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

#2,803
#2,803
ButchPlz said:
An attacker being armed is not a prerequisite for self defense basically anywhere.
Click to expand...

But hearing a gunshot is reasonable defense for shooting an unarmed person? If that ends up being the crux of the case, and he gets out of the charges, that's going to be an interesting precedent.
 
#2,805
#2,805
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...
You seem like a Darwinist belief kinda guy. Chasing a guy with an AR15 is frigging Natural Selection in action. And we aren’t disregarding the law. We see you purposely misinterpreting the law and call you on it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pepe_Silvia
#2,806
#2,806
BeardedVol said:
But hearing a gunshot is reasonable defense for shooting an unarmed person? If that ends up being the crux of the case, and he gets out of the charges, that's going to be an interesting precedent.
Click to expand...
You clown, why are you ignoring the testimony that you yourself posted, where it talks about the dead pedo attempting to assault the kid with the gun? What about the videos (multiple) of the dead pedo charging at the kid with the gun? Combine it with the several videos of the dead pedo menacing and bull rushing people that are ALL OVER THIS THREAD and boom, clearly self defense.

What are you even trying to prove? Admit you've not watched or seen anything and move on.
 
#2,810
#2,810
GAVol said:
He may actually have a problem on the final shot or two that he seemed to fire indiscriminately.
Click to expand...

We were talking about that today , NGV and I heard reports after he stood up but I can’t pin point where they came from . I actually though he looked like he was leaning or dodging “ something “ as he walked backwards away from the crowd .
 
#2,811
#2,811
0nelilreb said:
View attachment 302814
Click to expand...

I've read the statute. It's still going to be a stretch to argue that hearing a gunshot alone gave Rittenhouse a 'reasonable belief' that the unarmed Rosenbaum was going to cause 'imminent death' or great 'bodily harm' from a legal standpoint, so he was acting in self-defense when he shot him. It's going to come down to the eyewitness testimony given on when he turned and pointed the gun at Rosenbaum, and whether Rosenbaum grabbed the barrel of the gun before he was shot, and whether doing so, gave Rittenhouse the right to open fire on him.
 
#2,814
#2,814
BeardedVol said:
I've read the statute. It's still going to be a stretch to argue that hearing a gunshot gave Rittenhouse a 'reasonable belief' that the unarmed Rosenbaum was going to cause 'imminent death' or great 'bodily harm', so he was acting in self-defense when he shot him. It's going to come down to the testimony given on when he turned and pointed the gun at Rosenbaum, and whether Rosenbaum grabbed the barrel of the gun before he was shot, and whether doing so, gave Rittenhouse the right to open fire on him.
Click to expand...

If the kid had “reasonable belief “ ( and you can bet he will have ) that he was in danger of physical harm , the prosecutor is the one that has the tough job of proving he didn’t . Not only that , they have him charged with 1st degree , that was dumb to start with .
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77 and ButchPlz
#2,815
#2,815
NorthDallas40 said:
You seem like a Darwinist belief kinda guy. Chasing a guy with an AR15 is frigging Natural Selection in action. And we aren’t disregarding the law. We see you purposely misinterpreting the law and call you on it.
Click to expand...

What am I misinterpreting? The DA obviously feels like he had enough evidence to charge him accordingly. The Wisconsin statute is there for you to read. I even posted it for you multiple times. ;)
 
#2,816
#2,816
BeardedVol said:
What am I misinterpreting? The DA obviously feels like he had enough evidence to charge him accordingly. The Wisconsin statute is there for you to read. I even posted it for you multiple times. ;)
Click to expand...
So is the testimony from a guy standing there, but you chose not to even read what you posted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#2,818
#2,818
0nelilreb said:
If the kid had “reasonable belief “ ( and you can bet he will have ) that he was in danger of physical harm , the prosecutor is the one that has the tough job of proving he didn’t . Not only that , they have him charged with 1st degree , that was dumb to start with .
Click to expand...

Physical harm is not "grave injury" or "imminent death" in terms of using deadly force in an act of self-defense. If you are at the Waffle House and get into an argument over JG passing Peyton Manning if he comes back for another year in 2021, and your opponent says he's going to punch you in the face, you can't legally draw your concealed weapon and shoot him because you were afraid of "physical harm".
 
#2,819
#2,819
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...
Wrong.....dude fires a pistol in the air
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#2,820
#2,820
BeardedVol said:
Ok, I didn't hear the shot in the youtube vesion.

I'm still not sure how hearing a gunshot is going to help a self-defense argument when the person shot was obviously unarmed.
Click to expand...
The dude was running and being chased. He doesn’t have eyes in the back of his head
 
#2,821
#2,821
ButchPlz said:
So is the testimony from a guy standing there, but you chose not to even read what you posted.
Click to expand...

Assuming you are talking about McGinnis' statement?

McGinnis told police he was walking with Rittenhouse and warning the teen he was not handling his weapon well. Shortly thereafter McGinnis then saw Rosenbaum and others moving quickly toward Rittenhouse. According to the complaint, Rosenbaum appears to throw a plastic bag at the teenager. The complaint states that Rosenbaum appears to be unarmed throughout the encounter. McGinnis told police he saw Rittenhouse raise the gun.
“McGinnis stated that the first round went into the ground and when the second shot went off the defendant actually had the gun aimed at Rosenbaum. McGinnis stated he did not hear the two exchange any words.”
The complaint states that McGinnis stated that Rosenbaum was attempting to grab the barrel of the gun when he was shot.
 
#2,822
#2,822
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
I hadn’t seen this longer version. Those final shots are problematic, if they hit anyone.
Click to expand...
Even if they didn't hit anyone, in some states people in the general area would be enough for an aggravated assault charge. Who knows?

The big problem now is we've got 4 or 5 murky cases where DAs are apt to overcharge and it may lead to more violence if a verdict doesn't go the right way
 
  • Like
Reactions: sierraorange and jp1
#2,823
#2,823
BeardedVol said:
Physical harm is not "grave injury" or "imminent death" in terms of using deadly force in an act of self-defense. If you are at the Waffle House and get into an argument over JG passing Peyton Manning if he comes back for another year in 2021, and your opponent says he's going to punch you in the face, you can't legally draw your concealed weapon and shoot him because you were afraid of "physical harm".
Click to expand...

This is where your argument breaks down and the prosecution case gets tough .. neither of you can prove what the kid was feeling at that moment . Reread what the self defense and their castle doctrine says .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeslice13
#2,825
#2,825
BeardedVol said:
What am I misinterpreting? The DA obviously feels like he had enough evidence to charge him accordingly. The Wisconsin statute is there for you to read. I even posted it for you multiple times. ;)
Click to expand...
The DA overcharged and he’s gonna eat those. He walks across the board on the murder charges but they’ve got him on misdemeanor firearm possession. That’s it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeslice13 and 0nelilreb
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top