test to prove as defensive. Even Zimmerman worked to show he had physical contact against him. I don't know a single major case where someone said "they just chased me, so I shot them" and it worked as a mitigating circumstance. Maybe at sentencing.
1) I do not understand the unequal force. Are you saying that when someone attacks you then you should use equal force? 2) Doubt it will be phrased that way. Perhaps; much larger belligerent dud who was clearly agitated hunkered down and bull rushed me with evil intent in his eyes. Also there were a lot of people chasing him. He did not shoot them. He only shot two of the many attacking him while he was down on the ground.
This is Kyle Rittenhouse, prior to the first shooting. In this video, you can see victim number one Joseph Rosenbaum, the little guy asking to be shot and victim number two, Anthony Huber or skateboard guy. Tension is running high. Here you can see Rittenhouse being chased, you can see the man with his shirt around his head charging Rittenhouse, that man was Rosenbaum, you can clearly hear shots fired prior to the fatal shooting of Rosenbaum, shots that were not from Rittenhouse. Here is Rittenhouse running towards the police line, being chased by a mob. He falls and you can hear "get his ass, get his ass", the first man dropkicks Rittenhouse, while he is on the ground, the 2nd man, Huber, hits him with a skateboard and is shot in the chest, the 3rd man is Gaige Grosskreutz who is charging Rittenhouse with a handgun and suffers a wound to the arm. Here is a still shot of the dropkick, the first attack in the 2nd shooting. All 3 men who were shot had criminal records. As seen here. Rosenbaum was a registered sex offender, Huber domestic abuse and Grosskreutz, the man with a handgun, had a felony burglary charge. These weren't peaceful men, they were agents of chaos. https://twitter.com/MichaelCoudrey/status/1298873436102565888?s=20 Rittenhouse, by any account prior to the initial shootings, was there to protect businesses from rioters but to also act as an EMS. There is video of him and the few others that were armed with him, saying they were there to protect, one of the other armed men, who is standing next to Rittenhouse says "we are with you, as long as you don't [uck fay] with us, we are with you, no lives matter until black lives matter." From there, the crowd moves towards the area where the first shooting occurs. I can't figure out what happened between the initial confrontation at the gas station, the "shoot me n***a" portion of the night and Rittenhouse being pepper sprayed. It is fairly clear that Rittenhouse was leaving the area in a hurry when gun shots rang out and he was lunged at by a man who was chasing him and literally asking to be shot moments earlier. From there, Rittenhouse presumably calls police saying "I just killed someone" as he is leaving the scene. He makes his way towards the police line when he loses his balance and falls to the ground. The mob that is chasing him attacks. The first assault is the dropkick, he shot and missed on that guy. He is then assaulted with a deadly weapon by Huber, who he shot and fatally wounded. Grosskreutz approaches Rittenhouse while pointing a handgun at him. He shoots and nearly blows his arm off. The second attack is self-defense, no way around it. The shooting of Rosenbaum is bit more tricky, the video quality isn't great. But given Rosenbaum's words and actions prior to being shot and given the fact that he was chasing Rittenhouse and made an attempt to attack or disarm him at the very least, coupled with multiple gunshots happening just prior to their engagement, you could pretty easily come to the conclusion that Rittenhouse was acting in self-defense. Rosenbaum's previous charges for sexually assaulting a minor will be in play here as well. Lin Wood, the attorney that represented Nicolas Sandman in his defamation suit against CNN and MSNBC, has taken Rittenhouse's case, pro bono. A charge of first degree murder, in light of all the evidence above, is a walk. Rittenhouse may face some secondary charges for illegal possession and use of a firearm, crossing state lines and probably a host of other charges but I see no way that he gets convicted on first degree murder. I'm not sure how all of this will look once posted, I have never included more than one link to Twitter in a single post but it was easier to lump it all together. So apologies in advance if this takes an entire page or doesn't format properly. Hope you all have been well, given the times.
Let me simplify the whole thing, by saying we don't actually have to even decide if there is a mitigating circumstance, by the following: If I break in to your house, and you try to kill me, can I claim a mitigating circumstance of self-defense, because I feared you were going to kill me, and I was just robbing the place? No, because I was doing something illegal, and you weren't, and you feared for your life. If I'm selling meth, and I fear you, the meth head, are going to harm me, and I kill you. Can I said it was self-defense? It'd be tough, right. Was the kid doing something illegal, which makes an argument of self-defense tough, from the get go? Yea, probably. Was he illegally carrying a weapon? Was he on private property, thus trespassing? The point is if he was doing something illegal to start with... he probably can't also claim self defense.
The white dude calling names and chasing him seems like an idiot, but either of those isn't a capital offense. Blake not following cop instructions is not correct, either, but, again, not a capital offense. I think there is some leeway between being a perfect citizen and being cut down by someone serving as your judge and jury.
Rittenhouse's race is described at Latino on a court document from a speeding charge that he had received earlier this year.
I haven't read the rest of the 5 pages, but don't jump to conclusions is what I hope we can learn from these kind of things
It'd be nice, but I think cops are always going to jump to conclusions about what someone may or may not do.
Was the fact the police were called because the person shot was violating a restraining order, I think I read that, or that he had a knife in his hand the whole time the police were there discussed yet?
I don't see a knife in his hand in the video. Did you read that he had a knife in his hands the whole time on facebook? Not being a [penis], but that sounds like a facebook thing.
