• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

(W#4255)The trial of Kyle Rittenhouse for the intentional first degree homicide of 2, injuring of 1

Cordelier said:
I think all of that was in the cards from the get-go. That's why true justice is so precious a concept - it's rarity makes it so.
Click to expand...
There's just too much racist vigilante bloodlust in that courtroom - and by extension, Kenosha. That's why there was a riot/demonstration in the first place.
 
Rexedgar said:
DA hasn’t been very good…….
Click to expand...
Yeah, they might be in on the fix and throwing the case. Remember Louisville? That prosecutor was a guest at the RNC after he helped acquit Brionna's murderers. He might as well have been those cops' defense.
 
TurtleDude said:
I think that is fair but we are past that point now. bad judgment is not sufficient to brand him with a felony conviction. Plus he did society a service.
Click to expand...

I am so torn on that too, Turtle.

The kid may be first responder material, with a little maturity. If anything, this trial may be maturity enough. A felony will destroy that, and ruin his life in other endeavors.

But, I can't get over the deaths with only a misdemeanor conviction.

Straight-up, I'm glad I'm not on the jury. It would be too much agony. I think Kyle has some culpability, but I'd be loathe to ruin his life.
 
Cordelier said:
Nope. Because a handgun carries a different message than a rifle. And he wasn't brandishing it until people started getting shot.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that message is that he wants to be able to kill someone and then conceal the means he just used to do it.
 
lurchadams said:
No. Who else was killed that night by citizens carrying guns? Seems like the racist kid was the only killer than night.

Just my thoughts.
Click to expand...
The fact you pull the race card in a trial that has nothing to do with race, and other than the first guy who was shot, nothing about race has been a part of this hearing, tells me that your comments are 100% political and don't belong on this thread.
 
JustPlainJoe said:
Yes, probably. With the evidence presented, it probably wouldn't have been self-defense but I don't think this evidence would have been available in that case. Grosskreutz appears to have chased down Rittenhouse because he was a "bookaloo boy", which means he instigated the fight. But again, I doubt that evidence would have been presented and definitely would not have been confirmed by Grosskreutz in testimony, if he was on trial.
Defense for Grosskreutz is "I heard a shot, saw a guy running with a gun, the crowd said he's the guy! He shot a guy! I ran over to stop him and he pointed his gun at me, so I shot him."



IMHO - Both have a valid claim of self-defense.
Even if Rittenhouse had not shot anyone, but Grosskreutz thought he was going to, then yes because Grosskreutz can show that he reasonably feared for his life. . Even if they both shot each other and neither died, both could claim they legitimately feared for their life and shot in self-defense.
Click to expand...

The bolded, in my opinion, is the crux of the matter!

Which is why I believe Rittenhouse bears some culpability.
 
20 minute break while the prosecutor scrambles to find an iPhone expert.
 
Lutherf said:
Rittenhouse has been holding up amazingly well through this. His composure definitely comes from a place well beyond any preparation he had with his legal team.
Click to expand...

I agree, especially given his age.
 
Grizzly Adams said:
Yeah, that message is that he wants to be able to kill someone and then conceal the means he just used to do it.
Click to expand...

To me, a handgun is a weapon of self-defense... a SA rifle is an offensive weapon - if you bring it somewhere, you mean to intimidate people.

I'd be willing to bet that if Rittenhouse had armed himself with a handgun - and it didn't draw it - then none of this would have happened.
 
Grim17 said:
The fact you pull the race card in a trial that has nothing to do with race, and other than the first guy who was shot, nothing about race has been a part of this hearing, tells me that your comments are 100% political and don't belong on this thread.
Click to expand...
The racist kid wanted to be a right-wing hero - now he'll be usurped by some white militia and become just another right-wing terrorist. And your intellectual dishonesty is not working - whether Rittenhouse murdered in cold blood white or people of color that night, all were BLM sympathizers, thus, they had to die.

IT WAS ALL ABOUT RACE!
 
Chomsky said:
I am so torn on that too, Turtle.

The kid may be first responder material, with a little maturity. If anything, this trial may be maturity enough. A felony will destroy that, and ruin his life in other endeavors.

But, I can't get over the deaths with only a misdemeanor conviction.

Straight-up, I'm glad I'm not on the jury. It would be too much agony. I think Kyle has some culpability, but I'd be loathe to ruin his life.
Click to expand...
See, I view it differently. The jury has a very strait forward and simple task.

The PEOPLE of that state, though, may want to revisit and edit their laws, so there IS some limited culpability in cases like this.

I hold no hope of this, as FL didn't do this after the Zimmerman trial. People are apathetic, in the long run.

The only ones who will care about this 9 months from now are the families of the dead and disfigured.
 
Lutherf said:
Rittenhouse has been holding up amazingly well through this. His composure definitely comes from a place well beyond any preparation he had with his legal team.
Click to expand...
Yes and you and I know where that place to be.
 
Cordelier said:
Nope. Because a handgun carries a different message than a rifle. And he wasn't brandishing it until people started getting shot.
Click to expand...

Gotcha, a rioter gets a pass because it doesn't support your argument. You really need to be working for the procecution as it would be such a good fit with such terrible arguments.
 
Cordelier said:
To me, a handgun is a weapon of self-defense... a SA rifle is an offensive weapon - if you bring it somewhere, you mean to intimidate people.

I'd be willing to bet that if Rittenhouse had armed himself with a handgun - and it didn't draw it - then none of this would have happened.
Click to expand...
Yep, the sight of the kid with a weapon incited the violence that ended up in the deaths of two people and injury to the other.
 
lurchadams said:
No. Who else was killed that night by citizens carrying guns? Seems like the racist kid was the only killer than night.

Just my thoughts.
Click to expand...
The race card, how expected :rolleyes:

The question isn't who else was killed, it should be who else made themselves a threat to serious bodily harm on another individual?
 
Grim17 said:
Again, the active shooter who was running away from the crowd, not threatening anyone while he ran away, and was heading directly for the police officers a block in front of him.
Click to expand...

And yet he didn't turn himself in. And before the argument comes up "well he tried to"? Yes, he ran toward police, who stupidly waved him on. There were cops all over that city which he made no attempt to make contact with. He could have waited for cops to show up at CS. So running directly for the police was shot out of the water when he got back to car source, got into Dominick's car and went back to Illinois.
 
lurchadams said:
The racist kid wanted to be a right-wing hero - now he'll be usurped by some white militia and become just another right-wing terrorist. And your intellectual dishonesty is not working - whether Rittenhouse murdered in cold blood white or people of color that night, all were BLM sympathizers, thus, they had to die.

IT WAS ALL ABOUT RACE!
Click to expand...
Rosenbaum was a BLM sympathizer, going around screaming the n-word at everyone?
 
So is this judge actually trying to parody My Cousin Vinny?
 
ASHES said:
Rosenbaum was a BLM sympathizer, going around screaming the n-word at everyone?
Click to expand...
Did Rittenhouse hear that? Are you sure? Because if he didn't, Rosenbaum was just another "n***er" lover.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom