Police shooting black man in the back ... again (Kenosha, WI)

#2,776
#2,776
BeardedVol said:
There was no molotov cocktail; the first shooting of Rosenbaum is definitely not self-defense. Whether the second and third are deemed self-defense, will be determined by whether the jury finds that Rittenhouse is guilty of 'provocation' by shooting and killing Rosenbaum.

Wisconsin Legislature: 939.48
(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.
Click to expand...
You can post this crap all you want.
He was running away.
They caught up with him when he fell.
100% righteous shoot
 
  • Like
Reactions: AirVol, davethevol, Rickyvol77 and 3 others
#2,777
#2,777
BeardedVol said:
There was no molotov cocktail; the first shooting of Rosenbaum is definitely not self-defense. Whether the second and third are deemed self-defense, will be determined by whether the jury finds that Rittenhouse is guilty of 'provocation' by shooting and killing Rosenbaum.

Wisconsin Legislature: 939.48
(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.
Click to expand...
Spam it all you want. He’s gonna walk. There was a damn pistol shot.

You’ve spammed that like 10 times now. Brace yourself for disappointment
 
  • Like
Reactions: davethevol
#2,778
#2,778
SamRebel35 said:
I'm not even convinced he knew a water bottle was thrown at him. He heard a gunshot while being chased by a mob. That is enough for any reasonable person to conclude that their life is in danger. You do understand that he didn't fire the first round, right?
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter if he thinks he heard 50 gun shots. He still shot an unarmed man who throw a plastic bag at him. That's not going to fly under what constitutes self-defense under Wisconsin law. I've watched the video there are no gunshots when Rosenbaum is chasing him, nor when he chucked the plastic bag. The only shots are those from Rittenhouse after the fact.

Dr. P. Douglas Kelley of the Milwaukee Medical Examiner’s office determined that Rosenbaum suffered one gunshot to the groin that fractured his pelvis, another to the back which perforated his right lung and liver, another to the left hand, a superficial gunshot wound to his lateral left thigh, and a graze wound to the right side his forehead.

Criminal Complaint Against Kyle Rittenhouse Details Prosecutors' Version Of Events In Kenosha Shooting That Killed 2, Wounded 1
 
#2,779
#2,779
Orangeslice13 said:
You can post this crap all you want.
He was running away.
They caught up with him when he fell.
100% righteous shoot
Click to expand...

It's always interesting when people who claim to believe in the rule of law, disregard the law because of their emotional connection to a situation, regardless of the facts.
 
#2,780
#2,780
BeardedVol said:
It's always interesting when people who claim to believe in the rule of law, disregard the law because of their emotional connection to a situation, regardless of the facts.
Click to expand...
The rule of law should have put the man to death the moment he was convicted of sexually assaulting a child.

Keep up the pedophile defense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeslice13
#2,782
#2,782
ButchPlz said:
The rule of law should have put the man to death the moment he was convicted of sexually assaulting a child.

Keep up the pedophile defense.
Click to expand...

That might be true, but that doesn't make throwing a plastic bag at Kyle Rittenhouse an act that provoked his right to self-defense. Whether or not Rosenbaum was a piece of filth isn't going to be what the jury deliberates on when this goes to court.
 
#2,783
#2,783
BeardedVol said:
It's always interesting when people who claim to believe in the rule of law, disregard the law because of their emotional connection to a situation, regardless of the facts.
Click to expand...
Sure thing pal.
You can spin all you want but by the law he was totally defensive. Running away isn’t exciting a riot in any way. This is 100% self defense and a righteous shoot. By the law.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 615vols and Rickyvol77
#2,784
#2,784
BeardedVol said:
That might be true, but that doesn't make throwing a plastic bag at Kyle Rittenhouse an act that provoked his right to self-defense. Whether or not Rosenbaum was a piece of filth isn't going to be what the jury deliberates on when this goes to court.
Click to expand...
No, but what does clearly show self-defense is the video evidence showing the pedophile bullrushing both Kyle Rittenhouse and others screaming racial obscenities and grabbing the barrel of the kid's firearm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#2,786
#2,786
ButchPlz said:
No, but what does clearly show self-defense is the video evidence showing the pedophile bullrushing both Kyle Rittenhouse and others screaming racial obscenities and grabbing the barrel of the kid's firearm.
Click to expand...

Being ran at or cussed at by an unarmed man will not pass muster for the need exact lethal force in self-defense with a firearm; It wouldn't for you or I either in any state that I'm aware of.

It won't surprise me if Lin Wood doesn't try to argue lowered mental capacity considering the he did seem to have some LEO/freedom fighter fantasies.
 
#2,787
#2,787
BeardedVol said:
He shot Rosenbaum for throwing a plastic bag with a water bottle in it that fell 8 feet short of even hitting him. The provocation would be the act of illegally discharging his rifle into Rosenbaum's face. Whether the second and third shootings are considered self-defense is going to be in the hands of the jury. His attorney better hope that it stays local, and doesn't get kicked up to to the 7th circuit.

Picture of your "molotov" smh....
EgX_zx5U4AAcjnY
Click to expand...
Im sorry that your friends can’t get away with threatening physical harm against someone who is defending themselves
 
  • Like
Reactions: TNVOLNAVY and Rickyvol77
#2,788
#2,788
BeardedVol said:
It doesn't matter if he thinks he heard 50 gun shots. He still shot an unarmed man who throw a plastic bag at him. That's not going to fly under what constitutes self-defense under Wisconsin law. I've watched the video there are no gunshots when Rosenbaum is chasing him, nor when he chucked the plastic bag. The only shots are those from Rittenhouse after the fact.

