STOP. MAKING. ****. UP. Cite your source in Wisconsin law for this garbage that just fell out of your mouth. Further, how much are you expecting him to disarm, while still being chased by a hostile person? If he had a pocket knife, is he obligated to drop that, too? Shoelaces can be used to strangle someone, so he should probably have shed them also. Fists of fury are no joke, so he should have chopped off his own hands, right? Please do also explain how he's supposed to get the second hand chopped off after relieving himself of his deadly-weapon left hand. And before you claim this is the perfect example of a ridiculous argument, please remember that it is YOU who claims that being armed negates any possibility of withdrawing from a fight, despite the fact that Rittenhouse was running away from Rosenbaum for at least half a block.[/QUOTE]
Wisconsin’s statute concerning Second Degree Intentional Homicide specifically states that if a person acts in self-defense based on an actual but mistaken belief about the risk of harm to themselves or the amount of force they need to threaten or use to prevent the other person from harming them while killing the other person in an act of self-defense, then they can be convicted of Second Degree Intentional Homicide rather than First Degree Intentional Homicide. Wisconsin’s statute on Second Degree Intentional Homicide explains that if the prosecution is unable to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant intended to kill, and did kill, another person yet the person claiming self-defense “believed he or she or another was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that the force used was necessary to defend the endangered person” yet one of the defendant’s beliefs were unreasonable, then the defendant can be charged with Second Degree Intentional Homicide. Wis.Stat. § 940.05(1); Wis.Stat. §940.01(2)(b).
prosecution commonly argues that the person claiming self-defense is not entitled to self-defense because his or her behavior was the type of behavior that causes another person to attack and that the attack would not have happened if the other person had not been provoked. Wis.Stat. § 939.48(2)(a). Under this situation, a person forfeits the right to use self-defense unless
(2) the person claiming self-defense 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;” Wis.Stat. § 939.48(2)(a); or
(3) the person claiming self-defense “in good faith withdraws from the fight and gives adequate notice thereof to his or her assailant.” Wis.Stat. § 939.48(2)(b).
So, can you show me where he put his hands up and said I give up? Or that he did not stop and re engage the situation? He ran, but he stopped and turned and shot....that isn't trying to get away, that is stopping and re entering the fight.
The Right to Self-Defense in Wisconsin | KCP Law Group | Appleton, Sheboygan, Green Bay
Yet if a person intentionally provokes a fight as part of a plan to cause death or great bodily harm another person and claim a right of self-defense, he or she forfeits the right to use self-defense because his or her action is premeditated or intentional. Wis.Stat. § 939.48(2)(b).
Under the “Castle Doctrine,” for example, it is presumed to be reasonable for a person to shoot and kill a burglar who broken into a person’s house, appears to be unarmed, and immediately flees when he or she recognizes that the homeowner has a gun.
Yet if the person claiming self-defense were to shoot and kill the an unarmed burglar in another person’s home under the same situation, the person claiming self-defense would not have a presumption of reasonableness and therefore could easily be convicted of Second Degree Intentional Homicide under a theory of imperfect self-defense or First Degree Intentional Homicide.