Dr. P. Douglas Kelley of the Milwaukee Medical Examiner’s office determined that Rosenbaum suffered one gunshot to the groin that fractured his pelvis, another to the back which perforated his right lung and liver, another to the left hand, a superficial gunshot wound to his lateral left thigh, and a graze wound to the right side his forehead.

Criminal Complaint Against Kyle Rittenhouse Details Prosecutors' Version Of Events In Kenosha Shooting That Killed 2, Wounded 1
Click to expand...

Shot an unarmed guy who was chasing him to kick the sh** out of him. Is he supposed to wait until he's on the brink of death to use his gun? Or better yet, is he just supposed to let the mob catch him and take his gun from him? What do think the mob would do with his gun? Is his life in danger then? Self defense should absolutely apply even for the first kill.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 615vols, davethevol, MemphisVol77 and 4 others
#2,789
#2,789
The shooter was not aggressive, the guy who ended up shot was very aggressive and made physical contact with multiple people during the altercation. So we have a guy who has committed battery on the shooter already, with the shooter running away from him. The dead guy catches up to the shooter and grabs the gun, the shooter then fired his weapon at the dead guy. The shooter was being physically assaulted at the time he pulled the trigger. That will be the claim of self defense. The case against the shooter is weak at best.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77 and Rickyvol77
#2,790
#2,790
KB5252 said:
The shooter was not aggressive, the guy who ended up shot was very aggressive and made physical contact with multiple people during the altercation. So we have a guy who has committed battery on the shooter already, with the shooter running away from him. The dead guy catches up to the shooter and grabs the gun, the shooter then fired his weapon at the dead guy. The shooter was being physically assaulted at the time he pulled the trigger. That will be the claim of self defense. The case against the shooter is weak at best.
Click to expand...
I'm really struggling to see how this is hard to understand for people. It's like we're watching two entirely different videos.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davethevol, RollinVol, jaybird_1981 and 4 others
#2,791
#2,791
BeardedVol said:
Being ran at or cussed at by an unarmed man will not pass muster for the need exact lethal force in self-defense with a firearm; It wouldn't for you or I either in any state that I'm aware of.

It won't surprise me if Lin Wood doesn't try to argue lowered mental capacity considering the he did seem to have some LEO/freedom fighter fantasies.
Click to expand...
If someone grabs your firearm that has already committed battery against you that is a threat of bodily harm. All the justification he needs to pull the trigger.
 
#2,792
#2,792
BeardedVol said:
Being ran at or cussed at by an unarmed man will not pass muster for the need exact lethal force in self-defense with a firearm; It wouldn't for you or I either in any state that I'm aware of.

It won't surprise me if Lin Wood doesn't try to argue lowered mental capacity considering the he did seem to have some LEO/freedom fighter fantasies.
Click to expand...
You literally posted a testimony saying that the pedophile was attempting to make contact with the kid that shot him. Assault, self-defense merited. The end.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77, Rickyvol77 and golfballs
#2,795
#2,795
SamRebel35 said:
Shot an unarmed guy who was chasing him to kick the sh** out of him. Is he supposed to wait until he's on the brink of death to use his gun? Or better yet, is he just supposed to let the mob catch him and take his gun from him? What do think the mob would do with his gun? Is his life in danger then? Self defense should absolutely apply even for the first kill.
Click to expand...

If you own firearms, especially if you have a concealed carry permit, you should make yourself aware of the self-defense laws in the states you carry in; they aren't nearly as broad as some of you believe.

There was no "mob" chasing him until after he shot Rosenbaum. His first kill is most likely not going to get considered self-defense since Rosenbaum was unarmed, and threw a plastic bag at him that never hit him. The question will be on the second killing and the shooting of the armed Grosskreutz considered 'self-defense' or whether Rittenhouse provoked the situation by shooting Rosenbaum.
 
#2,796
#2,796
BeardedVol said:
If you own firearms, especially if you have a concealed carry permit, you should make yourself aware of the self-defense laws in the states you carry in; they aren't nearly as broad as some of you believe.

There was no "mob" chasing him until after he shot Rosenbaum. His first kill is most likely not going to get considered self-defense since Rosenbaum was unarmed, and threw a plastic bag at him that never hit him. The question will be on the second killing and the shooting of the armed Grosskreutz considered 'self-defense' or wether Rittenhouse provoked the situation by shooting Rosenbaum.
Click to expand...
Even the New York Times can refute your ********
 
#2,798
#2,798
BeardedVol said:
If you own firearms, especially if you have a concealed carry permit, you should make yourself aware of the self-defense laws in the states you carry in; they aren't nearly as broad as some of you believe.

There was no "mob" chasing him until after he shot Rosenbaum. His first kill is most likely not going to get considered self-defense since Rosenbaum was unarmed, and threw a plastic bag at him that never hit him. The question will be on the second killing and the shooting of the armed Grosskreutz considered 'self-defense' or whether Rittenhouse provoked the situation by shooting Rosenbaum.
Click to expand...
What is the law regarding self defense in Wisconsin?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top